R
reneewood
Guest
- Status
S
Scapular
Guest
But,
Sacred Heart Parish, Caro, MI – No Crucifix
St. Mary Cathedral, Sagniaw – No Crucifix
Blessed Sacrament, Midland – No Crucifix
St. Stephen, Saginaw – No Crucifix
This is the off-the-top-of-my-head list. Could others chime in here?
Why?
Because we need to look at what happens when we take Christ off the Cross.
What greater salvific force for mankind is there than Christ Crucified?
Why, why, why, would any bishop ever take Christ off the Cross, indeed, even take down the crucifix?
I would just like to learn the twisted pattern of illogic that was used to bring us to this place with no cricifix, no Christ Crucified…
Unable to understand,
Scapular
E
ekindermann
Guest
I had the pleasure 
of attending a Town Hall meeting at the parish in Harrison, St. Athanasius, They have the risen Jesus there, no crucifix. The pastor nun showed me the new “atrium” for the Catechesis of the Good Shepherd program ( program for 3-6 year olds to learn the Faith, however they leave Mass, completely miss the Mass in order to go to the program on Sundays, which I never like children being taken out like that) The program is known for the small models of objects which the kids can play mass, etc. And my point is, that I noticed that even the cross they have for the kids is the risen Jesus cross, and not a crucifix. I did not see one image in the etire room or church that had a crucifix. Although my friend tells me they did put the stations of the cross back up, but I haven’t looked for myself yet. St. Cecilia’s in Clare also has the risen Christ cross, not a crucifix. He smiles down at us all through Mass. 
they carry in a cross during the procession and I think that might be a crucifix, I remember trying to focus on it during Mass, but its small and depending on where we sit and where they put it (up towards the rear of the altar), it is hard to see.
Beth K.
of attending a Town Hall meeting at the parish in Harrison, St. Athanasius, They have the risen Jesus there, no crucifix. The pastor nun showed me the new “atrium” for the Catechesis of the Good Shepherd program ( program for 3-6 year olds to learn the Faith, however they leave Mass, completely miss the Mass in order to go to the program on Sundays, which I never like children being taken out like that) The program is known for the small models of objects which the kids can play mass, etc. And my point is, that I noticed that even the cross they have for the kids is the risen Jesus cross, and not a crucifix. I did not see one image in the etire room or church that had a crucifix. Although my friend tells me they did put the stations of the cross back up, but I haven’t looked for myself yet. St. Cecilia’s in Clare also has the risen Christ cross, not a crucifix. He smiles down at us all through Mass. they carry in a cross during the procession and I think that might be a crucifix, I remember trying to focus on it during Mass, but its small and depending on where we sit and where they put it (up towards the rear of the altar), it is hard to see.Beth K.
F
Fast_ed75
Guest
WHO’S WHO IN WINDSWEPT HOUSE
Volunteer Sharon M. Woolhiser, 59, of Bay City, scores bread Wednesday morning at Holy Trinity Catholic Church community center. The bread will be served to an estimated 2,500 people for Holy Communion during Bishop Kenneth E. Untener’s funeral Thursday.
- Bp. Primas Rochefort (NY) - Bp. Matthew Clark, Rochester
- Bp. Bruce Longbottham (MI) - Bp. Kenneth Untener, Saginaw
- Abp. Cuthbert Delish (WI) - Abp. Rembert Weakland, Milwaukee (retired)
- Bp. Manley Motherhubbe (NY) - Bp. Howard Hubbard, Albany
- Bp. Raymond Luckenbill (MN) - Bp. Raymond Lucker, New Ulm
- Bp. Ralph Goodenough (IL) - composite of Chicago auxiliaries
- Sr. Fran Fedora (Seattle) - Fran Ferder
Volunteer Sharon M. Woolhiser, 59, of Bay City, scores bread Wednesday morning at Holy Trinity Catholic Church community center. The bread will be served to an estimated 2,500 people for Holy Communion during Bishop Kenneth E. Untener’s funeral Thursday.
F
frommi
Guest
Is it possible that (again) it’s a return to an earlier tradition in the Catholic church? The early Christians had no crucifixes, there is no way they would’ve put a crucifix up anywhere in those early years of this church.
Over time, the history of the church led us to a point where there was uncertainty that Jesus even died on the cross, thus the reliance on the icon of a crucifixion.
For me personally, I don’t know that it matters that much. Our symbol is the cross…the sign we make at the beginning and end of mass.
Isn’t there salvation in a Risen Lord? Isn’t the idea that Jesus transformed life for us by conquering death?
I don’t think this is all that hard to understand scapular.
S
Scapular
Guest
F
frommi
Guest
Here’s a challenge…why if the image of Christ crucified is so key to any cross…do we venerate a plain wooden cross on Good Friday (assuming that the parish you attend has people come up to kiss the cross, etc.)?
While I do understand that GIRM indicates a cross with Jesus crucifed should be present in the sanctuary, I fail to see how it should be the first thing that a new Bishop runs around his diocese to take care of.
E
ekindermann
Guest
Actually, I have been to many Good Friday services at which we kissed the feet of Christ on the CRUCIFIX. No body? No feet to kiss.
Beth K.
M
MrS
Guest
The answer is in your own words… we venerate (not worship) the cross.
on Good Friday… we recognize the exception to the rule… and the drama of covering the Cross for that one day is meant to remind us of what happened. All the other days… Christ Crucified… even on Easter when Christ rose.
F
frommi
Guest
I’m not sure you have any real back up for that statement.
And the reason I used Good Friday as an example was to continue my conversation with Scapular about the idea that perhaps an icon of a crucified Christ does not go as far back in the history of the church as some of the people trying to “reform” my way of thinking may beleieve.
P
psalm90
Guest
Don’t keep us in suspense. What IS the first thing that the new Bishop should run around fixing?
E
ekindermann
Guest
I’ve got one…the bread for communion needs to be the correct matter (get rid of the white flour, salt, baking soda and honey!) so that we have a valid mass to attend!Thank you!
D
Detroit_Sue
Guest
As the wife of a deacon, I can categorically state that my husband’s ministry is NOT my ministry. Most of the other deacons’ wives I know feel the same way. In the AOD, the wives are encouraged to attend classes with their husbands (I did not), and we attended monthly formation meetings. These were designed to touch on different aspects of the diaconate, fellowship, and the importance of a wife’s supportive role. To think Untenter refused to ordain Permanent Deacons because the wives were not ordained is a travesty. Who knows how many good men he denied for his own political agenda? Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face…
I
Illini
Guest
*Is it possible that (again) it’s a return to an earlier tradition in the Catholic church? The early Christians had no crucifixes, there is no way they would’ve put a crucifix up anywhere in those early years of this church. *
-Illini
Code:
Why must our traditions (not Tradition) be solely based on what the "early Church" did? Christians in the early times had to make accommodations because they were persecuted. Hence there were no church buildings in the year 100. Does that mean the great cathedrals built in the Middle Ages do not represent authentic traditions and should be torn down?
Our traditions have a teaching role as well. What was necessary to explain Christ's teachings in the "early Church" may well be unnecessary today, and vice versa. Perhaps a crucifix was not necessary at that time as the early Christians were closely connected to the Apostles, or simply because someone had not thought of the icon yet.
An excellent example of "teaching traditions" is Eucharistic Exposition and Adoration. The Eastern Catholic Churches do not utilize this practice much. Why? There were no questions in the East about the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. There were, however, questions in the West that persist to this day. Exposition and Adoration are not necessary for salvation, but they exist to emphasize the Real Presence, to allow a beautiful opportunity to worship the Lord outside of Mass, and to clearly state our beliefs for Catholics and others.
Today, (and for the last 1,500 years) the crucifix is a profound reminder of what Christ did for us, as well as the purpose of the Mass itself. Accordingly, the Church has spoken *today* on crucifixes, in light of the teaching role they provide and a connection to prior eras: they must be present in the church. It is a shame that many parishes (including, apparently, several in Saginaw) fail to recognize that and just change so they can be different. To the contrary, Rome knows what she is talking about.
F
frommi
Guest
Detroit Sue:
And please remember that the late Bishop commissioned a very large number of lay ministers. He simply did not see the fairness in requiring the same things of both genders and ordaining one gender, and commissioning the other. Frankly, it’s not something I agree with, but can see the point.
In many places, like the archdiocese of chicago, they are referred to as “deacon couples” and the wives go through just about the same formation as the husbands.As the wife of a deacon, I can categorically state that my husband’s ministry is NOT my ministry. Most of the other deacons’ wives I know feel the same way. In the AOD, the wives are encouraged to attend classes with their husbands (I did not), and we attended monthly formation meetings. These were designed to touch on different aspects of the diaconate, fellowship, and the importance of a wife’s supportive role. To think Untenter refused to ordain Permanent Deacons because the wives were not ordained is a travesty. Who knows how many good men he denied for his own political agenda? Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face…
And please remember that the late Bishop commissioned a very large number of lay ministers. He simply did not see the fairness in requiring the same things of both genders and ordaining one gender, and commissioning the other. Frankly, it’s not something I agree with, but can see the point.
F
frommi
Guest
See…I would reverse the question, because most of the time, when people seek to “reclaim our lost traditions” they are speaking of 50 years ago, not 2000 years ago.
I have a problem when the debate around these issues is framed to say something like “these liturgists are trying to innovate too much, I want things how they USED to be”. And that is an unfair argument, because how things USED To be is probably closer to what the liturgical scholars are saying.
I agree that the church is an organic, living, breathing thing. It should adjust and change with the times. But part of allowing for that train of thought is to allow yourself to believe that the times continue to change and the spirit continues to move us in new directions to see new things and open our eyes to new facets of our beliefs.
As for your last sentence…I’d be curious to know why “Rome knows what she is talking about”? The dicasteries in Rome are so disjointed that often they end up saying opposite things about the same issue. And why is there a monopoly on truth in Rome? I have a hard time with that.
F
frommi
Guest
ekindermann said:
Thank you!
Do you really truly believe that there are pastors out there intentionally trying to invalidate the mass? Have you ever asked for the recipe from these churches and considered submitting it to a bishop or the CDW to see if it is problematic or not?
E
ekindermann
Guest
I just saw the recipe this Friday, when I asked to see it, when I was still contemplating wether or not to return to the illict mass and await in joyful hope the changes I pray will come. I left with my children in tow, very sad and sheken by this. I stupidly had a thought in my head that perhaps, just perhaps, although they were insisting upon making their own substantial bread, that they would use only the correct matter. Silly me! What was I thinking?! I then went home and read, read, read all the many documents put out by Rome - yes Frommi - ROME - we’ll get to that in a minute - and opinions on the documents put forth by respected people. (EWTN, Adoremus, CUF, this board - Respected because they get it right!) It is most definitely illicit and possibly invalid. I don’t have to submit it, MANY others have already done so and the answers are there for all to hear - if they WANT to hear. the other reason I don’t have to submit it is because it is very clear to those of us that live here, that are “Saginaw refugees” as I call us, can see that this bread recipe was the purposeful CHOICE of the Bishop at that time, as was his Saginaw blessing - which I also found glued to the inside cover of the music books. Do they do so on purpose? HMMMM well, if one (the priest) knows that it is illicit, and possibly invalid, and continues to allow it, then yeah, I guess he’s doing it purposefully. Why? Well that is the 10,000 dollar question, now isn’t it? Why deal with the problems inherent in making their own “substantial bread” crumbling, molding, edilble or not, etc, etc, etc, JUST to be different?! To do it THEIR WAY! Not to do it the Lord’s way, not to return to the old days, just to be dissident! The fact that it is the body & blood of Our Lord doesn’t seem to matter to them. But perhaps, they like many have forgotten that that is what we believe.
Now, when I got home Friday, I was so upset about this that I picked up the phone and called the LIturgy office in Saginaw. Guess what she said? “Don’t make waves for your parish, it is probably going to change.” Well, that is tantamount to admiting guilt and sweeping it under the rug. NIce huh?
Once again, thanks for your thoughts Frommi, but you are clueless, or you are of the same ilk who really do know exactly what is going on and you are obstinately - why? we don’t know - obstinately defending WRONG behaviors and teachings.
Dear God have mercy on us all.
P
psalm90
Guest
Well, the Church is beyond the reach of the Freedom of Information Act and so I wouldn’t expect cooperation, in the first place.
Second, I think it is possible for there to be enough variation, so that the use of invalid communion wafers would be hard to document, except by the testimony of witnesses.
The answer to the first question is, I wouldn’t expect pastors to reveal those intentions. I surmise that the ongoing innovation in the Masses locally reflects Bishop Untener’s belief that the Mass is boring. He preached so much about making worship better, that his appraisel of GIRM-compliant worship is obvious. The fact that he videotaped Masses and held critiques of priests shows how much he intended to micromanage.
In fact, I think the way to improve Mass is not to change anything superficial in the Mass, but to provide ongoing education so that people can grow into appreciating it.
If people want to innovate, and I wouldn’t want to stop that, then why don’t the Bishops of the U.S. petition the Vatican to develop a new Rite? Sure, let’s abandon the Latin rite. Let’s take ten years and develop a well-thought-out and -designed multicultural rite for the U.S. and other English-speaking countries that want to adopt it?
In at least one of the valid Rites of the Church, the words of consecration do not require repeating Christ’s words at the Last Supper. That’s an indication of how far you can go. (Bishop Untener didn’t like the fact that at best, the people have one minute of participation at Mass, and the priest has the rest. He didn’t think that Vatican II went far enough in opening up the Mass.)
But, until that time, I, for one, strongly recommend adherence to the Latin-rite / English-translation Mass based on the GIRM, no additions or extensions or improvisations or different-every-week interpretations.
F
frommi
Guest
I really appreciate how you thank me for my thoughts then call me clueless without any knowledge of my credentials in the area of liturgy.
Let me give you an example…at St. Mary’s Student Parish, Mt Pleasant the recipe is published in the bulletin with the statement “this recipe was approved by the congregation of divine worship in the summer of 2004”. Now…again, either the parish is lying, or somewhere documents are being misintrepreted.
I find it laughable that groups like adoreums “get it right”. Adoremus is a group with its own agenda, they are to the far “right” what groups like “Credo” and “We Believe” are the the far “left”. They chose what bishops they find laudable, and blast those that they do not like. To call them a group that “gets it right” when their idea of “charity” is to “pray for Cardinals like Roger Mahony” is not something I’m prepared to do.
The evidence from the bishop’s conference is that even many bishops are tired of the liturgy being the subject of some kind of “counter-reformation”. Why else would they take the rare step of putting Bishop Trautman in charge of the liturgy committee, even though his name was not even in nomination?
I find many of the conversations on this board to allow me a deeper insight to many of the things that divide us as a church, but the pretentiousness that is present in some of the posters is scary, and occasionally unchristian.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to check for the Gospel passage where Jesus specifies the proper way to display a crucifx and forbids the disciples from using honey when “doing this in memory of me”.
- Status