Dealing with Covid Response/ Restrictions - Christmas Mass

  • Thread starter Thread starter throwawayaccount15
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
You should view this material. The Fox man described the situation as a pandemic. He interviewed a doctor who believes she knows the source. 🤷‍♂️ At last we have sources you believe??
 
Come on…that is NOT what I said and you know that. The poster I replied to was encouraging the OP to find parishes that would “ignore” the bishop’s decrees because of their conservative politics. It has NOTHING to do with the form of the liturgy. (Except that in the US it appears that those who prefer traditional liturgy tend to have very conservative political views, even when those views have nothing to do with Catholicism).

My archbishop is fairly traditional. At our cathedral, the EF Mass is sometimes offered…but even at the OF Mass we often have lots of Latin, incense, chant, polyphony…and an altar rail which is used at EVERY Mass, OF or otherwise. Yet when the Public Health Officer recently, once again, banned all public gatherings, the archbishop expressed that he was very disappointed that public Masses had been suspended, and that he personally didn’t agree, but called on all of us to be beacons of light and to obey…as we are called to do as Catholics. The poster I replied to was encouraging the OP to disobey the local bishop’s guidelines…find parishes that “ignore” the guidelines and don’t track anything…
 
Last edited:
If there’s a way for the OP to legally and licitly attend an EF Mass in the Chicago area…then great!
If not…then livestream… perhaps try to make an appointment for confession if that’s an option, or see if any churches are open for private prayer. (Here, public Masses are suspended again…but confessions are still heard and churches are open for private, socially distanced prayer).
 
Actually, they’ve known diseases were contagious since medieval times. Just sayin’
 
Last edited:
We’ve been lucky in my province, we’ve had fewer than 400 cases. Since March there have been more than 3500 deaths and only 4 have been attributed to covid. So, no, not every death is listed as covid.

Matter of fact, one person got ill the day after he immigrated to the province. He was hospitalized and died before his covid test came back positive. They made a point of clarifying that he had, in fact, not died from covid.
 
Last edited:
I was just about to flag any one of her posts and suggest to the mods that this person is actually dangerous. She is spreading misinformation about the pandemic like confetti. But it seems that others have beaten me to it.
 
TC3033 said:
Here ya go, plus all 700 of their sources…
Click to expand...
You have to realize you’re being baited, right? No matter what you present, he/she is just going to go “those aren’t trustworthy.” It’s a troll, man.
 
RolandThompsonGunner said:
You have to realize you’re being baited, right? No matter what you present, he/she is just going to go “those aren’t trustworthy.” It’s a troll, man.
Click to expand...
Yep, I know. I was wondering what they were gonna say when someone presented them with something they didn’t think existed. It’s 120 seconds of my life I won’t get back, but whatever.
Freddy said:
A banned troll at that. Sanity returns.
Click to expand...
For a day or two, until we’re all perma-banned.
 
You are eighteen, you don’t know that you need to provide sources for your “facts” but you want us to believe you are a mod somewhere?

🥴
 
Hmmm, I seem to recall telling you needed to cite a source and you whined about doing so, and told people to go look it up for themself. Then you said you were homeschooled and. Only 18 and didn’t know how to debate.

Yeah, we get that. No matter what age you really are.
 
Last edited:
There is now a second covid strain, more virulent then the first, both in UK.

I will thank you not to quote words of mine that have since been flagged and removed.
Hence I am going to flag your reply to me with that quote.

No one is asking you to ignore other mortality.

Half a million higher deaths already predicted in USA, if these new strains get in, one originating in South Africa, one in Spain, both now in a few countries including UK, that predicted death rate will look like just a wish.
 
Research again. Look at the measures taken then and how long that influenza was around.
 
One thing I miss about the old moderated version was the banning of medical advice. The distribution of misinformation over the internet is dangerous. It is not fun being banned, but I fear some may appear before God someday and have to answer for some life they cost through irresponsible publishing of uninformed and ignorant opinions.

Suffice it to say that priests, who are because of their pro-life beliefs, have the right to make what rules they deem necessary in for their parishioners. Those that are attacking these pro-life priests need to examine their conscience as to how much love they have for their neighbors.
 
Last edited:
What proof do you have that this is “made up”? (Anyone can make baseless claims of ‘made up data’, btw…) 😉
Monica83 said:
Actually, they’ve known diseases were contagious since medieval times. Just sayin’
Click to expand...
Sure, but they were stabbing in the dark:
  • People thought that the Black Death was spread by Jews.
  • People thought that TB was caused by a dog-shaped demon entering the person and eating his lungs.
Just sayin’… 😉
 
Against my better judgment, but in the desire to be honest and to clear up this misunderstanding, let me share canon 534 with you:
Can. 534 §1. After a pastor has taken possession of his parish, he is obliged to apply a Mass for the people entrusted to him on each Sunday and holy day of obligation in his diocese. If he is legitimately impeded from this celebration, however, he is to apply it on the same days through another or on other days himself.

§2. A pastor who has the care of several parishes is bound to apply only one Mass for the entire people entrusted to him on the days mentioned in §1.

§3. A pastor who has not satisfied the obligation mentioned in §§1 and 2 is to apply as soon as possible as many Masses for the people as he has omitted.
Click to expand...
So, this has to do with the obligation of a pastor (not a bishop) to celebrate a Mass for the intention “of the people” on Sundays and holydays of obligation.

It has nothing to do with “denying Mass”, and it certainly has nothing to do with the putative “numbers of people who had Mass ‘denied’ to them.”

Instead, the canon is merely asserting that if a pastor doesn’t celebrate the required number of pro populo Masses (and no one else celebrates them for him), then he needs to celebrate them himself. He can’t just say “well, I didn’t say Mass on Sunday. Tough beans.”

There’s also nothing there that requires that the Masses said for the intention “for the people” must be Masses that are celebrated publicly.

So… it’s kinda there, but not in the way that you interpreted it, @(name removed by moderator).
 
@(name removed by moderator) has left the building!

😉 Involuntarily, of course.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top