More of the Halloween Mass

[Ace86]

Here’s more of the Halloween Mass from youtube. Remember? The priest who dressed up like Barney? It seems he doesn’t hold too many “Catholic” beliefs.

youtube.com/watch?v=fHi_VZLtcQ8

Man these people are actually serious. They really want the guy removed from the priesthood.

 

[decn2b]

Starts with an S ends with a C and Rymes with titianic.

 

[mcliffor]

I’m sure whatever bishop sees this will be more concerned about the parish priest who dared to sing a latin hymn during mass.

 

[Missa_Solemnis]

I’m sure whatever bishop sees this will be more concerned about the parish priest who dared to sing a latin hymn during mass.

That is so true.

 

[palmas85]

Here’s more of the Halloween Mass from youtube. Remember? The priest who dressed up like Barney? It seems he doesn’t hold too many “Catholic” beliefs.

youtube.com/watch?v=fHi_VZLtcQ8

Man these people are actually serious. They really want the guy removed from the priesthood.

The truly sad thing about the whole situation is that the Priest apparently feels that he did absolutely nothing wrong. He had modern music, the conga player was really geting into it, people clapping, dancing and having a great time and he presented a truly innovative and cutting edge type of a Mass. Just the thing that the reformers at Vatican II envisioned. No more serious and dreary type of Mass but rather a relgious experience that any evangelical Protestant would be proud of.

After watching the video I watched the 1941 Mass narrarated by Bishop Sheen. I almost cried when I saw just how much we have lost in our quest to modernize. It just wasn’t worth it. It really wasn’t.

 

[introibo]

I’m sure whatever bishop sees this will be more concerned about the parish priest who dared to sing a latin hymn during mass.

What did this little jab at the bishops add to this topic, besides annoy people who think we ought to respect first and berate later?

In any case, the Halloween Mass is an absolute abomination. I do not agree that the priest should be laicized (although a sabbatical to get his head in the right place is probably in order) nor do I think the bishop should be removed, but this parish is in serious need of prayer. Let’s just pray for all parties involved. The matter has already been brought to the attention of the people that need to know about it, as evidenced by the priest’s apology- why cause more trouble?

 

[Ace86]

What did this little jab at the bishops add to this topic, besides annoy people who think we ought to respect first and berate later?

Because Latin is supposed to be used in the Mass, yet there are bishops who forbid it. Dressing like Barney is a liturgical abuse, yet said priest has yet to be reprimanded, at least publicly by his bishop or any other higher Authority.

 

[KnightforChrist]

Pray for that priest and the parishoners who endure such things. Halloween masses/costumes should be disallowed !!! This is horrible to watch !!!

 

[chotock]

I loved the part of his homily (if one could actually call it that) about the ridiculousness of the man attempting to have a serious talk with him while he (the priest) was dressed as a large pumpkin. I wondered why no one thought about how ridiculous it was that the man had to speak to a priest dressed as a pumpkin immediately after celebrating what is supposed to be a loving and beautiful worship.

 

[hilde_the_dog]

I copuld not watch that my body tingled and chicken skin appeared watching and listening to that.

 

[johnnykins]

What did this little jab at the bishops add to this topic, besides annoy people who think we ought to respect first and berate later?

Haven’t you noticed that it is “later?” Let’s see, through the 70s, 80s and 90s we kept quiet while the Bishops allowed, at least tacitly, all manner of abuse of the liturgy. Often times they encouraged it. They allowed heretical teachings in CCD, in homilies and at Catholic schools. They hid and enabled sexual abuse of children. They ignored Rome with abandon. They failed as shepherds, teachers, administrators, liturgists and moral leaders. They failed as Bishops. Pure and simple. They had the duty to be all of those things and they failed miserably.

Granted not all Bishops are as culpable as others - BUT THEY ALL WERE NEGLIGENT AT LEAST. Did those who know better rebuke any of the other Bishops? Certainly not publicly. Their actions and inactions were and are a scandal of monumental proportions. To date the “mea culpas” have been few and far between. I can’t say I’ve heard a single "mea maxima culpa! Those apologies that I am aware of dealt exclusively with the sex abuse scandal. Has anyone heard a single Bishop aplogize for his failure, or the failures of other Bishops, for the mess of the liturgy during those years? Or even for the continuing problems? How about the lack of catechesis, mal-catechesis and deliberate destruction of the faith of millions for 30 years? How about an apology for the state of “Catholic” colleges that are not in any way Catholic? etc., etc., etc…

Until the Bishops start getting it together - I’m all for pointing out their failures and holding them accountable for those failures. They threw away the respect that is owed them. The office may be due respect, but the individuals have been as sorry a lot of self-serving, self-righteous, scandal mongering egotistical clowns as has ever comprised the hierarchy. Let them build the respect for them back. It will be painful and a long time coming, but they need to do so. As for me, I am skeptical of everything they try to say and do now. As you sow, so shall you reap.

 

[Rand_Al_Thor]

Just the thing that the reformers at Vatican II envisioned. No more serious and dreary type of Mass but rather a relgious experience that any evangelical Protestant would be proud of.

After watching the video I watched the 1941 Mass narrarated by Bishop Sheen. I almost cried when I saw just how much we have lost in our quest to modernize. It just wasn’t worth it. It really wasn’t.

Pax tecum!

Have you read the VII documents? Please do. I assure you, there is nothing in there about allowing these kinds of liturgical abuses. In fact, they say that Latin, Gregorian chant, and polyphony are supposed to be used in every Mass.

In Christ,
Rand

 

[Missa_Solemnis]

Pax tecum!

Have you read the VII documents? Please do. I assure you, there is nothing in there about allowing these kinds of liturgical abuses. In fact, they say that Latin, Gregorian chant, and polyphony are supposed to be used in every Mass.

In Christ,
Rand

While the VII documents were not ‘bad’. They shouldnt have been written. The Church was getting along fine without it.

 

[palmas85]

Pax tecum!

Have you read the VII documents? Please do. I assure you, there is nothing in there about allowing these kinds of liturgical abuses. In fact, they say that Latin, Gregorian chant, and polyphony are supposed to be used in every Mass.

In Christ,
Rand

Yes, I know very well that the abuses that we have endured over the years were not specifically mentioned in the documents. Yes I have read them. Being old enough to actually remember when this whole thing took place, I can even tell you what actually happened. Ready

The Vatican II documents called for** MODERNIZATION**

To best accomplish that they allowed a period of experimentation to see what would work best as far as modernizing both the Liturgy and Religious Life in general.

This experimentation proved popular. So popular in fact that when the Vatican tried to stop it, they couldn’t. Liturgists who had been set free so to speak saw no reason to submit to the Vatican. Neither did the Religious in general and the Bishops in particular. . They saw that the Spirit of Vatican II was reform and reform if genuine had to be continuous, sort of like the Cultural Revolution in Maoist China. You could never sit still because sitting still bred complacency. Thus religious reform must continue or it wasn’t reform in the first place. Ditto for Liturgical reform.

Now something else but connected… When Paul VI published Humanae Vitae. he overruled his advisory council on its content. Many, heck, probably most of the reformers saw this a betrayal of the aforementioned spirit and they dug in their heels. To this day in fact, recalcitrance on the part of the Bishops towards anything coming out of Rome is well known and equally well documented.

You ask for the connection perhaps? Well, if the Vatican says do something that the Bishops don’t particularly agree with, they feel that they can ignore it completely or in part because in their eyes, the central authority of Rome was one of the things that needed to be changed and in fact they claim that it was one of the principal reforms sought by the Vatican Council. In fact many of them believe in the eastern model and see the Pope merely as first bishop among equals.

You see, it really doesn’t matter what the documents say, it is what the documents meant, which can be two or three or a hundred different things depending on the reader. .

 

[Cavaille-Coll]

What did this little jab at the bishops add to this topic, besides annoy people who think we ought to respect first and berate later?

If you would like to meet the bishop responsible for the Barney priest, look on the same YouTube page at the video entitled “… Refuses Holy Communion To A Kneeling Woman,” where a woman is told and then forced to stand by His Excellency before she could receive Holy Communion.

I am not one to advocate attacking our bishops, who are the successors of the Apostles and deserve our respect and obedience, but they are not infallible. When they allow their priests to continue in such activities, or themselves fall into error, we are not bound to blindly follow them.

 

[palmas85]

What did this little jab at the bishops add to this topic, besides annoy people who think we ought to respect first and berate later?

In any case, the Halloween Mass is an absolute abomination. I do not agree that the priest should be laicized (although a sabbatical to get his head in the right place is probably in order) nor do I think the bishop should be removed, but this parish is in serious need of prayer. Let’s just pray for all parties involved. The matter has already been brought to the attention of the people that need to know about it, as evidenced by the priest’s apology- why cause more trouble?

The Priest has been doing this for seven years or so. His Bishop, also a modern and therefore right thinking individual, more than likely isn’t going to do anything.

I read the apology. Basically it wasn’t his fault, but instead simple misunderstanding and maybe just a bit of ignorance on the part of his flock. I mean, how could he, only being the presider in the Mass actually dictate anything to them?

If he had a different Bishop, I would think something might actually happen. But with the one works for it will be business as usual. Wait till next year or better yet lets see what they do for New Years. According to what I’ve heard they have some good ones then as well.

 

[mystified]

Well, it was Orange County, and they were not kneeling or using Latin .

 

[Rand_Al_Thor]

Pax vobiscum!

palmas,

Nowhere is the word “modernization” used in the VII documents. That was not the point of the reform of the liturgy either. As Archbishop John Vlazny of Portland told me when I spoke with him about the VII changes to the liturgy, the documents weren’t explained to people well enough and then people got a hold of them without understanding what was being said.

In Christ,
Rand

 

[johnnykins]

Pax vobiscum!

palmas,

Nowhere is the word “modernization” used in the VII documents. That was not the point of the reform of the liturgy either. As Archbishop John Vlazny of Portland told me when I spoke with him about the VII changes to the liturgy, the documents weren’t explained to people well enough and then people got a hold of them without understanding what was being said.

In Christ,
Rand

Ya know, the Bishops certainly should have known what the documents were about - it was their obligation to know. Ditto for the priests. If the “people” didn’t have it explained properly - it’s the fault of the Bishops and the priests whose obligation it was to catechize the people. BTW if by “people” His Excellency meant “priests” - all the more reason for the Bishops to take the blame for their own gross ineptitude in training their own priests. This canard on people getting hold of the documents without understanding them - whose fault is that? Again it’s the BISHOPS. Why didn’t they regulate the liturgy? Why didn’t they stop the abuses? Why has it taken 40 years during which time Europe has become de-Christianized and the rest of the world not too far behind? If the litugy was manhandled - as it was and still is - it’s the DUTY of the local Ordinary to STOP the abuse - or at least try. Far too often they encourage it, promote it, ignore it or take ineffective and timid stands. They really should be ashamed of themselves. Instead, they do seem to want to gloss over their own negligence and/or mal-administration of their office.

Further, it’s strange how with the advent of the internet and easy access to the documents of VII and other documents the people now know what the documents say and have no trouble interpreting them. What I have found is that Bishops and priests truly resent an educated congregation that can tell them they are wrong - and point to the VII documents and GIRM citing chapter and verse.

 

[palmas85]

Pax vobiscum!

palmas,

Nowhere is the word “modernization” used in the VII documents. That was not the point of the reform of the liturgy either. As Archbishop John Vlazny of Portland told me when I spoke with him about the VII changes to the liturgy, the documents weren’t explained to people well enough and then people got a hold of them without understanding what was being said.

In Christ,
Rand

I believe the term that was used was reform. I might be mistaken, but I do believe that it was. And anyway, even if those specific terms wasn’t used what was the intent if not modernization and reform? You tell me. What else could it have been? Surely you are not saying that the entire Traditional way of worship was deficient in some way and therefore in need of substantial change and improvement or are you?

I agree on the second part though. I have always believed that people with certain specific agendas grabbed the ball and ran with it so to speak.