Questions

[MichaelFilo]

I'll be frank. I've been reading my [i]Fatima Crusader[/i]. I'm fairly sure some of you have been acquanted with it. Cutting the formalaties short, the more I read it, the more I feel that there is something that is very wrong going on about me. While usually I'd denounce such feelings, how can a book/magazine that calls for the Faithful to pray so duitfully, from an author who knows so much about the Saints and their works cause such feelings unless something was true in it. The more I read, the more I begin to realize that Vatican II has carried the Church from the stronghold of Faith against all errors, to one whose highest officials are those who teach such things. Specifically, the main points that follow, elaborated with a paragraphs worth, explain my contentions. Since this may lead to debate, I posted it here.

The first issue is that of the reception of the Eucharist. I have begun to receive kneeling, and have realized that it is a most pious and holy practice, and encourage all to do. When an Angel of the Lord came to teach Jacinta, Francisco and Lucy about the Eucharist in 1916, he went forth and bowed before the Blessed Sacrament (by the way, they are the three seers of Fatima). Many other saints have shown this reverance, and throughout history has been a sort of norm. Now, standing has also been in practice and I cannot deny that. The real problem is rooted in Hand Communion. I sat watching people receive Communion at Church. A child who wasn't allowed to receive (he hadn't be taught yet) took Communion and his mother pulled it out of his hand and placed it back in the EMoC's Communionion holder thing. Everyone else just received, taking our Lord Jesus Christ in their unconsecrated hands and put Him into their mouth, some making a sign of reverence to the tabranacle. None placed theirs hands forth "to make a little throne for the Lord". In Churches without a tabranacle in the main building, results are horrible. I don't understand how hand Communion can be allowed with standing if both are less reverant unless they are carried with some special show of Faith (bowing (since kneeling is no longer allowed to show repsect to our Lord lest it take up our precious time) and making "a little throne" in the case of hand Communion). Is this not some sort of sign of Satan's plans to modernize the Church?

The second issue, the vernacular. Up until Vatican II, Masses were not held in the vernacular of the country it was being said, but instead was held in Latin. Now, with this movement into English Masses (and the defense for the vernacular was a quote from St. Paul about understanding words which I think was about speaking in tongues, but correct me if I'm wrong), we have found the fullfilment of an old cry. Our "seperated brethren" wanted services in the vernacular, and the Bible in vernacular, and so did alot of other heretics who found it favorable to leave the Church so that they could no longer embrace any hope of salvation at the cost of getting things their way. When the Catholic Church has finally allowed it, what has it wrought? What are the fruits of this effort? All I see now is less faith (albiet, I wasn't around earlier to see it pre Vatican-II). Except, unlike before, preists now can change the words around and add in stuff, maybe even make up a new section to the Mass or change the words of consecration. At least in the Latin, you had to learn the language to go about all that, and that clealry left sluggard and renegade priests out of the picture since it takes work to learn a language and thrice times that work to become familiar enough with it to understand what you are saying as you say it. I don't see an advantage in the vernacular, just a loss. The distance that Latin put between God and the worshipper was a reverant distance, and allowed the Eucharist to not be our best friend but our God.

The third issue, the loss of benediction. I went to my first one recently. Whatever happened to it? It was so beautiful, but why have the ceased? Adoration is no longer in practice like it used to be. Whatever happened to Adoration's large following. It is very sad to see such things to be praised by the hierarchy but no longer in as wide a practice. To be fair, it has came back to my Parish in the form of Perpetual Adoration, but not elsewhere.

Finally, of the list I am willing to mention for now, whatever happened to Sister Lucy? Why was she silenced by the Vatican and not allowed to speak on the Third Fatima secret. Her claims that devil was going to enter into the Church's hierarchy was said in 1957. Years later, she mentioned that she has seen him taking over. The devil has succeeded, but the Faithful are being witheld the Third Secret. It was claimed it was a prophecy about the assassination attempt in 1990, but years earlier the Vatican said it was a vision of soliders and a bishop dressed in all white being shot and killed amongst other people who shared his fate. That doesn't sound like the assassination attempt whatsoever. So why is it being kept from the Faithful? Is it wrong to suspect the Church hierarchy of falling into corruption (although still protected from teaching error in Faith and morals) and that being in line with Sr. Lucy's claim that the corruption would "start at the top"?

I'm very confused indeed.

God bless,
Mikey

Edited May 3, 2005 by MichaelFilo

[mulls]

honestly, with all due respect to everyone, these are the things which allow me to so easily refuse catholocism.

[MichaelFilo]

I don't see how. You don't believe in the Real Presence. Therefore, the first is a non-issue. You already hold your services in the vernacular, so the second is a non-issue. You've never been to a benediction more than likely, so I fail to see the issue. And you reject the evident reality of the Fatima message because you aren't open to the Holy Spirit's work.

So I'll take it as a sarcastic remark, of the sort you are so well known for.

God bless,
Mikey

[Paphnutius]

Well someone correct me if I am wrong, but the preferred langauge for Mass is still Latin, but allows the vernacular for pastoral reasons. It seems that the bishops believe that the vernacular is more pastoral than Latin.

Adoration is alive and strong. You just have to know where to find it. If you wonder what happened to it, ask the priests. They are the ones that are to be the pastor of their parish. It is the pastor that has cura animorum and should see to things like this.

As far as feeling that the Church hierarchy falling into corruption I think we should look back to the Scriptures that says that the Holy Spirit will be with the Church protecting her from error. That the Church is the pillar of Truth and bride of Christ. I am not saying that the hierarchy does not make mistakes, but that it will be protected and guided.

[MichaelFilo]

I think it's the usage of the vernacular itself, as opposed to how it got there that really brings forth the problem.

Adoration is alive, I admit, but I didn't even know what a benediction was until yesterday. Something is terribly wrong with that, I think. That is a form of Eucharistic Worship that I don't see anymore, so some forms have been dropped. And I learned quite a bit from benediction,s o I don't see it as inferior. But even Eucharistic Adoration as a whole has dropped, but like I said in some places it has really picked up, but outside of the church with perpetual adoration, only people twice my age attend the Adoration hours.

I know that the Spirit will guide the Church, but this ties in with my final issue, the Fatima revelation. That is why I think I may have been misled by the Fatima Crusader, but then rethink it, because how could writings that I have turned to before that have inspired me to pray fervently and with great joy be the source of such a lie? That is where the problem comes in. In the magazine, there is always the reference to those who would dash the work of Fr. Gruner as being against God, and constantly the reference to the fact that Sr. Lucy wasn't allowed to release the Third Secret of Fatima.... That is why I worry.

God bless,
Mikey

[Paphnutius]

[quote name='MichaelFilo' date='May 2 2005, 09:40 PM'] Adoration is alive, I admit, but I didn't even know what a benediction was until yesterday. Something is terribly wrong with that, I think.
[/quote]
Yeah something is wrong with that. I believe it has a lot to do with the generation before us. I hate to blame our parent's generation, but they did kind of drop the ball. Not blaming our parents directly, but it was those that came before us that let things come to where they are now. I think we are beginning to see a come-back in things like Adoration and Benediction, though. It is just going to take time, catechesis, and most importantly prayer.

I am sure that the Vatican has appropriate reasons for how they handeled the revelation. I am not familiar with the magazine, but I will say this: God brings greater good from all things. If you wonder if it is a lie, but wonder why it can give such life to your faith, I think the answer lies in the way that God works. Look at some of the most important events in the Bible and see what God was able to do with them.

[MichaelFilo]

Whiile we don't agree on much Paphnutius, I think I agreed with all of that. More answers would be nice, however.

God bless,
Mikey

[Theoketos]

There is so much to consider here. I really do appreciate your frustrations, and in real life I am sure we can get along. But I am going to have react to what you said negatively.

1. Yes, EMoHC are not good at what they do. This is the problem, not communion in the hand. The only solution I see to this problem is more men becoming priests. I think that in a hundred years or so this will not be an issure at all. I think that you have given to much power to Satan, may he not be our guide and the Cross be our light instead.

2. Latin was originally used because it was the Vernacular of the Church. Moreover, this point should not easily be forgotten. Latin is of course to have a special pride in the Mass of the west because it is the language of our rite. It does not have a special pride to give a false sense of mystery due to confusion. Mystery comes from understanding (that is seeking knowledge) and seeking or desiring the infinite while being finite. It again does not come from a lack of understanding. This distinction I believe to be one of Council's greatest lessons.

At the same time, using a sacred language to set apart the Mass is a good thing. For something to be sacred means for it to be set apart. This is probably what you meant. Therefore, I give you some Credit.

3. There is probably a decline in Benediction, but wherever I have traveled in this great land, I have always come across a place that does it. It is up to the faithful to encourage our priests (not pressure or bully) to distribute the sacraments. I might suggest that you may not have been looking for it enough before now. I am glad that you are now.

4. I believe it was our Lady's instruction that dear Lucy tell only who she did. The third secret has been revealed. In addition, it is no coincidence that the Great John Paul II had a great devotion to our lady of Fatima.

Now doubt that the Hierarchy of the Church is corrupted. It has been since the time of Jesus. Does this mean that the way we do Mass now, probably not.

Keep struggling, but maybe stop reading conspiracies about the Church, at least until you have a stronger base. Stick to Cam42 and he will teach you.

Edited May 3, 2005 by Theoketos

[Paphnutius]

Eh, I always like to fall back on the thought that man cannot thwart the plans of God.

It is indeed time to get the ball rolling again and bring the faith back to vibrance. With people like those found here at phatmass, it is only a matter of time. Just imagine when the youngins here have their own parish, have their own family, are able to serve the Church in a fuller way. I am just biding my time till the occasion occurs.

BTW-yeah we are going to have to work on agreeing more often.

[Mateo el Feo]

Hi Michael,

You brought up a bunch of issues. I don't know how they can all be properly addressed on a single thread, but I'll try to give some brief thoughts.

[b]Fatima Crusader[/b]
If you would like to read "tradionalist" viewpoints, I would recommend that you continue your search to find one in which their fidelity to the Church is clear.

[b]Vatican II and Latin[/b]
This is an example of the confusion between the "Spirit of Vatican II" and the truth of Vatican II. The Vatican II documents encourage the preservation of Latin in the Liturgy, even in the post-Vatican II rites:
[quote name='Sacrosanctum Concilium 36'](1)  The  use  of  the  Latin language, with due respect to particular  law,  is to be preserved in the Latin rites.  (2) But
since  the  use  of  the  vernacular,  whether in the Mass, the administration  of  the  sacraments,  or  in  other  parts of the liturgy,  may  frequently  be of great advantage to the people, a wider use  may be made of it, especially in readings, directives and  in some prayers and chants.[/quote]
This "Vatican II" teaching is being underlined by the Magesterium through its most recent documents.

[b]Our "Separated Brethren" and Latin[/b]
I was discussing this issue a year or two ago, and I found it funny that Martin Luther's writings actually encouraged the preservation of Latin. Here's a little of his quote [url="http://history.hanover.edu/texts/luthserv.html"](link)[/url]:
[quote name='Martin Luther']I do not want in anywise to let the Latin tongue disappear out of Divine Service; for I am so deeply concerned for the young.[/quote]
Just a strange tid-bit.

[b]Vatican II [/b]
Even Pope Benedict XVI perceives a problem with the implementation of Vatican II. This is a time of great disbelief, and resounding mediocrity among believers. But, it's time for us to resist the temptation to dwell on the terrible examples of unfaithful priests, bishops, religious, and lay Catholics. It's time to start being the examples of a faithful Catholic to others, regardless of our vocation. To focus on the positive instead of the negative, I've been accused of "sticking my head in the sand."

I take great consolation in reading the writings of St. Ignatius of Loyola, writing at a time when about half of European Christendom fell to Protestantism, thanks in part to the poor witness showed by Catholic priests, religious, and laypeople. When you read through his writings, you only see hope--it's as if the loss of so many to the Reformation wasn't even happening. So I ask myself: was St. Ignatius "sticking his head in the sand?"

God bless you!