Hypocrisy in the Pews

[AltarMan]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

traditional with a small “t” as opposed to modernistic.
A woman in a Mantilla or chapel cap is an Historically Catholic picture.
Some of the Modernist that I have spoken to are very open to anything that is Historically Protestant such as hand holding in prayer (my Presbyterian in-laws do that) but tick and cluck at Rosaries, genuflecting or devotions such as the Divine Mercy Chaplet.

You’re not that way, are you? A woman covering her head in prayer is allowed, but not manditory in our churches. Again, there is nothing of protest here, solidarity maybe, but we do that in many ways.

I don’t like labels like “modernist” and “traditionalist” – they’re typically very devisive and mis-applied…

 

[JNB]

This is going round and round. The US bishops approved the new GIRM in 2001, the Vatican in 2002 approved that with stipulations asthe 3 letters from the Vatican stated on how the GIRM is to be interperted. End of discussion, Rome has spokne, again, these 3 letters from the CDW stated that those who kneel for communion are not to be considered disobident. I f you have a problem with it, take it up with Rome, and it surprises me , well shocks me, how so many Catholics of t he Neo-Con stripe put authority in things su ch as Bishops conferences that are not really part of the magesterium, and have a maximalist view of the authority of Bishops beyond what Rome states.

Orionthehunter:

I think this post deserves to be bumped as it does so well to explain where I’m coming from regarding how defying this legitimate instruction doesn’t enhance show respect and support for a Pastor charges with bringing all into GIRM conformance. It is especially a potential big hinderance if the person kneeling is known for his orthodoxy as he too is picking and choosing which legitimate instructions he is following.

 

[Dr.Bombay]

AltarMan:

I don’t like labels like “modernist” and “traditionalist” – they’re typically very devisive and mis-applied…

I love labels. Even more, I love those nifty little electronic label makers. They’re fun.

I’d be happy to make you a label Altar Man and send it to you. What would you like your label to say?

I have a few suggestions if you can’t think of anything…

 

[JNB]

What gets me about Catholics of the Neo-Con stripe is that they defend the liturgical changes brought on by progressives, think that “innovations” are great, yest still call themselves Conservatives. They are true Pharisee in terms of how legalistic they are, view things that are options(such as communion under both species, altar girls and EMHCs) as being mandated and defend these practices, and now their latest line is them saying how communion while kneeling is banned despite what Rome otherwise says.

fix:

With all the irregularities that happen so often in so many parishes, am I to believe someone kneeling to receive communion is the cause of disunity? That is legalism extraordinaire.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

Some of the Modernist that I have spoken to are very open to anything that is Historically Protestant such as hand holding in prayer (my Presbyterian in-laws do that) but tick and cluck at Rosaries, genuflecting or devotions such as the Divine Mercy Chaplet.

.

With respect, Netmil(name removed by moderator), that’s where these conversations get frustrating:

A) When you say Modernist, are you saying that people who do hold hands or employ the Orans position are guilty of the heresy of modernism? I don’t do either, but I don’t think they’re heretical. Who are modernists, to your way of thinking? Am I because I defend the Mass of Paul VI? I know we don’t see absolutely eye to eye on some things, but do you think I’m a heretic?!?!?! Modernism IS a heresy defined by the Church last I checked.

B) Holding hands is a bad idea at that point in the Mass and, IMHO, the only time it ought to be suffered is for parents to naturally/spontaneously hold the hands of their children, husbands to take the hands of their wives, young people in love moved to reach out to each other in this most sacred of moments, etc. I hope we move away from this as a liturgical “gesture.” BUT: It ISN’T protestant. I say this in the interests of history and because I so tired of the traditionalist argument that the Mass has been protestantized! It hasn’t. Just because some protestants do something doesn’t mean that it is Protestant. We didn’t hold hands in my Baptist church growing up, nor in my original Episcopalian parish. People were holding hands at inappropriate times long before the “reformers” came along and there is nothing in their writings that advocated for this as a liturgical gesture or sign. There isn’t anything in the Book of Common Prayer, for instance, that says,“Grab yo pardner, doe see doe, hold their hand, not their knee or their toe.” It’s just something some people unfortunately do (or fortunately, outside the context of the Mass, because lot of good Catholic babies started out when their parents first held hands!).

 

[AltarMan]

Dr. Bombay:

I love labels. Even more, I love those nifty little electronic label makers. They’re fun.

I’d be happy to make you a label Altar Man and send it to you. What would you like your label to say?

I have a few suggestions if you can’t think of anything…

That would be great! How about:

IMSICKOFALLTHEHYPOCRISYINTHECHURCH

 

[AltarMan]

JKirkLVNV:

With respect, Netmil(name removed by moderator), that’s where these conversations get frustrating:

A) When you say Modernist, are you saying that people who do hold hands or employ the Orans position are guilty of the heresy of modernism? I don’t do either, but I don’t think they’re heretical. Who are modernists, to your way of thinking? Am I because I defend the Mass of Paul VI? I know we don’t see absolutely eye to eye on some things, but do you think I’m a heretic?!?!?! Modernism IS a heresy defined by the Church last I checked.

B) Holding hands is a bad idea at that point in the Mass and, IMHO, the only time it ought to be suffered is for parents to naturally/spontaneously hold the hands of their children, husbands to take the hands of their wives, young people in love moved to reach out to each other in this most sacred of moments, etc. I hope we move away from this as a liturgical “gesture.” BUT: It ISN’T protestant. I say this in the interests of history and because I so tired of the traditionalist argument that the Mass has been protestantized! It hasn’t. Just because some protestants do something doesn’t mean that it is Protestant. We didn’t hold hands in my Baptist church growing up, nor in my original Episcopalian parish. People were holding hands at inappropriate times long before the “reformers” came along and there is nothing in their writings that advocated for this as a liturgical gesture or sign. There isn’t anything in the Book of Common Prayer, for instance, that says,“Grab yo pardner, doe see doe, hold their hand, not their knee or their toe.” It’s just something some people unfortunately do (or fortunately, outside the context of the Mass, because lot of good Catholic babies started out when their parents first held hands!).

Well said. Generally speaking it has been my experience that those who throw around words in an ecclesiastical context like “modernist”, “traditionalist”, “liberal” and “conservative” are people that are best avoided.

 

[msproule]

AltarMan:

This hypocrisy has and is taking a toll on the Church.

So you say.

Yet you still have not proven anything or anybody to be hypocritical here. Maybe I am stubborn and/or blind, but I do not see what you see. Please, before you hit reply, do not refer back to Michelle Arnold’s post again! That simply does not cut it, at least, not without including everything else that has been offered to you. Please stop discounting or blatantly ignoring valuable points.

 

[netmilsmom]

JKirkLVNV:

With respect, Netmil(name removed by moderator), that’s where these conversations get frustrating:

A) When you say Modernist, are you saying that people who do hold hands or employ the Orans position are guilty of the heresy of modernism? I don’t do either, but I don’t think they’re heretical. Who are modernists, to your way of thinking? Am I because I defend the Mass of Paul VI? I know we don’t see absolutely eye to eye on some things, but do you think I’m a heretic?!?!?! Modernism IS a heresy defined by the Church last I checked.

Wait, you and I have have many a conversation. You and I seem to almost always agree. Did you forget that I also defend the Mass of Paul VI? That I do not attend a TLM?

It’s hard for me to understand, while Ladies who wanted to cover their head (no way condemned) are compared to Rainbow Sash people, you have chastised me. And my words are frustrating?

B) Holding hands is a bad idea at that point in the Mass and, IMHO, the only time it ought to be suffered is for parents to naturally/spontaneously hold the hands of their children, husbands to take the hands of their wives, young people in love moved to reach out to each other in this most sacred of moments, etc. I hope we move away from this as a liturgical “gesture.” BUT: It ISN’T protestant. I say this in the interests of history and because I so tired of the traditionalist argument that the Mass has been protestantized! It hasn’t. Just because some protestants do something doesn’t mean that it is Protestant. We didn’t hold hands in my Baptist church growing up, nor in my original Episcopalian parish. People were holding hands at inappropriate times long before the “reformers” came along and there is nothing in their writings that advocated for this as a liturgical gesture or sign. There isn’t anything in the Book of Common Prayer, for instance, that says,“Grab yo pardner, doe see doe, hold their hand, not their knee or their toe.” It’s just something some people unfortunately do (or fortunately, outside the context of the Mass, because lot of good Catholic babies started out when their parents first held hands!).

Intimate holding hands between family members may have taken place at Mass but the prayer posture of Catholics was not holding hands.
If my Protestant husband (in RCIA, Praise God) thinks that we shouldn’t be doing it because it looks Protestant, maybe one should give pause.
If you walked into any Mass in the sixties, short of a Charismatic Mass, you would be hard pressed to find anyone holding hands.
It is Historically Protestant.

 

[netmilsmom]

AltarMan:

I don’t like labels like “modernist” and “traditionalist” – they’re typically very devisive and mis-applied…

They are not labels, they are classifications.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

If my Protestant husband (in RCIA, Praise God) thinks that we shouldn’t be doing it because it looks Protestant, maybe one should give pause.
If you walked into any Mass in the sixties, short of a Charismatic Mass, you would be hard pressed to find anyone holding hands.
It is Historically Protestant.

But is he reacting to things he’s heard you react to or others in your circle of friends? What does he cite to say that it’s Protestant or looks Protestant? Does he mean “out of place in a Catholic church?” Because you couldn’t have gotten more Protestant than me growing up and we didn’t hold hands and neither did the Methodists or the Presbyterians, and certainly not the Church of Christ, and the Pentecostals and the Holiness folk didn’t do it because their hands were up in the air! With respect and affection, I don’t think it can be called historically protestant, I think it can be called historically “flower child” or historically “peace nik” or historically “bleah,” but hardly historically Protestant. As to why I’m insisting on that when I don’t do it myself (so why am I grinding this ax), I think it marginalizes and stigmatizes a segment of Catholics who are more than likely just as doctrinally/dogmatically orthodox as you or I. They just like holding hands or they’ve just gotten used to it or some nut job for a pastor insisted on it and, like the story of the new bride and the ham, now no one remembers doing anything different.

 

[AltarMan]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

They are not labels, they are classifications.

Naw, they’re labels – usually misapplied labels…

 

[netmilsmom]

AltarMan:

Naw, they’re labels – usually misapplied labels…

Opinion, with no basis in fact.

 

[netmilsmom]

JKirkLVNV:

But is he reacting to things he’s heard you react to or others in your circle of friends? What does he cite to say that it’s Protestant or looks Protestant? Does he mean “out of place in a Catholic church?” Because you couldn’t have gotten more Protestant than me growing up and we didn’t hold hands and neither did the Methodists or the Presbyterians, and certainly not the Church of Christ, and the Pentecostals and the Holiness folk didn’t do it because their hands were up in the air! With respect and affection, I don’t think it can be called historically protestant, I think it can be called historically “flower child” or historically “peace nik” or historically “bleah,” but hardly historically Protestant. As to why I’m insisting on that when I don’t do it myself (so why am I grinding this ax), I think it marginalizes and stigmatizes a segment of Catholics who are more than likely just as doctrinally/dogmatically orthodox as you or I. They just like holding hands or they’ve just gotten used to it or some nut job for a pastor insisted on it and, like the story of the new bride and the ham, now no one remembers doing anything different.

Saying “Protestant” is opposed to Catholic. Like Oriental as opposted to Occodental or Jewish and Goyum.
He held hands in his Presbyterian Church for many years, his parents still do around the dinner table.
His Fundamentalist sister and family in California do it
His Evangelical Brother and his family do.
My ex-boss did it in her Baptist church growing up and still does.
All of them and more. I know I did with groups when dabbling with being a Lutheran. Any prayer service started will all of us holding hands. In fact, he thinks it’s funny that we do it in the mass. At most times it was prayer services or Team Sports that they held hands, but not unknown in a Sunday Service.

My husband pegs it as Protestant because it is. Maybe not your sect of Protestantism, but because no one in any rite of Catholic church pre 1970 (except Charismatics who have their beginings with many Protestant Charismatics) EVER did it. Just because we’ve been celebrating Cinco de Mayo for the last 15 years, does that make it Polish or us Mexican?

Protestant is like a Pronoun. Ever see “SchoolHouse Rock”?
Ruffus Xavier Sassparilla or He.
Presbyterian, Baptist, Fundamentalist and Evangelical or Protestant.
Aren’t all those sects Protestant?

There is nothing Historically Catholic about this gesture.
No reason to deny that there are Historically Protestant cases.

I never said one specific brand of Protestantism.

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

AltarMan:

Now we have the issue of kneeling while receiving Holy Communion. The GIRM is exceedingly clear on this matter. Rather than comply with the instructions of the Holy See we are met with resistance and a volley of paperwork created this time at the behest of the “traditional” wing of the Church in the USA. They seem to think they know better than the Church of what is best.

It would be wonderful if we just started following the Church and not what we personally feel is “best.” This hypocrisy has and is taking a toll on the Church.

I can see where this jab is aimed at my post: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=88181

The error you are making here is that the USCCB does not make up “the Church” and “the Holy See”.

Where the universal norm has made it clear that kneeling is “in” and the USCCB have declared standing the “exception” to the universal norm for the diocese of the US, they may not prohibit kneeling.

When you condescend documents by saying:

a volley of paperwork created this time at the behest of the “traditional” wing of the Church in the USA

You are speaking condescendingly of the Holy See itself, which spoke on the matter. Who are you, to infer Redemptionis Sacramentum, and the two letters from the CDW, which is part of the Holy See, ***Prot. n. 1322/02/L andProt. n. 1322/02/L ***are nothing more than a “volley of paperwork”? Those numbers are there for a reason.

Furthermore, the US Bishops submitted their preference in the GIRM to simply state that the US norm was to stand. However, the Vatican - that Church that you are speaking against - stated clearly that they could have the “standing” clause only with an understanding that communion may not be denied while kneeling. Sure, they “ok’d” the catechesis line, but they also stated that one can not be looked upon as “disobedient” for not standing. Then again, it is is on of those “volley of letters” you appear to be blowing off.

What is missing from your argument is that it is fine for a priest to explain why the USCCB has standing as the norm, in the hopes that the person will comply. It is a total lack of charity on the part of the priest and those who sit in judgment of people who prefer to kneel.

People like yourself are quick to point out the faults of a person who is not being disobedient by kneeling, while ignoring the fault of a priest who attempts to force a person to stand. Instruction is one thing, bullying and denial are quite another.

If the Vatican really wanted to support the US “get me out of church quick so I can get to the diner” norm of standing, they would not have added the stipulation.

One last thing: Canon Law trumps the GIRM. The GIRM comprehends Canon Law, but people attempting to apply the GIRM violated Canon Law with their interpretation.

Please feel free any time to stop in my parish and tell my pastor that we should all form a line and stand during Holy Communion rather than use our Communion Rail.

 

[netmilsmom]

Lux_et_veritas:

Please feel free any time to stop in my parish and tell my pastor that we should all form a line and stand during Holy Communion rather than use our Communion Rail.

I’d like to see that!
Or have someone show up at my parish and tell them to get rid of those kneelers for communion.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

Saying “Protestant” is opposed to Catholic. Like Oriental as opposted to Occodental or Jewish and Goyum.
He held hands in his Presbyterian Church for many years, his parents still do around the dinner table.
His Fundamentalist sister and family in California do it
His Evangelical Brother and his family do.
My ex-boss did it in her Baptist church growing up and still does.
All of them and more. I know I did with groups when dabbling with being a Lutheran. Any prayer service started will all of us holding hands. In fact, he thinks it’s funny that we do it in the mass. At most times it was prayer services or Team Sports that they held hands, but not unknown in a Sunday Service.

My husband pegs it as Protestant because it is. Maybe not your sect of Protestantism, but because no one in any rite of Catholic church pre 1970 (except Charismatics who have their beginings with many Protestant Charismatics) EVER did it. Just because we’ve been celebrating Cinco de Mayo for the last 15 years, does that make it Polish or us Mexican?

Protestant is like a Pronoun. Ever see “SchoolHouse Rock”?
Ruffus Xavier Sassparilla or He.
Presbyterian, Baptist, Fundamentalist and Evangelical or Protestant.
Aren’t all those sects Protestant?

There is nothing Historically Catholic about this gesture.
No reason to deny that there are Historically Protestant cases.

I never said one specific brand of Protestantism.

We’ll have to respectfully disagree, I guess. I’m glad to hear you don’t think I’m guilty of the heresy of modernism, I could take that off some of the radical traditionalists, but it would have been hard from someone whose arguments I’ve come to respect. Holy Advent to you and yours.

 

[fix]

Orionthehunter:

As one who wants to promote unity and bring people who have been practicing “misinterpretations” or “unintentional abuses” into compliance, I think that if I were to start doing something like this in defiance of a direct request of my Pastor, I don’t think I’d be helping the Pastor get people to comply on the other issues I think we all want to get done.

We need to dissect this more carefully. If a pastor has specifically told someone not to kneel. That person needs to discuss it with that priest, or bishop, or Rome if necessary. How is it anyone else would know what was going on in such cases? As we do not then we ought not to judge one’s intentions.

Secondly, Altarman’s comment about tripping over people and extending the time for communion is very real in at least all the parishes (7) in my city. Take for instance, my parish where we have three Masses on Sunday a.m. We have only 30 minutes between Masses and absolutely have to get people in and out becuase of limitations on parking. We live in a northern state and it is below zero today so to suggest parking in neighborhoods is not an option. Because of our parking problem, when Mass goes over an hour, you can sense the “energy” as people know that soon the “early arrivers” will be trying to get in the parking lot as they try to get out. It becomes totally chaotic.

Pedantic and over reaching. Kneeling for Christ should not be a cause to find every excuse in the book not to do it. Falls under the category give me a break.

If we were to have people kneeling and extending the time for Communion, we’d have to increase the number of EMHC’s. Is this what we want?

Reverence is a worthy goal.

 

[fix]

JNB:

This is going round and round. The US bishops approved the new GIRM in 2001, the Vatican in 2002 approved that with stipulations asthe 3 letters from the Vatican stated on how the GIRM is to be interperted. End of discussion, Rome has spokne, again, these 3 letters from the CDW stated that those who kneel for communion are not to be considered disobident. I f you have a problem with it, take it up with Rome, and it surprises me , well shocks me, how so many Catholics of t he Neo-Con stripe put authority in things su ch as Bishops conferences that are not really part of the magesterium, and have a maximalist view of the authority of Bishops beyond what Rome states.

Wish I had said that.

 

[AltarMan]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

Opinion, with no basis in fact.

Actually they are closer to judgements – particularly the way you employed “modernist.”