The most damaging innovation to Catholic parishes in the last 50 years...

  • Thread starter Thread starter ConstantineTG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think we’re all reading too much into this “cry room” thing.

People are all different. Some people can handle crying babies and lively toddlers in the Mass, and it doesn’t distract them, and the parents can smile and let all the noise roll off and still get a lot out of the Mass.

Others are extremely bothered by it. Even though they know in their minds that Jesus welcomes the little ones, they are still unable to concentrate on Mass or on the Lord as long as the crying and fussing continues at a loud level.

These people are not condemning children, or advocating abortion, or rejecting the commandments of Christ. They just have a more distractable personality, one that is more bothered by noise. We need to stop seeing evil motives and personality flaws in these people, and stop accusing them of damaging the Church.

We all have to look out for each other and as much as it’s in our power, try to help each other out as we all journey towards the grave. Those who aren’t bothered by noise need to recognize that others are. And those who are bothered by noise need to recognize that others aren’t. We need to accept each other for who God created us to be, and not expect everyone else to be just like us.

My feeling about children is that if they are making the little “baby noises” and talking the sweet baby talk or holding little toddler conversations or playing with toddler toys (little cars, dolls, etc.), that’s fine. But when a child is literally screaming their head off, they should be taken out of a public place and soothed privately. It’s better for the child.
 
daCatholicGuard said:
Greetings JReducation,

First, thank you for choosing the life of a Franciscan brother. I can understand your point and it is perfectly acceptable for Franciscans who take a vow of poverty to build simple churches, (although I disagree about the placement of Communion Rails and Tabernacles- those things are paramount and should be prominently placed out of simple respect). However, it is equally true that the life of a Religious and the life of a layperson are two separate entities. The Religious, i.e., priests, brothers, nuns, etc., spend their entire day… and life serving God and seeking out His Glory.

However, for the layperson; many of whom have to work long hours to keep food on the table, (and then they have to come home and cook it and take care of their kids); a daily prayer life often consists of just a few minutes a day. Given their hectic, turbulent days; the only time these people are often able to experience the grandeur and glory of God is at Church for Sunday Mass. This is one of the reasons why I think church architecture should help reveal to us God’s Glory and Majesty; it should be awe inspiring; as our God is awe inspiring.

Some of the most beautiful churches and cathedrals I’ve ever been in were built by very poor, immigrant congregations and those churches were built out of great sacrifice. If you ask me, it was time and money very well spent. Granted, some will say they should have built a simple church and given more to the poor. Had they done that; the poor would have eaten for a few months; however, those beautiful, baroque churches those working class congregations built will inspire generations for centuries.

Just as Jesus said when the dark apostle chided Mary Magdalene for using the very expensive jar of perfumed oil on Jesus; “For the poor you have always with you: but me you have not always.” I think it is a similar situation for some working families; their time at Church is the only time during the week when they can really be close to God in peaceful quietude from an otherwise hectic life- and I think that the church architecture that surrounds them should reveal God’s Majesty and provide a small inkling of the glorious inheritance that awaits them in the life to come.

Oremus pro invicem,

Sean C. 🙂
**Please recite the Rosary daily. Each bead; devoutly said; is an eternal rose presented to Jesus and Our Blessed Mother.

Be sure to read The Secret of the Rosary by Saint Louis de Montfort. It will change your life.

When you are in a tight spot; pray to St. Jude and have faith. **
Click to expand...
I can certainly understand what you are describing that people are looking for in a church building, “the grandeur of God.” I too enjoy the look and feel of a beautiful church. As I said, one of my favorite churches is the crypt church at the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception. When I was a seminarian in Washington, I would go there for mass just to be in that church. I found it very peaceful.

However, I also see what St. Bonaventure wrote for the brothers in the Itinerarium. The human person must seek to enter the mind of God. It begins through the senes, which is where the architecture and art, music etc enters the picture. However, he goes on to teach us that if these these that please the senses become so important that we can’t let go of them, then the journey is frozen in tme. In other words, you have stopped growing. The next stage is to enter into God without the senses.

This was the reason that Francis commanded that we build chapels very beautiful, but very simple. If you watch a chapel like EWTN on TV. You will notice a typical Franciscan design. There is no color on the walls, no communion rail, nothing that is elaborate. However, when you visit it, it is quite beautiful. The TV doesn’t let you see the whole thing, because it’s focussed on the altar.

It has white walls with dark wood, a very beautiful tabernacle with a very large and imposing Franciscan Cross over the sanctuary, the San Damiano Cross. The sanctuary is open, without the raling and the carpeting deliberately begins at the sanctuary and includes the are where the congregation sits. The sanctuary has only one step up. The reason is that Francis wanted to blur the lines between the priest and the laity. He wanted the laity to be absorbed into the sacrifice that the priest was offering. Therefore, he made several changes to the way that we celebrate mass.

The priest is one with the laity. They are not separate. He leads the laity in offering the sacrifice.

If there is more than one priest among the brothers, the other priests may not say mass, not even in private. This was to make sure that the brothers who were priests did not stand out even among the laity and that they did not distinguish themselves from their brothers who were not priests. The focus is always Christ, not the priest.

The priest must always be charming. He deliberately taught the friars how to be charming when they preached. This is still done, whether you’re a friar priest preaching at mass or a non ordained friar preaching a retreat or some other service. You must be charming, because Christ was charming.
 
The brothers and other people who attended the mass should focus on two points during the mass: the Table of the Word and the Altar of Sacrifice. Pope John XXIII was a Franciscan, he introduced that terminology at Vatican II. Pope Paul VI picked it up and it was later introduced into the new writings on the mass. But this was introduced by St. Francis in or around 1209 - 1221. He introduced things into the liturgy a little at a time. He took things away a little at a time too, such as the Gregorian chant. The reason was the in those days, only people who could read could do it. There were many friars who couldn not read. Then there were friars who joined the community from Germany and from Palestine. Latin was not a native language for them. The use of Latin was reduced to as much as they could memorize

St. Bonaventure would later explain that the reason that Francis is able to do this and the reason that others should imitate him is that God is the First Source. All things must focus on him. We use these other things to begin, but we must not stop there. We must move to the next level, where where we can see God’s mind without the externals. It is then that the soul begins to pray from the deep. Up to that point, we have prayed from the depths of emotion that is fed through the senses.

The whole point is that while we can make good use of the big and the beautiful to deliver a message and to get us going, we must not stop there. We must keep moving. This way, even the busy mother and father of a family can expeirence God worship him during their usual activities of parenting, work, caring for their home, etc. If we see the beautiful church on Sunday as the only place and time when we see and experience the grandeur of God, it’s life fasting the whole week until Sunday. Those things are like a diving board into the mystery and majesty of God. We must journey into the mind of God so that we can be united to him, even when we don’t have the awesome churches.

Fraternally,

Br.JR, OSF 🙂
 
JR,

I hope I did not come off as thinking the new bishop to be a door mat. I am happy to hear he cares for the poor. We have many poor parishes. Some of the churches look more like abandon buildings then an open church.

I did not mean to come off selfish sounding or anything. The one thing I admire about Francis and his order is that they care. I always say if I was a bit more comfortable being social I would join the order. But I have more of a personality of a recluse.
 
EzraJacob said:
JR,

I hope I did not come off as thinking the new bishop to be a door mat. I am happy to hear he cares for the poor. We have many poor parishes. Some of the churches look more like abandon buildings then an open church.

I did not mean to come off selfish sounding or anything. The one thing I admire about Francis and his order is that they care. I always say if I was a bit more comfortable being social I would join the order. But I have more of a personality of a recluse.
Click to expand...
You did not do that at all. I was just sharing, because many people confuse the bishop who is a brother with the bishop who is a door mat.

Franciscans remain brothers even if they become priests or bishops. They may never leave their order, nor may they ever cease to follow the rules of the order. When Archbishop Chaput or Cardinal O’Malley come to a friary, they are Sean and Charlie. They take turns doing dishes, laundry and they follow the work and prayer schedule until they leave. They can even be called on the carpet by a superior who may not even be a priest. That’s how seriously this matter is to Franciscans.

On the other hand, the same obedience that Francis commands of the brothers, the brothers who are bishops take this message to the laity and to the priests in their diocese. They must obey, even if they disagree. In Franciscan theology, disagreement is never a justification for disobeying.

There is only one time when you may disobey, when you can prove that the person asked to commit a sin. If it’s something that you believe may lead to sin, Francis would say that you’re speculating and there is no room for speculation in obedience.

If you read the Archbishop’s sermon to the K of C, he is free clear about what the Church is and how we embrace Christ, but we do not try to own the Church. In other words, we don’t try to run it. That’s the job of the bishops. If we spend more time embracing Christ and less time trying to run the Church, we would all be better.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Regarding crying babies in Mass.

Archbishop Fulton Sheen was preaching during Mass and a baby was crying unceasingly and very very loudly, the mother got up to carry the baby out of the Church. Fulton Sheen called to her, “The child’s not bothering me maam!” To which she replied, “No, but you’re bothering the child!”.

Which I found quite fun. 🙂
 
Dominics_FIre said:
Regarding crying babies in Mass.

Archbishop Fulton Sheen was preaching during Mass and a baby was crying unceasingly and very very loudly, the mother got up to carry the baby out of the Church. Fulton Sheen called to her, “The child’s not bothering me maam!” To which she replied, “No, but you’re bothering the child!”.

Which I found quite fun. 🙂
Click to expand...
Perhaps the baby was a closet modernist.
 
My goodness this has got to be the most ridiculous thing I’ve read in a long while.

With the destruction of high altars, removal of tabernacles and altar rails that have helped to erode the faith and reverence towards God… the implementation of Cry Rooms is the most damaging innovation???

Give me a break. Seeing as how I am constantly nursing a baby and dealing with small children at the same time, if there weren’t cry rooms I would hardly ever go to Mass.
 
Credo_in_Deum said:
Incorrect! The validity of the Sacrament depends on form and intention. The intention being the priest must intend to do what the Church does. The validity of the Mass does not require the priest to intend what the Church intends. As long as the priest follows the correct form and has this intention to follow the correct form then he offers a valid mass whether or not he believes in the Real Presence. Of course on his part by not believing he commits a sacrilege by consuming our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament.
Click to expand...
For a Sacrament to be valid they must have proper matter, form, and intention.

It is my understanding that if the priest does not have the proper intention - to turn the unleavened bread and the chalice into the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus Christ (and not in a symbolic way, but truly and really into the body of Christ) - than the Sacrament is invalid. I’ve never seen any Church document which abrogates the rule of proper matter, form, and intent for the validity of the Eucharistic Sacrament.
 
Paxvobis said:
For a Sacrament to be valid they must have proper matter, form, and intention.

It is my understanding that if the priest does not have the proper intention - to turn the unleavened bread and the chalice into the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus Christ (and not in a symbolic way, but truly and really into the body of Christ) - than the Sacrament is invalid. I’ve never seen any Church document which abrogates the rule of proper matter, form, and intent for the validity of the Eucharistic Sacrament.
Click to expand...
I know you didn’t say “orthodox”, but intending to “turn the unleavened bread and the chalice into the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus Christ” would require that the priest believe such a thing is what happens. A man doesn’t intend something that he believes doesn’t happen. So you are saying that orthodox belief and understanding is required for a priest to confect the Eucharist? If so, can you document this?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top