Tuesday, June 10, 2008


I am very happy to announce that a former board member of the supressed parish of St. Stanislaus Kostka in St. Louis, Edward Florek, has reconciled with the Church after meeting with a very jubilant Abp. Raymond L. Burke.

Florek told the St. Louis Review that he believed Father Marek Bozek, the priest hired to be the church’s pastor, was leading the parish away from Roman Catholicism. He said he stopped attending St. Stanislaus in March when the priest “refused to enter discussions with the archbishop.”

Florek expressed his regrets over the St. Stanislaus board’s actions.

“I regret that we didn’t envision the harm which we did to the parish and St. Louis. "We worried not only about the financial angle of the parish but about the spiritual guidance. We protected the financial part of the parish but we lost on the spiritual guidance and direction leading us from the Roman Catholic Church," Florek said to the St. Louis Review.


Archbishop Burke on Friday issued a statement about Florek’s reconciliation, saying, “He expressed his deep sorrow and regret over the harm which his schismatic activity, as a member of the Board of Directors, has caused, and promised to do everything possible in the future to promote the communion of the Church through obedience to her legitimate authority.

“I am profoundly happy that Mr. Florek has reconciled himself and is now, once again, in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church. The purpose of an ecclesiastical censure like excommunication is the return of a member, who has broken communion with the Church, to full communion with the Church. I thank God that Mr. Florek has returned to the Catholic Church and is no longer under any censure from the Church. His return gives hope that other board members will return home to the Catholic Church. I ask the faithful of the Archdiocese to continue to pray for that intention.”

Excerpts in italics from CNA. RSCT to the Curt Jester.

In the words of Stephen "Flounder" Furst: Oh boy, is this great!
In the words of little Stewie Griffin: Victory is mine!
In the words of Fred Flintstone: Yabba dabba doo!
And in the words of Brittany Theresa Page: Yay!



Jason Pennington said...

This is very intriguing. I went back and read the article. I was curious of course what exactly the guys had done over at St. Stan's. No really juicy details other than "they were led from roman catholicism". Surely the "renegade" was sacrificing goats or something. Burying virgins alive under the high altar? Substituting the Gospels for Science and Health With Key to the Scriptures? Insisting that the Pope actually has something to say that worth while? So, I read on.

The problem was that the archdiocese wanted the property the church sat on. They wanted the land. I guess they either hadn't wanted the land or they hadn't needed it back in 1891. All I can surmise is that the land probably is now worth much more than it was back then. The board's worry was that if the church got control of the land, something bad might happen to them. Could we assume that the church would then close the ethnic parish, and sell the land for a....profit? Makes one wonder why the church-founded board were so adament regarding their control of the property. We'll see if the church closes in the coming months. Let's keep an eye on this one. I think it could get really really interesting. Why was nothing done like this in over 100 years? Sounds fishy.

Any scoop on why the priest is a "renegade"?

I found the deal about recitation of the credo quite odd in this case, especially because the guy's excommunication had nothing to do with his faith in the Trinity (unless the "renegade" was actually a Unitarian or something). From the outside, the whole scenario looks this foolish:

Mama Ecclesia: "We want your land!"

People: "You can't have it. You let us have it in the first place."

M.E: "We changed our mind."

P: "Go F--- yourself!"

M.E: "Interdict! Christina, bring me the axe!"

P: "I'd sure like to see the cathedral mosaics again. Ok. I'm sorry."

M.E. "Now, since you were no longer a Christian for insisting on upholding our first decree and then not letting us change our mind, and thus denying the existence of the Holy Trinity and the virgin birth, read this text and sign here. Oh, and we'll need your first born."

Is St. Stan in a thriving business district with loads of development? Or is it in a place where no one much really wants to go and the land is worth more as a check in the bank than a deed in a portfolio? Hmm...isn't that the same question as "What if Catherine hadn't been related to Charles V?" I'll tell you this: She would have been Henry's legitimate ex and burning in hell for all eternity as an evil seductress, and princess Mary would have been subsequently swinging by her tits from the pope's bedpost (not that she'd have been the first to do so...)

At any rate, keep us posted as the curious case of St. Stan's unfolds. I have a feeling it ain't all over with just yet.


Brian Michael Page said...

The argument over the land was one thing that had gone on for quite some time. What got the board members excommunicated was that they took it upon themselves to "hire" a priest from the Springfield-Cape Girardeau diocese. That priest accepted the post at St. Stan's against the wishes of both Abp. Burke and the Bishop of Springfield-Cape Girardeau. This excommunicated the board and the priest that was hired, as they were found to be in schism.