P
- Status
T
TimothyH
Guest
The sword cuts both ways, and it hurts either way, doesn’t it?
It’s easy to state that people who go to Mass which doesn’t use Latin or that people who go to parishes which do not offer the Exraordinary Form of the Mass are more prone to sin. It’s easy to say that, isn’t it? But it hurts when someone says something just as absured and equally rediculous about the Ordinary Form of the Mass over the Extraordinary Form of the Mass. It hurts, doesn’t it?
I wish both sides would stop, because quite frankly it hurts me deeply, to the point of tears at times. I know it hurts, because it hurts Jesus.
There is nothing traditional about saying that you sin less because your Mass is in Latin and there is nothing modernist about accusing those who’s Mass has a communion rail and a priest facing a certain way of being faithless profiteers. These are neither traditionalist or modernist positions. They are simply sins against unity and therefor sins against my Lord and Savoir Jesus Christ and his Holy Mother, the Mother of the Church, Mary.
There is a thread going about sacriledge and profanation of the Eucharist where they are discussing dropping crumbs. To me, claims like this on both sides are are equally bad, and both are 10,000 times greater profanation and desecration of Christ’s Body than any accidental dropping of particles from the host will ever be.
-Tim-
E
Exsilivm
Guest
The real problem with the deacon’s talk was not that he riduculed the traditional services of the church which have come from the Fathers. It is that he did not state the message of the passage accurately. He wrote:
Origin, though, does have some interesting things to say in connection with Matthew 21:12about deacons: ccel.org/ccel/aquinas/catena1.ii.xxi.html
In contrast, St. Thomas Aquinas sets out the meaning clearly, with appropriate citations to the Fathers: it was not using the temple as a house of prayer that offended the Lord. It was changing good coin for bad that offended the Lord. The story is not about general failings, or whether the old sacrifices were good or bad.
Origin, though, does have some interesting things to say in connection with Matthew 21:12about deacons: ccel.org/ccel/aquinas/catena1.ii.xxi.html
P
ProVobis
Guest
I’d say it energizes more than hurts.
C
Corki
Guest
What troubles me the most is that this deacon thought that a slide presentation 
that critiqued a legitimate form of the Mass and legitimate practices of the Church was appropriate content for a homily. If he is so gung-ho on everything Vatican II, shouldn’t he know that the homily is supposed to center on the Scripture readings of the day?
that critiqued a legitimate form of the Mass and legitimate practices of the Church was appropriate content for a homily. If he is so gung-ho on everything Vatican II, shouldn’t he know that the homily is supposed to center on the Scripture readings of the day?
D
domandcarols
Guest
What a nutcase. 
S
Schism_hater
Guest
His point about the side altar masses is well-taken. Those, along with “private Masses”, are a liturgical abomination.
P
ProVobis
Guest
The OF is said “privately” many times. How can any approved Holy Sacrifice be an abomination?
C
Corki
Guest
As ProVobis already said, private Masses are regularly said in both forms.
As for the side altars, the deacon seems to relate them as a bad by-gone practice. Yet, the side altars exist in many large Churches. At the Bascilica in Washington DC, for example, several Masses are said at the same time at various side altars. Not to mention St. Peters where dozens of Masses are said on many, many altars at the same time.
Do you think these are “abominations”?
D
Dirt
Guest
This Deacon is “the fruit” of the spirit of Vatican II. He is the poster child of the mentality that was released immediately after the final session had ended and those with a personal agenda took the somewhat interpret-able documents and interpreted them to say what THEY wanted them to say. Communion in the hand? sure! females on the Altar? sure! Remove the Altar Rails? you betcha! Tabernacle? hide it. Pious attitudes? Don’t need 'em. Proper attire at Mass? quit being so old fashioned. Real Catechesis? why bother, we will just change it anyway. Just do what the protestants down the street do.
This destructive attitude, that the Church started in 1965 after the council is pervasive among many, to the destruction of the cohesiveness of The Faith. We have a battle ongoing within the Church; whether we shall restore the tradition and identity that has been thrown out , or forge ahead with this new ideology. It is a serious and pitched battle within the Curia. the result of this battle will determine which Catholic Church will carry the day. A Church based on the Teaching Of Jesus Christ, The Apostles, Doctors of the Church and our Saints, or the Church of the post-Conciliar world and the new prophets of “i’m OK You’re OK” theology where everything is up to debate.
The Gospel according to Saint Luke; Ch. 6
“[43] For there is no good tree that bringeth forth evil fruit; nor an evil tree that bringeth forth good fruit. [44] For every tree is known by its fruit. For men do not gather figs from thorns; nor from a bramble bush do they gather the grape. [45] A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth that which is evil. For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.”
Scripture from: drbo.org/index.htm
For those who have never read the actual documents of V-II, read them! You owe it to yourself to be educated in what is actually in the Documents.
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/index.htm
And for those wondering how this all happened, read this:
papalencyclicals.net/Pius10/p10pasce.htm
This destructive attitude, that the Church started in 1965 after the council is pervasive among many, to the destruction of the cohesiveness of The Faith. We have a battle ongoing within the Church; whether we shall restore the tradition and identity that has been thrown out , or forge ahead with this new ideology. It is a serious and pitched battle within the Curia. the result of this battle will determine which Catholic Church will carry the day. A Church based on the Teaching Of Jesus Christ, The Apostles, Doctors of the Church and our Saints, or the Church of the post-Conciliar world and the new prophets of “i’m OK You’re OK” theology where everything is up to debate.
The Gospel according to Saint Luke; Ch. 6
“[43] For there is no good tree that bringeth forth evil fruit; nor an evil tree that bringeth forth good fruit. [44] For every tree is known by its fruit. For men do not gather figs from thorns; nor from a bramble bush do they gather the grape. [45] A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth that which is evil. For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.”
Scripture from: drbo.org/index.htm
For those who have never read the actual documents of V-II, read them! You owe it to yourself to be educated in what is actually in the Documents.
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/index.htm
And for those wondering how this all happened, read this:
papalencyclicals.net/Pius10/p10pasce.htm
T
TrueLight
Guest
Has anyone said this?
Tim, we have two different viewpoints and I’m sorry you sometimes cry over this. You see it as two sides bickering. Let’s just say I don’t quite see it the same and I feel hurt over…other things.
A
anp1215
Guest
1000000
for thisAnyway, what a ridiculous homily. Critiquing the Mass (whatever form) is not appropriate homily material. If I saw this happen, I would email the Deacon asking him what made him think this was good material for a homily, then I would email the Bishop.
J
jeanannemarie
Guest
Thank you Dirt, reading about the Modernism is very informative.
E
Exsilivm
Guest
They are not. They go back to the catacombs. Moreover, they serve an important message in the original eastertide celebrations.
T
TimothyH
Guest
2 Samuel 12:7
T
TimothyH
Guest
2 Samuel 12:7
-Tim-
-Tim-
C
Cider
Guest
I’m just stunned, I can’t think of anything charitable to say about this deacon or his homily. I will say I would not put myself or my family under his personal spiritual direction.
S
Seamus_L
Guest
It was the reverence and beauty of the Latin Mass that brought me back to the Church, and most definitely not what this deacon described.
M
Mike30
Guest
Interesting. Does this include the thousands that still take place or just those from the horrid old Extraordibnary Rite that happened prior to Vatican II?
B
Brooklyn
Guest
I don’t mean to derail this thread, but I cannot let this statement go without commenting on it. The thread about the Eucharist is not about “dropping crumbs.” Each and every “crumb” from a consecrated host is the body and blood of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, the One who created us and who died a bloody death on Calvary to redeem us from sin and death. If we can cavalierly toss around and care so little about dropping these precious “crumbs”, that is the start to tossing away every belief we have. If we cannot honor and protect our Lord and Saviour, then we cannot be entrusted with anything.
I have no doubt that TimothyH would never do anything to purposely desecrate the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, and I know that he is not saying that we should not protect the Holy Eucharist. But if we cannot honor the very Body and Blood of our Lord, then what else matters? I am always amazed at how humble our Lord makes himself by coming to us under the appearance of bread, making Himself so completely vulnerable to us, just as He did when he was nailed to the Cross. There can be no greater profanation that that of the Holy Eucharist, the Source and Summit for all Catholics, even if it is not done intentionally but carelessly.
Again, my apologies for derailing this thread, but some things must be said.
- Status