Irreverent Mass

  • Thread starter Thread starter TradCatholic12
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
No because even an irreverent Mass is valid if the priest is validly ordained.
 
It occurs to me, that without YouTube, the NO bashers wouldn’t have much fun these days, would they?

The same old videos, over and over again, as if the more they get played the more value they have.

NOT
 
I have a feeling some people are going to be very uncomfortable in heaven, there will be too much joy there to tolerate. :rolleyes:
 
bobzills said:
Yes, really. And its no use taking it up with the Pope. For example, just take a look at all the dancing that takes place at the World Youth Congresses. And the Pope has been there.
Click to expand...
The holy father was not referring to just any old dancing. He was referring to dancing that takes place during Mass. Correct me if I’m wrong, but World Youth Day dancing is not liturgical.
 
una_fides said:
Few things. First, the many claims you made concerning St. Francis require citations.

Second, from what I’ve read, St. Francis was an anomaly and many thought him to be mad. I read on somewhere online that little children threw stones at him and that he encouraged them to do so until he was bloody, as he danced around and shouted “come and see the new madness” (I do not claim this information is necessarily correct because I do not have a legitimate citation). The point is that as you know St. Francis was anything but the norm, and citing him as such does actually gives more emphasis to the fact that the universal Church and her faithful were doing things differently. The fact is that 99.99% of the Latin Rite Church only used Latin in their Masses and the .01% received special permission to do otherwise. Anyone else would have been disobeying the Pope and the Council of Trent, which pretty-much disqualifies them from our perspective.

Moreover, St. Francis and his followers were extremely destitute and poor. They literally gave away everything that they owned and certainly did not live the comfortable lives that those who wish to wear torn jeans and flip flops to Mass do. In order for one to claim a right to follow in the footsteps of St. Francis, they should not start by liturgical innovations or simplicity. They should start by poverty and serious penance. It was among these minority, who were also practicing extreme self mortification that received any such permission as you indicated (citation needed). Certainly, their practices cannot be regarded as desirous to be normative for those who are weak in their faith, which judging from the lack of catechesis today, that would unfortunately consist of the majority of those who go to Mass on Sunday.

I agree with your last statement that the chant itself didn’t make them saints. But I would clarify that their love of Christ led them to thrive in their worship of Him through the calming of their spirits and thereby opening themselves up to His Divine Love. It was their love of God that also led them to preserve this very ancient form of the Church’s worship. Our goal should not be to figure out new ways to worship Christ that best fit our own personal fleshly preferences and desires. Our goal should be to follow in the footsteps of the saints that have gone before us and preserve their traditions. If we wish to worship like the early Church, let us use music like the early Church used. Modern-style music does not facilitate ancient-style worship.

God bless.
Click to expand...
You’ll have to read The Little Flowers of St. Francis, St. Bonaventure’s Life of St. Francis, The Rule and Constitutions of the Friars Minor Capuchin.

As to being normative, they became normative for this order and they still run their parishes according to these norms as well as their religious houses.

If you recall the Good Friday Liturgy, Fra. Raneiro, the official preacher to the Papal Household, preached without a stole. That’s just one example. Every priest was wearing a stole and an alb except him. He was wearing the Brother’s habit and nothing else.

If you check out Cardinal Sean’s blog, he too is a Friar Minor Capuchin and you will notice that he wear his red clothes only for his formal protrait. He attends even Papal audiences of Cardinals in his Brother’s robe and nothing else, while the other Cardinals are wearing their red robes.

Francis’ tradition is still held today.

Check out the Brother next to the Pope. He’s a real Cardinal. But he doesn’t have to wear the clerical clothing, even for the Pope.

cardinalseansblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/5_1.jpg

JR 🙂

By the way, St. Francis predates Trent by 300 years. The Bull of Honorius has never been revoked.
 
Fide

By the way, I doubt very much that the Church would have canonized Francis of Assisi the year after his death if they believed he was mad or an anomally. In fact, Pope Innocent III said that he would approve the rule of St. Francis, because he believed that St. Francis would save the Church of the Middle Ages from falling into ruins.

The fact that his religious family numbers over one million and is the largest religioius family in the Catholic Church hardly makes them a negligeable number or an anomally.

Finally, the fact that they still have the original bull given to them by the Pope in 1221 says something about their status in the Church.

I strongly recommend that you read about the man and his religious family, before you quote an online statement.

By the way, it was true that he did dance around when stones were thrown at him, but his words were not that he was a madman, but that he was a fool for Christ.

The primary objective of his rule is not poverty, contrary to urban legend. When the rite of religious profession was written for the Friars Minor Capchin the word were and still are:

“I Brother N, vow and promise to Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, the Blessed Virgin Mary, all the angels and saints, and to you Brother (Superior) to observe the Rule of the Friars Minor in obedience to our Holy Father St. Francis and to you Brother, without porperty and in chastity all the days of my life.”

To which the Superior responds

“And I on behalf of the Lord Jesus Christ, Holy Mother Church and our Holy Father St. Francis promise you, that if you persevere in all these things, you will have eternal life.”

Observe that the object is to live the gospel and obedience to St. Francis and his successors. Without property and in chastity describes the condition in which the friar shall observe the Gospel and live in obedience to St. Francis. The promise itself is to live the gospel and obey Francis.

If you obey Francis, you are obeying the Church, because what he taught was approve by Innocent III and later given a papal bull by Pope Honorius, so that it could not be changed except by another Pope.

The Bull has never been revoked and the only changes have come by way of dispensations from the Popes in minor matters, such as the ownership of property by the community, not the individual. The individual cannot own anything.

JR 🙂
 
bobzills said:
I thought I said it was a skit.
BTW, what do you think of the Masster of Puppets?
youtube.com/watch?v=NSbiL3XduvY
Click to expand...
You said that it is a skit illustrating what goes on in some masses. Where in the video does it say that there is a connection between the skit and the liturgy?

Anyone who pays attention to Steven Colbert also knows that he is a very orthodox Catholic and a comedian. What he does for comedy is one thing. What he believes is another.
 
JReducation said:
You said that it is a skit illustrating what goes on in some masses. Where in the video does it say that there is a connection between the skit and the liturgy?

Anyone who pays attention to Steven Colbert also knows that he is a very orthodox Catholic and a comedian. What he does for comedy is one thing. What he believes is another.
Click to expand...
It is true that this is from a skit but from some of the comments on You Tube, it appears that this might actually be remotely connected with a liturgy.
For example:
“Actually, although everyone touched on it, Colbert is making fun of a teacher (a nun) he had in elementary school, who INSISTED on liturgical dance. He is mocking it, and WELL HE SHOULD! Liturgical dance is just silly. “
“In a mere 45 seconds Colbert manages to sum up perfectly the liturgical indignities Catholics were subjected to in the 1970’s…”
youtube.com/watch?v=Fz2aE6DvHDc
youtube.com/watch?v=4_LSgMP0pIc
 
bobzills said:
Here’s a nice little skit illustrating the dancing and singing that goes on at some Masses:
youtube.com/watch?v=Fz2aE6DvHDc
or
youtube.com/watch?v=4_LSgMP0pIc
Click to expand...
bobzills said:
I thought I said it was a skit.
BTW, what do you think of the Masster of Puppets?
youtube.com/watch?v=NSbiL3XduvY
Click to expand...
blah blah…typical cheap shots. :rolleyes: You insult the NO by using a skit from Steven Colbert, then pull something from Call to Action to prove some lame point. I’m surprised you didn’t get out the old clown Mass. 🤷
 
bobzills said:
It is true that this is from a skit but from some of the comments on You Tube, it appears that this might actually be remotely connected with a liturgy.
For example:
“Actually, although everyone touched on it, Colbert is making fun of a teacher (a nun) he had in elementary school, who INSISTED on liturgical dance. He is mocking it, and WELL HE SHOULD! Liturgical dance is just silly. “
“In a mere 45 seconds Colbert manages to sum up perfectly the liturgical indignities Catholics were subjected to in the 1970’s…”
youtube.com/watch?v=Fz2aE6DvHDc
youtube.com/watch?v=4_LSgMP0pIc
Click to expand...
And you’re going to believe the comments on youtube, but you blatantly reject Pope John Paul’s call to ecumenism?

How doe that make sense?

JR 🙂
 
bobzills said:
It is true that this is from a skit but from some of the comments on You Tube, it appears that this might actually be remotely connected with a liturgy.
For example:
“Actually, although everyone touched on it, Colbert is making fun of a teacher (a nun) he had in elementary school, who INSISTED on liturgical dance. He is mocking it, and WELL HE SHOULD! Liturgical dance is just silly. “
“In a mere 45 seconds Colbert manages to sum up perfectly the liturgical indignities Catholics were subjected to in the 1970’s…”
youtube.com/watch?v=Fz2aE6DvHDc
youtube.com/watch?v=4_LSgMP0pIc
Click to expand...
Thanks for the clarification. I figured I was missing something. Now I’m laughing just thinking about it.

As for the Masster of Puppets, what if one were to experiment with the boldface text editing so that it kind of looked like:

M*******ter of Puppets
 
bobzills said:
It is true that this is from a skit but from some of the comments on You Tube, it appears that this might actually be remotely connected with a liturgy.
For example:
“Actually, although everyone touched on it, Colbert is making fun of a teacher (a nun) he had in elementary school, who INSISTED on liturgical dance. He is mocking it, and WELL HE SHOULD! Liturgical dance is just silly. “
“In a mere 45 seconds Colbert manages to sum up perfectly the liturgical indignities Catholics were subjected to in the 1970’s…”
youtube.com/watch?v=Fz2aE6DvHDc
youtube.com/watch?v=4_LSgMP0pIc
Click to expand...
I’ve been watching Colbert for a long time Bob, I love watching him. I seriously doubt he meant that in a mocking sense in the way you or anyone in here would want.
 
I wonder if it can be clarified ?

Points to anamchara on the latest post - I confess I’m having to do an excessive amount of mental gymnastics trying to picture a nun in habit doing that figure-skater emulation move holding one leg up in the air behind one’s self while hopping around/twirling on the other.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top