If you were the pope, would you free up the TLM?

[Cranch]

If I were Pope, I would help to do away with hunger, poverty, bigotry. Encourage prayer for peace and tolerance. Maybe get back to what we are suppose to be doing as Christians and stop focusing so much attention on ourselves and what “we” want during the Mass. Just a thought.

For the poor you have always with you: and whensoever you will, you may do them good: but me you have not always. –Mark 14:7
Jesus comes first. Everything else follows. But in any case, is there a Catholic church not involved with a food bank? Not finding some way to help the poor? You make it seem like maybe the Pope isn’t doing your list.

 

[bear06]

I do believe we have chaste gays in our Catholic community who struggle greatly. Next, shall we round up the Jews as well? I can only hope you are seriously joking.

 

[anamchara]

For the poor you have always with you: and whensoever you will, you may do them good: but me you have not always. –Mark 14:7
Jesus comes first. Everything else follows. But in any case, is there a Catholic church not involved with a food bank? Not finding some way to help the poor? You make it seem like maybe the Pope isn’t doing your list.

No one mentioned the current pope, that’s not what we are discussing. We are discussing what we were to do if we were pope,how or why you would draw such a base conclusion on another poster in a Christian forum is something I’ll leave for you to discover in your own heart.

On the question of the poor, I was referring to the global problems. These would be my primary concerns were I pope. Others stated their primary concerns which were somewhat different.

 

[anamchara]

---

I said the following:

Quote:
Confused?–Well let me clarify. You brought up — to stop focusing attention on what “we” want during the mass. Since you are contributing to this thread—it applies that you are part of what you object to. That sort of negates the whole essence of your statements.

I’m sorry but repeating a post that has just been cited as unclear does absolutely nothing to clarify it. I could re-state my understanding of what you posted but then we’d just go around in circles eventually degrading to “I know you are but what am I?” kind of language. There’s little point in that, right?

 

[Walking_Home]

No one mentioned the current pope, that’s not what we are discussing. We are discussing what we were to do if we were pope,how or why you would draw such a base conclusion on another poster in a Christian forum is something I’ll leave for you to discover in your own heart.

On the question of the poor, I was referring to the global problems. These would be my primary concerns were I pope. Others stated their primary concerns which were somewhat different.

If I were Pope, I would help to do away with hunger, poverty, bigotry. Encourage prayer for peace and tolerance. Maybe get back to what we are suppose to be doing as Christians and stop focusing so much attention on ourselves and what “we” want during the Mass. Just a thought.​

Just a thought: Cranch could have derived it from your statement about getting back to what we are supposed to be doing as Christians. This would imply that currently it is not being done—therefore —it reflects on our current Pope.

 

[anamchara]

anamchara;2291632:

I believe he meant homosexuals in the priesthood, not homosexuals in the pews. Just a clarification.

Perhaps, but in the interest of clarity I try to respond to what someone actually posts and not what I might guess they meant. At least I try, not always successfully. Regarding the priesthood, shouldn’t we be more concerned with sexual impropriety of any kind? That is the real issue. Were a homosexual to remain celebate, what would be the concern?

I’m not sure I follow you here. How is this scary language? Are we suddenly not supposed to pray for the conversions on non-Catholics? This would be news to me.

I shudder to consider the worldwide uproar were a pontiff to actually say he would “encourage prayer for the conversion of Jews, heathens, heretics, & schismatics” and then require all of us to do likewise in every Sunday’s liturgy. I’m not necessarily disagreeing with the underlying intent but to group those words like that…well, it’s scary. You don’t really hear “heathen” or “heretic” from the Vatican too much. And you’d certainly never hear it commingled with references to the Jews. I think there’s a good reason for that.

 

[anamchara]

If I were Pope, I would help to do away with hunger, poverty, bigotry. Encourage prayer for peace and tolerance. Maybe get back to what we are suppose to be doing as Christians and stop focusing so much attention on ourselves and what “we” want during the Mass. Just a thought.​

Just a thought: Cranch could have derived it from your statement about getting back to what we are supposed to be doing as Christians. This would imply that currently it is not being done—therefore —it reflects on our current Pope.

I suppose if one is looking for an argument, one might be able to twist my meaning around and infer that but it’s really a bit of a stretch and not what I meant at all. Note the part you did not highlight that follows what you did and clarifies my point. Hmm…“ourselves”…“we”…I just don’t see how an objective mind could read that as an affront on the Holy Father.

On that note, I say goodnight from the west coast, take care

 

[Walking_Home]

bear06;2291856:

Perhaps, but in the interest of clarity I try to respond to what someone actually posts and not what I might guess they meant. At least I try, not always successfully. Regarding the priesthood, shouldn’t we be more concerned with sexual impropriety of any kind? That is the real issue. Were a homosexual to remain celebate, what would be the concern?

I shudder to consider the worldwide uproar were a pontiff to actually say he would "encourage prayer for the conversion of Jews, heathens, heretics, & schismatics

" and then require all of us to do likewise in every Sunday’s liturgy. I’m not necessarily disagreeing with the underlying intent but to group those words like that…well, it’s scary. You don’t really hear “heathen” or “heretic” from the Vatican too much. And you’d certainly never hear it commingled with references to the Jews. I think there’s a good reason for that.​

The horror of it all----the Pope would probably be accuse of blasphemy. Hey—now that I think of it—our Lord Christ was accused of blasphemy.

 

[Walking_Home]

Quote=Walking_Home
Just a thought: Cranch could have derived it from your statement about getting back to what we are supposed to be doing as Christians. This would imply that currently it is not being done—therefore —it reflects on our current Pope.

I suppose if one is looking for an argument, one might be able to twist my meaning around and infer that but it’s really a bit of a stretch and not what I meant at all. Note the part you did not highlight that follows what you did and clarifies my point. Hmm…“ourselves”…“we”…I just don’t see how an objective mind could read that as an affront on the Holy Father.

On that note, I say goodnight from the west coast, take care

Quote=anamchara
If I were Pope, I would help to do away with hunger, poverty, bigotry. Encourage prayer for peace and tolerance. Maybe get back to what we are suppose to be doing as Christians and stop focusing so much attention on ourselves and what “we” want during the Mass. Just a thought.

---

From what you posted—there wasn’t need for twisting or stretching.

 

[Cranch]

If I were Pope, I would help to do away with hunger, poverty, bigotry. Encourage prayer for peace and tolerance. Maybe get back to what we are suppose to be doing as Christians and stop focusing so much attention on ourselves and what “we” want during the Mass. Just a thought.

No one mentioned the current pope, that’s not what we are discussing. We are discussing what we were to do if we were pope,how or why you would draw such a base conclusion on another poster in a Christian forum is something I’ll leave for you to discover in your own heart.

I see Walking_Home has already brought up a part of your statement that contributed to my general impression of your meaning. And you have declared that “a stretch.” On the contrary, I think it reasonable (even if inaccurate) given the juxtaposition of your phrases. You will also recall I said what your words “make it seem like maybe…” your meaning was. I have seen posters on this “Christian forum” hasten to clear up confusion their words may have caused rather than get defensive about it. Let me quote you one more time:

I agree people need to stop taking themselves so seriously.

Ok. I got that off my chest. I hope we can be friends now.

 

[Swiss_Guard]

I do believe we have chaste gays in our Catholic community who struggle greatly. Next, shall we round up the Jews as well? I can only hope you are seriously joking.

I meant to say I would not let homosexual priests serve in parishes and would remove all homosexual priests, faculty and seminarians from seminaries.

Before you start using politically correct language against my position, know that I have the same mindset as Bl. John XXIII:

Advantage to religious vows and ordination should be barred to those who are afflicted with evil tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty, since for them the common life and the priestly ministry would constitute serious dangers. (emphasis mine)
papalencyclicals.net/John23/j23religios.htm

I would like to know how you equate homosexuality, which is objectively a mortal sin, with Judaism? I would think someone as politically correct as you are would be more careful than to make such an anti-Semitic comment.

 

[Swiss_Guard]

Things I would do if I were pope:

1. Return the Traditional Latin Mass to being the normative Mass of the Latin rite.
2. Abolish Communion in the hand, altar girls, and extraordinary ministers of Communion.
3. Scrap the Paul VI Missal and have orthodox bishops, priests and theologians come up with one that’s an organic development of the Mass.
4. Do away with “collegiality.”
5. Order all bishops to refuse Communion to Catholic politicians who do not uphold Catholic teaching.
6. Reform the entire annulment process so annulments aren’t handed out like candy on halloween.
7. Remove all homosexuals from parishes and seminaries.
8. Remove all seminary rectors, formation directors, and faculty who aren’t orthodox.
9. Make the Green Bay Packers the official team of the Catholic Church.
10. Excommunicate all Chicago Bears and Minnesota Vikings fans.
11. Fire Ted Thompson as Packers GM.
12. Have paramedicgirl explain everything to TNT so he is no longer completely confused by her.

These are just a few things I’d do in my first week as pope.

I would also close all churches that have been “wreckovated” until the “wreckovation” has been corrected.

Oh, and no more “churches in the round” too. They either look like a space ship or a truck stop.

 

[Like]

I would actually make it a requirement that at least one Mass per Sunday at every church be a High Mass and every Saturday evening Mass a Low Mass. I don’t think that would be too hard for everyone involved.

I answered YES and I totally agree with palmas!

 

[Caesar]

Ahem. I can assure you all that upon my- er, I mean Our- election to the throne of St. Peter, We will ensure that the Holy Mass, as promulgated by Our most worthy successor St. Pius V, is restored to the Church. We shall also see fit to restore to Our Holy head the Papal Tiara and placed about Our shoulders the Papal mantle (embroidered with gold), and be carried through the streets of the Eternal City upon the sedia gestoria by the Papal chamberlains, accompanied by the Canons of the Basilica and the Roman clergy and the College of Cardinals, escorted by the Noble, Palatine and Swiss Guard, with twelve thurifers and seventy-two torch-bearers walking backwards before Our person, while the bells of every church ring and all the choirs of Rome sing “Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus!”

Ok, I’ll stop now

 

[batteddy]

If I were elected Pope, I would, like Caesar described, start by making my coronation traditional. Tiara, sedia, and all that. But I might tweak things a little so that the installation in the throne at St. John Lateran came before the coronation at St. Peter’s…because I think that reflects the theology of the papacy better. His cathedral is St. John Lateran, his office does come from being bishop of Rome.

Maybe all in one day. Start in the morning with the installation at the Lateran, have an “obedience” (homage) of the cardinals happen then. And then have a carriage procession to St. Peter’s square for the coronation, giving the ring, pallium, etc…

 

[batteddy]

I would say I wanted all the bishops in Rome for my coronation. Wait for them to arrive. Then, after coronation, immediately declare all bishops suspended and all the cardinals except the three I like best (there always have to be some cardinals in case I am shot right then). But then immediately appoint a bunch of traditional clergy cardinals and temporary bishops over large territories. This will all have been planned out in the time between election and coronation. I will order the bishops to all stay in Rome, and then take the time to sort through which bishops are traditional and can be restored, which should be “retired”, and which are so bad that they should be called to the Vatican, arrested by the guards, and go through the formal ceremony of degredation.

I would immediately declare that, in one months time, all priests should be saying the traditional liturgy to the degree of perfection possible (ie, at first they may have to be using printed sheets from online, or hand missals instead of altar missals), and within one years time all defects (such as the lack of maniples, un-traditionally-consecrated altars) must be taken care of.

I would immediately announce revocation of Vatican recognition of the state of israel.

I would also declare all involved in the SSPX explicitly excommunicated, and demand public penace from their bishops as a condition of the regularization of their status. Then we would see if they would come back to the total traditionalism I would offer in obedience, or if they are too wrapped up in their own narrative of self-justification. Would they repent and admit the consecrations were illicit in obedience, or would they remain a marginalized and increasingly crazy self-righteous group (which would shrivel fast as, the mainstream church being now fully restored to tradition, they would no longer have any special appeal)? However, if their bishops did preformed said public humiliation…I would likely give them very high positions in my administration overseeing the restoration of tradition.

All this in one big speech, with official copies secretly prepared distributed on paper to the media and those present, dispensing myself from all the bureaucracy canon law might otherwise require for this to become official.

 

[batteddy]

In the coming weeks, in a grueling flurry of activity, besides visiting the other patriarchal basillica’s, and making a triumphal visit home to the church of my baptism and my hometown church, I would do much.

I would sort through the bishops, as I said, degrade the bad, and appoint new ones for the dioceses that would be empty due to forced retirement of some of the bishops and outright removal of others. I would draw heavily from traditionalist clergy…including (and especially) the SSPX if their bishops would consent to the traditional canonical public penace (which would be especially humiliating, as it was not traditionally given to clergy…but I would send a strong message that clergy should not expect cushy protection from the institution). Their penance would last a year or so, marching around outside my palace in sack cloth and ashes…but if they agreed to it, I would regularize the society right away (not waiting the year) and starting drawing new bishops from their priests right away.

I would tell the new trusted bishops to carry out similar Inquisitions on the diocesan level with their priests. Sorting through them, sacking the bad.

I would not get rid of the NO entirely. For better or worse, it is a part of the Church’s liturgical history now. I would allow it, howevr, only in those churches whose architecture does not suit the Tridentine liturgy, and cannot be easily renovated to do so. The bishop would sort through all the churches at the diocesan level, deciding which are irreparably NO and allowing the NO, as if by indult, in those parishes. But no new ugly churches would be allowed to be built, any built before the changes should, if all possible, be restored, and since there is going to be a bit of shortage with the priest sackings…the non-tridentine-suitable churches should be closed before any tridentine-suitable ones.

When closing churches, the bishops will be instructed to close all irreparble post-NO churches before even considering closing a tridentine-suitable church, except in exceptional cases with rural diocese (where there may not be a tridentine suitable church for 300 miles). The remaining traditional priests will be shuffled and parish boundries re-drawn so that the number of tridentine suitable parishes is maximized.

But even in this indult NO at newer churches that somehow dont have to be closed (who knows, some diocese might have enough priests left to handle both all the tridentine-suitable churches, AND a few novus ordo)…women will not be lectors, there will be no altar girls, there will be no EMHC’s, there will be no communion on the hand. Still, vernacular will be allowed, non-ad-orientam will be allowed, and communion will be recieved either standing or kneeling.

But most of the world will be restored to the tridentine liturgy. 1954 books, until a new edition can be prepared incorporating new saints, etc…as well as a few revisions and expansions to the TLM I’ve always thought would be nice. Also, a new psalter schedule would be published. A less drastic revision than Pius X’s…matins made into divisi and distributed among the little hours to lessen the repitition and length. But other than that, the traditional 12 psalms everyday at matins (but no more 18 on Sundays)…pretty much the same as before Pius X. The extra canticles from Lauds II would be added to Prime instead.

I’d probably convoke a new council, though not one in any way innovating nor one that does anything more than basically assenting to my agenda. A “toe-the-line” council like Vatican I. Trent II. A statement that we are out of the “Vatican II era”. Vatican II would be declared free of heresy, and then basically allowed to slip into historical obscurity. The council would declare Mary Co-redemptrix, reaffirm all Catholic dogmas (perhaps defining an explicit list of all statements that are defined dogma so far), and clarify some things that might need to be clarified.

Hans Kung would be invited to the Vatican, not entirely under false pretenses…but I’d make it seem friendlier than it was. When he arrives, arrest him, throw him the dungeons, and subject him to the restored Inquisition.

Excommunicate all pro-abortion Catholic politicians.

Place the US under interdict, decry it as the whore of babylon.

Make the Pope’s theoretical temporal power very clear in a well defined declaration. Restore Emperors, titularly at least, especially a Holy Roman Emperor. Though they would probably just be ornaments of the papal court (at first, as least, and likely always…at least in my lifetime).

 

[batteddy]

Restore the devil’s advocate, make canonization a much more rigorous process taking much more time, as someone described. I would likely set an example, beatifying and canonizing few. And most of those I would canonize would be ones beatified centuries ago but for whom, for one reason or another, the cause slowed and they never got around to canonizing them. Except maybe Franco …

Restore the measurment of indulgences in days and years of canonical penance. Call a Jubilee in 2033. Allow a medal to stand in for multiple cincture cords (like the scapular medal).

Stop talks with the Anglicans entirely. Be dismissive of the Protestants in general. Be very firm with the Orthodox, and in a certain sense aloof. Keep the lines of communication open, but be totally uncompromising and keep a “we don’t need you, we’re doing this for your sake” attitude. But still, a lot of the issues with the Orthodox seem to be semantical misunderstandings, problems with the wording but not the underlying ideas…so I think we could still work to try to resolve that. With Muslim pressures growing greater in Orthodox regions…I think they might eventually cave for the sake of offering a unified Christian front in Europe, as long as they aren’t holding out because they think we also might be about to cave. If it’s clear that we arent…I actually think they might come around sooner than you might think.

Be very respectful of the Eastern Catholic Churches. Encourage them to proselytize, make switching into an Eastern Rite easier and let more Latins know about that option. Remove all latinization, including of theology, as long as we makes sure that their parsing of the dogmas is consistent and that we agree on the essential ideas, even if we emphasize different things or our wording is different or the philosophical methods and tools we use are different (ie, we’re not going to require them to adopt Scholastic metaphysics…as long as we are sure that they are expressing the same revealed teaching, just under the assumptions of a different philosophical system or with different technical language).

Okay, all that sounds very stern and dictatorial. But otherwise be a very charismatic Pope. Assuming the hypothetical election was when I was still young. LOL, ideally right now, in this alternate reality, at 18. But in my 20s or early 30s lets say, I could become the first celibate sex symbol! Give interviews, be off-the-cuff, do cameos in movies, use the internet, have small dinners with random people, both the famous and the poor and marginalized. Do a lot of volunteer work for the poor personally. Be seen dancing to modern music I like (though I would require that only chant be used in the liturgy). Be a bit cooky (but not hanging-babies-over-balconies cooky). Show people a joi d’vivre that will make traditionalism and Catholicism attractive, and not incompatible with fun, fullfillment, interest, or intellect.

 

[AJV]

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Okay, all that sounds very stern and dictatorial.

Understatement of the century (and in adjectives). Leave the stern and dictatorial stuff- who’s going to pay for the plane tickets and the room and board for 4880 people? And how are you going to find 4880 people to replace them?

 

[Melanie01]

I would certainly require the Tabernacle to take centre and front position in all Catholic churches…as well as numerous other things…