LA Religion Religious Congress 2008

[JKirkLVNV]

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:

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.

I agree 100 %. I don’t like the conference, never had. I still say there are ways to do it and mockery isn’t it.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Perhaps you might want to re-read Redemptionis Sacramentum:

.

Thank you for the exact quotation.

 

[eichenb2]

Did you, or people that share your same avenue of attack, ever stop and think that attitudes like this drive people away from traditionalism?

I am very much interested in learning about traditional Catholic practices, and to attend a TLM, but it’s people like you that keep me away.

I don’t mean to be insulting, but if this is the kind of elitism and sarcasm I can expect to see, I want no part of it.

Shouldn’t ever Catholic be a “Traditionalist”???

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Shouldn’t ever Catholic be a “Traditionalist”???

Every Catholic should adhere to Sacred Tradition, indeed, one must if one is a Catholic. Some traditions, however, are not Sacred Tradition, handed down to us by Christ through the Apostles. They are, however, sacred in the sense that they have the blessing of the Church, ie, are commended to the faithful, and have stood the test of time. That doesn’t make them, however, immutable or absolutely unchanging. Sacred Tradition IS immutable.

As for the term “traditionalist,” I’ve posted this before: According to HH Pope Benedict XV, of happy memory, it is sufficient to be a Catholic Christian. From his encyclical Beatissimii Apostolorum:

*"*24. It is, moreover, Our will that Catholics should abstain from certain appellations which have recently been brought into use to distinguish one group of Catholics from another. They are to be avoided not only as “profane novelties of words,” out of harmony with both truth and justice, but also because they give rise to great trouble and confusion among Catholics. Such is the nature of Catholicism that it does not admit of more or less, but must be held as a whole or as a whole rejected: “This is the Catholic faith, which unless a man believe faithfully and firmly; he cannot be saved” (Athanas. Creed). There is no need of adding any qualifying terms to the profession of Catholicism: it is quite enough for each one to proclaim “Christian is my name and Catholic my surname,” only let him endeavour to be in reality what he calls himself."

 

[ncjohn]

*"*24. It is, moreover, Our will that Catholics should abstain from certain appellations which have recently been brought into use to distinguish one group of Catholics from another. They are to be avoided not only as “profane novelties of words,” out of harmony with both truth and justice, but also because they give rise to great trouble and confusion among Catholics. Such is the nature of Catholicism that it does not admit of more or less, but must be held as a whole or as a whole rejected: “This is the Catholic faith, which unless a man believe faithfully and firmly; he cannot be saved” (Athanas. Creed). There is no need of adding any qualifying terms to the profession of Catholicism: it is quite enough for each one to proclaim “Christian is my name and Catholic my surname,” only let him endeavour to be in reality what he calls himself."

Amen!

 

[eichenb2]

Every Catholic should adhere to Sacred Tradition, indeed, one must if one is a Catholic. Some traditions, however, are not Sacred Tradition, handed down to us by Christ through the Apostles. They are, however, sacred in the sense that they have the blessing of the Church, ie, are commended to the faithful, and have stood the test of time. That doesn’t make them, however, immutable or absolutely unchanging. Sacred Tradition IS immutable.

As for the term “traditionalist,” I’ve posted this before: According to HH Pope Benedict XV, of happy memory, it is sufficient to be a Catholic Christian. From his encyclical Beatissimii Apostolorum:

*"*24. It is, moreover, Our will that Catholics should abstain from certain appellations which have recently been brought into use to distinguish one group of Catholics from another. They are to be avoided not only as “profane novelties of words,” out of harmony with both truth and justice, but also because they give rise to great trouble and confusion among Catholics. Such is the nature of Catholicism that it does not admit of more or less, but must be held as a whole or as a whole rejected: “This is the Catholic faith, which unless a man believe faithfully and firmly; he cannot be saved” (Athanas. Creed). There is no need of adding any qualifying terms to the profession of Catholicism: it is quite enough for each one to proclaim “Christian is my name and Catholic my surname,” only let him endeavour to be in reality what he calls himself."

My question was rhetorical and, in fact, it contained a tad bit of sarcasm. I apologize. I do have some concerns though. As a new Catolic, I have attended several Masses that seemed to lack in reverence (from parishioners and clergy). I left a protestant tradition to get away from that mentality. I figured that, across the board, Catholics would see the Mass as a solemn event with eternal importance. This appears to be the Church’s doctrinal stance. Yet, much of what I have seen has been the same old protestant mentality; the idea that it is just a gathering of friends. My opinion is that there is, in some cases, an inordinate emphasis place on the horizontal aspect of the Mass. Also, I agree with a previous post about not encouraging young Catholics to desire a peudo-evagelical experience at Mass. I think recent numbers indicate that many of these same young Catholics leave the Church for Protestant or non-denominational churches. When there is the theological and liturgical richness of Catholicism, I wonder why anyone would want to want a Joel Osteen-like experience. Why push the limits?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

My question was rhetorical and, in fact, it contained a tad bit of sarcasm. I apologize. I do have some concerns though. As a new Catolic, I have attended several Masses that seemed to lack in reverence (from parishioners and clergy). I left a protestant tradition to get away from that mentality. I figured that, across the board, Catholics would see the Mass as a solemn event with eternal importance. This appears to be the Church’s doctrinal stance. Yet, much of what I have seen has been the same old protestant mentality; the idea that it is just a gathering of friends. My opinion is that there is, in some cases, an inordinate emphasis place on the horizontal aspect of the Mass. Also, I agree with a previous post about not encouraging young Catholics to desire a peudo-evagelical experience at Mass. I think recent numbers indicate that many of these same young Catholics leave the Church for Protestant or non-denominational churches. When there is the theological and liturgical richness of Catholicism, I wonder why anyone would want to want a Joel Osteen-like experience. Why push the limits?

A lack of reverence is, quite sadly, a real problem in many places today and there IS far too great an emphasis placed on the horizontal rather than the vertical (though I personally feel that the horizontal and the vertical should be held in a dynamic tension, as it were, one not sacrificed for the other). There are things that we CAN borrow from our evangelical brothers (a fervent love of Scripture, for example, but read with the Mind of the Church and the Magisterium), but their worship generally conflicts with our understanding of worship and we SHOULD guard against what we see in the link provided by the OP.

Of course, attributing best motives, liturgical dance may not be INTENDED as anything, but reverent. It is the fact that it has been forbidden that makes it an outright sin, against obedience. As Benedictgal has pointed out, the use of the baskets and glassware for the Holy Sacrifice are equally forbidden, so this is again the sin of disobedience.

Of course, none of this begins to address the problems of the various speakers at the conference, many of whom take views at odds with Holy Mother Church.

 

[Ridgerunner]

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?

You could be right. Perhaps my computer is not performing right, but I couldn’t hear any sound with the slide show at all. So if anything inappropriate was said, I don’t know what it was.

I can’t tell you what it was like everywhere in the 1960s, because I was raised in the Bible Belt and there weren’t enough Catholics to have any kind of major gathering. My Yankee wife, however, grew up in a northern city where there were a lot of Catholics, and from what she tells me they did have large youth gatherings. Those were a kind of mixture of the very seriously reverent interspersed with the “kid silly” kinds of things non-depraved kids do when they’re having fun. Socialize, play games, music, etc.