Angry Parish Erupts At Bishop

[ThePenciledOne]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='10 February 2010 - 10:08 PM' timestamp='1265854124' post='2055013']
There is nothing wrong with a rainbow scarf, or a rainbow t-shirt, but the use of rainbow imagery on liturgical vestments is simply not traditional.
[/quote]

Yeah of course that's why I said as a side note.

[ThePenciledOne]

[quote name='zunshynn' date='10 February 2010 - 10:19 PM' timestamp='1265854778' post='2055016']
The liturgical aspect is a non-issue, as far as I'm concerned, so I'm not going to comment on that.

However as far as the rainbow HAVING to be associated with gay "rights"... it simply does because that's what other people associate it with, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.

For example, blue and red are gang colors... Even if I think it's dumb for a color to be associated with a gang, other people associate the two regardless of my opinion on the matter. So if I decide not to wear red or blue when I go to Oakland, am I getting "hung up on the worldly connotation", or am I being reasonably cautious by not wearing something that potentially could get me involved in a gang fight and possibly killed? I'm pretty sure I'm just being cautious and aware of what other people take those colors to mean.

No one said there's anything wrong with anyone wearing rainbow colors. If you want to, do it... but whether it's right or not, it HAS been claimed by the gay pride movement, and one is likely to associate someone donning those colors with gay pride. In some cases that could be scandalous to a certain degree if someone were to know that you profess to be Catholic, but don't know you well enough to know that you don't support homosexual lifestyles (I'm not referring to you specifically, just in general).
[/quote]

Or we can like not worry about being politically correct all the time.

I should be free to wear whatever color I want, without endangerment or ridicule or assumptions. We do have rights in this country last time I checked, so in that I can walk down any street anywhere wearing red, blue, rainbow without fear, though, I think this is just me.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='ThePenciledOne' date='10 February 2010 - 10:40 PM' timestamp='1265863230' post='2055104']
Or we can like not worry about being politically correct all the time.

I should be free to wear whatever color I want, without endangerment or ridicule or assumptions. We do have rights in this country last time I checked, so in that I can walk down any street anywhere wearing red, blue, rainbow without fear, though, I think this is just me.
[/quote]
Well like Zeezee said, some colours are "gang colours" in certain places. Sure, go walk down skid row wearing the colour of some gang. Do it without fear. Doesn't mean you're not going to get shanked. It's a sad reality in a broken world. Is it right? Absolutely not, but it's the reality.
Same way the swastika now is such an offensive symbol. It definitely never used to be. Do you want to reclaim the swastika? Might be nice, if it were no longer associated with Nazism, but personally I don't want to get anywhere near that association.

[MithLuin]

But, as I pointed out on the last page, the rainbow is associated with gay pride [i]in the US[/i], not in Europe. In Europe, if someone puts a rainbow flag out their window, it will have the word "peace" written on it, and is a form of anti-war protest. Since this video takes place in France, it is quite safe to say that the 'unfortunate' implications that we all are applying to his vestments are locally irrelevant.

In other words...there are grounds to call rainbow vestments liturgically inappropriate, but simply because the tradition is to use particular colors for particular seasons, not to sport them all at once.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='MithLuin' date='10 February 2010 - 11:33 PM' timestamp='1265866419' post='2055141']
But, as I pointed out on the last page, the rainbow is associated with gay pride [i]in the US[/i], not in Europe. In Europe, if someone puts a rainbow flag out their window, it will have the word "peace" written on it, and is a form of anti-war protest. Since this video takes place in France, it is quite safe to say that the 'unfortunate' implications that we all are applying to his vestments are locally irrelevant.

In other words...there are grounds to call rainbow vestments liturgically inappropriate, but simply because the tradition is to use particular colors for particular seasons, not to sport them all at once.
[/quote]
Yea, we do tend to be a bit western-centered.

Still, even as a peace flag I don't find it appropriate for vestments.

[Luigi]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='10 February 2010 - 05:42 PM' timestamp='1265841750' post='2054917']
The laity have shouted down hierarchs in Church before. The Church during the first millennium was far more raucous than people think.
[/quote]
That doesn't make it right.

[Luigi]

Put the shoe on the other foot: What would your reaction be if this were a conservative/orthodox bishop being shouted down by his liberal flock, perhaps for wearing pre-Vatican-II-style vestments?

Would it still be acceptable, or at least understandable and therefore defensible?

[Luigi]

And by the way, that's the tamest rainbow I've ever seen in my life, on a liturgical vestment or anywhere else. When I read the original post - before I watched the video - I thought I'd see some sort of dramatic hippie-dippie, tie-dyed, bold-splashes-of-color garment. In fact, it's little more than a few tasteful stripes. I've seen better rainbows from hand-held prisms.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Luigi' date='10 February 2010 - 11:53 PM' timestamp='1265867606' post='2055150']
Put the shoe on the other foot: What would your reaction be if this were a conservative/orthodox bishop being shouted down by his liberal flock, perhaps for wearing pre-Vatican-II-style vestments?

Would it still be acceptable, or at least understandable and therefore defensible?
[/quote]
There was clearly tension behind the scenes to begin with. I don't really want to speculate any further.
I remember some rather tense times in my parish when I was quite young when we merged with another parish.

[CatherineM]

I think there is no good way to remove a priest who has been in the same church for such an extended period of time. I do find our response interesting. When it was a similar situation in Australia of a popular priest, too long in the same parish, full pews, and the bishop wanted to make a pastoral change, we supported the bishop. Here, everyone is jumping on the bishop. The difference is that in this case, it is a conservative priest and liberal bishop. In Australia it was a liberal priest and a conservative bishop.

As to rainbow vestments, I have made many sets of them. They were mostly white with rainbow accents or designs. I thought they were going to be used for something like a sunrise service. I didn't know that rainbow was a gay thing at the time. There are sometimes that I can be really dense. Finally the lady at the fabric store explained to me what it meant. I must have supplied half the gay ministers in the southwest before I figured it out.

[Luigi]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='11 February 2010 - 01:12 AM' timestamp='1265868727' post='2055173']
I think there is no good way to remove a priest who has been in the same church for such an extended period of time. I do find our response interesting. When it was a similar situation in Australia of a popular priest, too long in the same parish, full pews, and the bishop wanted to make a pastoral change, we supported the bishop. Here, everyone is jumping on the bishop. The difference is that in this case, it is a conservative priest and liberal bishop. In Australia it was a liberal priest and a conservative bishop.

As to rainbow vestments, I have made many sets of them. They were mostly white with rainbow accents or designs. I thought they were going to be used for something like a sunrise service. I didn't know that rainbow was a gay thing at the time. There are sometimes that I can be really dense. Finally the lady at the fabric store explained to me what it meant. I must have supplied half the gay ministers in the southwest before I figured it out.
[/quote]

You raise another interesting point - who controls the "meaning" of a symbol? Before it was a gay symbol, it represented peace-love-dove-dope in the hippie 60s; Jesse Jackson put together a Rainbow Coalition in the 70s, wasn't it? Gays may have adopted the rainbow as a symbol recently, but it's not like they can copyright it. In essence, we allow them to define the symbolism of the rainbow when we accept their definition, tacitly agreeing to their meaning when we stop using it to represent our own meanings. "Oh! They're using symbol X to mean thus-and-so - I can't/won't use that symbol any more lest someone think I support their cause!" In which case the trouble-makers get all the good symbols and the rest of us are left with nothing. TAKE BACK THE RAINBOW!

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Luigi' date='10 February 2010 - 10:48 PM' timestamp='1265867336' post='2055146']
That doesn't make it right.
[/quote]
It doesn't make it wrong either. As with anything of this nature it depends upon the particulars of the case.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Luigi' date='10 February 2010 - 10:57 PM' timestamp='1265867863' post='2055154']
And by the way, that's the tamest rainbow I've ever seen in my life, on a liturgical vestment or anywhere else. When I read the original post - before I watched the video - I thought I'd see some sort of dramatic hippie-dippie, tie-dyed, bold-splashes-of-color garment. In fact, it's little more than a few tasteful stripes. I've seen better rainbows from hand-held prisms.
[/quote]
For me - as a Byzantine Catholic - it is a very hippie-dippie vestment.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='10 February 2010 - 11:12 PM' timestamp='1265868727' post='2055173']
I think there is no good way to remove a priest who has been in the same church for such an extended period of time. I do find our response interesting. When it was a similar situation in Australia of a popular priest, too long in the same parish, full pews, and the bishop wanted to make a pastoral change, we supported the bishop. Here, everyone is jumping on the bishop. The difference is that in this case, it is a conservative priest and liberal bishop. In Australia it was a liberal priest and a conservative bishop.[/quote]
Catherine I am surprised by your comment. The priest in the Australian case was - to be frank - a heretic, while this priest in the present French case is theologically and liturgically orthodox.

[quote name='CatherineM' date='10 February 2010 - 11:12 PM' timestamp='1265868727' post='2055173']
As to rainbow vestments, I have made many sets of them. They were mostly white with rainbow accents or designs. I thought they were going to be used for something like a sunrise service. I didn't know that rainbow was a gay thing at the time. There are sometimes that I can be really dense. Finally the lady at the fabric store explained to me what it meant. I must have supplied half the gay ministers in the southwest before I figured it out.
[/quote]
Once again, the key point is not that the rainbow has been distorted to support a deviant lifestyle, but that the whole idea of using it (i.e., the rainbow) in liturgical vestments is non-traditional.

Alas, it is sad to say, but there seems to be a complete disintegration of the sense of tradition in the Latin Church.

Edited February 11, 2010 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Luigi' date='10 February 2010 - 10:53 PM' timestamp='1265867606' post='2055150']
Put the shoe on the other foot: What would your reaction be if this were a conservative/orthodox bishop being shouted down by his liberal flock, perhaps for wearing pre-Vatican-II-style vestments?[/quote]
I would be disturbed by anyone shouting down an orthodox bishop or priest. During the time of the Arian heresy the laity often shouted down heretical priests and bishops, and I honestly have no problem saying that the actions of the laity at that time was perfectly legitimate and proper.

[quote name='Luigi' date='10 February 2010 - 10:53 PM' timestamp='1265867606' post='2055150']
Would it still be acceptable, or at least understandable and therefore defensible?[/quote]
Shouting down a heretic, even running him out of the Church, is not only acceptable, but is an act of charity and a work of mercy.

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='11 February 2010 - 01:30 AM' timestamp='1265873411' post='2055208']
Catherine I am surprised by your comment. The priest in the Australian case was - to be frank - a heretic, while this priest in the present French case is theologically and liturgically orthodox.
[/quote]
Oh, I agree the guy in Australia needed to be removed. Unfortunately, he needed to be removed 20 years ago. I was just commenting on the mirror image of the cases. I am for priests staying no longer than 5-7 years in any parish posting, and for giving Bishops the benefit of the doubt, even if I don't agree, because they are entitled to it. If a Bishop, or a priest for that matter, is a heretic, it's not up to me to make that judgment.

[Apotheoun]

[img]http://webspace.webring.com/people/up/pharsea/clown.jpg[/img]

If only the priest depicted above, who not only celebrates clown Masses, but who also says that adultery and fornication are not always wrong, would be shouted down by the lay faithful.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='11 February 2010 - 12:35 AM' timestamp='1265873751' post='2055211']
Oh, I agree the guy in Australia needed to be removed. Unfortunately, he needed to be removed 20 years ago. I was just commenting on the mirror image of the cases. I am for priests staying no longer than 5-7 years in any parish posting, and for giving Bishops the benefit of the doubt, even if I don't agree, because they are entitled to it. If a Bishop, or a priest for that matter, is a heretic, it's not up to me to make that judgment.
[/quote]
But the cases are not mirror images, because the priest in the Australian case was removed for promoting ideas contrary to Church doctrine, while the priest in the French case was removed for celebrating the older Roman Rite liturgy and for being theologically orthodox.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='11 February 2010 - 12:35 AM' timestamp='1265873751' post='2055211']
. . . is a heretic, it's not up to me to make that judgment.
[/quote]
This is false. Certainly you do not make a canonical judgment, but you must make a moral judgment, and it is never legitimate to participate in evil. Lack of judgment is not a virtue.

P.S. - Nor are you judging the person, but only the actions and statements of the person, and if those actions and statements do not conform to the doctrine of the Church you are obliged object.

Edited February 11, 2010 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

I personally witnessed events very similar to those in the French case, and watched as a theologically orthodox priest was abused by a bishop, and a priest who advocated positions contrary to the moral doctrine of the Church was given the pastorate of a very orthodox parish.