SCOOP: Milwaukee – Archbp. Dolan sets up a house for the ICK

I received this news.

Archbishop Dolan of Milwaukee today issued a decree erecting a house of the Institute of Christ the King in Milwaukee at St. Stanislaus Parish.

The Institute will control the parish with one of their men as parochial administrator and some Institute fellows joining him. 

A secular priest will care for the Ordinary Form liturgy there.

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in SESSIUNCULA. Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to SCOOP: Milwaukee – Archbp. Dolan sets up a house for the ICK

  1. Patrick says:

    Didn’t they already run this parish?

  2. adamsaj says:

    this is from the Institute’s website:

    Milwaukee, Institute’s New Apostolate Location
    The Most Rev. Timothy M. Dolan, Archbishop of Milwaukee, has graciously invited the Institute of Christ the King to serve the Latin Mass apostolate in his archdiocese. Priests of the Institute will be offering Sunday Mass at St. Stanislaus Church starting in Advent. Many thanks to His Grace, as well as to the Franciscan Fathers at St. Stanislaus.

    it has been there for a while now. it looks like they had a priest traveling to say Mass there, but now they are actually opening a house. also sounds like the Franciscans have left, and the Institute is actually taking over the parish.

  3. Patrick Rothwell says:

    Just out of curiosity, how is it that the ICK is able to control parishes – parishes of historical and/or architectural significance – in a way that the FSSP hasn’t so far? Is it the ICK’s high aesthetic standards? Does the ICK Play Well With Others in a way that the FSSP is not adept? Is it the FSSP’s history as an SSPX offshoot?

  4. Marc says:

    This is awesome news! Keep the TLM train a going!!!

  5. Antonius says:

    Mr. Rothwell,

    I’m not sure I would be able to state my opinion on the conduct of the Institute compared to the FSSP without coming off as polemical, but I suggest you, just as an example, compare the few sentences (regarding the apostolate in the archdiocese of Milwaukee) from the Institute’s website and the choice of words used for everything surrounding the new church hosting FSSP’s Rome apostolate.

  6. dj says:

    As a Wisconsinite, I seem to recal tha the Latin Mass community had been operating out of a small and plain church outside of Milw. St. Mary’s Help of Christians I think it was called. That Church was closed down and the Latin Mass community relocated to St. Stans’ which is an amazing Church in the “Polish Cathedral” style, in the old Polish south side neighborhood in Milw. The Franciscans run St. Anthony’s Church which is honestly one bloc from St. Stans which they were also running and for a while I think had only one Mass a week. The Latin Mass commuunity moved in last winter I think and so now St. Stan’s is growing and doing well. When I Was there last an older (retired) priest was doing the Mass but I think with ICK arriving he will be able to slow-down a bit, I am hoping that there will be daily Mass in the Extrodinary Form there soon.

  7. ds says:

    As a Wisconsinite, I seem to recal tha the Latin Mass community had been operating out of a small and plain church outside of Milw. St. Mary’s Help of Christians I think it was called. That Church was closed down and the Latin Mass community relocated to St. Stans’ which is an amazing Church in the “Polish Cathedral” style, in the old Polish south side neighborhood in Milw. The Franciscans run St. Anthony’s Church which is honestly one bloc from St. Stans which they were also running and for a while I think had only one Mass a week. The Latin Mass commuunity moved in last winter I think and so now St. Stan’s is growing and doing well. When I Was there last an older (retired) priest was doing the Mass but I think with ICK arriving he will be able to slow-down a bit, I am hoping that there will be daily Mass in the Extrodinary Form there soon.

  8. David O'Rourke says:

    Antonious

    Please, by all means let avoid polemics with regard to the FSSP and the ICRP. However, your references to the two announcements really says nothing. If you have a valid point to make surely you can make it in a spirit of Christian Charity.

  9. adamsaj says:

    Patrick,

    i think it has a bit to do with the charisms of the two communities. the FSSP seem to me to be primarely concerned with celebrating the traditional rites, while the ICRSS sees the preservation of Catholic culture and beauty as one of their central missions. its worth noting that many of the churches in the US that the Institute is famous for having they either renovated (St. Mary, Wausau; The Shrine, Chicago; Old St. Patrick, Kansas City; etc…) or are restoring (St. Francis De Sales, St. Louis). these projects are something that the Institute puts a lot of time and money into.

    there are probibly other factors involved too, but im not familiar enough with the politics involved to say anything about that.

  10. Jason Keener says:

    I’m a member of St. Stanislaus Oratory in Milwaukee.

    The Institute officially began their apostolate at St. Stanislaus last Advent when the church became an oratory dedicated to the Extraordinary Form. Two Institute priests who serve other oratories in Wisconsin have been coming to offer the Holy Mass on Sundays. These two priests are assisted by several older retired priests who offer some weekday Masses and Sunday Masses when the Institute priests are not available. The Institute will be staffing St. Stanislaus in a full-time capacity beginning sometime this summer. Msgr. Schmitz of the Institute said his eventual long-term goal is to have several Institute priests, oblates, and even religious sisters at St. Stan’s. (Just like the good old days when the parish rectory and convent were full! We can only hope!)

    We were also told last winter that Archbishop Dolan invited the Institute to serve the Archdiocese of Milwaukee at St. Stanislaus Oratory because the Institute was already operating successful apostolates in our province.

    If you are ever in Milwaukee, please come visit!

  11. Marcus says:

    Great news! Can anyone tell me about oblates in the Institute? What’s their task, original profession …(?) and so on. Thanks.

  12. adamsaj says:

    jason,

    thanks for the clarification.

    marcus,

    the oblates are roughly equivalent to the lay brothers you find in other religious orders. they go through a somewhat simplified formation and then dedicate themselves to more practical, non sacramental aspects of the Institute’s apostolate. i have seen them fulfill jobs like sacrastin, choir director, etc.. they are also ordained to the subdioconate (hence, they are clerical oblates and not lay brothers) so that they can assist in the liturgy. information about them is somewhat limited, so if you want to know about them the best way is to ask one directly.

  13. Patrick says:

    adamsj,

    It appears that the FSSP operates a handful of personal parishes in different dioceses. Also, some of their priests are parochial vicars at regular parishes. I’m pretty sure that’s the same set-up that the ICKSP has in different places.

  14. Patrick says:

    I don’t mean to start a fight with this question…

    Why do they need another priest assigned there to say the ordinary form? I know that part of the character of the ICKSP and the FSSP are using the books of 1962. But in light of what the Holy Father wrote in Summorum Pontificum (or the corresponding letter, I forget), wouldn’t it be better for the priests of ICKSP and FSSP to learn to say the ordinary form and offer it as needed in the parish? This would be in keeping with the Holy Father’s desire.

    It would also be a strong example to other priests that only know the ordinary form. It kind of says “hey guys, we’re taking the time to learn and offer “your” form, how about you learn to offer “our” form?” I think it also would give a great example that, if you are a priest of the latin rite, you should know and be able to offer Mass in both forms of your rite.

  15. adamsaj says:

    patrick,

    i would think that we would need to see some substantial changes to the OF before we will see any traditionalist priests celebrating it. the fact is that the NO has some problems that go deeper than just liturgical abuse. even if all the problems were fixed, i think it would be difficult to come up with a strong enough reason to make one of these priests put forth the effort to learn the new Mass.

  16. Michael says:

    “i think it would be difficult to come up with a strong enough reason to make one of these priests put forth the effort to learn the new Mass.”

    This is a good point that I think is often overlooked. While there is wide disagreement about which form of the Roman Rite is “better”, I think that there is nearly universal agreement with the idea that one form is superior to the other. In that light, why should a Priest take the time to learn a form that he believes is inferior? I suppose that one good reason is to be able to better meet the pastoral needs of his parishoners, but wouldn’t their pastoral needs be better met by convincing them of the superiority of the better form?

  17. Patrick says:

    Adamsaj and Michael,

    Why should a priest bother to learn it and say it?

    Well, for the reasons I already articulated.

    The Holy Father said: “Needless to say, in order to experience full communion, the priests of the communities adhering to the former usage cannot, as a matter of principle, exclude celebrating according to the new books. The total exclusion of the new rite would not in fact be consistent with the recognition of its value and holiness.”

    It sounds like you are both calling for priests to exclude celebrating according to the new books as a matter of principle. That’s exactly what the Holy Father said he does not want.

    Priests of the latin rite should be ready, willing, and able to offer the Sacraments in both forms of the latin rite. It cuts both ways.

  18. Michael says:

    “It sounds like you are both calling for priests to exclude celebrating according to the new books as a matter of principle. That’s exactly what the Holy Father said he does not want.”

    And what principle might that be? Excluding the use of one tool because a superior tool is available is not a matter of principle. You do not seem to understand that every time a person chooses one thing over another, by definition he is excluding the object not chosen. It does not matter if it is trivial and mundane (paper or plastic at the grocery store) or a matter of great importance (Ordinary Form or Extraordinary form), every time one thing is chosen, all other things are rejected. So, there could be any number of valid and legitimate reasons why a priest “refuses” to offer the new form or the traditional form, none of which has anything to do with the matter of principle referred to by the Holy Father.

    You also seemed to have pounced a bit too early. You may be able to deduce which form I believe is superior based on other postings, but if you read closely, you’ll note that I took special care not to limit this to either form.

  19. Patrick says:

    Michael,

    So, what exactly did the Holy Father mean when he said ““Needless to say, in order to experience full communion, the priests of the communities adhering to the former usage cannot, as a matter of principle, exclude celebrating according to the new books. The total exclusion of the new rite would not in fact be consistent with the recognition of its value and holiness.” Please help me understand what he meant here.

    Thanks

  20. dad29 says:

    Advent, eh?

    All this time we thought it would be July 1st.

    But maybe Advent comes early this year.

  21. Michael says:

    “Michael,

    So, what exactly did the Holy Father mean when he said ““Needless to say, in order to experience full communion, the priests of the communities adhering to the former usage cannot, as a matter of principle, exclude celebrating according to the new books. The total exclusion of the new rite would not in fact be consistent with the recognition of its value and holiness.” Please help me understand what he meant here.”

    I have always understood that the principle mentioned was the belief that the Novus Ordo was inherently heretical and invalid. I suspect this was directed at particularly hard-line SSPX adherents that do believe so. As an institution, I don’t think the SSPX teaches that the NOM is invalid, but I can easily imagine that some members do.

    Of course, this is only my opinion, but it makes the most sense. In any case, it cannot refer to the belief that the NOM is flawed. The Holy Father himself thinks so; otherwise, he would not be spending so much effort to correct it. “Total exclusion” also cannot be meant literally because later in the same document he allows for the exclusive celebration of the older form. If a Priest exclusively celebrates the older form, does that not mean that the newer form has been “totally excluded”?

  22. Dave says:

    No, no, not to worry…No need to wait until Advent. I think the earlier writer was thinking about last year, when they arrived on the first Sunday of Advent. The Institute priests will be in place in short order.

  23. Patrick says:

    Michael,

    Thanks for the response. I think his words mean what they say. That communities ought not to exclude the new missal. What is the exact quotation where he calls for “exclusive celebration of the older form”?

    There is nothing in SP that would indicate that the Holy Father believes the ordinary form to be flawed. He believes that it needs to be done correctly, but he doesn’t say anything about it being flawed.

    I think your interpretation that this is meant for the SSPX is somewhat off base. The words the Holy Father uses are very clear and indicate a desire that communities should not exclude celebrating according to the new books.

    Look at Fr. Z for example. I have no doubt that he prefers greatly the extraordinary form, but when needed or called for, he celebrates the ordinary form (no doubt quite well). I guess I am not seeing why the FSSP and ICKSP don’t do the same (or maybe the do in some places).

  24. Michael says:

    “Thanks for the response. I think his words mean what they say. That communities ought not to exclude the new missal. What is the exact quotation where he calls for “exclusive celebration of the older form”

    Sorry for the mis-identification. It is actually from Article 3 of Summorium Pontificum itself and not from the accompanying letter as I first stated. I also never stated that he called for anything; rather I said he allowed for it. Anyway, here is a partial extract with my emphasis:

    If an individual community or the entire Institute or Society wants to have such celebrations [according to the older form] often or habitually or permanently, the matter is to be decided by the Major Superiors according to the norm of law and the particular laws and statutes.

    How can an entire society permanently celebrate according to the older form and not “exclude” celebrating according to the new form? In any case, it is impossible for anyone to comply with your absolute literal interpretation of the Holy Father’s letter so it must mean something other than what you state.

  25. Franzjosf says:

    Patrick: With the promulgation of SP, all priests of the Latin Rite have the right to the NO and/or the TLM, regardless what their superiors say. It is a matter of law. The admonition of not excluding the NO in principle, in the accompanying letter, does not have the force of law. It is explaining the law. Thus, institutes dedicated to the TLM may not, in their statutes, forbid any of their member priests from saying the New Mass. But neither will they be forced to do so in practice. When the FSSP wanted to include a rule in their statutes to prevent any of their members from saying the New Mass, Rome wouldn’t allow that rule. But at the time, Cardinal Castrillon, I think it was, suggested that their priests might consider assisting in choir at the Chrism Mass. It is clearly not Rome’s intention to force these guys to say the NO.

    Do you suppose the Holy Father doesn’t understand human nature and timing? Force priests who have returned to full communion to say a rite which was part of the reason they weren’t in communion in the first place? (In the case of some of the FSSP.) I don’t think so.

  26. Jason Keener says:

    The specific charism of the ICKSP and the FSSP is to build up the Mystical Body of Christ through the celebration of the Extraordinary Form and devotions that flow from the older form of the Mass. If the ICKSP and FSSP are prohibited from exercising their own special charism because they are celebrating the Ordinary Form instead, the Church loses out on something valuable.

    The Ordinary Form is already widely available, so there doesn’t seem to be a pressing need to take the ICKSP and FSSP away from their own unique call to serve the Church through the riches of the Classical Roman Rite.

  27. Matt Q says:

    Patrick wrote:

    “I think it also would give a great example that, if you are a priest of the latin rite, you should know and be able to offer Mass in both forms of your rite.”

    )(

    Exactly. This is what the Pope has been saying about Summorum Pontificum. Priests need to know both Forms and both Forms need to be said in the parishes on a regular basis, so says Cardinal Hoyos anyway. We pray.

  28. Simon Platt says:

    This sounds like good news both for the ICKSP and for the people of Milwaukee.

    In England, the Institute has offered to take responsibility for St. Walburge’s, Preston, an architecturally outstanding and historically important church at risk of closure as part of the Diocese of Lancaster’s “Fit for Mission” review. Please pray that our diocese will accept the Institute’s offer for the good of the whole church in this part of Lancashire, which remained largely faithful through penal times but which in recent years has experienced a crisis of religious practice.