pionono Posted July 10, 2004 Posted July 10, 2004 [quote name='maxk' date='Jul 10 2004, 02:53 PM'] Who says this Mass would be "perfect"? Even Traditional Latin Masses have anti pope "Catholics" attending them, even if the Church and the Priests are in line with JPII. I'm not against the Traditional Latin Mass; I think it is a beautiful way to celebrate the Liturgy, but the answer to Liturgical abuses is not to turn pre Vatican II, that wouldn't help. We have yet to see many of our Parishes celebrating real [i]post[/i]-Vatican II Masses. If only people sat down and looked at Vatican II's writings! They would understand more about the changes that Vatican II called for; they would see the Mass that the Holy Spirit [i]envisioned[/i] and implanted in the heart of the Council. [/quote] Even if there are "anti-pope Catholics" at this Mass that is not her problem. These people will not disturb the Mass nor cause any problems liturgically. Besides, there are plenty of anti pope types in the Novus Ordo as well. They just happen to be on the left rather than the right. I would also be interested in hearing your definition of "anti pope Catholics." But that is not the topic of this thread so we should leave it for another time. In any case, the Mass itself should be fine and cause no worries.
maxk Posted July 10, 2004 Posted July 10, 2004 [quote name='pionono' date='Jul 10 2004, 04:37 PM'] Even if there are "anti-pope Catholics" at this Mass that is not her problem. These people will not disturb the Mass nor cause any problems liturgically. Besides, there are plenty of anti pope types in the Novus Ordo as well. They just happen to be on the left rather than the right. I would also be interested in hearing your definition of "anti pope Catholics." But that is not the topic of this thread so we should leave it for another time. In any case, the Mass itself should be fine and cause no worries. [/quote] Thanks pionono, I guess I was refering more to the statement of the "perfect Church" than the "liturgical abuses" Sorry!
Donna Posted July 11, 2004 Posted July 11, 2004 (edited) My Lady, You are a shining light of a good Catholic. Your crosses in this scandulous situation [i]shame[/i] my petty complaints. Praying for you, Donna ______________________________________ To all: this is a perfect example of a good Catholic woman and her three children being thrown out of a Catholic parish. And so close to the feast of Maria Goretti, Lady only pursues modesty in nursing the baby in church. Don't think Our Lord doesn't see this for what it is. If I were where she's currently at, I'd attend the Indult, if possible. Otherwise, I'd do just what she is being forced to do. And Our Lord knows this. Could a confessor in the ilk available to her even be trusted to discern whether there is moral culpability of her missing Mass? Is she willfully giving God the finger, pursuing lounging around vs. attending Mass on the holyday? Quite the opposite. She is Magdalen, IMO, trying to find where they have taken her Lord. Well, Lady? Is there a trusted priest anywhere (even one you "know", through print) whom you could go to with this? The whole situation is disgusting. I suggest we be very gentle with Lady. To manage those 3 children at Mass (and a nursing baby!) is absolutely heroic. Her husband doesn't understand (not being Catholic); nor is he even [i]available[/i] so she can venture out further from home sans the perky 4 and 7 yr. old ( but still w/ the nursing baby). Here is a woman wanting to love and adore Jesus: will anyone let her? Edited July 11, 2004 by Donna
Christina Posted July 11, 2004 Posted July 11, 2004 Donna, that was absolutely beautiful and I wholeheartedly (did I spell that right?) agree with you. Lady, you and your family are in my prayers. I had to leave my Parish because of abuses that I could not stand to take. I drove 15-20mins to a different Parish each Sunday, when my home Parish was just a couple blocks away. It was very hard leaving the Parish I grew up in and it tormented me to make my decision. But, you know, it was the right thing to do. I am happy and being fed. My home Parish is getting a new Priest very soon and I will go back after a couple months to see if he has changed anything. I would very much like to go back, so please keep my intentions in your prayers. Thank you! PS, my son was a monster too in Church.....ONCE.
Quietfire Posted July 11, 2004 Posted July 11, 2004 Donna, Your post was exquisite. Thank you for reminding me why I come here again and again. You are a blessing. Lady, I am sorry if I offended you in any way. I remember when I first came here and asked for help. When it was given I broke down in tears. So many loving hearts willing to help. We will do anything to assist you, you need only ask. May you consider us part of your family?. May you continue to post here and be a member of our phamily. Your piety is an inspiration. God Bless You, your children and your husband. May he always know what a blessing you are. Peace My Lady.
IcePrincessKRS Posted July 11, 2004 Posted July 11, 2004 (edited) [quote name='Lil Red' date='Jul 11 2004, 01:33 PM'] great post, Donna!!! [/quote] I agree. On another note. The parish mentioned by CatholicCrusader, according to friends of mine from near Houston is an excellent parish (in their words, it's the most orthodox parish in the area!--sure there may be a few "bad eggs" who attend Mass there but what parish lacks that?), their Latin Mass is approved by the Bishop, and if they lived closer they would attend Mass there every week if not daily. The only "downer" to it is its downtown, and anyone from Houston knows what a pain it can be getting there, so if LadyBug is no where near there... I understand why she cannot benefit from this great parish at this point in time. Ladybug, you and your family are in my prayers! I pray that you can find a parish that meets your needs near enough to where its not burdensome dealing with your precious munchkins. God Bless you. Edited July 12, 2004 by IcePrincessKRS
traichuoi Posted July 12, 2004 Posted July 12, 2004 just in response to Crusader's pre-Vatican II comment: [quote][b][u]The Courage to be Catholic[/u][/b] [i]by George Wiegel[/i] A Failure to Implement Vatican II? Almost four decades after the Second Vatican Council concluded its epic work, an aging, intellectually sterile, and numerically shrinking cadre of Catholic dissidents continues to insist that every problem in the Catholic Church today is caused by a failure to implement the Council's teaching and "spirit." This failure is typically described as a failure to "democratize" the Church, or to "share authority." Those to be "empowered," in what the dissidents wrongly imagine to be "reform," are typically intellectuals or activists. It seems of little consequence to those who have chanted this mantra of democratization and power-sharing for more than theirty-five years that Vatican II solemnly reaffirmed the sumpreme authority of the pope as chief pastor of the Church, or that the Council taught that local bishops, in communion with the Bishop of Rome, enjoy full ecclesial authority. The vocabulary of "empowerment" and "power-sharing" also fudges the full and complex truth of the Council's teaching on the priesthood of all the baptized and the priesthoood of the Church's ordained ministers. For while Vatican II affirmed the ancient truth that all the baptized share in the priesthood of christ and exercise that common priesthood in prayer, the Council also affirmed the unique character of the ordained priesthood as being different in kind, no simply in degree, from the priestly character of the laity. Dissidents rarely if ever mention the Council's teaching that celibacy has an important relationship to priesthood. For those convinced that the "spirit of Vatican II" requires the Catholic Church to become another American "denomination" in its approach to doctrine and in its structures of authority and responsibility, what Vatican II actually taught seems of little consequence. The sixteen documents of Vatican II can, of course, be read in different ways within the boundaries of Catholic orthodoxy. The history of the Council, its intentions and tensions, is just now being written. The Catholic church will be debating the meaning of Vatican II for decades, perhaps centuries. That is perfectly understandable, and perfectly accpetable. Ecumenical councils always take decades, even centuries, to digest. What is neither understandable nor acceptable is that dissidents' suggestion that Catholicism should follow the self-destructive path charted by liberal Protestant denominations that have been hemorrhaging congregants for decades. Christian communities that deconstruct themselves doctrinally and morally have been failing dramatically since the Second World War, to the point where liberal Protestantism will be a mere fraction of world Protestant Christianity by the middle of the twenty-first century. If good fences make good neighbors, as poet Robert Frost suggested, clear doctrinal and moral boundaries seem to make for vibrant Christian communities. The answer to the tw-edged crisis of clerical sex and abuse and inert episcopal leadership cannot be found in making Catholicism's boundaries so porous that no one is certain what constitues fidelity or infidelity. On the contrary, it is precisely such porousness that has helped create the current crisis. The crisis has everything to do with the authentic implementation of Vatican II, and with the failure of the Church's leadership to do just that. But what the dissidents mean by implementation of Vatican II is more accurately described as the [b]demolition of Catholicism[/b].[/quote] i've posted this before...sorry but going pre-Vatican II is not the answer...
cmotherofpirl Posted July 12, 2004 Posted July 12, 2004 [quote name='traichuoi' date='Jul 12 2004, 03:30 AM'] just in response to Crusader's pre-Vatican II comment: i've posted this before...sorry but going pre-Vatican II is not the answer... [/quote] THis needs to go to the apologetic section.
conservativecatholic Posted July 13, 2004 Posted July 13, 2004 [quote name='CatholicCrusader' date='Jul 9 2004, 04:02 PM'] I found the [i]perfect[/i] Mass for you! This Mass I KNOW has no innovations and goes by exactly what the Vatican states: Annunciation Church in Houston. Here is the church's information: 1618 Texas St., Houston, TX 77003-3033. The Priest is Msgr. James Golasinski. The phone number is (713) 222-2289. Mass is listed here to be at 8 a.m. on Sunday; however, I would call to make sure, since sometimes online times are not 100% accurate. This Mass is the Mass provided for by Pope John Paul II to be said according to the Missal of 1962 (pre-Vatican II). If you have come to the conclusion that you must stay at home because the abuses are so bad, that is the perfect church fo you because it will, you can take my word, have no abuses. God bless! [/quote] Since I live in Houston, I see Annunciation Church quite a bit. It is gorgeous! [url="http://www.photohome.com/photos/texas-pictures/houston/annunciation-church-1.html"]Annunciation Church photo[/url]
qfnol31 Posted July 13, 2004 Posted July 13, 2004 [quote name='CatholicCrusader' date='Jul 9 2004, 03:47 PM'] If we only could go back to before Vatican II... [/quote] This caught my attention a little while ago. Do you realize that not too long before Vatican II people didn't receive Holy Communion more than a few times a year (St. Thérèse received 22 times one year, and that was a lot)? I have received Jesus in the most Blessed Sacrament more times than that in a month. Our current Holy Father is rumored to go to Reconciliation once a day, and I know he goes at least once a week. Reconciliation hadn't been practiced that much 100 years ago. I think he's done a lot to change that. I know those two things didn't change so much as a direct result from Vatican II, but I do know that the council found more ways for the layity to receive more graces, something we need today. But then there's the Liturgy of the Hours. A hundred years ago, it was practiced. It's been said since the beginning of the Church, but Vatican II added a special significance to this prayer. It is the second most powerful prayer in the world, second only to Mass! Now it is more open for the laity to recite this beautiful prayer, one we're definately not worthy to recite (St. Thérèse). We get to share in many things that she did not. And the Mass is changed. Many people do not like the Novus Ordo, and I sympathize in the way that I have a difficult time with abuses in the Mass, but read the following: [quote name='"Sacrosanctum Concilium"']21. In order that the Christian people may more certainly derive an abundance of graces from the sacred liturgy, holy Mother Church desires to undertake with great care a general restoration of the liturgy itself. For the liturgy is made up of immutable elements divinely instituted, and of elements subject to change. These not only may but ought to be changed with the passage of time if they have suffered from the intrusion of anything out of harmony with the inner nature of the liturgy or have become unsuited to it.[/quote] Though, I will admit some things were better before Vatican II. First on that list were that people didn't try to form the Church based on their personal view, but rather followed her more fully, or so it seems to me. Oh well, sorry for the rambling.
Kilroy the Ninja Posted July 14, 2004 Posted July 14, 2004 There has been a request from the originator of this thread that it be deleted. In the interest of those who have posted here, I am going to close the thread and allow it to die. After a couple of days I'll probably go ahead and delete it since we've nowhere for threads to die in anymore. Questions, please pm me. Kilroy the
Recommended Posts