« Kneeling? Standing? | Main | Missed this... »
March 22, 2004
Confrontation in St. Louis
Who gets the deed to the Polish church?
Archbishop Raymond Burke sent a clear message this weekend to an independent Polish church in St. Louis: Follow church law or cease to exist as a Catholic church.Many parishioners of St. Stanislaus Kostka Church north of downtown received the letter Saturday from the archbishop outlining the reasons the church must hand over control of approximately $9 million in assets and its finances. Currently, the church is run as a civil corporation with a lay board of directors.
Posted by Amy Welborn | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/567118
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Confrontation in St. Louis:
» AP: (St. Louis) Parishioners challenge archbishop from Extreme Catholic
In 1891, Archbishop Peter Kenrick deeded the Church property in perpetuity to a private parish lay corporation.
This is interesting, I wonder how many of these anomalies are still in existence in the United States.
I think the Archbishop shou... [Read More]
Tracked on Mar 29, 2004 5:13:26 PM
Comments
This is a shame that a confrontation may occur and create some badwill, but the Bishop appears to be right.
Posted by: Peggy at Mar 22, 2004 7:27:02 PM
Oh, please -- we know why they let this run for 100 years!
100 years ago the whole Polish National Church thing was going on and bishops were seriously afraid of losing whole parishes and made all sorts of irregular arrangments; the same is true of lots of older Ruthenian parishes, I'm told.
The idea of post-Council of Trent uniformity has always been more of ideal than a reality, anyway.
Posted by: Michael Tinkler at Mar 22, 2004 7:34:30 PM
Lay Trusteeship lives.
Posted by: Jimmy Mac at Mar 22, 2004 7:57:30 PM
There are compromises that can be made in cases like this. For example, the nonprofit corporation petitions the local planing authority for a lot partition, then gives the church and the land it is on to the Archdiocese. Or if they can get the Archbishop to go along with it, negotiate a peppercorn lease to the Archdiocese for as long as the church is kept open.
Posted by: Claude Muncey at Mar 22, 2004 8:03:41 PM
Archbishop Burke is no doubt within his rights, which he knows very well as an excellent canon lawyer. But situations like this are reminders that the Church in the United States was erected with much more tyrannical episcopal authority than many places in Europe had ever known, this out of fear of any system that even vaguely resembled a Protestant one.
The old code has a revealing canon, 455: "The right of appointing and instituting pastors belongs to the local Ordinary...reprobating any contrary custom [i.e., there were places that had had a different system for generations], but with due regard for the privilege of election or presentation, where this legitimately applies."
Posted by: David Kubiak at Mar 22, 2004 8:44:32 PM
OK so the parish is intact financially but most of the parishioners are out of town leaving about 130 regular worshippers. There are two diocesan (paid) priests staffing a parish with how many baptisms, first communions, confirmations, weddings and deaths?
There are no weekday Masses here and either one or two on Sunday - that's it.
If one looks at the arch of St. Louis website one can see the multitude of parishes in the same area - including another Polish parish. Do the parisioners want a 'vibrant' community of out of towners or a beautiful museum because right now they have both things.
Posted by: Colleen at Mar 22, 2004 9:43:55 PM
Archbishop Burke is simply making them **** or get off the pot. They cannot claim they're a Catholic Church if they're not. If only more of our leaders had as much courage as he! He understands that this reluctance claim to ourselves and everyone else what we are has led us to where we are.
Posted by: michigancatholic at Mar 22, 2004 10:05:19 PM
Ditto Jimmy Mac's comments. Who would have thunk it--the year 2004 and we're still talking about Lay Trustees and considering a possible Plenary Council of Baltimore. I have to finish reading the volumes of John Carroll I started a few months ago.
Posted by: Bill Cork at Mar 22, 2004 11:53:32 PM
New Oxford Review once ran a story by a former federal investigative official who indicated that accounting practices in many dioceses and parishes offer the possibility of misfeasance or malfeasance, and that the NCCB doesn't want to do a thing about it.
Here is a case in which a church is run in a financially accountable manner, with lay people in key positions, and the bishop wants it to comply with his "business model" or else it's no longer Catholic? What arrogance!
When you consider this case along with Cdl. Mahony's arbitrary removal of a pastor with a reputable track record in the L.A. archdiocese, Bishop Grahmann's similar activity in Dallas (which has resulted in the spiritual decline of the Church in question), Cdl. Keeler's abritrary release of priests in Baltimore merely accused or sexual molestation or impropriety you get a picture of not only bureaucratic arrogance but outright tyranny. The fact that Dolan is an "outstanding canon lawyer" only means that he knows how to manipulate the law for his purposes.
How long must we Catholics put up with such tyranny in the name of an outmoded governance style designed for Imperial Rome?
Posted by: Joseph D'Hippolito at Mar 23, 2004 1:41:40 AM
I read these comments and think, do you guys want a vibrant parish or an empty beautiful museum?
The parish has TWO priests to minister (one resident and one administrator) to not more than 130 parishioners. The parish is virtually empty during the week and has only two Masses on Sundays.
Take a look at this map , St. Stanislaus Kostka is number 13 - there are 52 parishes in St. Louis city. This parish is in an area which is very run-down and dangerous. I think it's great that people continue to financially support the parish although they've moved out of the area and are no longer parishioners, but isn't a parish about more than financial contributions?
Posted by: Colleen at Mar 23, 2004 8:02:58 AM
Bishop threatens to close parish if it doesn't obey canon law.When I first read the headline I was hoping for so much more. Imagine if some of the many, many parishes that are consistently violating canon law every Sunday Mass with their interpretations of the words of the Canon were threatened like this! You mean they have the power to close these places of mockery of our faith? Oh well, it was about who controls the money. Thats so important.
Posted by: A differentAmy at Mar 23, 2004 9:28:42 AM
There's quite a bit more to this story than meets the eye, it's pretty messy: "Polish Church faces crisis". What interested me is the apparent inner dissention among the parish trustees.
Posted by: Colleen at Mar 23, 2004 10:25:09 AM
Catholic parishes are routinely incorporated under Wisconsin law, so it's surprising that Archbishop Burke, just promoted from LaCrosse to St. Louis, now finds this so great a problem.
Posted by: Terrence Berres at Mar 23, 2004 10:37:58 AM
No Terrance, it's not surprising, unfortunately. It's called "greed" and "lust for power".
Posted by: Joseph D'Hippolito at Mar 23, 2004 12:18:22 PM
Wow, that's a pretty hefty allegation there Mr. D'Hippolito. I'd be interested to see your reasons for accusing Abp. Burke of greed and lust for power. You must know him pretty well to be able to make such a statement.
Posted by: Tim Ferguson at Mar 23, 2004 1:51:49 PM
Just a useless tidbit...I used to work with someone from Stl (I live in the Metro-east) who went to St Stans- he really loved the polka masses....(really- I'm not making this up!)
Posted by: Mel at Mar 23, 2004 3:58:45 PM
Colleen: silly woman! An orthodox museum is INFINITELY more preferable than an active, vibrant parish that isn't what the neocons want! Then they can have liturgical concerts as opposed to masses, dress-up parades and re-enactments of days gone by which were, in their time, deviations from what went on before them.
Posted by: Jimmy Mac at Mar 23, 2004 7:44:29 PM
An active, vibrant old-folks home you mean, Jimmy?
Posted by: michigancatholic at Mar 23, 2004 10:07:25 PM
Jimmy Mac: not sure what this has to do with "neo-cons" (another label [smack!] I can't keep track of!) - this situation seems to be a commonsensical one, not based in ideology.
Posted by: Colleen at Mar 24, 2004 11:00:55 AM
Just thinking that the title of this thread should be changed from "Who gets the deed to the Polish Church" to "Who gets the dead Polish Church".
Posted by: Colleen at Mar 24, 2004 11:02:14 AM
Tim, human tendencies such as greed and lust for power don't mitigate themselves just because the person manifesting them is a clergyman. In fact, those tendencies can get worse if the person in question works within a system that discourages accountability and transparency, and allows his to get away with whatever.
Ask yourself this, Tim: If the parish in question weren't governed by a lay board of directors, would the archbishop care?
Also, I thought the Polish Catholic Church was a separate denomination from the Roman Catholic Church (though in communion w/Rome), and could govern itself in methods independent from those dictated by Rome. Anybody out there have any info about this?
Posted by: Joseph D'Hippolito at Mar 24, 2004 3:48:06 PM
I don't think the Polish Catholic Church is in communion with Rome.
Joe, even the lay run board is split on this issue.
Posted by: Colleen at Mar 24, 2004 4:37:21 PM
If this is a parish of the Polish NATIONAL Catholic Church then no, it is not in communion with Rome. If it is an Polish ethnic enclave of the Roman Catholic Church, that's another story.
Posted by: Christine at Mar 24, 2004 4:59:19 PM
But then it occurs to me, if it were a Polish National Catholic Church parish it wouldn't be under the jurisdiction of a Roman Catholic bishop anyway, although the PNCC is undergoing talks with Rome.
Posted by: Christine at Mar 24, 2004 5:00:31 PM
Yes, two priests. One, a lawyer at the Curia, the other straight from the old country-an employee of the Archdiocese with a non-immigrant visa.
Posted by: Ten Uzytkownik at Oct 14, 2004 1:07:19 AM
