1,000 dollars for front pew seat at Christmas Eve Mass in MN

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic29
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Catholic29

Guest
Look where the spirit of Vatican II or that of the age has gotten one parish, they must be in real need of money, thats all I can say.

**
O come, all ye (well-heeled) faithful
Click to expand...
Tony Kennedy, Star Tribune
December 18, 2005

To fundraisers at Nativity of Our Lord Catholic Church in St. Paul, front-row seats at a Christmas Eve mass have become the spiritual equivalent of arena skyboxes. For about $1,000 per pew, well-heeled parishioners have bought the divine luxury of a reserved seat at the Rev. Peter Christensen’s 4 p.m. standing-room-only service.

The practice isn’t unheard of in the United States, and the money goes to Nativity’s populist-minded elementary school. But some religious scholars wonder if the auctioning of tickets to a celebration of the First Noel is more in the spirit of taking than giving.

“It smacks of a mindset that is not Christmaslike,” said Jim Beilby, associate professor of theology at Bethel University in Arden Hills. “The more we focus on money, the more it pulls us away from God.”

Full article startribune.com/dynamic/mobile_story.php?story=5788657

**
 
I fail to find any correlation between the "spirit of Vatican II’ and this story.

In the 40’s and for some years preceding in most parishes in my home diocese, famlies subscribed an annual pew fee; their family name was put on the pew with a bronze plate and it was for their family members only. “Free” seats were in the back half of the church. This changed in the 50’s and people then sat anywhere at any time. Many churches in Europe had prominent family pews for generations.

While I can’t say I’m fond of this practice it’s a matter of preferment in today’s more eglatarian times. Many parishes are hard pressed and if the idea works and raises money, well good luck to them. If the parishoners don’t like it and complain, then it’s just another idea whose time is past.
 
40.png
HagiaSophia:
I fail to find any correlation between the "spirit of Vatican II’ and this story.

In the 40’s and for some years preceding in most parishes in my home diocese, famlies subscribed an annual pew fee; their family name was put on the pew with a bronze plate and it was for their family members only. “Free” seats were in the back half of the church. This changed in the 50’s and people then sat anywhere at any time. Many churches in Europe had prominent family pews for generations.

While I can’t say I’m fond of this practice it’s a matter of preferment in today’s more eglatarian times. Many parishes are hard pressed and if the idea works and raises money, well good luck to them. If the parishoners don’t like it and complain, then it’s just another idea whose time is past.
Click to expand...
Whether this practice has anything to do with the “spirit of Vatican II” is open to debate.

However one must admit it does smack of elitism. Which in turn is contrary to gospel principles, because Christ didn’t offer front row seats at the Last Supper to those with the greatest of material means.

Anyhow this is the first time I have heard tell of anything like this occurring prior to V2, which was why I connected it with the “spirit of Vatican II” phenomenon.
 
40.png
Catholic29:
Whether this practice has anything to do with the “spirit of Vatican II” is open to debate.
Click to expand...
You first stated that the practice has to do with the spirit of Vatican II then when you are challenged by another poster you change your mind and now you say it is open to debate. What evidence do you have that connects this to Vatican II?
It seems that you don’t like something that happened at one parish and now you are trying to rubbish Vatican II.
I don’t find that very charitable.
 
40.png
thistle:
You first stated that the practice has to do with the spirit of Vatican II then when you are challenged by another poster you change your mind and now you say it is open to debate. What evidence do you have that connects this to Vatican II?
It seems that you don’t like something that happened at one parish and now you are trying to rubbish Vatican II.
I don’t find that very charitable.
Click to expand...
I must first clarify that the “spirit of Vatican II” and Vatican II itself are two very different things.

The definitions are:
  1. Vatican II = The divinely inspired ecumenical council, convened in 1962 by Pope John XXIII, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Vatican_Council
  2. Spirit of Vatican II = The rash misinterpretation of Vatican Council II. Resulting in undue reforms, abolitions and watering down of certain practices within Catholicism not in line with the council documents themselves.
With those distinctions in mind I do not attribute the practices of this parish in question to any of the documents promulgated by the council itself as in 1. However the distinctions in number 2 could, and I say “could” apply here.

I apologize I didn’t explain this earlier as the term of “spirit of Vatican II” is not in universal usage throughout the Church, and can be a very deceptive term when someone is not aware of the definition or the context in which it used such as times like these.

And no I do not rubbish Vatican II, and am in fact obedient to all its decrees in all of its 16 documents.

Again I apologize for this misunderstanding.
 
40.png
Catholic29:
I must first clarify that the “spirit of Vatican II” and Vatican II itself are two very different things.

The definitions are:
  1. Vatican II = The divinely inspired ecumenical council, convened in 1962 by Pope John XXIII, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Vatican_Council
  2. Spirit of Vatican II = The rash misinterpretation of Vatican Council II. Resulting in undue reforms, abolitions and watering down of certain practices within Catholicism not in line with the council documents themselves.
With those distinctions in mind I do not attribute the practices of this parish in question to any of the documents promulgated by the council itself as in 1. However the distinctions in number 2 could, and I say “could” apply here.

I apologize I didn’t explain this earlier as the term of “spirit of Vatican II” is not in universal usage throughout the Church, and can be a very deceptive term when someone is not aware of the definition or the context in which it used such as times like these.

And no I do not rubbish Vatican II, and am in fact obedient to all its decrees in all of its 16 documents.

Again I apologize for this misunderstanding.
Click to expand...
I’m also sorry in case my comments came across too aggressive.
 
40.png
Catholic29:
Look where the spirit of Vatican II or that of the age has gotten one parish, they must be in real need of money, thats all I can say.
Click to expand...
It is a grave violation of Canon Law to in any way, shape or form to charge or even to look like there is a charge for the Sacraments or charge admission to a Catholic Mass. All celebrations of the Sacraments are freely open to ALL the Catholic faithful.
 
Amen Br Rich. There smacks the idea of an audience…or a show … it sounds wrong to me.
 
40.png
Melanie01:
Amen Br Rich. There smacks the idea of an audience…or a show … it sounds wrong to me.
Click to expand...
Before one gets their drawers too much in a wad, perhaps a reading of the pastor’s message in yesterday’s bulletin will help.

nativity-mn.org/Parish/documents/518034December252005.pdf

Now that you’re done reading, perhaps a note of appreciation and support for the pastor is in order, or, at least, a prayer for the parish and it’s staff.

Merry Christmas,

Richard
 
40.png
HagiaSophia:
I fail to find any correlation between the "spirit of Vatican II’ and this story.

In the 40’s and for some years preceding in most parishes in my home diocese, famlies subscribed an annual pew fee; their family name was put on the pew with a bronze plate and it was for their family members only. “Free” seats were in the back half of the church. This changed in the 50’s and people then sat anywhere at any time. Many churches in Europe had prominent family pews for generations.

While I can’t say I’m fond of this practice it’s a matter of preferment in today’s more eglatarian times. Many parishes are hard pressed and if the idea works and raises money, well good luck to them. If the parishoners don’t like it and complain, then it’s just another idea whose time is past.
Click to expand...
And let us not forget “pew rent” in the form of a dime before entering the church for Mass.
 
40.png
CantorRick:
Bef

Now that you’re done reading, perhaps a note of appreciation and support for the pastor is in order, or, at least, a prayer for the parish and it’s staff.
Click to expand...
**
** Collection totals from December 18, 2005**
Click to expand...
Stewardship Offering $ 32,445.85

Plate $ 2,119.61
Reminder: for tax purposes, your contributions for 2005 must be

received by the office no later than Friday, December 30.
I pray the pastor, staff and parish see the error of their ways and correct themselves…****

**
 
40.png
OutinChgoburbs:
And let us not forget “pew rent” in the form of a dime before entering the church for Mass.
Click to expand...
Thank you, I’ll stand and the floor is just fine for kneeling.
 
I read the pastor’s comments in the online bulletin. They’re charging to sit in the first six rows at one Christmas Mass. As the pastor put it, it’s six rows at one Mass out of something like 850+ during the course of the liturgical year. It raises $6000 to help the parish school.

No one is being excluded from the sacrament, no one is being charged for the sacrament, and no one is being kept from being in the church for the liturgy.

Meh… I don’t see what the big deal is.
 
Quote:
Collection totals from December 18, 2005
Stewardship Offering $ 32,445.85
Plate $ 2,119.61
Reminder: for tax purposes, your contributions for 2005 must be
received by the office no later than Friday, December 30.
Here I have a comprehension problem. Do I gather that you can give your contributions and the parish gets a contribution of your tax added to them ?

Where I live we have a scheme called Gift Aid - and by signing a form annually your contribution to a Registered Charity , in this case a Church, will result in the Church being able to claim a tax refund on all your contributions . This is obviously to their benefit.

So what is wrong with the Scheme - if you are not able to be present the parish still has your donation for that week ? The Church still has to be heated , lit , cared for etc etc . By claiming your tax contributions you are aiding them with a little more than you could otherwise have been able to donate.

As to the scheme to raise money from the front pews on a once a year scheme - how many Churches make money from bingo ?

If this is a once a year scheme , and for one Mass only , and everyone understands why it is done , why not ? It results in money which is sorely needed for educational purposes . Are the parishioners willing to up their contributions each year so this wee auction is not needed ?
 
40.png
Catholic29:
Whether this practice has anything to do with the “spirit of Vatican II” is open to debate.

However one must admit it does smack of elitism. Which in turn is contrary to gospel principles, because Christ didn’t offer front row seats at the Last Supper to those with the greatest of material means.

Anyhow this is the first time I have heard tell of anything like this occurring prior to V2, which was why I connected it with the “spirit of Vatican II” phenomenon.
Click to expand...
It used to happen all the time. Not auctioning them off but families in essence buying the seats so that they would always have them available. In my travels I have seen many pews in older churches with family names on them. If the family was there, they got the seats. If not others could have them.

Elitism and materialism have always existed in the Church, even in the “pure” primitive church that we seem to aspire to these days. Read Corinthians. Human nature really hasn’t changed a lot over the years.
 
40.png
palmas85:
Elitism and materialism have always existed in the Church, even in the “pure” primitive church that we seem to aspire to these days. Read Corinthians. Human nature really hasn’t changed a lot over the years.
Click to expand...
Early Christian Church unearthed in Israel

11.07.05

MEGIDDO PRISON, Israel - In a maximum-security jail just down the road from Armageddon, Israeli archaeologists have unearthed what they believe is the oldest church discovered in the land where Jesus was born…

One inscription on the floor indicates that a Roman soldier helped pay for the mosaics, and another dedicates a table to the memory of Jesus, archaeologists said.
Click to expand...
I prefer a table that is simply dedicated to the memory of Jesus. We all can do without any indication of who paid for it…today and 2000 years ago.

In fact a few years ago my DH and I pledged and paid a healthy sum of money to help build a new church. After it was built we were sent a letter requesting how we wanted our names printed on the dedication board…we declined from having our names on the board…we did not feel it was the right thing to do.

Sitting in the paid front row brings advertised giving to a new dimension…off the the printed dedication board and into living color…wow…
 
Perhaps those bothered by this have taken the time to contact the Church and make a future, yearly donation of $6,000+ so they may stop doing this auction… 👍
 
I think people make too big a deal out of it. If people have the money and the Church will be helped then its no big deal.

At St Peter’s in Rome for the Midnight Christmas Mass they said there were over 30,000 requests for tickets for seats but the church could only seat 10,000. Now do you think that personal status didnt play a part in who was going to get those seats? If I requested a seat and it was given to someone else because they helped the Church I would be fine not getting a seat.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top