You know, moving to St. Louis some three years ago has been an educational experience in so many ways. St. Louis remains very much an old-fashioned, blue-collar, labor-friendly city. St. Louis has two very strong religious identities: Roman Catholic and Lutheran. These religious identities are due, in large part, to the very strong ethnic identities with which St. Louis is blessed. One such ethnic identity – the Polish immigrants of the St. Stanislaus Kostka parish – are in the midst of a legal battle with the St. Louis archdiocese that is painful and saddening to witness.
St. Stanislaus is unique in that it was granted a “perpetual charter” to control the property and assets through a board of directors. The St. Louis archdiocese has been attempting to gain control of the parish’s $9 Million in assets, having no legal, moral, or other authority or power to do so. The dispute has escalated from the archdiocese removing the parish’s priest, to the parish independently hiring its own priest, to the archdiocese excommunicating said priest along with the entire board of directors and declaring all religious rites performed at the parish to be “illicit”, to the parish continuing to hold mass and perform religious rites in defiance of the archdiocese’s edicts, to the archdiocese removing the parish from the archdiocese altogether.
The reaction of Saint Louisans has been divided, perhaps even hotly, with support for both St. Stanislaus (more) and the archdiocese of St. Louis (more). Of course, both the archdiocese and the parish have their own side of the dispute.
At least at this point, I am somewhat dispassionate with respect to the legal dispute. Others much more well-versed in the details can offer much more meaningful opinions. The issue I have a problem with, though, is the archdiocese excommunicating the priest, board of directors, and essentially the parish itself over a legal dispute. (I question the right of anyone other than the Holy Spirit to “excommunicate” anyone, but that is another matter altogether.) The idea that such a legal dispute could be grounds for moral action does not appear to be consistent with my understanding of the Bible. For the archdiocese to claim that participants in a so-called “illicit” mass are placing themselves in danger of “mortal sin” is preposterous. The mass worships and glorifies God, regardless of whether or not one recognized as an “official” priest officiates it. (Of course, again, my reading of I Peter 2:9 tells me that there is no longer any separation between laity and priesthood – so my bias is obviously against the Roman Catholic position here.)
Yes, I am extremely bothered that I am forbidden to participate in communion (eucharist) if I attend Roman Catholic mass. We profess faith in the same Christ, and claim righteousness through that same faith. What about “make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace”? Would the Roman Catholic church consider my Catholic friends to be in danger of “mortal sin” if they attended a service at my non-Roman Catholic church? That very thought is preposterous. I would not join those protestants who think that Catholics are “non-Christian” or “unsaved”; to me, anyone who professes faith in Jesus Christ, and claims salvation from sins through that faith alone, is my brother (or sister) in Christ.
Among my observations of being a Saint Louisan for better than three years now is that this city is fragmented and segregated – ideology, ethnicity, even neighborhoods – more than any city I’ve ever known. Identity is not so much as a Saint Louisan as a member of a neighborhood community (of which there are too many to list here). It is extremely disappointing that the same segregation appears in the Christian community in Saint Louis. I pray for the unity of the city – but my prayer is first for the unity of the Church of Saint Louis. And I pray that I will have the opportunity to participate in bringing about the reconciliation so desparately needed.
Chip, Anna, and baby at New Year’s Eve party, December 31, 2005
