F
frommi
Guest
Well…the pastor allowing it is Bishop Carlson’s MC and is pretty much the point man for GIRM implementation. So do you think he’s doing it and the bishop is totally unaware?
- Status
E
ekindermann
Guest
And, you know this information (“is pretty much the point man for GIRM implementation”) how???
What does MC stand for? Do you mean emcee as in Master of Ceremonies? as in some type of spokesperson, like an emcee on a stage? Forgive my ignorance I do not understand.
Beth
E
ekindermann
Guest
Just finished reading the letter above - absolutely, positively unbelievable! Why?!
Has ANYONE asked the bishop about this?:banghead: How can it possibly be acceptable?
E
ekindermann
Guest
Did I find my own answer? This from his letter says:“MC for the Diocesan Respect Life Mass at Saint Stanislaus Parish, Bay City” I have heard this term used in referring to a priest in the TLM, but have never heard it used re: an NO Mass. Does he mean the “Main Celebrant”? If so, frommi, how do you mean that he “is Bishop Carlson’s MC”?
G
grotto
Guest
Does this mean that a Catholic priest and choir have been invited to the Presbyterian church to preach a sermon and sing - sort of like trading jobs for the day? Who gets the collection?
F
frommi
Guest
MC, meaning “Master of Ceremonies”. Even the pope has one, although his is an archbishop.
This priest-pastor in question has been the MC for the last 3 bishops of Saginaw.
The MC is sort of an altar server/acolyte type. At more complex masses, it definitely helps to have someone that knows what the heck they are doing in this particular role.
As far as “point person” for the GIRM…he’s the interim director of the office of liturgy. GIRM implementation is one of his main jobs.
E
ekindermann
Guest
Thanks for the explanations. So I was right as far as the MC label goes. It is used the same way as when I’ve heard of it used in re: to the TLM. But I have never known one to be used for a normal everyday NO Mass. But oh well, what do I know, not much for sure.
It is disturbing to me that IF this priest IS in such a position WHY he’d set up such an arrangement as described in his letter. Once again, is it not outright disobedience to the GIRM? Oh, please, she whimpers pitifully, let this not degenerate into another battle over what the GIRM says is allowed.
If it is disobedient, then I guess it just falls in with all the other disobedient lay preaching that is to STOP in Lent (WE THINK!).
Yes, this is making me crazy.
F
frommi
Guest
Before everyone gets too fired up…remember that you don’t know the context of the preaching…it could very well be some type of post communion reflection, and not during the homily period…
As far as the musicians go, as one myself, trust me that from time to time talented musicians not of the catholic faith have worked the piano with me.
E
ekindermann
Guest
one can only hope & pray…
fired up? me? naw! :bigyikes:
We italian/irish types don’t get fired up.
O
Orionthehunter
Guest
Was this seminarian an ordained transitional deacon? If so, he is allowed to preach the homily.
I’d be interested to know if he preaches during the homily (prohibited) or after Mass. I think that after the Mass, this can be a positive. Unity is something that Christ wants us to aspire to and our position as Guardian of the Full Deposit of Faith puts special and extra-ordinary obligations to find ways to bring about Unity.
I recall a conversation with a good Christian man of the Anabaptist tradition. He told me about his new friend the local Catholic Priest. He told me that this Priest is a good Christian man of the Bible and can pray as good as any minister he has ever heard.
By inference, this man was surprised that a Priest could be a good Christian, reads the Bible, and knows how to give a spontaneous prayer that isn’t read from a book. This is a good man who lives with and has socialized with Catholics his entire life and he was surprised by the faith of this Priest. The lack of knowledge and misperceptions of our separated brethren about the Catholic Church is a major obstacle to Unity. We need to take it upon ourselves to bridge these divisive gaps.
Keep in mind that the Church celebrates Truth whereever it is found. Even in a most extreme separated Christian community, there are threads and parts of the Truth in the community. However, by allowing them to share their limited knowledge of the Truth with us, we will get a similar opportunity to share the greater Truth and dispel the above mentioned barriers to Unity. Christ and His legions of angels must celebrate with joy when such progress is made.
Bishop Carlson understands this very well. He was my Bishop prior to moving to Saginaw. When he left, the ministers of every faith in the diocese were emphatic in their praise of him and sincere in their sadness to see him leave. He didn’t earn their respect and admiration by watering down the Truth but by proclaiming it with more deeds than words. He showed these other faiths respect in recognition for the limited Truth held in their faith tradition.
In addition to his fidelity to sound liturgical practice, catechesis, promotion of Catholic devotions and identy, seminarian development, and active Catholic leadership in areas of social justice, Bishop Carlson will emphasize efforts to bridge the gaps that are divisive to Christian Unity. He is the complete package.
The outward signs of his efforts won’t be seen overnight. But every day progress will be made. He will focus his efforts first on providing information and gaining understanding within his flock and resort to executive fiat as a last resort. He knows that a change of heart is the most long-lasting and most effective.
F
frommi
Guest
Sorry to cut your post down for quoting purposes…
First of all…no, the student in question was not a transitional deacon, he was a seminarian.
Second, you know, I believe very much that all Bishops come from a place of good will and holiness. They have to do something pretty bad for me to have that belief shaken.
And, it comes to me now, that part of the problem with this whole “debate” about Bishop Carlson is that statements are made like “he is a holy man”, which no one is questioning. And yet, it seems like statements like that might be made to imply that Bishop Untener was not a model of holiness.
We talk about Christian Unity, and Bishop Untener did tremendous work in this area, and its good that Bishop Carlson is carrying on this work, in his own way, but he is carrying it on.
I think this whole thread would be different if it were acknowledged that each Bishop that enters a diocese has the privilege to sow what was planted before he was there.
There was and is much good in the diocese of Saginaw. Yes, people can question the pastoral judgment of Bishop Untener for what he allowed liturgically, but it was his right as pastor of the flock to allow those things. Likewise, I suspect some people will be uncomfortable with some of Bishop Carlson’s pastoral applications (one woman I know is about ready to scream if he says one more time “Well back in Sioux Falls we did…”)
No Bishop is like the one that preceded him, but Bishop Untener believed in the rosary and the power of prayer, and good preaching. Bishop Carlson believes in those same things from what I see.
So why continue with the comparisons? Why make it seem like one is better/worse than the other?
M
MBS1
Guest
PiusXIII said:
What did you think PiusXIII - did you get the same impression or am I way off base here? (I’ll apologize ahead of time if I am).
By the way, thanks to all of you who post here. I never dreamed that a little thread I started to find out about Bishop Carlson could grow to 880+ comments - remarkable. I, for one, have learned a lot. God Bless,
MBS1
Depends which church you were at in Midland. At St. Brigid it is Sister who often will give the homily. At Blessed Sacrament it is the lay director of the RCIA program. If it was her at Blessed Sacrament, her last homily was - in my opinion - poorly done. She was trying to discuss the sharing of God’s divine nature with man and ended up with a homily that would have been loved in a Mormon Church (we can all be gods too). I happened to be there that day with someone else who doesn’t go to that church very often and we both looked at each other and said - did she just say what we think she said? I don’t know if the priest proof reads her homilies, but after this maybe he should.
What did you think PiusXIII - did you get the same impression or am I way off base here? (I’ll apologize ahead of time if I am).
By the way, thanks to all of you who post here. I never dreamed that a little thread I started to find out about Bishop Carlson could grow to 880+ comments - remarkable. I, for one, have learned a lot. God Bless,
MBS1
F
frommi
Guest
16,000 webhits…a few bruised egos…some hurt feelings…a number of mea culpas…
But yeah…overall I’d say we’ve learned a lot about each other
E
ekindermann
Guest
Ok, so how to say this the right way…this being Christian Unity Week and all, don’t want to upset the good feelings going on here…
I cannot swallow “it was his right as pastor of the flock to allow those things.” things like: confession two years after first communion, …
interrupting self now: I decided to go over to the thread “How Happy is Saginaw” forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=46829
in order to look for the list of problems that had been previously listed there, and which silly me was beginning to retype to you, frommi. So as I began scanning the first 60 posts, I grew more and more incredulous that we are back here with the same discussion. What it boils down to is you saw/see nothing wrong with anything under Bishop Untener (May he rest in peace) and you cannot understand those of us who saw a great deal wrong and want it changed/corrected/FIXED! You do not want to admit/realize that he misled (intentionally? only God knows and it now only matters to Him) and there is a great deal of reteaching that needs to happen. Now does that mean that he did nothing good? Of course not. I am sure he did much good. However, perhaps because I’m out here in the sticks, I never saw it. I only saw the negative. And when I attempted to find answers he ignored my letter. (I handed it to him directly.) The only interactions I had with him was when he celebrated Mass, and gave his homily which was an entertaining show of piano playing and jocularity. To attend a decent liturgy, where I will not be forced to stand, I will travel 30 miles tomorrow, one way, at 2.40/gallon for gas and there are three Catholic Churches within 15 minutes of me.
AND IF he promoted the rosary and other traditional devotions and practices then one would think the fruits would be all over after 25 years! Instead, statues of Mary and other saints are removed, kneelers removed, corpus of Christ removed, rosaries not promoted, lay preaching abounds, no seminarians, etc, etc - Oh, and let’s not forget INVALID MATTER for the Eucharist. See there I go again telling you again what has been said a zillion times on this thread and the other. So, warm fuzzy feelings for everyone all around, including you frommi, but we gotta have some things majorly changed here.
Beth
G
grotto
Guest
Was the Bishop defended when this woman you know was mockingly uncharitable in her remark? Is this reader of your fabricating agenda supposed to be cleverly amused?
And, may I request that you answer your own last two questions from above as you continuously practice jealous comparisons.
F
frommi
Guest
grotto said:
I’m not jealous of you Grotto or your home on Lake Woeisme.
I’m not jealous of any bishops in the Catholic church.
It’s a blinding lack of catechesis as to what the role of a bishop is that has led to this constant stream of things about “abuses” etc etc. When none of the items in question where outside the ordinary authority of the diocesean bishop. That’s what I think most have a hard time accepting.
G
grotto
Guest
It does seem obvious that you cannot accept others declaring liturgical abuses being widespread in the diocese. You may say it “ain’t so” till the cows come home but that won’t change reality.
Lest you think I am concerned you might be jealous of me on “Lake Woebegone” not “Woeisme” rest assured, no worries! My pride is healthy; in fact at times I am proud of being humble (thats a joke)!
I just think you portrayed a woman being rude in regards to our Bishop and that it was clever, intelligent and “lets all share this sentiment” type of portrayal. Thats where I get the idea that you have a jealous attitude regarding your understanding of our Faith and that which others reveal. I may be coming down with attention deficit disorder from all the belaboring praise for the wonderful era you keep describing.
I’ll take a rosary break now and hope you have a good afternoon!
Lest you think I am concerned you might be jealous of me on “Lake Woebegone” not “Woeisme” rest assured, no worries! My pride is healthy; in fact at times I am proud of being humble (thats a joke)!
I just think you portrayed a woman being rude in regards to our Bishop and that it was clever, intelligent and “lets all share this sentiment” type of portrayal. Thats where I get the idea that you have a jealous attitude regarding your understanding of our Faith and that which others reveal. I may be coming down with attention deficit disorder from all the belaboring praise for the wonderful era you keep describing.
I’ll take a rosary break now and hope you have a good afternoon!
F
frommi
Guest
I was not protraying that as jealousy, simply making the point that it doesn’t matter who the bishop of a diocese is, from time to time feathers will be ruffled. That was all I was saying, you were reading something into it that wasn’t there.
I’m also not “saying it isn’t so”. I’m simply stating the obvious…it’s the Bishop who moderates the liturgical life of his diocese. The pastoral judgment of the curia is not to be substituted for the pastoral judgment of the local bishop. That’s theology 101.
8
8640
Guest
Ahh the ol’ battle of what is the bishop’s perogative. I think I understand what you are saying frommi but there is also a danger in what you are saying if it is taken too far. The bishop is responsible for what happens liturgically in his diocese but he also must make sure that his diocese stays catholic, which means universal. Now that simply means he must allow liturgies that are allowed by the Holy See (which includes the Curia). The Holy See does allow for some “play” and flexability but not quite to the extent that the former bishop of Saginaw allowed. Thus what he was doing was outside what the “Catholic” church celebrates and worships in her liturgies. Some of these allowances have led ultimately to sloppy theologies in which people think the Church hierarchy no longer has authority and that the Eucharist is only a sign of the congregation’s unity because “we are the body of Christ.” Now these theologies may or may not have been shared by Untiner but I believe that the sloppiness he allowed did enable things like this to pop up.
M
msproule
Guest
Since so many of us were not catechized properly (and I can promise you…I was not), please tell us what we are missing.
What you seem to continually infer about the Episcopacy smacks of Relativism, IMO. That is, within any particular frame of reference (in this case, the Diocese) whatever the Bishop says must be correct. This holds true regardless of whether or not he is at odds with the Whole Church. (Please tell me I misunderstand you on this!)
- Status