Restoring Tradition

  • Thread starter Thread starter dmorgan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
tpw said:
Probably not the wisest thing for the priest to say during a public liturgy of any sort. But 's interesting that the assembly responded the way that it did. There is after all something called the “sense of the faithful” which plays a role in ecclesial decision-making. But who knows? The question has been “closed” for now. But questions especially if they are legitimate have a way of re-appearing again and again. The question will continue to be discussed among theologians in their realms of scholarship…
Click to expand...
I agree – it was an off-hand remark out of context in a quinceanera – that probably reveals more about what preoccupies this priest and his colleague – and it was a distraction from the celebration of the girl’s special day.

To my knowledge no one has done a survey in our diocese, but I’ve never encountered anyone vehemently opposed to discussing – in the context of tradition – the question of broadening the priesthood. A number of theologians on the faculty of the college where I teach are part of the ongoing national discussion about whether the male-only priesthood can or should be changed.

StAnastasia
 
tpw said:
LaFebre excommunicated himself by ordaining schismatic bishops. It remains to be seen if Benedict’s generous act of re-inviting them back into the Roman fold bears any cooperation on their part. If they continue to deny the legitimacy of the Second Vatican Council, it will be interesting to see what happens.

Your suggestion that the Second Vatican Council was somehow the “work of the devil”… If that is true you would imply that those who were engaged in it, must also be the devil’s handmaidens. By extension JPII and Benedict who were both deeply involved should be held suspect. True, you didn’t say it, but by suggesting the entire council was somehow demonic, your implication follows.

Re: JPII’s convening of the Assisi gathering in 1986… Ratzinger was very suspicious of the event believing that it contributed to syncretism. But as JP II qualifed it as "religious people coming together to pray. Praying together is one heckuva alot better than not-speaking to each other or encouraging violence against each other, no? One also must be mindful that “the Holy Spirit moves in ways which we don’t understand”. Who’s to say the Holy Spirit wasn’t active in such an event?

Re: the sex abuse matter. JPII was coming out of a Polish context. During Soviet control the USSR regularly made allegations about sexual misconduct of the clergy as a way to drive a wedge between Poles and the Church. He assumed - for much to long unfortunately - that the allegations in the US were of the same caliber.

But this too will be a moment of grace for the church… The injured parties, the lawsuits, the bad press will bring a healing impact on the Church and perhaps society at large. If only the news media would focus on the breadth of sex abuse in society as a whole, we would really make great strides…
Click to expand...
Archbishop LeFebvre (not LaFebre) did not ex-communicate himself, and he didn’t ordain schismatic bishops. Why should they accept Vatican II? Give me several good reasons. That would be going against what Archbishop LeFebvre did and taught in his lifetime. The fact is nothing good came out of Vatican II.

Secondly, I never implied John Paul II and Benedict II were demonic or handmaidens of the Devil. What I’m getting at is neither are Traditional. You have one Pope (JPII) who prayed with people that were all different religions (a major violation of Church teachings) and the other Pope (Benedict XVI) who does one Traditional thing, but the next day can do something similar to his predecessor, like praying with people of different religions. The Holy Ghost I’m sure was not pleased at all with what went on at those religious meetings held by JPII. The meeting was implying that all religions are equally vaild and are on the same level. So it doesn’t matter that all false religions were created by the Devil? The Pope of all people should know better than this, but it shows just how nothing good came out of Vatican II.
 
The fact is nothing good came out of Vatican II.
Click to expand...
Your supporting evidence is what?
The Holy Ghost I’m sure was not pleased at all with what went on at those religious meetings held by JPII.
Click to expand...
You got that in an email from the “Holy Ghost”?
The meeting was implying that all religions are equally valid and are on the same level.
Click to expand...
Your supporting evidence is what?
So it doesn’t matter that all false religions were created by the Devil?
Click to expand...
Your supporting evidence is what?
 
StAnastasia said:
Your supporting evidence is what?

You got that in an email from the “Holy Ghost”?

Your supporting evidence is what?

Your supporting evidence is what?
Click to expand...
1.- I don’t need any on that. If you were to ever take a minute or however long to look around and see what has changed since Vatican II (or better yet do research) you would see Vatican II was not a good Council.

2.- That’s what everyone says these days. “Did the Holy Ghost tell you that in person?” or something like that. I could ask you the same question about your beliefs. Comments like that get us nowhere, though.

3.- Don’t need any evidence for that either. What do you think the meeting implied? That everyone should be Catholic? A meeting like that cannot imply such a thing. Just think about it…

4.- I’m shocked you don’t think all false religions were created by the Devil. Do you honestly believe that gods such as Buddha exist? You’re a Catholic, you should know! What about this Bible verse? “All gods of the pagans are devils” (Ps.95,5). You can’t argue with true scripture.
 
SpiritusSanctus said:
4.- I’m shocked you don’t think all false religions were created by the Devil. Do you honestly believe that gods such as Buddha exist? You’re a Catholic, you should know! What about this Bible verse? “All gods of the pagans are devils” (Ps.95,5). You can’t argue with true scripture.
Click to expand...
Shall I tell this to my theology students at the seminary? I might have to break it to them gently…
 
StAnastasia said:
Shall I tell this to my theology students at the seminary? I might have to break it to them gently…
Click to expand...
So you’re teaching them that all religions are valid? Or something else? I’m confused, but regardless you should know about this stuff.
 
SpiritusSanctus said:
So you’re teaching them that all religions are valid? Or something else? I’m confused, but regardless you should know about this stuff.
Click to expand...
The bit about the devil creating other religions never came up in my doctoral studies. This is the first I’ve heard about that. I’ll ask some of my priest colleagues, to see if any of them have run across your theory.
 
SpiritusSanctus said:
1.- I don’t need any on that. If you were to ever take a minute or however long to look around and see what has changed since Vatican II (or better yet do research) you would see Vatican II was not a good Council…
Click to expand...
This is the first I’ve heard of that theory.
 
StAnastasia said:
The bit about the devil creating other religions never came up in my doctoral studies. This is the first I’ve heard about that. I’ll ask some of my priest colleagues, to see if any of them have run across your theory.
Click to expand...
Before you do that, you should verify that your colleagues are *Catholic *priests.
 
StAnastasia said:
Perhaps you live in a cult, or an assisted living facility. I work with children at our school, and our Masses are packed with kids. Merriam Webster online defines "reverence as “profound adoring awed respect.” If children praying and adoring in their own way is not reverence, I don’t know what is. Reverence is not manifested in a kindergarten class the same way it is in in an assisted living facility.
Click to expand...
Neither is it manifested by climbing over the back of the pews, running a toy truck back & forth on same or making 6 trips to the bathroom. I saw to it that my own children knew what behavior would be accepted in Church, they knew when they were in God’s house. They also knew they couldn’t run up & down the aisles, kick their Mother in the shin when she said “no”, or disrespect other people. Thank God that they, in turn, taught their own children the same things. I can take any or all of my 8 Grandchildren to Mass without worrying about their behavior.

As for the disruptive, rude happenings l mentioned above. I’ve seen them all happen during Mass.

BTW. I know I’m not the poster you are replying to…but I’m wondering about your remark, “Perhaps you live in a cult, or an assisted living facility.” Perhaps you can elaborate?
 
qui_est_ce said:
*Extraordinary *Minister of the Eucharist is the correct term, and could explain the confusion.
Click to expand...
Absolutely! And of course this means that these EXTRAordinary Ministers of the Eucharist are to be used in EXTRAordinary circumstances.
 
StAnastasia said:
Roman Catholic.
Click to expand...
By Roman Catholic, I assume Latin Rite?
Insight, I ran your post by my evolutionary biologist colleague in the office next door, and she was astonished. .
Click to expand...
I assume you are teaching students working on their Master’s of Divinity?

There are evolutionary biologists who have offices, and presumably teach, at the seminary?
 
SpiritusSanctus said:
Archbishop LeFebvre (not LaFebre) did not ex-communicate himself, and he didn’t ordain schismatic bishops. Why should they accept Vatican II? Give me several good reasons. That would be going against what Archbishop LeFebvre did and taught in his lifetime. The fact is nothing good came out of Vatican II.

Secondly, I never implied John Paul II and Benedict II were demonic or handmaidens of the Devil. What I’m getting at is neither are Traditional. You have one Pope (JPII) who prayed with people that were all different religions (a major violation of Church teachings) and the other Pope (Benedict XVI) who does one Traditional thing, but the next day can do something similar to his predecessor, like praying with people of different religions. **The **Holy Ghost ****I’m sure was not pleased at all with what went on at those religious meetings held by JPII. The meeting was implying that all religions are equally vaild and are on the same level. So it doesn’t matter that all false religions were created by the Devil? The Pope of all people should know better than this, but it shows just how nothing good came out of Vatican II.
Click to expand...
Did the Holy Ghost tell you this himself? Why are you going all “Jerry Falwell” on this thread? God doesn’t hear the prayers of other religions??? really…since when? :rolleyes:So the JPII prayed with people of different religions…and…so? Pray is the “key” word.
 
By Roman Catholic, I assume Latin Rite?
Click to expand...
Yes.
I assume you are teaching students working on their Master’s of Divinity?
Click to expand...
Some; I also have undergraduates and graduates in liberal studies.
There are evolutionary biologists who have offices, and presumably teach, at the seminary?
Click to expand...
No - the biologists are at the university. I teach adjunctly at the seminary.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top