Vatican reverses Illinois priest’s suspension
Tags
Related Posts
About the author
Rev. William Rowe
An Illinois priest, forced out of his parish by Belleville Bishop Edward Braxton for improvising prayers during Mass, has had his suspension reversed by the Vatican.
The Vatican decided in favor of the Rev. William Rowe on one of three counts, saying Braxton had not followed the proper procedure. Rowe said an accompanying letter from Braxton informed him that the bishop would appeal that final Vatican decision to a higher church court.
The Vatican’s reversal of Rowe’s suspension means the priest can celebrate Mass outside the Belleville diocese, Rowe said, so long as he has the approval of the bishops’ governing other dioceses where he would say Mass.
Despite that, the Vatican ruled against much of Rowe’s appeal. Rome had upheld his removal from the parish by Braxton, and agreed with the bishop’s withdrawal of the priest’s “faculties” — or his license to practice ministry under church law.
Rowe, the former pastor of St. Mary Catholic Church in Mount Carmel, Ill., has clashed with Braxton over altering the liturgical prayers of the Roman Missal — the book of prayers, chants and responses used during Mass.
Braxton did not respond to a request for comment.
Rowe is currently working at St. Joseph parish in Olney, teaching religion classes, helping students prepare Mass and cleaning tables in the lunch room.
If the Vatican’s reversal is upheld on appeal, Rowe said, he may move to another diocese in order to be able to celebrate Mass.
“I’ll have to begin to explore how open other bishops would be to that,” Rowe said.
SOURCE
Leave a Comment
Photo Archive
-
Jun 19, 2013 5:55
Poll: Catholic Church view on same-sex marriage causing parishoners to flee
-
Jun 19, 2013 5:52
Man arrested in shooting during Catholic church service in Utah
-
Jun 19, 2013 5:45
Scituate parishioners taking dispute to highest Vatican court
-
Jun 19, 2013 5:41
Local clergy abuse survivor testifies before the United Nations
-
Jun 19, 2013 5:38
Alleged victim of clergy sexual abuse files lawsuit
-
Jun 18, 2013 10:28
Chaos as gunfire erupts at Utah Father’s day Mass
-
Jun 17, 2013 4:51
Obama names former CRS head ambassador to the Vatican
-
Jun 17, 2013 4:46
Addressing U.S., global child malnutrition a top priority for advocates
-
Jun 17, 2013 4:42
Female priests risk excommunication to be ordained
-
Jun 14, 2013 5:04
Catholic League president: ‘Nest of homosexual priests’ should be ‘rooted out’
41 Comments
what ever is bound on earth is bound in heaven
Nice calling a cannonized saint delusional.
Come on Jim some of the canonized saits were real crazies, that doesn’t take away from their dsanctity. Read the life of Christina the astonishing. I think in our Catholic Culture we have made some delusional wack jobs saints. The paranormal is alive and well in the lives of the saints. What else did Jesus forget to tell us while he was on earth, that he told Faustena.
Well said Joan. In the diary of Saint Faustina, Jesus says that he desires obedience above all.
Perhaps Faustena was delusional. I thought Revelation ended with the death of the last apostle. Did Jesus forget to tell us some thing and then say, “Ooops Faustina I forgot to mention , and the tell her about obedience. The church is very clear that no one has to accet private revelation.
One is not forced to accept private revelation but he that does so is acting like a fool.
Joe, Jesus already said “I only do those things which are pleasing to the Father.” We have the gospel which indicates the obedience of Jesus. Faustina jumping in has added nothing we didn’t know already.
Joe,
I thought Jesus desires love above all. Funny isn’t it that Paul get it so wrong when he wrote that the greatest of all is love.
The changes were necessary due to the butchering of the original translations. And they were done by the holy father. And it’s not wasting time and money when it comes to the liturgy.
I thought the translation came down like the DEW FALL. Admittedly it is very difficult and cumbersome to pray. No one in the parishes I am associated with likes it.
The eastern catholics or orthodox also have rules and rubrics to be followed. The problem with the priest is that he’s trying to be cute and make the liturgy his own. And that’s disobedience.
Joe, you need a new perspective. I’m with Tony. Do you know how much $ and wasted time in years the Bishops spent tweaking the Mass with words like “Consubstantial with the Father?” Every parish then had to shell out big bucks for all new lectionaries. It all amounts to nothing of eternal value.
“Consubstantial” was a concession to the English speakers of ENGLAND who have been saying it for 40 years. The English-speaking bishops wanted one translation for all English speaking peoples across the globe. And since American has a tendency to be culturally imperialist, they chose a word that was familiar to England’s Catholics–AND is more precisely theologically. It’s helpful to know this context.
You must not be catholic then Tony. You might want to read the catechism, early church fathers, to get a better understanding of scriptures and tradition.
No Joe, I’m a Catholic, I know a little bit about how the early church came to celebrate Eucharist. I know to that the celebration of liturgy among the Eastern Churches and our churches differ in some ways in form and words. I just don’t think it’s worth getting all bent out of shape over. Jesus is greater than us, and I’ll bet he isn’t as worried about a few little words as we are.
Tony, there’s a thing called obedience that Jesus takes very seriously. When you are specifically instructed to do something, you obey and do it. Are you catholic? Do you know who the priest is? who he represents? Yes, not saying the correct formula for consecration will make it null. Only the priest has the power to consecrate, not the lay people.
Oh wow, so Jesus would be very legalistic over the words of consecration even though in the Gospels he warned people not to be legalistic.
Avoiding legalism does not mean ignoring the law. It means making the law so second nature internally that one can rise above it without abolishing it. Legalism alone is inadequate, but abolishing the law is inadequate as well. This is where liturgical stability comes into play,just like the rules of golf or football or traffic laws. If one person choose to change them, then it is no longer a communal activity.
Joe,
Just what is the correct formula. There are 4 accounts of the Last Supper in the New Testament and each one has a different formula.
For some here, it seems like it’s not is a big deal, but it is It’s not about legalism, but obedience. Wait until the priest tries to be cute with the words of consecration and your left with nothing but bread and wine and empty souls. None of these abuses are found in the extraordinary form.
I wonder if Jesus would limit his presence over a few words. Didn’t he say, where there are two or moere gathered in my name, I am there too.?
Basically, he was guilty of thumbing his nose at his superiors, a punishable offense in any venue.
So was Jesus.
More and more Catholicism has become simply centered on legalism –all of which Jesus told church leaders of His time they were off base. So much focus on such minor points John speaks of in Revelation concerning the church at Ephesus “You have lost your first love” –that of Christ. Catholic hierarchy have now morphed into modern day Pharisees.
“College Instructor” above seems not to know that the words at Mass are determined by the Church using the authority given her by Christ himself, is the power to bind and loose. Those who act in defiance of that authority act in defiance not just of the Church but of her divine Head, Jesus. This much Christ made plainly clear, as Sacred Scripture also records.
Dear Father, Please resist the temptations to improvise prayers at mass.
Fr. Bill: I am sure Christ is more honored by seeking His righteousness *first* rather than in your legalistic exercise of liturgical ritual.
Praise God!
“Concerned’s” comments above evince great ignorance. Of course there are serious problems in the world, and no institution does more to mitigate them than the Catholic Church. The priest did not merely change any old words – he changed the words that Christ himself mandates through his Church. It’s hard to think of anything more deleterious to human happiness than altering that which is mandated with divine approbation and authority.
How in the world did you conclude that the prayers said during Mass were mandated by Christ? Not hardly.
It is you Arthur who show ignorance of Jesus’ message. He told the Pharisees and scribes that their concern over such things were not only misguided but doing great harm. Do you think Jesus is more pleased by the person who simply reads words from a book or the person who prays from the heart? You are being misled by thinking that by simply say words you are closer to God. Our God has given the message that what is desired is not sacrifice but a humble heart. Read how many times in Scriptures God rebukes those who pay lip service.
Great problems face the world. Very grave problems face the Church. People are hungry, homeless, dying. People are seeking help, support, comfort. What does a Bishop concentrate on? A priest who changes some words. “Why do your disciples not observe all the rules?” was the question asked by the Pharisees and scribes. Jesus exposed them as hypocrites. I can’t help but think that if this story, a priest who used different words, were in the Gospels, we would see it followed by, “and Jesus wept.”
The words given by the Church are carefully chosen…they are the words of the Bride (the Church) to her Spouse (Christ). They are words that attempt to say on earth what is being said in heaven in the dialogue of love between Father and Son. This question is not about discipline alone (although that is important) but about the formative power of the Word on the people of God. Any priest who sows division among his people by doing whatever he wants in disobedience is the wold in sheep’s clothing.
You really think you are saved by mere words? It’s a shame that so many believe God cares about a few words. I think many are in for a big surprise.
He’s being disciplined because as a priest he is the representative of the Church, and thus is obligated to do what the Church tells him to do. The Mass is public prayer, and as such we pray with what the Church gives us to pray with. The Roman Missal gives various options for things, but for those words and prayers that are fixed, they’re fixed. “Catechism of the Catholic Church”, No. 1125: “For this reason no sacramental rite may be modified or manipulated at the will of the minister or the community. Even the supreme authority in the Church may not change the liturgy arbitrarily, but only in the obedience of faith and with religious respect for the mystery of the liturgy.”
Those of you who are accusing some of being legalistic…….can you imagine what would happen if each priest just said”his own thing”. With obedience comes wisdom and humility, two very necessary virtues if you want to really practice your faith. there are plenty of churches who do their own thing, that is why there are so many other denominations and so many variations of each denomination. I love the fact that one can go anywhere in the world and the Catholic Church will have the same readings and the same words, on any given day. Religious have taken vows of obedience. Sometimes I believe that we forget that it isn’t about us.
Your analogy actually applies to the priest in this case, not the Bishop. In the story you reference, people were treating well intended, but man-made laws as ABOVE the laws of God. Jesus was not condemning adherence to law, but rather condemning the idea that man-made improvisations are equal to, or greater than, the law of God. The priest in this case is doing exactly that – he is putting his own ideas above that of the divinely authorized Church, which he cannot do. So, you are correct that Jesus would weep – he’d weep for people like this priest and those that support him.
[...] http://www.cathnewsusa.com/2012/09/vatican-reverses-illinois-priests-suspension/ Share this:FacebookPinterestImprimirCorreo electrónicoStumbleUponRedditLinkedInTwitterTumblrDiggMe gusta:Me gustaBe the first to like this. [...]
I hope this silences the liturgical police who go around reporting every time a priest sneezes and it isn’t written in the liturgy for him to do so.
I hope this silences the dissident priests and the ill-informed laypeople who support them! This priest’s behavior was no accident.
What is most important about this article is that the priest is not allowed to minister in the diocese in which he was ordained. He can look for another diocese if he wishes who will received him, but Bishop Braxton was able to give ample proof of his “words” and the other line which was just as important. “Despite that, the Vatican ruled against much of Rowe’s appeal. Rome had upheld his removal from the parish by Braxton, and agreed with the bishop’s withdrawal of the priest’s “faculties” — or his license to practice ministry under church law.” In other words, this priest cannot use his faculties unless he is given incardination by another Bishop and/or license to minister in any given diocese.