Nc parishioners demand removal of pastor for defying ‘spirit of vatican ii’

[exnihilo]

I will say it’s curious to hear the terminology “Spirit of Vatican 2”, a phrase I have only heard among traditionalists in the past decade. If I said that to the Catholics I know they would have no clue what I am talking about.
That may be a clue as to what ‘more’ there is to this story.

I have personally heard last year a priest say at the end of Mass that his parish is proudly in the spirit, or maybe it was tradition, of Vatican II.

This goes on quite a bit I think, but this is an extreme case. My priest told me that he was once berated by angry parishioners because he covered the chalice with a veil. This is a practice that the GIRM called “praiseworthy” and that at least one other local parish does. There are also those who dislike having the psalm sung, although again the GIRM encourages this. It is a very positive thing if “spirit of vatican 2” types who manipulate what the council actually said to their own ends, go to a protestant church, they will get on a lot better there.

No matter what our own preferences are it is good to keep in mind that priests no doubt hear a lot of complaining. I try to keep that in mind and make an effort to praise any changes towards things I like rather than complain about their absence.

 

[OraLabora]

People, on the whole, are usually resistant to change. It’s a bit ironic in fact, that some will berate those who disliked the changes of Vatican II to in fact display the same resistance to even minor liturgical changes in their own parishes, such as the new English translation or attempts to bring back a few traditional gestures and music. They are really doing exactly the same thing as many did at Vatican II’s changes! I don’t think it’s necessarily always a “modernist vs traditionalist” issue. More likely just human nature’s natural resistance to change trotting out the usual accusations in order to resist it.

I love Gregorian chant and sing in a men’s schola. It’s a delicate issue. It seems to go over quite well when a little troup like ours pops in from time to time; then it’s a novelty for some, and nostalgia for others (we brought one elderly priest to tears once, so long it had been since he heard chant). But try to use it on a regular basis and then troubles like this arise.

Fortunately the abbey that I’m attached to is close enough that this chantohaulic can get his weekly fix (and it is overall the OF Mass as SC had intended).

 

[Saints_Alive]

And what would that be?

---

Peace, Mark***

I know you didn’t ask me, but I liken this topic to the way some of the SSPX laity speak of +Fellay regarding his talks with Rome.

On one side you have liberal lay extremists embracing dissidence and on the other, trad lay extremists embracing schism. And both groups demanding their clergy obey them.

Neither of these groups is practicing Catholicism in an orthodox manner. They are both cherry picking and defining Catholicism to suit their fancy.

And sadly, both groups use the spirit of Vatican 2 to justify their version of Catholicism albeit in a different way.

Perhaps instead of bottom rung of the ladder, we may say bottom of the pecking order. Both of these groups need to be reminded of their place regarding the Hierarchy. Which in fact, is indeed at the bottom.

 

[Saints_Alive]

It sounds like some modernist have run amok. I pity them. We should pray for all involved.

:twocents: Bottom Rung = Our responsibility to remain obediant to the churches authority; not that we’re less important than the clergy in the eyes of god, or his church.

Agreed

 

[Mark121359]

This is not all that surprising really. It reminds me of the group of Catholics in S.F. that sent a letter to Pope Francis demanding that he replace Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone with someone more “true to our values.” (I cringe to envision what these “values” might be…don’t you?) They claimed that he “fostered an atmosphere of division and intolerance” basically because he took a strong stance reaffirming the church’s position on same-sex marriage among other things.

And who can forget poor Dominican Sister Jane Dominic Laurel, who came under fire from outraged parents after their poor little “babies” heard her speak the truth about the Catholic Church’s position on homosexuality at a Charlotte Catholic High School. They took out an online petition. Their mob rules mentality worked. Soon after, Sister Jane Dominic announced that she had withdrawn from all speaking engagements and was taking a sabbatical from teaching at Aquinas College. What a pity! I’ll tell you something in all seriousness. If we don’t get back to strong catechesis and soon, the Church will find herself heading into even greater peril IMHO.

Peace, Mark

 

[1neophyte]

I know you didn’t ask me, but I liken this topic to the way some of the SSPX laity speak of +Fellay regarding his talks with Rome.

On one side you have liberal lay extremists embracing dissidence and on the other, trad lay extremists embracing schism. And both groups demanding their clergy obey them.

Neither of these groups is practicing Catholicism in an orthodox manner. They are both cherry picking and defining Catholicism to suit their fancy.

And sadly, both groups use the spirit of Vatican 2 to justify their version of Catholicism albeit in a different way.

Perhaps instead of bottom rung of the ladder, we may say bottom of the pecking order. Both of these groups need to be reminded of their place regarding the Hierarchy. Which in fact, is indeed at the bottom.

I’m glad someone more eloquent than me stepped up and answered. The fact is that everyone believes that what they subjectively want is “truth”. Whether it’s a chantaholic wanting a regular “fix” or someone who wants to hold hands during the Our Father. The differences between “trads” and “liberals” are just facades. At heart, they’re both the same. Just people who want what they want. The bad reputation of both “sides” is rooted in their illusion of superiority.

 

[1neophyte]

If we don’t get back to strong catechesis and soon, the Church will find herself heading into even greater peril IMHO.

Peace, Mark

The ship has already sailed on that one. The Church is not headed for great peril, the peril has already taken firm root. And while the discussions about trad this and liberal that go on ad nauseum, the world sinks and sinks. Catechesis? Who is even going to listen to catechesis from a Church with no singular identity? It’s a total free for all with no one who can legitimately assert any authority that very many will listen to, unless they happen to naturally agree.

 

[Saints_Alive]

This is not all that surprising really. It reminds me of the group of Catholics in S.F. that sent a letter to Pope Francis demanding that he replace Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone with someone more “true to our values.” (I cringe to envision what these “values” might be…don’t you?) They claimed that he “fostered an atmosphere of division and intolerance” basically because he took a strong stance reaffirming the church’s position on same-sex marriage among other things.

And who can forget poor Dominican Sister Jane Dominic Laurel, who came under fire from outraged parents after their poor little “babies” heard her speak the truth about the Catholic Church’s position on homosexuality at a Charlotte Catholic High School. They took out an online petition. Their mob rules mentality worked. Soon after, Sister Jane Dominic announced that she had withdrawn from all speaking engagements and was taking a sabbatical from teaching at Aquinas College. What a pity! I’ll tell you something in all seriousness. If we don’t get back to strong catechesis and soon, the Church will find herself heading into even greater peril IMHO.

Peace, Mark

Totally agree.

 

[peter26]

I’m glad someone more eloquent than me stepped up and answered. The fact is that everyone believes that what they subjectively want is “truth”. Whether it’s a chantaholic wanting a regular “fix” or someone who wants to hold hands during the Our Father. The differences between “trads” and “liberals” are just facades. At heart, they’re both the same. Just people who want what they want. The bad reputation of both “sides” is rooted in their illusion of superiority.

Nonsense. We have canon law, the GIRM and other documents regulating what happens at Mass for a reason. The GIRM prefers Gregorian chant. Does that make it compulsory? No. But if a priest chooses to use it, it is not a legitimate ground for anyone to be upset, because it is encouraged by the GIRM. Personal preferences are one thing, preferences given by the GIRM or other liturgical documents are a different matter. Its also a slippery slope. One day people are holding hands during the Our Father, next day you have a Clown Mass. There are no two ways about it, the priest in this story is a hero and is doing what the church wants.

 

[Saints_Alive]

I’m glad someone more eloquent than me stepped up and answered. The fact is that everyone believes that what they subjectively want is “truth”. Whether it’s a chantaholic wanting a regular “fix” or someone who wants to hold hands during the Our Father. The differences between “trads” and “liberals” are just facades. At heart, they’re both the same. Just people who want what they want. The bad reputation of both “sides” is rooted in their illusion of superiority.

Very true. The liberal crowd drove me towards the Trad crowd when I returned to the Church in 2006. I wanted to practice Catholicism and I thought the only place I could do that was in one of the local trad communities. Thank goodness I finally realized that I didn’t want to be considered a trad, nor a liberal. I finally figured out that Catholicism can only be practiced in an orthodox manner. Otherwise one isn’t practicing true Catholicism.

I wish I would have spent more time praying during the last few years than all the time I spent on forums arguing about Catholicism.

Anyhow, I’ll end my rambling Lol.

God Bless us all in these turbulent times +

 

[Mark121359]

The ship has already sailed on that one. The Church is not headed for great peril, the peril has already taken firm root. And while the discussions about trad this and liberal that go on ad nauseum, the world sinks and sinks. Catechesis? Who is even going to listen to catechesis from a Church with no singular identity? It’s a total free for all with no one who can legitimately assert any authority that very many will listen to, unless they happen to naturally agree.

Uh-huh. So let me get this straight. According to the gospel of 1neophyte, the gates of hell have already prevailed. To borrow a quote from Brig. Gen. Anthony C. McAuliffe…NUTS!!!

Peace, Mark

 

[1neophyte]

Nonsense. We have canon law, the GIRM and other documents regulating what happens at Mass for a reason. The GIRM prefers Gregorian chant. Does that make it compulsory? No. But if a priest chooses to use it, it is not a legitimate ground for anyone to be upset, because it is encouraged by the GIRM. Personal preferences are one thing, preferences given by the GIRM or other liturgical documents are a different matter. Its also a slippery slope. One day people are holding hands during the Our Father, next day you have a Clown Mass. There are no two ways about it, the priest in this story is a hero and is doing what the church wants.

So… The priests who choose not to use it are not doing what the church wants? Who are the priests then? And who is the church? If the priests are not “the Church”, then what are they even doing celebrating mass?

 

[OraLabora]

I’m glad someone more eloquent than me stepped up and answered. The fact is that everyone believes that what they subjectively want is “truth”. Whether it’s a chantaholic wanting a regular “fix” or someone who wants to hold hands during the Our Father. The differences between “trads” and “liberals” are just facades. At heart, they’re both the same. Just people who want what they want. The bad reputation of both “sides” is rooted in their illusion of superiority.

I’m the self-identified “chantohaulic”. Nowhere did I suggest though, that chant should be imposed on those who don’t want it or whose culture and language make even basic Latin an obstacle. I seek it out where I can find it and use it in my own personal prayer of the LOTH rather than try to impose it on my parish. Our schola rotates around different parishes of our diocese. We ask parishes if they are interested; if not, we don’t insist and move on.

I do it from love of it and the belief that this 1000+ year patrimony of the Church is worth preserving. I find what often lacks in these sorts of issues is humility. We are the “me” generation. My will. Be done instead of thy will be done.

 

[peter26]

So… The priests who choose not to use it are not doing what the church wants? Who are the priests then? And who is the church? If the priests are not “the Church”, then what are they even doing celebrating mass?

Well the church is first and foremost the Holy See. And no, if the GIRM encourages but does not recommend it, the priest is not being disobedient by not doing it. However, if he chooses to, parishioners who object are really objecting to what the Holy See is recommending.

 

[1neophyte]

Uh-huh. So let me get this straight. According to the gospel of 1neophyte, the gates of hell have already prevailed. To borrow a quote from Brig. Gen. Anthony C. McAuliffe…NUTS!!!

Peace, Mark

Hardly. But there always seems to be a lot of lamenting over the lack of strong catechesis, and little to no action to institute it. For example, why is this story about a priest instituting a pastor-led catechetical program so newsworthy? Because it is so rare? That’s pretty outrageous. It doesn’t mean the gates of hell have prevailed, it just means there’s a whole lot of apathy accompanied by a lot of empty words.

 

[Sunbreak]

I read the articles on this issue and it just seemed to me that the dissenting parishioners are a bunch of babies who aren’t getting their way. I don’t see where the pastor is doing anything wrong.

 

[commenter]

Some thoughts:

• Posters are turning this into a typical liberal/conservative battle. Focus on what it is: a disagreement within a specific parish. It’s tempting for both sides to jump to the ramparts and assume this is exactly like every other parish situation.
• We should pray for all those concerned. We should also try to post charitably. Whenever I get emotional about an issue, I tend to stop learning from my “opponents” and “allies” alike, and my posts get longer and more tedious; so they influence no one.
• FYI, there is a process in place through the Code of Canon Law whereby parishioners can petition for redress of grievances. But Canon Law also is concerned with the rights of pastors, too. This does not take the place of informal contacts with the bishop, nor the necessity of reaching out to the pastor - or from the pastor’s point of view, the necessity of reaching out to the people. Not sure what has happened but if either side is reaching out to the secular media, that destroys their credibility.
• From my experience, there often are complicating factors we don’t know about: the unique history of that parish, the personalities of the pastor and the parishioners who are upset, and other stuff going in on town.
• If some people are supposedly on the verge of leaving the Catholic Church altogether, I consider their spiritual welfare very important. But that would not make me more confident in the solidity of their Catholic judgement of the situation.

 

[LPS]

This caught my eye, as it is not far from where I live.
So Catholics, is this a minor issue, or rather widespread?

Jon

ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/north-carolina-parishioners-clash-pastor-petition-his-removal

This kind of story just makes me sad I can give the benefit of the doubt to all involved because I don’t know any of the details but I do know three things:

• In these situations, nobody “wins” except satan, who is having a heyday
• All involved need lots of prayers
• The priest especially needs prayers - all priests do.

 

[Casilda]

This is not a minor issue, but it is less widespread.
There was a huge chunk of the generation that grew up shortly before Vatican 2, especially nuns but also priests and laity. After V2 they were influenced by genuine trends of spiritual renewal, but also by secular trends that urged Christians to persuade their church to follow the secular trends.

There were other trends and movements, some good like ecumenism, Cursillo, Charismatic prayer, Bible study, etc mixed in with the bad, at the time. Many seminaries allowed doctrinal content to decline, some religious orders disintegrated spiritually.

In the US the “renewed” peeps evaluated the Magisterium by the standard of the secular media, which now rules them. The fact that V2 called for some needed changes fueled demand to push through other agendas “in the Spirit of V2”. They networked and took control of catechetics in many places, fading in recent years.

Now you have the angry generation (like my 70 year old cousin) and the brainwashed generation (like my 40 year old cousin, who never learned doctrinal content). The bishops dealt with lots of bad and good trends, they also had traditionalists who, seeing bad stuff “in the Spirit of V2”, rejected V2 itself.

Under St. JP II, different men entered the seminaries, which themselves reasserted doctrine. Some aspects of V2, which were ignored, are being implemented in parishes. Some aspects of the “spirit of V2” are being phased out. In my diocese, there are few really liberal parishes left, with liberal pastors near retirement. My 70 year old lay cousin actively works for liberal religious causes. My 40 year old cousin is inactive Catholic. Her children won’t be Catholic at all.

In most cities, if a liberal parish turns around, there are other liberal parishes or campus ministries people flee to. As time goes on, there are fewer liberal pastors and less money to support Catholic places. There are fewer people under a certain age who are liberal, and also willing to work for “the cause”. If the pastor talks about prolife, they won’t bother fleeing somewhere else, they simply sleep in on Sunday. But my 70 year old cousin will be busy, criticizing our new bishop about same sex marriage.

Our new bishop can’t do much about the liberal pastors near retirement. But he spends a lot of time with the seminarians and younger priests, who all seem conservative. He works a lot with home schoolers, prolifers, and similar groups. You can see the trend here.

Commenter, thank you for this. I live in a very liberal diocese and witnessed a priest’s removal from a parish. It was just one of many things I witnessed that made me veer off from it. Your concluding paragraph is hopeful.

 

[Casilda]

Very true. The liberal crowd drove me towards the Trad crowd when I returned to the Church in 2006. I wanted to practice Catholicism and I thought the only place I could do that was in one of the local trad communities. Thank goodness I finally realized that I didn’t want to be considered a trad, nor a liberal. I finally figured out that Catholicism can only be practiced in an orthodox manner. Otherwise one isn’t practicing true Catholicism.

I wish I would have spent more time praying during the last few years than all the time I spent on forums arguing about Catholicism.

Anyhow, I’ll end my rambling Lol.

God Bless us all in these turbulent times +

I fled the liberal Catholic diocese I live in all together