Assisi 2011

[James924]

At this Assisi meeting (27 Oct), according to the AP, an animist (African paganism) was permitted to stand on the altar and invoke pagan deities (which is demonic).

At the first one, Buddhists were permitted to worship a statue of Buddha on the altar.

Question 1: Do you think the devil smiles at these incidents or frowns?

Question 2: Why was any of this permitted?

Question 3: Should we all be making acts of reparation for this?

 

[NewsTheMan]

Question 1: Do you think the devil smiles at these incidents or frowns?

He is delighted.

Question 2: Why was any of this permitted?

The response will be that “nobody knew what he was going to do” or “it took everybody by surprise”. Something to that effect. I don’t buy it, that’s all I’ll say.

Question 3: Should we all be making acts of reparation for this?

Definitely. The SSPX have been making acts of reparation for some time (I believe their Novena ended yesterday). People seem to forget that God hates pagan worship almost as much as he hates luke-warm souls.

 

[MontChevalier]

I’m with many others on this one. I do not like this at all.

The Pope is definitely being too politically correct. I wonder what Jesus would say. Alas, Jesus is not here, and we need him now more than ever to shut these sorts of things down.

-MontChevalier

 

[Padraig1972]

Pray the rosary, pray for our Holy father and pray for our church. The devil is working hard these days with his wicked snares.

I rather be morally right than political correct, any day.

 

[PrayForMeStJude]

Well, at least pray with Patriarch Bartholomew I. I would love to see that.

You can see it every day on youtube! They have attended each others’ liturgies, and have even said the (Orthodox version of the) Nicean Creed together in St. Peter’s.

 

[Denise1957]

At this Assisi meeting (27 Oct), according to the AP, an animist (African paganism) was permitted to stand on the altar and invoke pagan deities (which is demonic).

At the first one, Buddhists were permitted to worship a statue of Buddha on the altar.

Question 1: Do you think the devil smiles at these incidents or frowns?

Question 2: Why was any of this permitted?

Question 3: Should we all be making acts of reparation for this?

Where in Church teaching does it say to make an act of reparation for something that the Pope himself has approved? We should be focusing on our own problems and sins, instead of focusing on the supposed sin of others.

The SSPX has made an apostolate of complaining. It’s what they do, it’s what they have always done, and what they will always continue to do, because they don’t know any better, and it isn’t Catholic.

 

[NewsTheMan]

Where in Church teaching does it say to make an act of reparation for something that the Pope himself has approved?

… Huh? We are making an act of reparation for something offensive to God. Violation of the 1st commandment. The Pope has not approved Pagan worship. If he did… well…

The Pope is not Jesus. He is not above criticism when criticism is legitimate. We must respect him, and his office, but let’s not engage in papalotary.

We should be focusing on our own problems and sins, instead of focusing on the supposed sin of others.

Not either/or… it’s both/and. Do you forget we are the Church Militant? All in this together.

The SSPX has made an apostolate of complaining. It’s what they do, it’s what they have always done, and what they will always continue to do, because they don’t know any better, and it isn’t Catholic.

The SSPX isn’t Catholic? Oh boy The SSPX is Catholic. They complain when it’s time to complain. Do you say the same thing about St.Athanasius? He was made into a saint for “complaining”. The SSPX carry tradition and save souls. They don’t just complain.

 

[Denise1957]

… Huh? We are making an act of reparation for something offensive to God. Violation of the 1st commandment. The Pope has not approved Pagan worship. If he did… well…

The Pope is not Jesus. He is not above criticism when criticism is legitimate. We must respect him, and his office, but let’s not engage in papalotary.

Not either/or… it’s both/and. Do you forget we are the Church Militant? All in this together.

The SSPX isn’t Catholic? Oh boy The SSPX is Catholic. They complain when it’s time to complain. Do you say the same thing about St.Athanasius? He was made into a saint for “complaining”. The SSPX carry tradition and save souls. They don’t just complain.

Who in the church has the legitimate authority to claim and declare that what is happening now at Assisi lll is offensive to God? Are you sure that you and the SSPX and others have to proper authority to proclaim that it is offensive to God? Or is it your private opinion?

I didn’t say that the SSPX is not Catholic. I said that it isn’t Catholic to make an apostolate out of complaining. The SSPX defines itself more by what it is against, rather than what it is supposedly for (proper Catholic teaching).

The SSPX situation has no similarity to St. Athanasius. You’ve been sucked into to SSPX party line, unfortunately.

 

[passer_by]

Who in the church has the legitimate authority to claim and declare that what is happening now at Assisi lll is offensive to God? Are you sure that you and the SSPX and others have to proper authority to proclaim that it is offensive to God? Or is it your private opinion?

I didn’t say that the SSPX is not Catholic. I said that it isn’t Catholic to make an apostolate out of complaining. The SSPX defines itself more by what it is against, rather than what it is supposedly for (proper Catholic teaching).

The SSPX situation has no similarity to St. Athanasius. You’ve been sucked into to SSPX party line, unfortunately.

I am not SSPX but I think you are being unreasonable here.

Any person with proper use of reason can JUDGE whether an action is good in the long run or not, whether it is very consistent with a given INFALLIBLE set of rules or not.

If that were not possible, then we would not be able to judge our own actions and therefore not even be responsible for ANYTHING we do.

So in this case, observers can see Assissi and make a reasonable judgement whether it is good in the long term or not, or whether it might cause confusion or not. That is very much valid and unless you have an incorrect belief that the actions of Pope’s are also infallible, there is nothing wrong with that.

And yes, I am not SSPX, but I still think that Assissi was a bad idea. But hey, the Pope is human. Everyone makes mistakes. I rest easy knowing that the Holy Father still has the best of intentions with respect to what he wants to achieve and would never be allowed to teach error.

 

[NewsTheMan]

Who in the church has the legitimate authority to claim and declare that what is happening now at Assisi lll is offensive to God?

Church teaching as set out by (just one recent example) Pope St. Pius X in his Encyclicals against modernism, especially The Syllabus of Errors. Furthermore, you have the 10 commandments. And scripture - St.Paul tells us not to mix with Gentiles and the OT is full of God being angry at the Jews for participating in Pagan worship.

I’m not sure you understand Papal Infallibility properly if you think the Pope is above reproach or criticism. Look, I still love Papa Benedict and hope God gives him many more years. I think he’s an amazing man and will most likely be a saint in the coming years, but he has made mistakes.

Are you sure that you and the SSPX and others have to proper authority to proclaim that it is offensive to God? Or is it your private opinion?

It is a reasonable opinion to hold. There is no ‘public’ opinion on this. It is all private opinion. You seem to believe it is unreasonable and against the faith. I believe tradition supports the view that I hold - which is that these meetings are scandals. We are in one of the biggest crisis the Church has ever faced, people losing their faith left and right… and so our Shepherd decides to do something which might confuse his own flock and will confuse other souls too. It just doesn’t seem right to me.

I didn’t say that the SSPX is not Catholic. I said that it isn’t Catholic to make an apostolate out of complaining.

Let’s play your game… says who? Do you say what is authentic Catholicism? Hmmm. In any case, the SSPX are not an apostolate nor do they spend their time complaining. You could twist any kind of literature, including Catholic Answers own literature, and say it’s all about the complaining.

The SSPX defines itself more by what it is against, rather than what it is supposedly for (proper Catholic teaching).

Bizarre statement not grounded in reality. They define themselves as for certain things, which necessarily require they are against certain things. This is basic logic. Now, part of being for these things is that at times they must speak up against what they are against. Do we not criticize our Bishops for not upholding this almost every single day? Oh if only they would speak up! You’re reading into things as you want to see them.

The SSPX situation has no similarity to St. Athanasius. You’ve been sucked into to SSPX party line, unfortunately.

I didn’t compare them in likeness, I compared them in kind. I have never spoken to a member of the SSPX save for online once or twice. I hardly read any of their literature. I don’t even attend SSPX Masses. I’m not sure what I have been ‘sucked into’.

 

[barb_finnegan]

Other pope?

Yes-the head of the Coptic Church is called a Pope. The current one’s name is Pope Shenouda (forgot what ‘number’ he is). Do a Google search on him, or else on Wikipedia.

He spoke out against the recent anti-Christian violence in Egypt.

 

[JReducation]

At this Assisi meeting (27 Oct), according to the AP, an animist (African paganism) was permitted to stand on the altar and invoke pagan deities (which is demonic).

At the first one, Buddhists were permitted to worship a statue of Buddha on the altar.

Question 1: Do you think the devil smiles at these incidents or frowns?

Question 2: Why was any of this permitted?

Question 3: Should we all be making acts of reparation for this?

You do realize that the person was not standing on the altar?

There is one of two things going on here. I believe that it’s the first, because I like to give people the benefit of the doubt.

1. Many people who don’t have the proper vocabulary refer to the entire sanctuary as “the altar”.
2. There are many reporters who work for the AP that love stirring the pot. To say that the person sang a song that comes from an African religions while standing at the front of the Church on the sanctuary step is not as exciting as to say that they stood on the altar and invoked demons or whatever. The former may be something that many people may not like, but there is no law being violated. The latter creates waves. Some journalists know this. They know how to push the Trads buttons. They use such deliberate speech in order to stir contraversy.

The truth is that sanctuaries of major basilicas have often been used for concerts, speeches, lectures and even plays. The Blessed Sacrament is placed in reserve and the sanctuary is used even for a secular purpose, provided that it is not obscenee or immoral in any way. But the altar of sacrifice is not touched. In other words, no one is allowed to stand on it.

By the way, The Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer do not agree with the SSPX on this one. Actually, they disagree with the SSPX on many things. Let’s not compare the two. They are similar in the ritual practices, but different in their relationship with the Vatican, especially with Pope Benedict XVI. The Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer have great respect for and trust Pope Benedict.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[passer_by]

The former may be something that many people may not like, but there is no law being violated.

Br. JR, OSF

Of course there is no law being violated. Otherwise I would never be looking at the Pope the same way again.

What happened was that the Pope made a pretty dumb decision that lead to someone taking advantage to speak of why Indigenous Religions should also be respected. I will bet you he thought that the Pope inviting him was a sign that the Pope approved of indigenous religions and was trying to build respect for it.

So the Pope didn’t break the law. He didn’t have a bad intention. He just didn’t think too far enough. It’s human. Correct the mistake and move on.

 

[NewsTheMan]

By the way, The Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer do not agree with the SSPX on this one. Actually, they disagree with the SSPX on many things. Let’s not compare the two. They are similar in the ritual practices, but different in their relationship with the Vatican, especially with Pope Benedict XVI. The Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer have great respect for and trust Pope Benedict.

I’m not sure if this was directed at me or not. In any case - I know the FSsR disagree with the SSPX on many things. Of course, I do too. They are also correct in other things though. I haven’t heard from the FSsR on the Assisi matter and they’re probably staying away from it - rightly so. Perhaps I should do the same, huh? I too have a great respect, love and trust for Pope Benedict. I still cannot condone the Assisi meetings though. I know he’s not looking for my approval, sure. He knows better than I do, not just because he’s the Pope but he’s learned, and four times my age.

But, I just can’t reconcile it in my head why this would happen or be considered a good thing. If the Church were now as it was in 1920? Yeah, I could see this being something good (if it were a bit more controlled i.e. no pagan prayers please!). But right now? In this world? With the way Catholicism is now? I just can’t appreciate it. I think it’s possible to trust the Pope without blindly following and approving of every action. I’m not even placing any shame, blame or guilt on Papa Benedict. I am speaking quite generally here, and making general points. I believe the Holy Father has good intentions. He’s a great man, and a good Pope. I guess the false dichotomy bothers me though. If we’re not trying to make nothing out of something that is scandal, then we’re Pope-hater schismatics. I am loyal and faithful to be Pope, but to me this meeting wasn’t good and His Holiness made a bad call.

I read in another forum that the only reason that this has become a big issue is because we’ve made it into a big issue. Perhaps I am doing just that. It’s been a good discussion and I think it may be time for me to value my own opinions less for now

 

[JReducation]

I’m not sure if this was directed at me or not. In any case - I know the FSsR disagree with the SSPX on many things. Of course, I do too. They are also correct in other things though. I haven’t heard from the FSsR on the Assisi matter and they’re probably staying away from it - rightly so. Perhaps I should do the same, huh? I too have a great respect, love and trust for Pope Benedict. I still cannot condone the Assisi meetings though. I know he’s not looking for my approval, sure. He knows better than I do, not just because he’s the Pope but he’s learned, and four times my age.

But, I just can’t reconcile it in my head why this would happen or be considered a good thing. If the Church were now as it was in 1920? Yeah, I could see this being something good (if it were a bit more controlled i.e. no pagan prayers please!). But right now? In this world? With the way Catholicism is now? I just can’t appreciate it. I think it’s possible to trust the Pope without blindly following and approving of every action. I’m not even placing any shame, blame or guilt on Papa Benedict. I am speaking quite generally here, and making general points. I believe the Holy Father has good intentions. He’s a great man, and a good Pope. I guess the false dichotomy bothers me though. If we’re not trying to make nothing out of something that is scandal, then we’re Pope-hater schismatics. I am loyal and faithful to be Pope, but to me this meeting wasn’t good and His Holiness made a bad call.

I read in another forum that the only reason that this has become a big issue is because we’ve made it into a big issue. Perhaps I am doing just that. It’s been a good discussion and I think it may be time for me to value my own opinions less for now

My comment was for your benefit, but I didn’t do the proper quote thingy. Sorry for that. The Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer may certainly have an opinion on this as do Franciscans, Dominicans, Augustinians, Jesuits, Trappists, Benedictines and so forth. The list of religious families is long, as we both know.

The difference between the FSSR and the SSPX is that like the other religious families, the FSSR trusts the Holy Father, respects the Holy Father too much to go out in public and criticize him, even when they disagree, and they do not allow their members to do so either.

Part of being a holy religious is the virtue of discretion along with the virtue of obedience. St. Alphonse always taught the early Redemptorists to obey and when they found obedience a challenge, they should question themselves before questioning authority. St. Francis had taught something similar centuries before. You are to obey, even if the command is foolish, after you have determined that you’re not being asked to sin. St. Dominic told his brothers that the only authority that could define sin is the Church. Just because they believed something to be a sin, was not a good enough reason to disobey. The individual is not a law unto himself.

My great admiration for the FSSR is their orthodoxy in living the religious life. Unlike many communities today who have made it their mission to open mouth, insert foot and upset everyone in the process, the Sons observe a loving obedience coupled with discretion. They do something very beautifu, which is also common to Carmelites, Benedictines and Franciscans. When they have a concern such as this, they go to their superior to ask if their concern has legitimacy. If the superior says it does, they ponder it and pray over it. If the superior says it has no legitimacy, they put it aside. In either case, they show respect for Church authority and they protect the Church from wagging tongues, while dealing with an issue, if there is an issue to be dealt with. They’re very holy men.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[NewsTheMan]

Snip

Thanks for that Brother. Good information and thoughts. I guess… well, yeah. I guess it’s hard - to balance ones own conscience, duties and obedience. As a religious you probably know this all too well! I always think to myself - and have been especially in the last few days - “Is this me just being a bit of a stirrer? Am I posting/reading/conversing for good intention?”. I must admit, it has been difficult to know the right answer. As I say, there is a part of me that is offended as a Catholic. Another part says I am being a bad Catholic by feeling such things. Another part says whatever I feel I must just keep it zipped. Yet another says that I have a duty as a Catholic to not keep it zipped. The last thing on my mind is to be self-important or overbearingly self-righteous. It’s a hard thing to balance.

I long for the religious life. If Fr. Michael Mary said “this is unimportant and doesn’t concern our community” I would happily and humbly obey and carry on as usual. If he said something else, again I’d obey. Until such time, though, I sit and wait as pretty much the only Catholic I know in my area who pays attention to these things. It’s frustrating, because one never wants to be indifferent to the needs of the Church or to the faith. One never wants to say to God “Well, I’ll just sit back and let you sort this out”. In some sense, and some cases, we can say that I know. It’s figuring out which is which.

I guess, then, in the spirit of the FSsR I’ll disengage from this thread and keep my opinions to myself. I trust the Holy Father. Most of all I trust Christ to lead His Church. I was told the other day, even, that this is not even vaguely related to my salvation or personal growth in holiness. In my arrogance I brushed that off and decided to mouth off. Mea Culpa.

A bit of a unnecessary and personal post I suppose, but your post spoke to me Br.JR

 

[JReducation]

Thanks for that Brother. Good information and thoughts. I guess… well, yeah. I guess it’s hard - to balance ones own conscience, duties and obedience. As a religious you probably know this all too well! I always think to myself - and have been especially in the last few days - “Is this me just being a bit of a stirrer? Am I posting/reading/conversing for good intention?”. I must admit, it has been difficult to know the right answer. As I say, there is a part of me that is offended as a Catholic. Another part says I am being a bad Catholic by feeling such things. Another part says whatever I feel I must just keep it zipped. Yet another says that I have a duty as a Catholic to not keep it zipped. The last thing on my mind is to be self-important or overbearingly self-righteous. It’s a hard thing to balance.

I long for the religious life. If Fr. Michael Mary said “this is unimportant and doesn’t concern our community” I would happily and humbly obey and carry on as usual. If he said something else, again I’d obey. Until such time, though, I sit and wait as pretty much the only Catholic I know in my area who pays attention to these things. It’s frustrating, because one never wants to be indifferent to the needs of the Church or to the faith. One never wants to say to God “Well, I’ll just sit back and let you sort this out”. In some sense, and some cases, we can say that I know. It’s figuring out which is which.

I guess, then, in the spirit of the FSsR I’ll disengage from this thread and keep my opinions to myself. I trust the Holy Father. Most of all I trust Christ to lead His Church. I was told the other day, even, that this is not even vaguely related to my salvation or personal growth in holiness. In my arrogance I brushed that off and decided to mouth off. Mea Culpa.

A bit of a unnecessary and personal post I suppose, but your post spoke to me Br.JR

I know that you want to be a good religious and I believe that if you truly have a vocation to the FSsR, you will have a place to be one. As a community, it is a holy one. I have no doubts of that. I’ve met them. LIke every community, they have their problem children. Find me a family that does not have problem child. But I admire that they have returned to the more healthy ways of religious life.

In my own Franciscan tradition, we have begun our recovery as well. We have had to silence many Franciscans, secular and regular, because they have been very imprudent. Not everything that one thinks or knows should be shared with the world. It can do more damage than good.

In addition, one has to know what battles to pick. One also has to learn that only fools and children speak without measure. I’m not so sure about children.

We have an obsession with transparency. There is a point when transparency is nothing more than nudity, which is inappropriate. There is a right place and a wrong place to voice concerns. When Catholics start throwing their concerns out there for everyone else to use as ammunition against Catholicsm or against the pope, that’s nudity, not transparency.

Transparency is honesty, not indiscretion. I go to my superior, my spritual director, my bishop or a spiritual person whom I trust with my concerns. One must never keep his concerns a secret. The devil wants us to do that so that he can go about doing his thing undetected. One should never spread his concerns far and wide either. The devil makes use of that to stir up division.

The holy religious is a sign to the world. He is a sign of honesty and discretion at work together. Honest + discretion = charity.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[NewsTheMan]

Snip

Thanks again Brother. Great post. I should read this every single time I think of posting. The danger of the internet (and of my own sinful nature) and message boards in particular is that I tend to marvel at my own posts and think “Yes, yes, this opinion of mine is something everybody should hear!”. I am grateful for you posting in this thread. It shows me how far I am from sainthood, and how far I am from being where I want to be, where I must be and where I need to be as a Catholic.

In His mercy God hears the prayers of a sinful man such as myself.
Tonight I will pray for you.

 

[JReducation]

Thanks again Brother. Great post. I should read this every single time I think of posting. The danger of the internet (and of my own sinful nature) and message boards in particular is that I tend to marvel at my own posts and think “Yes, yes, this opinion of mine is something everybody should hear!”. I am grateful for you posting in this thread. It shows me how far I am from sainthood, and how far I am from being where I want to be, where I must be and where I need to be as a Catholic.

In His mercy God hears the prayers of a sinful man such as myself.
Tonight I will pray for you.

I need those prayers.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[severus68]

Where in Church teaching does it say to make an act of reparation for something that the Pope himself has approved? We should be focusing on our own problems and sins, instead of focusing on the supposed sin of others.

The SSPX has made an apostolate of complaining. It’s what they do, it’s what they have always done, and what they will always continue to do, because they don’t know any better, and it isn’t Catholic.