2010 RE Congress

[Revs96]

We must pray for those who disrupt our discussions. He/she has angered me too at times, but charity trumps all. Bearing crosses like these are not hard compared to the weight of the Cross carried by Our Savior.

Let not the temptations to succumb to anger drag our minds from this Holy Week of our Faith.

Amen. Well said.

 

[CatholicLife]

Go ahead and resort to the ad hominem attack. I expect it in this forum. Your pronouncements are again just your opinions. It’s sad that you offer them as fact when they clearly are not.

What I find remarkable is the that self-professed “traditionalists” spent the time and energy to watch and then discuss this Mass. You had to go looking for something to denigrate? *That’s just terrible.
*

The high level of ignorance and absolute lack of tolerance exhibited on this and the CCR thread by “traditionalists” SHOULD BE CALLED TO MIND should anyone actually denigrate the Mass as traditionalists prefer it to be celebrated. “Enough Said.” (sic) :yup:

So you think this is okay?

youtube.com/watch?v=rh_nqtp3VrU&feature=related

 

[wynd]

Go ahead and resort to the ad hominem attack. I expect it in this forum. Your pronouncements are again just your opinions. It’s sad that you offer them as fact when they clearly are not.

What I find remarkable is the that self-professed “traditionalists” spent the time and energy to watch and then discuss this Mass. You had to go looking for something to denigrate? *That’s just terrible.
*

The high level of ignorance and absolute lack of tolerance exhibited on this and the CCR thread by “traditionalists” SHOULD BE CALLED TO MIND should anyone actually denigrate the Mass as traditionalists prefer it to be celebrated. “Enough Said.” (sic) :yup:

Do you have any grounding whatsoever in the tradition of your Church? “Well they didn’t technically break any rules, the rest is just preference” is not the teaching of the RCC.

 

[ChurchTorch]

He only has the right to do things that are within his competence and that is dictated by the documents:

He doesn’t get to define the “limits of his competence”, they are defined by the liturgical books and the documents of the Church.

You don’t get to set the limits either.

Some can cut-n-paste paragraph after paragraph from the GIRM, RS, CoCL and other documents and then demand that their understanding of the documents are the final wordl. They don’t understand their interpretations are not the final word. They also don’t know where the actual authority lies within the Church.

I would never take a position that it was good for Cardinal Mahony to give relief on RS with regard to pouring the Precious Blood. I am only saying that he has the authority to do so. Please make that distinction. Past that, some will continue to believe bishops do not have that level of authority but if they dug a bit deeper they would find out they do. I think some such people would be shocked to learn the truth.

Considering that his book on the Mass and the video that accompany it are big on consecration in the flagon and pouring, he has a vested interest in not stopping the practice even if the Church dictates otherwise.

It’s still within his authority. We’re not discussing if the pouring of Precious Blood is a good idea. We’re talking about if he has the authority. The Church has indeed set specifications for what we are talking about. Cardinal Mahony decided to grant relief and yes he has that power. Do I agree with his actions? Nope, not personally. But I would bet dollars to donuts that he had to authority to do what he did – no matter how repugnant it might be to some.

Rather than rely on blogging pundits like fr. z, why not write the Cardinal a nice letter asking him to explain where his authority comes from on this specific manner. I bet you would get a detailed answer. Not the one you might want to hear but one that passes muster with the Holy See.

Given how clearly he did it (he posted in the The Tidings) and its reach (somewhere between 4-5 million in his ecclesial province) I’m fairly certain the Church would have taken action if he had done so in a manner outside of his authority. The Church has never taken action on the matter and its been years…

 

[ChurchTorch]

Do you have any grounding whatsoever in the tradition of your Church? “Well they didn’t technically break any rules, the rest is just preference” is not the teaching of the RCC.

I’ll compare my formal education and bookshelf to your own anytime. Send me a private message if your question is real.

 

[Onegin]

I’ll compare my formal education and bookshelf to your own anytime. Send me a private message if your question is real.

Not that I’m questioning your freedom to post on CAF or anyting, but why are you bickering with us in the Traditional Catholicism forum when you can post on pretty much any other forum on CAF and most of the people will agree with you?

I see no purpose in that.

 

[wynd]

I’ll compare my formal education and bookshelf to your own anytime. Send me a private message if your question is real.

Formal educations and full bookshelves do not a traditional mind make.

 

[Revs96]

I’ll compare my formal education and bookshelf to your own anytime. Send me a private message if your question is real.

To quote Fr. Corapi, “Some people have done been educated into imbecility.”
To quote Mother Angelica, “Some people have been educated beyond their intelligence.”
She also said that “they have alphabet soup after their names” but are “educated fools” in Zuhlio’s words.

 

[malphono]

To quote Fr. Corapi, “Some people have done been educated into imbecility.”
To quote Mother Angelica, “Some people have been educated beyond their intelligence.”
She also said that “they have alphabet soup after their names” but are “educated fools” in Zuhlio’s words.

 

[ChurchTorch]

Formal educations and full bookshelves do not a traditional mind make.

Neither does a bigoted mind…

 

[bkovacs]

A Church Divided. Analysis from the American Superior of the SSPX.

youtube.com/watch?v=_hGxyz6r5PY

 

[ChurchTorch]

So you think this is okay?

youtube.com/watch?v=rh_nqtp3VrU&feature=related

I think when “traditionalists” attack other Catholics – be it the LAREC or the CCR they should remain quiet if they themselves should ever get attacked by anyone who simply dislikes their choice of worship.

It says a great deal about those traditionalists who would spend the time to watch and then comment on these video clips…

 

[ChurchTorch]

Not that I’m questioning your freedom to post on CAF or anyting, but why are you bickering with us in the Traditional Catholicism forum when you can post on pretty much any other forum on CAF and most of the people will agree with you?

I see no purpose in that.

I see no purpose with “traditionalists” tearing into this subject and the CCR unless it’s simply to gossip and make themselves feel good about themselves.

 

[benedictgal]

I thought it pretty wonderful and wish we had more masses like that.

However, there were many, many ilicit acts going on there that it makes for something that should not be repeated.

For those of us who truly love the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, what went on at the Congress is something that is truly and regretfully lamentable. The Mass is not our own personal property that we can do with as we please. The Sacred Liturgy is not some free form exercise in creativity. Perhaps those who seem to favor this have not read the authoritative documents of the Holy See. The whole matter really saddened me and left me deeply perturbed. It reminds me of what Pope Benedict wrote for the Ninth Station of the Cross:

Should we not also think of how much Christ suffers in his own Church? How often is the holy sacrament of his Presence abused, how often must he enter empty and evil hearts! How often do we celebrate only ourselves, without even realizing that he is there! How often is his Word twisted and misused! What little faith is present behind so many theories, so many empty words!

With all due respect, those who seem to favor what occured in Los Angeles seem to me to have fallen prey to the dictatorship of relativism, which is sad.

Now, check out the replay of the Papal Mass for Palm Sunday. That sets the standard for how every Mass should be celebrated.

 

[benedictgal]

You don’t get to set the limits either.

Some can cut-n-paste paragraph after paragraph from the GIRM, RS, CoCL and other documents and then demand that their understanding of the documents are the final wordl. They don’t understand their interpretations are not the final word. They also don’t know where the actual authority lies within the Church.

I would never take a position that it was good for Cardinal Mahony to give relief on RS with regard to pouring the Precious Blood. I am only saying that he has the authority to do so. Please make that distinction. Past that, some will continue to believe bishops do not have that level of authority but if they dug a bit deeper they would find out they do. I think some such people would be shocked to learn the truth.

It’s still within his authority. We’re not discussing if the pouring of Precious Blood is a good idea. We’re talking about if he has the authority. The Church has indeed set specifications for what we are talking about. Cardinal Mahony decided to grant relief and yes he has that power. Do I agree with his actions? Nope, not personally. But I would bet dollars to donuts that he had to authority to do what he did – no matter how repugnant it might be to some.

Rather than rely on blogging pundits like fr. z, why not write the Cardinal a nice letter asking him to explain where his authority comes from on this specific manner. I bet you would get a detailed answer. Not the one you might want to hear but one that passes muster with the Holy See.

Given how clearly he did it (he posted in the The Tidings) and its reach (somewhere between 4-5 million in his ecclesial province) I’m fairly certain the Church would have taken action if he had done so in a manner outside of his authority. The Church has never taken action on the matter and its been years…

There is no need for you take on such an insulting, demeaning and uncharitable tone in your posts. Such does not make for conducive discussion.

A bishop does not have the authority to override, overrule and abrogate a document promulgated by the Holy See. According to the GIRM, these are the only things that a bishop can do:

1. The Diocesan Bishop, who is to be regarded as the high priest of his flock, and from whom the life in Christ of the faithful under his care in a certain sense derives and upon whom it depends,148 must promote, regulate, and be vigilant over the liturgical life in his diocese. It is to him that in this Instruction is entrusted the regulating of the discipline of concelebration (cf. above, nos. 202, 374) and the establishing of norms regarding the function of serving the priest at the altar (cf. above, no. 107), the distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds (cf. above, no. 283), and the construction and ordering of churches (cf. above, no. 291). With him lies responsibility above all for fostering the spirit of the Sacred Liturgy in the priests, deacons, and faithful.

Any changes a bishop wants to make to the GIRM or any indults he wants need to be brought up to the national episcopal conference, in our case, the USCCB. Such are to be approved by 2/3 of the Latin Rite bishops and then sent to Rome. At that point, the Holy See will decide if it will grant the necessary recognitio or deny it.

Bishops do not act in a vacuum. Rather than making fun of people, it would, perhaps, do you some good if, with all due respect, you were to actually read the authoritative documents of the Church.

 

[Onegin]

I see no purpose with “traditionalists” tearing into this subject and the CCR unless it’s simply to gossip and make themselves feel good about themselves.

So what if a few people on one forum out of a few dozen on CAF cave to human weakness? Why not let it be and simply participate in those forums who hold views more similarly disposed to your own?

 

[Onegin]

To quote Fr. Corapi, “Some people have done been educated into imbecility.”
To quote Mother Angelica, “Some people have been educated beyond their intelligence.”
She also said that “they have alphabet soup after their names” but are “educated fools” in Zuhlio’s words.

This reminds me of a great passage by Malcom Muggeridge:

"…it has become abundantly clear in the second half of the twentieth century that Western Man has decided to abolish himself. Having wearied of the struggle to be himself, he has created his own boredom out of his own affluence, his own impotence out of his own erotomania, his own vulnerability out of his own strength; himself blowing the trumpet that brings the walls of his own city tumbling down, and, in a process of auto-genocide, convincing himself that he is too numerous, and labouring accordingly with pill and scalpel and syringe to make himself fewer in order to be an easier prey for his enemies; until at last, having educated himself into imbecility, and polluted and drugged himself into stupefaction, he keels over a weary, battered old brontosaurus and becomes extinct.”

• Seeing Through the Eye: Malcolm Muggeridge on Faith (p. 16)