It was more than a property dispute about which the board members chose to engage in rebellion and incite others to the same rebellion and disobedience. Sufficient information has been made available, both to the issue of the dispute and to the issue of obedience. Those who state that the matter is not a doctrinal one are correct - up to a point. Those, such as yourself, who state that the issue is not a disciplinary one, are incorrect, and seem to be relying on personal opinion rather than the laws of the Church. Whether this reliance on one's one personal opinion is due to ignorance or a deep seated disdain for Church authority, I cannot tell. We can rest assured, however, that a continued reliance and decision of the matter based on one's own personal opinion to the exclusion of the truth and rights of the Church and the hierarchy to make judgments in these matters, basically makes one a protestant (lowercase "p" - it is not intended as a derogatory statement of Protestants - capital "P")
I have no horse in this race. I have provided information so that others may come to see the truth in the matter and avoid making "rash judgments", engaging in "calumny" against Archbishop Burke, or repeating "lies" or distortions of the truth - all of which are, objectively, grave violations of the 8th Commandment. Furthermore, information has been provided, explaining the necessity of obedience in lawful ecclesiastical matters. This has particular relevance in keeping the 4th Commandment.
By a similar line of reasoning - such as what Burke wrote - a local Bishop may place under interdict traditionalist Catholics......be it over property, doctrine, liturgics or whatever.
A bishop, as a successor of the Apostles, does, indeed, possess a tremendous amount of power for governing the flock. In addition, he bears even greater responsibilities to his flock. It is Christ, Himself, who gave this power to the Church and to the leaders of the Church. The bishop, indeed, has power over the temporal goods of a diocese, over liturgy and doctrine-to the extent granted by the Church, but not over "whatever." This is a "red herring", an attempt to divert attention away from the crux of an argument by the introduction of an irrelevant detail or supposition.
The process for placing one under the penalty of interdict requires certain steps be taken. It does not happen arbitrarily, contrary to certain individuals' opinions.
Memory recalls excatly the above described scenario when the local ordinary in Alabama threatened Mother Angelica and her order & ministry over liturgical matter. It matters little that Mother was correct in what she was doing......in hte current ultra-obendient mode of thinking: "it's my Bishop - right or wrong"!!!!
Again, this is an irrelevant issue, entirely...except to say that, Mother Angelica "obeyed" her bishop.
Similar was threatened by Cardinal Mahoney - after his heretical writings on the mass were righteously criticized by Mother Angelica, with allegations of possible heresy, he could - and would - have used his power to get her silenced, with the generous cooperation of her Ordinary.
Again, irrelevant. And she was not silenced. Had she been so, such a penalty or decision may have been worthy of an appeal to the Holy See.
Of course, you and those with a similar view......that absolute, total, and mindless obedience is demanded of Catholics.......will continue upon your merry way.
Hopefully, "on my merry way" to eternal beatitude! One wonders where St Pio would be mow, if he had followed your advice and disobeyed his superiors, even granting that his silencing may have been inappropriate or illicit? One must wonder what would have happened had St. Thomas More and St. John Fischer, disobeyed Christ and the Church, and for the convenience of saving their lives joined with Henry? Obedience is impossible for those who reject the graces of humility. Christ, whom we should follow, provided the utmost example of what we are to do - He was obedient unto death. True and proper obedience is not mindless. One's intellect, after having been enlightened with the truth, is to conform one's will to that of Christ.
But what happens when its YOUR parish which is in jeopardy of being closed/merged.....its assets seized by your Bishop. Will you still sing the same song? Or will you rejoice in this, as a sign of your obendience? Better yet......will you stick the IV needle of electronic funds transfer from your bank account to the local pastor.........so you can remain mindless and numb as priest and bishop alike continue to bleed you dry.....spiritually & financially?
For me? I will obey the lawful commands of the spiritual shepherd whom Christ has appointed. Why, because, by the grace of God, I am a Catholic and I have Faith, Hope, and Charity - And I want to follow and obey our Lord so that I might get to heaven!
It is not property ownership, nor parish corporate structure which makes a person or a parish "Protestant" - it is matters of doctrine which deviate from what the Catholic CHurch teaches.
This strict obedience is nonesense! St. Thomas More & St. John Fisher were martyrs preciesly because they were disobedient to a lawful, but immoral authority. So much for your knowledge of the lives of the saints!
The "Mother Angelica" example is hardly irrelvant - it is crucial, but of course it suit you to wave it away. She "obeyed" as she had no choice, lest she and her entire ministry be silenced by apostate bishops.
In terms of the situation which I posited - where your local ordinary suppresses YOUR parish, seizes its assets, and demands your immediate and total silence and meek obedience - I would contend that anyone who would obey such a Bishop is a fool! There is nothing - not even Canon Law - which gives a Bishop the right to act in such a premptory, greedy, and uncharitable manner. Yet they are doing just that......right now......in many dioceses as I write this.
And - as I said - just because something is in Canon Law does not make it "right". After all, Canon Law is entirely man-made. It did not descend from heaven out of whole cloth. It is merely a proceedural document. That does not mean that pastor and bishops should not be obeyed. But it does not do away with the intelligent excercise of right reason, and human logic.
Again I say: Christ walked this earth for 33 years and owned nothing but the clothes upon his back. He had no money or material goods......neither did his apostles. They were given food to eat by the common people, bathed in the river like them, and wore what they wore. If they had any little money for food, it was becuase of the random generousity of people.
Christ gave to Peter.....and hence to all future popes, bishops, and priests........nothing.....but raw spiritual power. He did not promise them money, much less great buildings, and countless riches. He did say that the Father would provide for all their needs.
That, in the final analysis is ALL that the Church has: spiritual authority and power. It has always been at its greatest when, like its Master, it was poor, and had to depend solely on that power.
Soon, what is left of the infrastructure of the NO church will be stripped bare. This is now happening before our eyes. It is a mimicing of the stripping of Christ prior to His crucixion.
Left bare and abandoned by apostate priest, power mad apostate bishop, and layman alike, the remnant of the Church will learn again how to weild that raw spiritual power again. This was what made the church great - and will make it great again.
And for an epilogue........Judas was perhaps the most learned of the 12. He spoke multiple languages, and was literate.
He also was the one who kept the books........and held the purse for the group.
With apologies to Gilbert & Sullivan: "Judas is the very model of a modern Vicar General"
.........or bishop.