Another Liturgical Abuse Video- B. Brown's Diocese of Orange

[Karin]

[1] Yes perhaps they do… or at least they should. But you must have a knowledge of “rebel” bishops unless you have lived in a cave alone all your life. Show me two bishops who disagree and my guess is that at least one of them is wrong.

[2] Not an arguement… just common sense for one, and it is the way the GIRM is devised for another. They are the “to-do” instructions from the Church… not the “please-consider-this-while-you-do-your-thing” suggestions.

[3] Cardinal Arinze is not only a part of Magisterium, but in his office he oversees our bishops, and corrects them where it is necessary and/or possible. Much of this, I would think, it done without your ok or mine. So your comment is a false generalization of those Catholics who choose to safeguard the liturgy from abuses (even when some abuses end up being a norm for a period of time).

.

thank you

 

[netmilsmom]

Curious to me that no one thinks this is an inappropiate thing to do when the Eucharist is present on the altar…to start filiming for no other purpose than the entrapment of a bishop.

The cameramen at St Peters are off to the sides and filming discreetly from a designated position, which is one significant difference.

I can hardly wait for the next episode of the “Brown Witch project”

Why would it be a problem if there is NOT a problem with the goings on?
We film Holy Mass all the time. Especially when it is a big event.

 

[netmilsmom]

Hmm…please correct me if I am incorrect netmil(name removed by moderator) orif I have left something out…
But I do not think that she is showing disdain for the USCCB and to say that she is is rather offensive, but this is just my opinion…what she is saying is that the USCCB can not on their own without approval override something that the Vatican states/teaches etc.

Joysong stated that she is bowing out and will not be back to this thread.

 

[frommi]

[3] Cardinal Arinze is not only a part of Magisterium, but in his office he oversees our bishops, and corrects them where it is necessary and/or possible. Much of this, I would think, it done without your ok or mine. So your comment is a false generalization of those Catholics who choose to safeguard the liturgy from abuses (even when some abuses end up being a norm for a period of time).

.

Incorrect eccliesology there…his emnience more or less ‘works for’ the bishops of the world, they don’t work for him. He is not their superior.

 

[paramedicgirl]

Why would it be a problem if there is NOT a problem with the goings on?
We film Holy Mass all the time. Especially when it is a big event.

Videos of liturgical abuses should be filmed with the intent of sending them to the bishop, then to Cardinal Arinze (or even the pope) so as to get the abuses fixed. Those should be the intended recipients of the video.

But that’s just my opinion. I don’t expect anyone else to agree with me.

 

[frommi]

Why would it be a problem if there is NOT a problem with the goings on?
We film Holy Mass all the time. Especially when it is a big event.

Do you encourage congregants to bring hand held video cameras into the pews?

That’s what I’m pointing out, that’s what seems pretty inappropriate to me…especially considering that I would guess the ‘secret shopper’ didn’t get permission from the pastor to do this.

 

[Karin]

Joysong stated that she is bowing out and will not be back to this thread.

 

[Karin]

Videos of liturgical abuses should be filmed with the intent of sending them to the bishop, then to Cardinal Arinze (or even the pope) so as to get the abuses fixed. Those should be the intended recipients of the video.

But that’s just my opinion. I don’t expect anyone else to agree with me.

I agree…
As I stated earlier…

how else without visual documentation will a Bishop believe that these abuses are actually happening in their Churches?

but then that is just my opinion

 

[paramedicgirl]

Incorrect eccliesology there…his emnience more or less ‘works for’ the bishops of the world, they don’t work for him. He is not their superior.

Are you sure? Isn’t a prefect the high administrative official?

 

[frommi]

Are you sure? Isn’t a prefect the high administrative official?

I’m quite sure…Cardinal Arinze has no authority over a bishop’s diocese…or over a bishop.

He may be the instrument by which the pope communicates an indult or lack of indult (like the purification of vessels).

But more or less…no…he doesn’t have the college of bishops reporting to him on the topic of liturgy. It doesn’t work that way.

 

[Karin]

Do you encourage congregants to bring hand held video cameras into the pews?

That’s what I’m pointing out, that’s what seems pretty inappropriate to me…especially considering that I would guess the ‘secret shopper’ didn’t get permission from the pastor to do this.

why would he/she get permission esp. if abuses are going on… I would think that the Priest if he was asked for permission would flatly refuse it (since he knows it would capture abuses)!

 

[frommi]

why would he/she get permission esp. if abuses are going on… I would think that the Priest if he was asked for permission would flatly refuse it (since he knows it would capture abuses)!

So this is what we’ve come to in the church…

What’s next…“COPS: Liturgical Abuses”…or perhaps we can get that Chris Hansen guy from Dateline…“Dateline: To Catch a Lay Homilist”…

The possibilities are endless…

Even if they do a better job of changing the mass into some sort of pervese entertainment and commodity than anything Bishop Brown could hope to come up with.

 

[netmilsmom]

What’s next…“COPS: Liturgical Abuses”…or perhaps we can get that Chris Hansen guy from Dateline…“Dateline: To Catch a Lay Homilist”…

One of the blogs came up with “Extreme Makeover - Parish Addition” that cut straight to the point!!!

 

[Karin]

I’m quite sure…Cardinal Arinze has no authority over a bishop’s diocese…or over a bishop.

He may be the instrument by which the pope communicates an indult or lack of indult (like the purification of vessels).

But more or less…no…he doesn’t have the college of bishops reporting to him on the topic of liturgy. It doesn’t work that way.

Description: does whatever pertains to the Apostolic See concerning the regulation and promotion of the sacred liturgy, primarily of the sacraments, without prejudice to the competence of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. (Pastor Bonus, 62) catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dxdws.html

 

[Karin]

So this is what we’ve come to in the church…

What’s next…“COPS: Liturgical Abuses”…or perhaps we can get that Chris Hansen guy from Dateline…“Dateline: To Catch a Lay Homilist”…

The possibilities are endless…

Even if they do a better job of changing the mass into some sort of pervese entertainment and commodity than anything Bishop Brown could hope to come up with.

I am just pointing out that to photgraph or video tape abuses perhaps is the only option or a option for the lay people (US) to show and prove to the Bishops that abuses are going on…
why do you have such issues with this???
Dont you want the abuses brought to light so they can be STOPPED?

 

[Strummer]

As so often is the case with such discussions, misunderstanding arises when one side argues the objective act (using other “examples” to justify it) and the other argues the manner in which the act was performed. Vidcams at a Mass are not automatically inappropriate. Following the Vatican’s example (and, it would seem, other large churches that I see on EWTN), the cameras used are of a professional grade and mounted out of the way of the procedings. IOW, they distract as little as possible. The video in question on this thread was obviously made with “consumer model” and by an amateur who periodically lifted the camera up and then lowered it and then lifted and then… Frankly, I think sipping from a water bottle would’ve been far less distracting But I digress.

A very important point that has been roundly ignored by many here was made by the moderator on post #95. I urge you all to re-read it but to summarize: essentially, she is saying that the anonymity of the video and the selective editing and superimposition of text makes this particular example suspect. I would further add (as our mod has almost implied?) that while this vid is on YouTube, the lack of validation calls into question its classification as a “publicly available document” and as such becomes a “banned topic” as cited in item 16 of post 6 here.

 

[netmilsmom]

A very important point that has been roundly ignored by many here was made by the moderator on post #95. I urge you all to re-read it but to summarize: essentially, she is saying that the anonymity of the video and the selective editing and superimposition of text makes this particular example suspect. I would further add (as our mod has almost implied?) that while this vid is on YouTube, the lack of validation calls into question its classification as a “publicly available document” and as such becomes a “banned topic” as cited in item 16 of post 6 here.

I would bow to the mod. If she felt it was worthy of discussion and not a banned topic, then it is.

I’m a visitor in this house. The owner makes the rules.

If the owner says, no shoes in the house, but I come with slippers, the owner has the right to rule whether they are okay or not.

 

[anamchara]

I am just pointing out that to photgraph or video tape abuses perhaps is the only option or a option for the lay people (US) to show and prove to the Bishops that abuses are going on…
why do you have such issues with this???
Dont you want the abuses brought to light so they can be STOPPED?

I have to agree with Frommi’s posts in here Karin, it does seem very in bad taste, but my thought on how to bring these abuses to light is why not jot things down and if it’s really bad, go back a few more times and write a down how you feel and then send a letter to the powers that be, maybe the bishop and further up?

To me this would be the most respectful way.

 

[Karin]

I have to agree with Frommi’s posts in here Karin, it does seem very in bad taste, but my thought on how to bring these abuses to light is why not jot things down and if it’s really bad, go back a few more times and write a down how you feel and then send a letter to the powers that be, maybe the bishop and further up?

To me this would be the most respectful way.

Hmm…and what if the Bishop does not take your word for it"?
If you have visual proof…IMHO this speaks louder at times than the written word in showing abuses.
IMHO I think ALL masses should be video taped (like they do at teh Vatican) that way the Priests that do allow abuses will be less hesitant to preform them.

but this is just my opinion and I dont expect anyone else to agree with it

 

[Julianna]

Curious to me that no one thinks this is an inappropiate thing to do when the Eucharist is present on the altar…to start filiming for no other purpose than the entrapment of a bishop.

The cameramen at St Peters are off to the sides and filming discreetly from a designated position, which is one significant difference.

I can hardly wait for the next episode of the “Brown Witch project”

yes it does make you wonder if the Patriot Act has mixed with the Church. Filming is great…but it is the witch hunt mentality that concerns me. If I witnessed something like that, I would go through the chain…I would request a meeting with the priest, if he refused based on what I wanted to talk to him about, I would go to the Bishop. If the priest did speak to me, I would make sure I had written documentation to back it up…and I would warn him that there are less than savory characters out there who are secretly filming his mass and he could take it from there. I would like to give the priest in error the benefit of the doubt. I would then write a letter to the bishop, and let him know that I met with the priest and what we talked about. The ball would then be in the Bishop’s court, as it should be, to follow up on the abuses. His job is to run the diocese…and I would respect him enough to let him do that.

I would not skulk around parishes with a hidden video camera, post the video on the web thus creating the mad villagers…(i.e. Beauty and Beast movie) storming the church steps. Nor would I use it to promote “scare tactics”, that the church is going to hell in a handbasket to prove my own agenda of turning the clock back to the good 'ol days, (pre VatII)

I would respect the heirarchy of the church, and follow the chain of command. If the abuses continued…again, I would leave it in the hands of the Bishop. If he gets enough legitimate complaints in the proper protocol, he may do something. In light of the scandals…the Bishop has to be on his toes in all matters of error.