Orthodoxy v Obedience

One thing that occurred to me to say, which I haven't gotten around to, is that this is not necessarily an "orthodox" v "progressive" debate, though there is usually a strong correlation. A progressive priest isn't automatically going to be so outwardly disobedient. He is capable of respecting his vows while working modestly for changes he thinks are necessary. [This should be obviously true since our priests are the only ones in this era who have publicly called for resignation of their bishop, save the Card. Law case which was extra-ordinary.] An orthodox priest is not immune to disobedience either. Holding particular values and not violating those values are 2 different things. One has to work hard to avoid sin, after all.

Further, as far as Bishop Braxton is concerned, it has been debated whether he's uber-orthodox or not. Some extra-ordinary form devotees in Lake Charles were quite upset when he ended their Mass, but I don't know if that's the whole story. He certainly did not put the kabosh on liturgical dancers at the St. Clare dedication Mass or his own installation Mass here (I think). But he did prohibit Luke Timothy Johnson, a great scripture scholar, from speaking at SIUC's Newman Center b/c of his advocacy for gay marriage and other issues.

There is no doubt that the signing priests are generally on the progressive side of things such as liturgy and authority, while the bishop is more traditional, certainly in terms of hierarchical authority. I am not aware that these priests (Fr. Karban excepted--we know what he thinks) do not accept Catholic dogma (Virgin Birth, Resurrection, etc), though many appear to question matters of discipline and authority.

All that said, an industrious reader sent some additional statistics on the make-up of letter signers and non-signers:

There are 38 active priests in the Diocese ordained 25 years or less.

These are the "John Paul II" priests -- attracted to the priesthood by the late Pope's person, teaching, example. They are the bishops, chancellors, vicars general -- and good parish priests -- in the years to come.

Of these 38 JPII priests, only 5 signed the infamous letter! That's only 13%...

This opposition to the Bishop is generational. Those trained/ordained in the 1960's and 1970's -- who are now in their own '60's and 70's -- are the dissenters.
****
I also noted that Bp. Braxton has placed in Belleville obedient priests who did not sign the statement.

One last thing I will note about the priests ordained in the '60s and '70s is that I have read in the Messenger a good many interviews over the past few years with these men as they celebrate anniversaries of ordinations. I am going to speak in generalizations here based on my recollections of those interviews and how they struck me, so please understand. I have gathered that these men were under the impression--as many Catholics worldwide were--that things were going to be radically different upon completion of V2: liturgically, morally, hierarchically. Humana Vitae was a great disappointment to progressives, including priests who were already ordained and models for the young men who were ordained in that period. Well, they have been different, sure, but not what some folks have wanted, hence we have a plethora of dissenting groups in our faith.

I think some of the Belleville priests of that era may have expected to be able to marry and have families. Many discussed in their interviews that they had gone through episodes of depressions. Many outright expressed their disappointment that the "promises of V2" that they were fed as young men have not materialized. Some priests expressed a lack of fulfillment in their vocations. One went so far as to adopt a boy, which is a great act of charity, but the man did it because he felt incomplete as a priest. What I recall to be most troubling was that I did not see any priest say he pursued his vocation because he loved Jesus and His Church.* I don't recall a clear statement that any wanted to spread the Good News. Some did want to serve God's people. One expressed a love for the liturgy, but I thought the way it was put was odd. It sounded like he enjoyed being able to create his own variations. A few older priests discussed the devotional traditions in their homes (probably in the 1940s-50s) being of strong influence, but I did not read anything deeper in the interview, so maybe there's more there.

I detected a great deal of unhappiness among the interviews of priest from the 60-70s era. This is not what they wanted. Sadly for these men, they were fed lies and are "stuck." Many of their co-horts left the priesthood, of course. But these men hang on, hoping to change Jesus' Church. They really need our prayers for healing. Under any circumstances, being a priest is a difficult vocation day in and day out. All priests need our prayers and support.

St. John Vianney, pray for our priests.

---
*You see, this conflict is about whether they love Jesus and His Church, not whether they like Bishop Braxton.