L
Loud-living-dogma
Guest
Link please?
Last edited:
- Status
J
JulianN
Guest
Well, here’s his apology: (he pulled the original)http://wdtprs.com/blog/2017/02/wher...nd-explains-a-response-to-a-readers-question/
And here’s an article about it from a year later in which he told the interviewer it was “frankly, not a sin.”
www.buzzfeednews.com
And here’s an article about it from a year later in which he told the interviewer it was “frankly, not a sin.”
Meet the Blogger Priest Firing Red Pills At the Vatican
Fr. Z’s critics say he’s an “alt-right” priest. He says they’re snowflakes who should toughen up. His surprising rise to prominence shows that in 2018, even the longest-lasting institution in the Western world isn’t immune to the strains of the social internet.
www.buzzfeednews.com
P
pnewton
Guest
I mentioned in similar thread about who people can ignorantly swallow what they are fed through the media. This is a great example of people who do not like this priest labeling him “alt-right” and believing a twisted version of what he said. His answer was perfectly orthodox when read in context, though there are a lot of disclaimers.
R
Rau
Guest
Well, I think that’s an odd way of looking at the removal of altar rails. More logically, one might ask, “why did we install them previously if they were not really required anyway”?
Last edited:
L
Loud-living-dogma
Guest
Oh ho ho. There were a lot of things gotten rid of! Have you not read the accounts of statues thrown into river, etc? I myself know of a parish where their beautiful stations of the Cross were chopped up and buried in pieces in the parish cemetery!edwest211:
Well, I think that’s an odd way of looking at the removal of altar rails. More logically, one might ask, “why did we install them previously if they were not really required anyway”?
R
Rau
Guest
So…that would be on those who did that act I think…and nobody else. “Oh ho ho”.
E
Entwhistler
Guest
To be fair, beautiful stain glass windows are not required. Neither are the statues. But they do create a sense of wonder and awe.
Likewise, people knelt for communion back in the day. You could kneel on the ground but you could also kneel on an altar rail. It is more practical. And it could lift your mind towards God if it was ornamented.
Likewise, people knelt for communion back in the day. You could kneel on the ground but you could also kneel on an altar rail. It is more practical. And it could lift your mind towards God if it was ornamented.
R
Rau
Guest
Look at the extraordinary and ornate churches in Europe. Soaring, inspiring, uplifting…and expensive! We chose certain approaches in certain time periods. It is well and good to like and prefer certain designs and features. But few features are compulsory!
C
CradleRC58
Guest
Do you really believe that ?
Where are these young Converts getting these notions you speak of ? RCIA ?
The way you describe things here, the first 1950 years of the Church’s roughly 2000 years of History are some sort of detriment to piety.
Perhaps they just want to be orthodox and are simply using the modern-day term to distinguish between heterodox and orthodox.
To be orthodox is simply to be
traditional. And traditional may be a better term rather then orthodox. A lot of people equate orthodox with Greek Orthodox or Russian Orthodox.
I
idifacs_john
Guest
I have no clue on vatican 1 or 2 and really do not care, the reading of the material is beyond convoluted, with everyone trying to speak in some kind of pompous religious tone as if every word is supposed to be enlightening an some deep spiritual meaning. When in reality it is probably nothing more than a power struggle. everyone wants to be top dog, so someone says hey i dont like this lets change it. and then the arguement begins. more over from what i gather the Church hasn’t even fully adopted all of what ever the vatican 2 changes are, so exactly why should I care what it is even about if the leaders of the church cant even impliment everything from the change. ( answer is, i dont have to because when greedy pompous leaders cant even do the right thing and try to pretend they can force changes on other, it becomes unimportant and voided)
What is even sader is one can not negatively criticize the pope on this forum, but other bishops are allowed to dissent and disagree with the pope and claim he is a heritic or on the verge of it or some other nonsense.
So there are constantly one after the other morally poor leaders in the higher tiers of the church who are more interested in grand standing and showing off their feathers and playing politics on lots of levels, than actually letting the pope that they elected, lead and let him bare the responsiblities of his decisions and in turn follow suit. There is too much corruption and greed in the church to trust any of them, and trust is something earned not given.
so to really ask if anyone rejects Vatican II is a bit of a wobbly unimportant question, especially when one has to realize the papacy is masked in secrecy as to how the electing of one is done, and then for the layity becomes a popularity game of is someone from their country chosen, to which everyone wants their pope to become a saint afterwards .
Not to mention the corrupted process of someone being chosen to become a saint.
in the end it is just a joke and there are better things to worry about. nothing more than the same games being played in US Politics, it is absolutely no better.
What is even sader is one can not negatively criticize the pope on this forum, but other bishops are allowed to dissent and disagree with the pope and claim he is a heritic or on the verge of it or some other nonsense.
So there are constantly one after the other morally poor leaders in the higher tiers of the church who are more interested in grand standing and showing off their feathers and playing politics on lots of levels, than actually letting the pope that they elected, lead and let him bare the responsiblities of his decisions and in turn follow suit. There is too much corruption and greed in the church to trust any of them, and trust is something earned not given.
so to really ask if anyone rejects Vatican II is a bit of a wobbly unimportant question, especially when one has to realize the papacy is masked in secrecy as to how the electing of one is done, and then for the layity becomes a popularity game of is someone from their country chosen, to which everyone wants their pope to become a saint afterwards .
Not to mention the corrupted process of someone being chosen to become a saint.
in the end it is just a joke and there are better things to worry about. nothing more than the same games being played in US Politics, it is absolutely no better.
T
TK421
Guest
I suppose another Ecumenical Council was necessary to address the subject of liturgy & the organization of lunar / suborbital / martian dioceses and their respective populations, along with the need to address animal DNA in humans, ethical applications in neural interfaces, widespread hypersensitivity to pathogens and how to address it in public worship, along with the crisis in socialization never being learned and pandemic anxiety problems.
Plus there was that incident in 2168 when the Madagascan virtual ice hockey team was attacked by trans-transhumanist Tibetan eco-terrorists in suspended animation. Awkwaaaaard.
Still, sometimes I miss the good old days of going to Mass without my biosuit. People were so rugged & adventurous shaking hands like that. Kids these days.
Cheers mate.
Last edited:
J
JulianN
Guest
My point is that he did a lot of damage with his original answer—to people who have been raised to hold the deepest respect for the pope, his answer was shocking.
S
StarMapp
Guest
What he said…
C
Crocus
Guest
Whole lotta healin’ needa be goin’ on.
I’d like to see people present their own actual wounds, without bringing forward others’ they’ve “heard about” often second or third hand over what is it, 60 years?
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
I’d like to see people present their own actual wounds, without bringing forward others’ they’ve “heard about” often second or third hand over what is it, 60 years?
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Last edited:
P
Peter_M
Guest
Of course, Vatican II is not responsible for the rise of post-modern philosophy, and the general decline of the culture that results from relativism and “constructed truth”.
But the liturgical reforms were developed by a group of clergy who disliked the Tridentine Mass, and listened to those vocal criticisms of it, most of which were inspired by a post-modernist culture developing at the time. My mother stoped going to mass when the reforms kicked in because, as she said, “They don’t take it seriously anymore.” That was in the 1970s. She was right. I no longer attend Mass. Its banality is suffocating.
I don’t reject Vatican II. I reject the putrid consequences of those who reformed the church to fit comfortably in the disturbed culture that we live in today.
But the liturgical reforms were developed by a group of clergy who disliked the Tridentine Mass, and listened to those vocal criticisms of it, most of which were inspired by a post-modernist culture developing at the time. My mother stoped going to mass when the reforms kicked in because, as she said, “They don’t take it seriously anymore.” That was in the 1970s. She was right. I no longer attend Mass. Its banality is suffocating.
I don’t reject Vatican II. I reject the putrid consequences of those who reformed the church to fit comfortably in the disturbed culture that we live in today.
Last edited:
C
commenter
Guest
You accurately describe some of the processes that happened. There were many times I would have preferred “banality” to some of the liturgical abuses I encountered. But for me, the Mass (new or old, reverent or otherwise) never stopped being a participation in the liturgy of Heaven. That liturgy never stopped being good.
Keep an open mind about whatever Masses are available in your area.
P
pnewton
Guest
I have never seen anyone use the term “traditional” that way. For example, I would not normally see charismatic Catholics contemporary hymns, or liberal theologians labeled traditional, even if they are orthodox.
P
Peter_M
Guest
Unfortunately, “that liturgy” is not what I experience at Mass. Perhaps I am setting up my own - impossible to obtain - standard; perhaps I am paying too much attention to trivial matters. It certainly has more to do with me than it does with the liturgy (at least as an ideal).
C
CradleRC58
Guest
Well, I totally see where you’re coming from there.
Fair enough. All Catholics recite the same Creed on Sunday.
Labels don’t really do any good.
Fair enough. All Catholics recite the same Creed on Sunday.
Labels don’t really do any good.
S
stpurl
Guest
You get to recite a Creed at Mass on Sunday–be thankful.
Some of us do not have that ‘option’ and have not had it for years.
But hey you know, ‘illicit’ is not the same as invalid, right?
Pile illicit act on illicit act, it still may not add up to invalid, but it’s like Chinese water torture, starts out small, barely noticeable, ends up increasing, increasing, and ultimately unbearable (without the grace of God).
Some of us do not have that ‘option’ and have not had it for years.
But hey you know, ‘illicit’ is not the same as invalid, right?
Pile illicit act on illicit act, it still may not add up to invalid, but it’s like Chinese water torture, starts out small, barely noticeable, ends up increasing, increasing, and ultimately unbearable (without the grace of God).
- Status