LA Religion Religious Congress 2008

[maurin]

Maurin, honestly, I am unaltered and unchanged.

you have never been disrespectful of others, as you have in this round of posts.

I’ve never given quarter to a “traditionalist” that was wrong.

but you kept your comments focussed on the poster, not generalized a group, as you have in this round of posts.

] If you regard that as arrogance, well, I don’t know what to say.

I know what you can say: you can say that you will qualify your remarks, as you have not done in this round of posts.

I CAN be arrogant,

me too

I suppose I can be pompous, too,

me too!

but I don’t think that defending the second poster’s complaint as just makes me either.

but you went well past that. Many of us on this thread have not slammed the Archbishop, as you have slammed many of us with your unqualified “many Traditionalists.” Many of us here are unmoved by your “if the rock doesn’t have your name on it…”, when all you had to do was to qualify your statements. I’ve asked you to do that a number of times now.

I’m truly sorry, but I don’t see it.

I’m truly sorry too that you don’t see it, refuse to see it, and don’t respect “many of us” enough to try.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

you have never been disrespectful of others, as you have in this round of posts. but you kept your comments focussed on the poster, not generalized a group, as you have in this round of posts. I know what you can say: you can say that you will qualify your remarks, as you have not done in this round of posts. me too me too! but you went well past that. Many of us on this thread have not slammed the Archbishop, as you have slammed many of us with your unqualified “many Traditionalists.” Many of us here are unmoved by your “if the rock doesn’t have your name on it…”, when all you had to do was to qualify your statements. I’ve asked you to do that a number of times now.
I’m truly sorry too that you don’t see it, refuse to see it, and don’t respect “many of us” enough to try.

Well, how is this (and I’m not being antagonistic, I’m asking to see if we can find a middle ground):

“The arrogant and pompous attitude of MANY WHO SELF-IDENTIFY AS TRADITIONALISTS is off-putting and counter-productive to their cause, the EF, etc., etc.?”

 

[I_Believe]

Wolves can come in all stripes, liberal and conservative…even traditional. Whether one falls out of the boat on the right side or the left side, one has fallen out of the boat.

Ok, so you can’t quote my “stance” because I didn’t take one here, and you don’t know who he might have meant by the wolves. Could have been anyone huh ?

Fair enough. Now that we have settled that, carry on.

 

[maurin]

JKirkLVNV;4889832:

Well, how is this (and I’m not being antagonistic, I’m asking to see if we can find a middle ground):

“The arrogant and pompous attitude of MANY WHO SELF-IDENTIFY AS TRADITIONALISTS is off-putting and counter-productive to their cause, the EF, etc., etc.?”

How about: there are some Traditionalists whose arrogant and pompous attitude is off-putting and counter-productive to their cause…

there are some in all groups who fit that one.

I’m all for finding the middle ground with you Kirk.

Clearly we disagree with one another on many many issues, Kirk. But first and foremost, before this evening, you have ALWAYS been a gentleman. I look forward to your continuing that example.

 

[I_Believe]

At least the trads here aren’t screaming in caps.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

But as a new Brother in Christ, please read the Summorum Pontificum, attend both forms of the Mass and draw your own conclusion as to which form is most fitting. Please don’t get caught up in all of the fuss. Instead, realize you are in a position to enter the Church with an unbiased view. Again, look to our Holy Father and follow your heart.

Well, I thought the above disclosed a bit of a mindset, since the Holy Father seems to think BOTH forms are “most fitting.” That was why I responded as I did, ie, BOTH forms are fitting (and by that, I mean equally “most” fitting.)

 

[benedictgal]

I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment of liturgical dance. I also agree we cannot hide our heads in the sand. There are ways to go about it, however, and holding a priest up to mockery does not seem to me to be “tradionally” Catholic.

And Jesus was God and the Pope is His Vicar, not you and not me. It isn’t our place to cast anyone out.

Nor was it, if we hold your last line, the place of St. Catherine of Sienna to tell the Holy Father at the time that he was wrong and that he needed to return to Avignon and get back to business. Sometimes, the laity have to take a stand.

Today we celebrate Texas Independence Day. If my ancestors hadn’t stood up and fought for their rights, we would not be where we are today. Redemptionis Sacramentum tells us that we have rights regarding the proper celebration of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. The document is very clear. Furthermore, no one has the right to tinker with the Mass as he sees fit, whether he be a layman or a high-ranking Church official. Even the authority of the bishop only goes so far.

The problem is that conferences like these wind up spreading liturgical abuses like fire. People can come back (and I have seen this happen from folks from here who have been to the conference) and justify doing strange liturgical practices that are squarely in violation of the GIRM and RS simply because they were done at the Conference in the presence of the Metropolitan Archbishop of the host city.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

At least the trads here aren’t screaming in caps.

Do try not to be deliberately antagonistic or offensive. The caps were to distinguish from what I said before, ie, that’s what’s different.

 

[Freshman88]

Now, answer me: how was this priest any different than Cardinal Mahoney?

What does this have to do with anything?

I just walked home from a Novus Ordo. Of course the priest is wrong.What does that prove? That this guy is an idiot? Ok…

I really wish we had an ignore feature so I won’t be exposed to that kind of vile attack, again . And I say again because its clear you won’t recant.

Now I’m sick of this thread, and quite frankly, sick of your attitude. You insulted me and those I cherish, look up to and live with. I don’t need to put up with this.

Don’t post anymore questions to me, I won’t respond.

 

[I_Believe]

I really wish we had an ignore feature so I won’t be exposed to that kind of vile attack, again . And I say again because its clear you won’t recant.
.

Just click on the user name, then “add user to ignore list”

 

[Freshman88]

Just click on the user name, then “add user to ignore list”

I can’t seem to find it; I have add to buddy, email, find all posts, etc, but no ignore list.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

What does this have to do with anything?

I just walked home from a Novus Ordo. Of course the priest is wrong.What does that prove? That this guy is an idiot? Ok…

I really wish we had an ignore feature so I won’t be exposed to that kind of vile attack, again . And I say again because its clear you won’t recant.

Now I’m sick of this thread, and quite frankly, sick of your attitude. You insulted me and those I cherish, look up to and live with. I don’t need to put up with this.

Don’t post anymore questions to me, I won’t respond.

I have to protest. You’ve characterized my words as “vile.” I think that is a strong overstatement. I also have not said that EVERY traditionalist is to be characterized as arrogant or pompous. You are really looking for ways in which to be offended.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Nor was it, if we hold your last line, the place of St. Catherine of Sienna to tell the Holy Father at the time that he was wrong and that he needed to return to Avignon and get back to business. Sometimes, the laity have to take a stand. The gospel account of Our Lord driving the money changers out of the Temple is very often used to justify our own actions done in anger. To be sure, there is a godly anger, but I heard long ago a minister’s response to the use of this passage and I think it makes sober sense to ponder it: Jesus WAS and IS God. It was His Temple and He had the right to do as He deemed fit. We don’t necessarily fall into the same category and we certainly have no window into any other person’s soul. As for Saint Catherine, I know that I am certainly no saint.

Today we celebrate Texas Independence Day. If my ancestors hadn’t stood up and fought for their rights, we would not be where we are today. Redemptionis Sacramentum tells us that we have rights regarding the proper celebration of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. The document is very clear. Furthermore, no one has the right to tinker with the Mass as he sees fit, whether he be a layman or a high-ranking Church official. Even the authority of the bishop only goes so far. **But there are ways to deal with this and ways we should not venture toward: the mockery of a priest is one. **

The problem is that conferences like these wind up spreading liturgical abuses like fire. People can come back (and I have seen this happen from folks from here who have been to the conference) and justify doing strange liturgical practices that are squarely in violation of the GIRM and RS simply because they were done at the Conference in the presence of the Metropolitan Archbishop of the host city.

**As I said, there are proper ways to deal with such matters and improper ways. We do not hear of Pope Benedict, for example, engaging in that mockery. **

**As for your allusion to Texas history, I am a son of the Republic. My 4 times great grandfather fought under Sam Houston at the Battle of San Jacinto and latter served in the government of the Republic. The “rights” our ancestors fought for did NOT exist under the grant made to them by the government of Mexico. They were to fufill certain obligations and responsibilities which they failed to do. Did you know that the government of Mexico forbade slavery? The Texicans wanted to keep their slaves. Did you know that one of the requirements for Stephen F. Austin’s colony was that all the immigrants be Catholic? Did you know that Austin was an influential Mason and sought to expand Free Masonry throughout Texas? From a moral standpoint, dear sister, our heritage is not without some moral ambiguities. I’m not certain I would cite that vis a vis the very Church that Austin and others latter abandoned when they had no need to claim to be Catholic. We’re proud of our Texas heritage, to be sure…because we won. **

 

[Ridgerunner]

I am NO fan of Cdl Mahony. I am kind of a conservative guy, and I do revere the TLM.

However, I will say I have seen a LOT worse stuff than this. Most of the participants seem to be kids. Kids are given to this kind of thing, and it seems a lot better to me that they expend their excess energy in this way than in some of the alternatives available to them.

 

[elts1956]

why not? you did. good for you:thumbsup:
the fact that “many of you have questioned priests at the doors of our parishes after Sunday Mass…as to the irregularities they witnessed” doesn’t excuse your arrogance or generalizations of “many Traditionalists.”

Maybe you should follow your own advice and not your example?

I think on threads such as these, or in only writing, it is hard to tell the mindset, or emotional stance of the writer. What to some may seem to be arrogance could be a very just anger, especially when abuses in the liturgy are so prevalent. Every time I make a statement which I think is a true teaching of the Church, I think again, am I being arrogant, or am I expressing anger? It is so very hard to tell. Of course if one uses sarcasm, or intententionaly humiliates another poster, that should be very evident, or should it?

 

[maurin]

I think on threads such as these, or in only writing, it is hard to tell the mindset, or emotional stance of the writer. What to some may seem to be arrogance could be a very just anger, especially when abuses in the liturgy are so prevalent. Every time I make a statement which I think is a true teaching of the Church, I think again, am I being arrogant, or am I expressing anger? It is so very hard to tell. Of course if one uses sarcasm, or intententionaly humiliates another poster, that should be very evident, or should it?

I think that before entering the fray, one ought to know what one is talking about, especially in threads such as these. You may be speaking to the wrong person.

I think also that peace has tried to have been made, with some refusing to accept and take their share of the responsibility, thereby prolonging the foolishness.

 

[benedictgal]

**As I said, there are proper ways to deal with such matters and improper ways. We do not hear of Pope Benedict, for example, engaging in that mockery. **

The bottom line is that this kind of activity breeds confusion and disunity, as I see it. The rights that I spoke of regarding the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass are clearly spelled out in Redemptionis Sacramentum:

[12.] On the contrary, it is the right of all of Christ’s faithful that the Liturgy, and in particular the celebration of Holy Mass, should truly be as the Church wishes, according to her stipulations as prescribed in the liturgical books and in the other laws and norms. Likewise, **the Catholic people have the right that the Sacrifice of the Holy Mass should be celebrated for them in an integral manner, according to the entire doctrine of the Church’s Magisterium. **Finally, it is the Catholic community’s right that the celebration of the Most Holy Eucharist should be carried out for it in such a manner that it truly stands out as a sacrament of unity, to the exclusion of all blemishes and actions that might engender divisions and factions in the Church.32

From the recent history of this conference and from the broadcasts on YouTube, one can say that the rights of the faithful to a proper and solemn celebration of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass are non-existent at this conference. It is not a mockery of the priest; it is, as I see it, a mockery of the Sacred Sacrifice.

Calling a spade a spade is also not mockery. St. Catherine was a simple nun with very little education when she told the Holy Father that he needed to go back to Rome. Granted, some of us are far from sainthood right now, but, that does not excuse us from standing up to something that is wrong. Apathy and indifference are Satan’s best weapons.

Regarding Texas, well, I am a native Texan, and I am proud to be from Texas. I brought Texas up because if something is worth fighting for, you fight. For me, the integrity of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is a battle that is worth fighting for because it is sacred.

 

[benedictgal]

I am NO fan of Cdl Mahony. I am kind of a conservative guy, and I do revere the TLM.

However, I will say I have seen a LOT worse stuff than this. Most of the participants seem to be kids. Kids are given to this kind of thing, and it seems a lot better to me that they expend their excess energy in this way than in some of the alternatives available to them.

There is still a huge concern here, especially where young people are involved. They are young and their consciences and faith life are still in formation. Some of these topics may wind up confusing them, especially if they run contrary to an authentic Sensus Fidei and that is never a good thing.

I got into a bit of a tussle with the diocese down here because they allowed the fledling youth group at my dad’s old parish to go to a Protestant Evangelical youth conference called “Acquire the Fire: Here Comes Trouble.” These kids do not yet have the proper formation. The USCCB and one of the national Catholic youth organizations cautioned against this, but, the bishop let them go anyway. There was no mention in the bulletin that this was a Protestant Evangelical meeting. The man who took them is an attorney who wants to become a priest.

This kind of thing, coupled with what is happening in LA, makes me shudder. I often wonder how it was like before the 1960s for the youth and if such conferences like what happens in LA occurred back then. Were they even necessary?

 

[benedictgal]

I don’t have it in front of me, but the law of the Church is that at the bare minimum, the sacred vessels are supposed to be guilded on the surface that touches the Most Sacred Species.

Perhaps you might want to re-read Redemptionis Sacramentum:

1. Sacred Vessels
   [117.] Sacred vessels for containing the Body and Blood of the Lord must be made in strict conformity with the norms of tradition and of the liturgical books.205 The Bishops’ Conferences have the faculty to decide whether it is appropriate, once their decisions have been given the recognitio by the Apostolic See, for sacred vessels to be made of other solid materials as well. It is strictly required, however, that such materials be truly noble in the common estimation within a given region,206 so that honor will be given to the Lord by their use, and all risk of diminishing the doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharistic species in the eyes of the faithful will be avoided. Reprobated, therefore, is any practice of using for the celebration of Mass common vessels, or others lacking in quality, or devoid of all artistic merit or which are mere containers, as also other vessels made from glass, earthenware, clay, or other materials that break easily. This norm is to be applied even as regards metals and other materials that easily rust or deteriorate.207

It makes the point rather crystal clear that glassware is not to be used, nor are baskets. Therein lies the problem. The celebrant and those planning should have known better. Even at the Papal Masses, where thousands and thousands of faithful are in attendance, the vessels are made of gold, including the many ciborria used to distribute Holy Communion.

Furthermore, RS makes an interesting observation about the distribution of the Precious Blood:

[101.] In order for Holy Communion under both kinds to be administered to the lay members of Christ’s faithful, due consideration should be given to the circumstances, as judged first of all by the diocesan Bishop. It is to be completely excluded where even a small danger exists of the sacred species being profaned.187 With a view to wider co-ordination, the Bishops’ Conferences should issue norms, once their decisions have received the recognitio of the Apostolic See through the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, especially as regards “the manner of distributing Holy Communion to the faithful under both kinds, and the faculty for its extension”.188

[102.] The chalice should not be ministered to lay members of Christ’s faithful where there is such a large number of communicants189 that it is difficult to gauge the amount of wine for the Eucharist and there is a danger that “more than a reasonable quantity of the Blood of Christ remain to be consumed at the end of the celebration”.190 The same is true wherever access to the chalice would be difficult to arrange, or where such a large amount of wine would be required that its certain provenance and quality could only be known with difficulty, or wherever there is not an adequate number of sacred ministers or extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion with proper formation, or where a notable part of the people continues to prefer not to approach the chalice for various reasons, so that the sign of unity would in some sense be negated.

Even though paragraph 101 states that there is some discretion given to the diocesan bishop, paragraph 102 makes it very clear that the Precious Blood should not be ministered when there are a great number of communicants.

 

[LRThunder]

Regarding the Religious Education Congress, keep this in mind:

If con is the opposite of pro, is Congress the opposite of progress?