F
- Status
R
rpp
Guest
FAB, this is an incorrect assessment of Freshman88’s post. There most certainly are elements pushing these ideas in the Church. And all of these are absolutely critical areas and part of the main teachings of the Church. All of these matters are either grave sins or stated heresy and all are quite important.
I suspect the right-wing conservative document Freshman88 is reading is called The Catechism of the Catholic Church.
F
Freshman88
Guest
The tradition of the Church is the Truth which is preserved in the Church. It is indeed guided and protect by the Holy Spirit. The Holy spirit, however, will never contradict itself. What was true 2000 years ago, is true today.
Catholic isn’t just a reference to physical space, but to time as well. The faith of today, is the faith of both the past and the future. The Truth is unchanging.
F
FAB
Guest
R
rpp
Guest
There is great difference between change and development.
(By the way, and this is in no way intended as a criticism, the current version of FireFox browser has a really cool built-in dictionary that will spell check when you post here. It has really helped me to clean-up my typos (I am the typo king!) Just Google “FireFox”.)
F
FAB
Guest
God’s Truth is unchanging, but I’m not going to think that I have a full understanding of that truth. The Holy Spirit is our guide, as 2000 years ago, as today, and for tomorrow.
Peace,
FAB
A
AngelRose81
Guest
I agree with the statements.
The only thing I ever do not like is when you have what seems to be an irreverent OF of the Holy Mass (i.e. changing words in Eucharistic prayers, no kneelers, etc) and it upsets me when it seems many parishoners in some parishes are knowingly irreverent themselves (i.e. just wandering around the nave or altar and not bowing to the altar or genuflecting toward the Tabernacle when the Body of Christ is reserved in it).
I understand that some people weren’t catechized well either when they were growing up or during RCIA, but there can’t be THAT many!
The only thing I ever do not like is when you have what seems to be an irreverent OF of the Holy Mass (i.e. changing words in Eucharistic prayers, no kneelers, etc) and it upsets me when it seems many parishoners in some parishes are knowingly irreverent themselves (i.e. just wandering around the nave or altar and not bowing to the altar or genuflecting toward the Tabernacle when the Body of Christ is reserved in it).
I understand that some people weren’t catechized well either when they were growing up or during RCIA, but there can’t be THAT many!
R
rpp
Guest
It refreshing to hear this, but I would say that a significant majority of the Catholics I meet while going through RCIA were very poorly catechized. In my case, I got virtually nothing out of my 17 months in RCIA, (2003-2005) except being shown how to reach my animal spirit guide and pray to the spirits of the four winds.I understand that some people weren’t catechized well either when they were growing up or during RCIA, but there can’t be THAT many!
To learn about the Church, I bought dozens of books and taught myself.
S
Spiller
Guest
My own belief is that a Catholic Christian in perfect communion with the Pope simply could not hold your views. Not because of what you have done or not done, but because of the graces God bestows on all members of His Church.
“Kill” the very form of the Mass celebrated daily by the Pope? I think not.
Your comments sound like you’re from some bigoted, anti-Catholic group whose aim is to spew out false and pernicious comments just to get others agitated. Create dissent from within.
“Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; for you are setting your mind not on divine things but on human things.” (Matthew 16:23)
R
rpp
Guest
Yes it is. The good news is that most of loudest and obnoxious of these people seem to be getting on in years and, thanks to their rejection about the teachings on contraception, they do not have many younger people following them.
As a side note, I would also like to ask people to maintain their sense of charity on this thread.
E
ethelzguy
Guest
:yup: :clapping: :tiphat: 
A
AngelRose81
Guest
B
brotherhrolf
Guest
I’ve tried about five times now to give y’all a cogent viewpoint.
Bottom line: mine is a baby-boomer generation. I graduated from a Catholic high school in 1969 after 13 years of Catholic education. There are a whole bunch of people who are older than me on these forums and there are a whole bunch of people who are younger than me that retain memories of before Vatican II.
The years after Vatican II were traumatic on the religious front not to mention the societal turmoil of that era. It is clear to anyone who reads the documents coming out of Vatican II that what the council fathers expected is not what they got. Am I wrong?
I can’t talk about anyone but me. I make no bones about it. I’ll make a long story short. I had to request permission to leave my geographic parish in 1983 because I didn’t like the music and I didn’t like what were obvious abuses (athough I know I am going to be pooh-poohed for that). We have driven 25 miles one way for the last 25 years to attend a reverent NO cathedral parish.
I also admit to y’all that I have prayed fervently since 1969 for a return to traditional music. (And, yes, I know I’m going to be shredded for that too). The HF’s Motu Proprio is the first sign of hope I have had in 40 years. I make no apolgies for praying for it.
I would like to see one sung Solemn High Mass a month. Is that asking too much?
I can’t help wondering how much most of you have been exposed to our own traditional music.
And my convert brothers and sisters - God Bless You! Your fervor does you honor but you need to sit back and think about that there is a whole bunch of us - a whole bunch of us who have quite different memories that should be honored. You have no frame of reference for us but that doesn’t mean we should be dismissed. You might not see it in your parish but, oh boy, we exist. We do, indeed, exist.
Bottom line: mine is a baby-boomer generation. I graduated from a Catholic high school in 1969 after 13 years of Catholic education. There are a whole bunch of people who are older than me on these forums and there are a whole bunch of people who are younger than me that retain memories of before Vatican II.
The years after Vatican II were traumatic on the religious front not to mention the societal turmoil of that era. It is clear to anyone who reads the documents coming out of Vatican II that what the council fathers expected is not what they got. Am I wrong?
I can’t talk about anyone but me. I make no bones about it. I’ll make a long story short. I had to request permission to leave my geographic parish in 1983 because I didn’t like the music and I didn’t like what were obvious abuses (athough I know I am going to be pooh-poohed for that). We have driven 25 miles one way for the last 25 years to attend a reverent NO cathedral parish.
I also admit to y’all that I have prayed fervently since 1969 for a return to traditional music. (And, yes, I know I’m going to be shredded for that too). The HF’s Motu Proprio is the first sign of hope I have had in 40 years. I make no apolgies for praying for it.
I would like to see one sung Solemn High Mass a month. Is that asking too much?
I can’t help wondering how much most of you have been exposed to our own traditional music.
And my convert brothers and sisters - God Bless You! Your fervor does you honor but you need to sit back and think about that there is a whole bunch of us - a whole bunch of us who have quite different memories that should be honored. You have no frame of reference for us but that doesn’t mean we should be dismissed. You might not see it in your parish but, oh boy, we exist. We do, indeed, exist.
R
rpp
Guest
I am a convert and I prefer the EO Mass.
I agree with BrotherHRolf, the Council Fathers did get what they expected with Vatican II. While I will not speculate about specifics, I think the reasons are manifold and the solutions complex.
I believe both Roman Rite forms have benefits, but I would prefer to see a unification and a return to a single form of the Mass.
The current Ordinary Form is clearly not going to be a source of unity, and the current Extraordinary form is intimidating to many and disliked by those who think participating at Mass means being entertained. This is not caused merely by the abuses or styles in the OF MAss, but is a reflection of a change in society. In a world where people are bombarded by media, tv, radio, iPods, internet, email, video games, no one stops to read or think anymore; they are always “doing” something. THAT is why many people are intimidated by the EF, it is quiet, slow, unpretentious and requires them to do the one thing most people have forgotten (or never learned) how to do; contemplate and reflect. THAT is participating at Mass.
However, it is the Extraordinary Form which carries with it the centuries-old expressions of reverence and faith more fully than OF, thus it must be framework upon which a unified Roman Rite must be built on.
I agree with BrotherHRolf, the Council Fathers did get what they expected with Vatican II. While I will not speculate about specifics, I think the reasons are manifold and the solutions complex.
I believe both Roman Rite forms have benefits, but I would prefer to see a unification and a return to a single form of the Mass.
The current Ordinary Form is clearly not going to be a source of unity, and the current Extraordinary form is intimidating to many and disliked by those who think participating at Mass means being entertained. This is not caused merely by the abuses or styles in the OF MAss, but is a reflection of a change in society. In a world where people are bombarded by media, tv, radio, iPods, internet, email, video games, no one stops to read or think anymore; they are always “doing” something. THAT is why many people are intimidated by the EF, it is quiet, slow, unpretentious and requires them to do the one thing most people have forgotten (or never learned) how to do; contemplate and reflect. THAT is participating at Mass.
However, it is the Extraordinary Form which carries with it the centuries-old expressions of reverence and faith more fully than OF, thus it must be framework upon which a unified Roman Rite must be built on.
C
Cat
Guest
What do homosexual rights, spirit guides, etc. have to do with the OF vs. the EF?!!
- Status