Why Don’t Priests Follow Rubrics? Fr. Z Cheerfully Rants.

[Evangetholic]

You're not sharing your concerns with the Bishop. You are posting them on a public forum where anyone may see. Non-Catholics like me and even non-Christians. People are questioning the man's sanity. If he teaches erroneously warn others and by all means rebuke him. But if all that is happening is that you do not understand his manner of life or like the words he chooses then there is no justification for saying so in public. It's not about him, but about the good name of Jesus Christ and the work that is the Gospel. Do not attack other Christians unless (public) sin or error on some essential point of the faith is at stake.

[Evangetholic]

Small correction: "the work that is the Gospel"  the Gospel is a work. God's work. I meant rather "the work that is sharing/spreading the Gospel."

 

 

[Basilisa Marie]

OP asked for our opinions, probably with full knowledge that there's a whole lot of diversity in this Catholic forum - a diversity that's just fine.  We're giving our opinions.  I'm not concerned enough about him to go to his bishop, but I'd be within my rights to do so if I were.  If you scroll alllllllll the way down to the bottom of his blog, he has a disclaimer saying that his opinions are just his own and not representative of any organizations he belongs to.  
 

If I have no right to criticize him in public a public place (a place with the purpose of discussion of ideas, seeing as that's what a forum is) if I just disagree with his validly held opinions that HE has expressed in public...then why doesn't the same logic apply to him and his disagreements with me over my own validly held opinions?  He frequently uses inflammatory language to make his point.  Would I be denied the same right? 

Edited February 10, 2013 by Basilisa Marie

[Nihil Obstat]

Nihil, he's a diocesan priest taking his position as a moral leader to a more-than-local level.  He's set himself up as a leader in the blog community, and we have every right to write a letter to his bishop if we think something is going amiss, or if we need clarification.  Since he has no specific parish, his audience is his flock.  

I know of another priest who has his own blog and was posting incredibly uncharitable things about some Catholics and responding to people in a very un-pastoral way.  A bunch of people wrote emails to his bishop, and he has since toned it down.  We can't expect bishops to be completely knowledgable about the online activities of all the priests in their care.  In fact, it's our job to help each other out, and the polite and proper course of action would in fact be a letter or email to his bishop.  You write to the bishop, and let the bishop take care of it.  

So then write to that bishop, and Fr. Z's own diocesan bishop. Go ahead. That is always our right as Catholics. But some of the comments in this thread are completely inappropriate.

 

By the way,

 

I am a priest in good standing in the Suburbicarian Diocese of Velletri-Segni in Italy.  This is one of the little ancient dioceses encircling Rome, thus “Suburbicarian”.  My name appears on my diocese’s website in the list of diocesan priests.  Unlike poor Roger Maris, I have no asterisk by my name.  I have faculties to say Holy Mass (can. 903), to preach (can. 764), and to receive sacramental confessions (can. 969.1).

I am living, with the knowledge and consent of my bishop and his predecessor, outside my diocese and in the United States.  I am working on my doctoral thesis, working on the internet, writing as a columnist for different publications, and giving talks at conferences and other events.

I am not engaged in any official external apostolate where I live.  I have no assignment.  I haven’t sought anything on top of what I now do.  I can barely make headway on my thesis as it is!  (It’s about the figure of David as an exemplum of civic virtues between Augustine and Ambrose, by the way, for the Augustinianum.) Since I am not functioning publicly in any way as a priest within the diocese where I live, I do not need the faculties of the diocese and therefore I have not sought them.  I have been in the diocese with the knowledge of the last two bishops of the place.  I don’t know what the present bishop knows. I haven’t been in touch.

Think about it this way.  If a priest goes fishing in another diocese or, say, goes to a condo he buys for retirement in Florida and never functions publicly as a priest there, he doesn’t need the faculties of the local diocese.  If he travels to another place and stays there, even for some time, and yet never functions as a priest there, he doesn’t need to inform the diocese or obtain anything from them.  He can say Mass privately and go about his business as it pleases him and his own bishop back home. This is something that Ms. Zagano doesn’t seem to understand, and she has apparently allowed her less-than-well-informed imagination run wildly down a steep path.

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2011/08/waiting-for-zagano/

[Evangetholic]

OP asked for our opinions, probably with full knowledge that there's a whole lot of diversity in this Catholic forum - a diversity that's just fine.  We're giving our opinions.  I'm not concerned enough about him to go to his bishop, but I'd be within my rights to do so if I were.  If you scroll alllllllll the way down to the bottom of his blog, he has a disclaimer saying that his opinions are just his own and not representative of any organizations he belongs to.  
 

If I have no right to criticize him in public a public place (a place with the purpose of discussion of ideas, seeing as that's what a forum is) if I just disagree with his validly held opinions that HE has expressed in public...then why doesn't the same logic apply to him and his disagreements with me over my own validly held opinions?  He frequently uses inflammatory language to make his point.  Would I be denied the same right? 

 

He hasn't the right either if he's done so. But cheek turning, submissiveness to those in authority, Christian love, and what not. and neither this forum nor this country are granters of rights, whatever those are...

[Nihil Obstat]

I do not care if someone disagrees with Fr. Z's opinion. I have a problem with slinging accusations of mental instability and hinting at sinister motives. And so does basic Catholic morality.

[Basilisa Marie]

He hasn't the right either if he's done so. But cheek turning, submissiveness to those in authority, Christian love, and what not. and neither this forum nor this country are granters of rights, whatever those are...

 

 

Well, he's not my bishop, I respect his position as a priest, the fact that he's working on his doctorate, has made a name for himself in the Catholic blogging community, and does fine work explaining the liturgy to people.  I don't think it's right to say he's mentally unstable.  I don't always agree with his opinions and I have good reasons for my own opinions. I don't like the way he expresses his opinions sometimes, but so what?  I don't always express myself charitably, either.  Do I think he has more of an obligation because he has a large following and is a priest? Sure, but that's just my opinion.  And it's obvious he's not left undefended on this forum - I knew the moment I posted a response that Nihil was probably going to jump in and say he's awesome.  

[Nihil Obstat]

Fr. Z draws many people back to confession. Some after decades away. I say he is doing his duty as a priest. Better than many I have met.

[Lil Red]

Fr. Z draws many people back to confession. Some after decades away. I say he is doing his duty as a priest. Better than many I have met.

 

a lot of people excused Fr. Corapi's pretty naughty behavior because he "spoke the truth" and brought people back to the Sacraments. Doesn't make what he did okay.

[Nihil Obstat]

a lot of people excused Fr. Corapi's pretty naughty behavior because he "spoke the truth" and brought people back to the Sacraments. Doesn't make what he did okay.

That is correct. Good thing there is no credible or sane reason to suspect that Fr. Z is doing such things. Equating them seems to be in rather poor taste.

[Lil Red]

to be clear, I personally don't care for Fr. Z's tone, the way he writes, etc. (because he usually comes off as a pompous blowhard to me). But I choose not to read him. I do have a problem with celebrity priests and the following that they attract. Because sooner or later, for a lot of people, truth is true because Fr. So-and-So says it, not because the Church says it. (like what has happened with Fr. Corapi and other priests).

That is correct. Good thing there is no credible or sane reason to suspect that Fr. Z is doing such things. Equating them seems to be in rather poor taste.

 

The comparison is a good one. A lot of people excuse a priest's behavior or poor character because "he brings people to the Sacraments."

[Nihil Obstat]

The comparison is a good one. A lot of people excuse a priest's behavior or poor character because "he brings people to the Sacraments."

I said nothing about his character or behaviour, good or bad. I said he is doing his job as a priest.

[Lil Red]

I said nothing about his character or behaviour, good or bad. I said he is doing his job as a priest.

 

So was Fr. Corapi.

Of course, same could be said for a priest who abuses people/children as long as he is "bringing people to the Sacraments".

[Gabriela]

What does it mean, specifically, for an opinion to be "valid"?

[Maggyie]

I can barely make headway on my thesis as it is!  (It’s about the figure of David as an exemplum of civic virtues between Augustine and Ambrose, by the way, for the Augustinianum.) Since I am not functioning publicly in any way as a priest within the diocese where I live, I do not need the faculties of the diocese and therefore I have not sought them.  I have been in the diocese with the knowledge of the last two bishops of the place.  I don’t know what the present bishop knows. I haven’t been in touch.

 

Emphasis mine. Surely he isn't serious?