Whoa... Now that's what I call a "parallel church" movement

[_veritas]

chiesa.espressonline.it/dettaglio.jsp?id=21939&eng=y

Why does JP II supposedly love this group? Is it just because they’re “popular” and trumpet all the vocations they have?

Has anyone experienced this group before? I have heard of it, but I don’t think they are very active in the US (odd… I wonder why? Most of our liturgical “progressives” would love them I think)

+veritas+

 

[TNT]

chiesa.espressonline.it/dettaglio.jsp?id=21939&eng=y

Why does JP II supposedly love this group? Is it just because they’re “popular” and trumpet all the vocations they have?

Has anyone experienced this group before? I have heard of it, but I don’t think they are very active in the US (odd… I wonder why? Most of our liturgical “progressives” would love them I think)

+veritas+

PLEASE, PLEASE…JUST TRUST ROME…
LEFEBVRE IS OUT, AND KIKO IS IN…INFALLIBLY SO

THE NEOCATECUMENAL WAY IS THE WAY TO FURTHER THE TRUE SPIRIT OF VATII. THE SSPX IS NOT.
and the revolution rolls on…on…on.>>1964>>1969>>>>1975>>1986>>1995>2000>>2002>>2005>>>2030>>Great>apostasy.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I do not see anything in this article that says the Holy Father Loves this group.

I am troubled by what is going on but by what the article says, the bishops seem to have things in hand and are letting the Vatican know what is giong on. Also it appears that the Way’s catechical material is being held up as there are still conscerns with it.

It also says that the Holy See approved its statutes in 2002 on an “ad experimentum” basis for five years. So I am sure that they will wait till 2007 when theis experiment ends before they do anything.

I would say trust in the Church.

As for this nonsense…

TNT:

PLEASE, PLEASE…JUST TRUST ROME…
LEFEBVRE IS OUT, AND KIKO IS IN…INFALLIBLY SO

THE NEOCATECUMENAL WAY IS THE WAY TO FURTHER THE TRUE SPIRIT OF VATII. THE SSPX IS NOT.
and the revolution rolls on…on…on. **1964 > 1969 > 1975 > 1986 > 1995 > 2000 > 2002 > 2005 > 2030 > Grea t> **apostasy.

http://www.rocksmyfaceoff.net/forum/images/smiles/deadhorse.gif I do not know what the errors of the SSPX have to do with this. Or are you of the mindset that if one group appears to be in error, another group should be allowed?

Just more sour grapes.

Just like children say all the time to their parents, “but timmy’s parents let him do it why can’t I?”

As for apostasy, I do not think the Church can do such a thing because if it could then there would be no more Church.

I would add that Lefebvre is no better than any of the protestant “refomers” as he elevated himself in authority over the Church.

 

[oat_soda]

Ahhh, finally someone is critical of their liturgy! I’m in the neocatecuminal way. The liturgy is a total fabrication based on the misconceptions of the early church. they force you to receive the eucharist in the hand. because the bread is home-made, it is very crumby and can lead to abuse.

this article confirms my suspicions. a priest during a retreat told us that the concept of the sacrifice of the mass was borrowed from paganism. he also said that mass is a feast and that is why they celebrate it on a table. the only good thing about the way is the scripture study. the rest is silly. i think my days are numbered.

 

[space_ghost]

chiesa.espressonline.it/dettaglio.jsp?id=21939&eng=y

Why does JP II supposedly love this group? Is it just because they’re “popular” and trumpet all the vocations they have?

Has anyone experienced this group before? I have heard of it, but I don’t think they are very active in the US (odd… I wonder why? Most of our liturgical “progressives” would love them I think)

+veritas+

ever heard “if they are not against us, they are for us”? You could do worse than mirror the Love, acceptance, and ecumenism practice by JP II… He loves everybody regardless of their faith… so does God…, you and I should too…

 

[katolik]

ByzCath:

I do not see anything in this article that says the Holy Father Loves this group.

I am troubled by what is going on but by what the article says, the bishops seem to have things in hand and are letting the Vatican know what is giong on. Also it appears that the Way’s catechical material is being held up as there are still conscerns with it.

It also says that the Holy See approved its statutes in 2002 on an “ad experimentum” basis for five years. So I am sure that they will wait till 2007 when theis experiment ends before they do anything.

I would say trust in the Church.

As for this nonsense…

http://www.rocksmyfaceoff.net/forum/images/smiles/deadhorse.gif I do not know what the errors of the SSPX have to do with this. Or are you of the mindset that if one group appears to be in error, another group should be allowed?

Just more sour grapes.

Just like children say all the time to their parents, “but timmy’s parents let him do it why can’t I?”

As for apostasy, I do not think the Church can do such a thing because if it could then there would be no more Church.

I would add that Lefebvre is no better than any of the protestant “refomers” as he elevated himself in authority over the Church.

The thing is that…
why are these people praised by the Pope when they do horrible things with the Mass but the SSPX doesn’t commit these sacrileges and is “in schism”?
ewtn.com/vexperts/showmessage.asp?Pgnu=3&Pg=Forum6&recnu=55&number=425927
The good priest says they are “an essential part of the Church”. Now repent of this namecalling

 

[TNT]

ByzCath:

… I do not know what the errors of the SSPX have to do with this. Or are you of the mindset that if one group appears to be in error, another group should be allowed?

As for apostasy, I do not think the Church can do such a thing because if it could then there would be no more Church.

I would add that Lefebvre is no better than any of the protestant “refomers” as he elevated himself in authority over the Church.

The Church won’t, the churchmen certainly can.
Catechism of the Catholic Church

The Church’s ultimate trial

675 Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers.[573] The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth[574] will unveil the “mystery of iniquity” in the form of **a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception **is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh.[575]
Ergo, many will apostatize. And as JPII says and the USCCB “MANY” can mean “ALL”…Multi=Omnibus.

The SSPX point is that if ones errors TOWARD perennial Tradtiion or Historical Magisterium, then IMMEDIATELY they are put out.
If one errors* toward *anit-catholic (Kiko, Kung, Greeley et al) teaching, or even a paganism, they are just carefully,“studied” ad infinitum **even while the cancer grows.
**As in, “I think we should study those fire ants on my child’s legs.”
Clear? NOT about dead horses, but about hypocrisy.

I ***do not see anything ***in this article that says the Holy Father Loves this group.

“Since they constructed their worldwide citadel on Mount Korazym, above the Sea of Galilee, which was i***naugurated by the pope in person !
*** On June 29, 2002, the Holy See approved its statutes.”

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

TNT:

The Church won’t, the churchmen certainly can.
Catechism of the Catholic Church

The Church’s ultimate trial

675 Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers.[573] The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth[574] will unveil the “mystery of iniquity” in the form of **a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception **is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh.[575]
Ergo, many will apostatize. And as JPII says and the USCCB “MANY” can mean “ALL”…Multi=Omnibus.

Ok, I got ya on this.

The SSPX point is that if ones errors TOWARD perennial Tradtiion or Historical Magisterium, then IMMEDIATELY they are put out.

There is a different between the Way and the SSPX.

The Way followed the Church and gave their statues to the Church and were approved on an experimental basis for 5 years, which ends in 2007. I doubt the Church will act much until then. They have also given their catechical works to the Church for approval and continue to work though the process.

This differs from the SSPX and Lefebvre. Lefebvre acted outside of the Church, acutally went so far as to act against the Church’s commands.

katolik:

The thing is that…
why are these people praised by the Pope when they do horrible things with the Mass but the SSPX doesn’t commit these sacrileges and is “in schism”?

I have not really seen the Holy Father praising the Way and if he is that is a personal thing.

As for your command to repent, I have nothing to repent for. The SSPX are outside of the Church by their own act of schism and I am not bound by anything Fr Levis says.

 

[TNT]

ByzCath:

Ok, I got ya on this.

There is a different between the Way and the SSPX.

Of course! The NCWay uses secret baked crumbly bread that crumbles all over the place. No heresy in acta there…for you…
You need to do a search on this bunch, really.
From the article:
"the innumerable attestations of esteem made by John Paul II, which are compiled in the second part of the book. "

"I don’t see any love of JPII for the NCWay"
uh huh…Yea.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

TNT:

Of course! The NCWay uses secret baked crumbly bread that crumbles all over the place. No heresy in acta there…for you…
You need to do a search on this bunch, really.
From the article:
"the innumerable attestations of esteem made by John Paul II, which are compiled in the second part of the book. "

"I don’t see any love of JPII for the NCWay"
uh huh…Yea.

Really, I have no feelings for the Way or against it. I have been cautous of it though as it did seem odd to me the first time I heard of it but again. It has stayed in the Church and followed the Church’s guidlines and rules. SSPX is a different matter.

As for the bread, as long as it is unlevaned, it does not matter if it is crumby.

The bread we use at the Melkite parish I attend is levaned, as is our tradition, and is home made by one of the praishioners or the priest. It crumbles at times but the priest takes care of it.

Also I know this may scandalize some but a couple of priests have told me this, a crub is a crub, not bread, so it is not the Body and Blood as the bread is. They say that the way some act towards crumbs borders on scrupulosity. Now that is not to say that they allow crumbs all over the place.

 

[kk1727]

ByzCath:

Also I know this may scandalize some but a couple of priests have told me this, a crub is a crub, not bread, so it is not the Body and Blood as the bread is. They say that the way some act towards crumbs borders on scrupulosity. Now that is not to say that they allow crumbs all over the place.

I’m not sure how one would reconcile that statement with the de fide understanding of transubstantiation: the whole substance that is consecrated contains the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Lord. As far as I am concerned the smallest microscopic particle contains the whole Christ until the accidents disintegrate.

Pax,
Keith

 

[Church_Militant]

space ghost:

ever heard “if they are not against us, they are for us”? You could do worse than mirror the Love, acceptance, and ecumenism practice by JP II… He loves everybody regardless of their faith… so does God…, you and I should too…

Well said S.G.!

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

kk1727:

I’m not sure how one would reconcile that statement with the de fide understanding of transubstantiation: the whole substance that is consecrated contains the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Lord. As far as I am concerned the smallest microscopic particle contains the whole Christ until the accidents disintegrate.

Pax,
Keith

That is easy. The de fide teaching that the real presence ceases to be when the bread and wine no longer retain the appearance of bread and wine.

So when the bread becomes digested it no longer contains the real presence. When the wine dries up, even if it leaves a stain, it no longer retains the real presence.

That is how to reconcile the statement that a crumb (spelt correctly this time) is a crumb and therefore no longer retains the appearance of bread.

 

[TNT]

ByzCath:

Really,…
As for the bread, as long as it is unlevaned, it does not matter if it is crumby.

Come now, a SECRET receipe !..
Why is it secret if only weaten and water are used???

What “Rite” are they practicing the mass in??

Ingredients can Invalidate! and we all know it.

No one can certify the INGREDIENTS … would you send a catholic to that mass??

 

[TNT]

ByzCath:

That is easy. The de fide teaching that the real presence ceases to be when the bread and wine no longer retain the appearance of bread and wine.

So when the bread becomes digested it no longer contains the real presence. When the wine dries up, even if it leaves a stain, it no longer retains the real presence.

That is how to reconcile the statement that a crumb (spelt correctly this time) is a crumb and therefore no longer retains the appearance of bread.

:banghead:
When my wife says go buy some bread crumbs, YOU tell her there is no such thingy.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

TNT:

Come now, a SECRET receipe !..
Why is it secret if only weaten and water are used???

What “Rite” are they practicing the mass in??

Ingredients can Invalidate! and we all know it.

No one can certify the INGREDIENTS … would you send a catholic to that mass??

I agree with you but I am obedient to the Church and only the Church can rule on this and these issues.

We are not the authority to make such rulings.

I will not join this group and I would not send anyone to them, but again, it is up to the Church to act not me.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

When my wife says go buy some bread crumbs, YOU tell her there is no such thingy.
[/quote]

As I said, this was told to me by priests. I am not scrupulous by nature and I do not deal with the crumbs anyways, the priest and deacon do.

And I would say that your wife sort of proves my point. She doesn’t send you out for bread. She sends you out for something totally different than bread, bread crumbs are not bread.

I would suggest that next time she sends you out for bread crumbs you come home with bread instead. Now I bet it would be exciting! http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/rotfl.gif

 

[FenianMan]

Wow! There sure is a lot flying around here tonight. As the article clearly states (along with the official website which is linked from the bottom of the article) the group is involved in some pretty peculiar irregularities and some outright abuses. While deference to church authority is admirable, the laity also have the right (and the responsibility) to nudge our leaders in the right direction (a la sex scandals). The pope’s prudential judgement about the veracity of a given group is not protected by his infallibility. If it were, we’d still have Templars running around. It is not being unfaithful to suggest that the pope made a prudential error. That being said, there’s a way to do so prudently. It probably wouldn’t be best to write a public editorial about it. What might be appropriate is that if someone were actually able to get into one of these Masses and experience the abuses first hand then they could write letters, first to the local ordinary and then to the Congregation for Divine Worship. Either way, this is a pretty clear example of the way in which liturgical abuses breed bad theology. By intentionally omitting or downplaying the sacrificial nature of the Mass the Way seems to have come to the conclusion that the sacrificial nature of the Mass is a pagan intrusion. That’s not just hooky, it’s outright heresy and they should be corrected and, if need be, disciplined for it. Permissions can, and often are, rescinded. If real abuses are occuring then the faithful response is not, “Let’s let the sacrilege go on and the error continue to propagate itself.” Rather, the faithful response is, “Your Grace, this group that my cousin belongs to is executing the following liturgical abuses and promulgating clear error. Please, Father, do something.” And of course, as always, pray for them (both the group and the ordinary).

All that being said, I think that the separate strain here going on must result from a confusion. Obviously bread crumbs are still substantially bread, that’s why they’re called *bread *crumbs and not some substance other than bread crumbs. The change that occurs to a piece of bread in fragmentation, either the initial at the fraction rite (big host to two pieces) down to the smallest visible (or sensible) fragment is accidental, as it pertains to the size and not the subtance of the thing. The change which occurs in your stomach is altogether different as the acids in the stomach actually begin to break down the bread into it’s component parts. Out of charity I must assume that the priests were talking about people that are actually, often clinically, scrupulous. That’s altogether different. There are loads of stories from the fifties about men being unable to finish Mass after the consecration for fear of fragmenting our Lord. Appropriate reverence is still enough of a significant norm in the Eastern Churches that I can imagine something like that happening pretty regularly. You’d have to go to some pretty special places in the Latin rite to find it, though. It is, of course, possible that the priests just need a refresher in Aristotelian metaphysics as well.

Incidentally, the biggest error that the Way seems to lapse in to (as best as I can see) is what Tolkien called “antiquarianism,” or “primitivism.” While the early church is surely to be respected, something being old doesn’t necessarily constitute it’s being good or true. Thoughts anybody?

 

[TNT]

Re: Thoughts anybody?
YES.
You sound just like my oldest sister, Virginia.

 

[Prometheum_x]

FenianMan:

All that being said, I think that the separate strain here going on must result from a confusion. Obviously bread crumbs are still substantially bread, that’s why they’re called *bread *crumbs and not some substance other than bread crumbs. The change that occurs to a piece of bread in fragmentation, either the initial at the fraction rite (big host to two pieces) down to the smallest visible (or sensible) fragment is accidental, as it pertains to the size and not the subtance of the thing. The change which occurs in your stomach is altogether different as the acids in the stomach actually begin to break down the bread into it’s component parts. Out of charity I must assume that the priests were talking about people that are actually, often clinically, scrupulous. That’s altogether different. There are loads of stories from the fifties about men being unable to finish Mass after the consecration for fear of fragmenting our Lord. Appropriate reverence is still enough of a significant norm in the Eastern Churches that I can imagine something like that happening pretty regularly. You’d have to go to some pretty special places in the Latin rite to find it, though. It is, of course, possible that the priests just need a refresher in Aristotelian metaphysics as well.

If that is the case, then the fears of those men from the fifties are well founded, for as the host is handled – especially when it is fractured – many microscopic particles are scattered into the air, the only change being that of size.