Jesus Called: He Wants His Religion Back.

I get to the office this morning and there's a message from my boss: he's going horseback riding and he'll be in sometime after noon. I was irritated; I wanted to have breakfast with my sister before she heads back to California, and I should otherwise be in bed with this hellacious cold... but nooooo...

~~

I was startled to read in Monday's Repulsive that Father Dale Fushek is once more feeding his ego. He has been forbidden to hold any services or do any kind of ministry in light of the allegations and his administrative suspension. The first glaring error in the article is that Fushek is not a "former priest"; he is still a priest at the present time, and one in deep trouble at that. The phone lines to Rome must be burning up.

From the article: "He said he's a preacher and he wants to preach." To me, that translates into "I'm in it for me, and I'll do what I want." BZZZZZZT, wrong answer! This is the same guy who went in with a former priest--Mark Dippre, former pastor of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, who dumped the priesthood and married the woman he'd been boinking for awhile--and did another similar service before Thanksgiving.

The fact that he takes his vows and vocation so lightly is sad. What happened to obedience? What about humility? From a forum I read, "Secular priests are bound by an implicit vow of chastity that results from taking orders. Their obligation to obey the bishop does not come from a vow, but from Canon Law." I'm thinking that Fushek wasn't paying attention and took a vow of disobedience. He's certainly ignored any direction from Bishop Olmsted and Msgr. Adamson. I also believe he's mistaken the terms career and vocation. You don't "quit" the priesthood and do a career change. It's not corporate America.

It's strange--once he was beyond the protection of Bp. O'Brien, his star fell fast.

Fr. Mike Manning, SVD, on one of his Q&A pages, stated: "A priest's obedience to a bishop's difficult order catches our attention when we find ourselves enmeshed in an overly selfish understanding of freedom. The prophetic call of the priesthood speaks of an ideal. It is an attempt to imitate Christ in a radical way." Fushek was and is not living up to this ideal, even if you ignore the legal woes he has.

I'm not one to say this often, but Fushek is listening to the devil these days, thinking he doesn't need to obey, doesn't need to look within himself and see the flaws, causes and effects of his actions, and he's obviously listening to his ego, rather than remember the promises he made to God in shepherding His flock.

I was going to continue the commentary with anecdotes and opinions, but in the end I know I shouldn't--I'll just pray that he sees the errors of his ways and humbles himself before God and asks his forgiveness for making a sham out of his vows.

One last thought, though, from the end of the article: " 'If I have to leave the church for him, I'll do it' Gergosian said."

Wow. Just.... wow. Cult of personality, anyone? You're following the wrong man, sir. The one you should be following is the Man on the Cross.

~~

This leads me to something that has bothered me for awhile. In candidates' formation recently, one of the formation directors (we have it co-chaired) keeps harping on the decisions made by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, both before and after his election to the papacy. One he doesn't like at all was the declaration of the primacy of Catholicism. Well, duh--even if you're not a theologian, of course we believe that we are the One True Faith. Why else would we be here? Besides, he's made a statement on a matter of faith; shush.

And I know Franciscanism embraces ecumenism, which is great and fine--I'm good with that, and have always lived my life thusly; in fact, I'm fascinated by the rites and rituals of other religions. However, I have found in my two and a half years here that we Franciscans are extremely tolerant of any other religion on earth, but there's a thread of distrust and dislike for a certain section of the Catholic community, if some don't just outright despise them.

In fact, this past spring, I was to cover a subtopic of Catch Me a Rainbow Too that was titled, "Fundamentalism". The entire section was a backhanded slap in the face against anyone who observes or even likes the Tridentine Rite, and I was going to gently call the writer on it and encourage dialogue within the group. I personally find this stance highly hypocritical of the SFO--we embrace those with conflicting beliefs but shun those within our own fold? My presentation on that section, however, got hijacked by the then-director, who proceeded to go off on anything and anyone who even liked the Mass and anything that came to pass prior to Vatican II. I was shocked at the vitriol and vehemence (an attitude mirrored by the aforementioned current co-chair). I was disillusioned and sad, and my talk got derailed so badly that I saw no point in trying further.

From this incident nearly ten months ago, a burgeoning depressive funk has been born on my part where it came to the SFO, compounded by various other things within the functions and activities of my individual fraternity. I was momentarily uplifted by the retreat, but more and more I have felt that because I lean towards the traditional end of the spectrum that I may not fit into the scope and mission of the SFO, because of it's liberal, and sometimes mind-blowing outright disobedient, leanings within the Church.

I have been told twice, in two separate meetings, that if I do not "conform" to certain things, that if I don't pattern myself on other candidates' path, that I will "not be recommended to move forward." I find the use of pressure re: conformity odd in light of the fact that Francesco Bernadone was the greatest non-conformist in the Church, yet he succeeded in weaving his new way of thought within the fabric of the Catholic faith, remaining obedient, and getting the message across that Catholicism is not a passive religion--something that needs to be preached today as it was 800 years ago.

There's a few problems with these rocks being flung at my head: most of the people in fraternity are old enough to be my parents, and in some cases, grandparents; I am the youngest by at least five years; I am at a totally different place in my life than the fellow candidates I'm being prodded into "conformity"; and I will not be goaded into being disobedient and/or flouting the Church's stances--don't get my wrong, I'm not a blind follower by any means (God gave us brains, after all), but even Francis on his deathbed exhorted his flock to be true to the Roman Church, and that is what I intend to do.

From Testament of the Holy Father St Francis:

...After that the Lord gave me, and gives me, so much faith in priests who live according to the form of the holy Roman Church...

...And we ought to honor and venerate all theologians and those who minister to us the most holy Divine Words as those who minister to us spirit and life... (et tu, Ratzinger?)

...And I caused it to be written in few words and simply, and the Lord Pope confirmed it for me...

...I, little Brother Francis, make for you, my blessed brothers, in order that we may observe in a more Catholic way the Rule which we have promised to the Lord...

From St. Bonaventure’s Major Life of St. Francis:

...He spoke of patience and poverty and of being faithful to the Holy Roman Church, giving precedence to the Holy Gospels before all else... (emphasis mine)

Skepticism, indifference, sadness, pressure, grief, apathy, feelings of exile and exclusion... I'm torn between composing a resignation letter to my minister and sticking it out to be a voice of reason in a mad world.

I don't know what to do.