homeschoolmom Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 [quote name='CatholicCid' post='1309238' date='Jul 2 2007, 10:07 AM'][img]http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n188/PhatmassWall/biretta.gif[/img][/quote] [img]http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n188/PhatmassWall/biretta.gif[/img] [img]http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n188/PhatmassWall/biretta.gif[/img] [img]http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n188/PhatmassWall/biretta.gif[/img] [img]http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n188/PhatmassWall/biretta.gif[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatholicCid Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 (edited) Gave it a more priestly touch [img]http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n188/PhatmassWall/biretta-1.gif[/img] I like the first one better though, 2nd one keeps getting a pointy top. [img]http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n188/PhatmassWall/biretta.gif[/img] Edited July 2, 2007 by CatholicCid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 [quote name='CatholicCid' post='1309247' date='Jul 2 2007, 10:21 AM']Gave it a more priestly touch [img]http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n188/PhatmassWall/biretta-1.gif[/img] I like the first one better though, 2nd one keeps getting a pointy top. [img]http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n188/PhatmassWall/biretta.gif[/img][/quote] [img]http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n188/PhatmassWall/biretta-1.gif[/img] [img]http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n188/PhatmassWall/biretta-1.gif[/img] [img]http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n188/PhatmassWall/biretta-1.gif[/img] [img]http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n188/PhatmassWall/biretta-1.gif[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aalpha1989 Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 [quote name='Terra Firma' post='1308178' date='Jul 1 2007, 07:07 PM']That's a GREAT attitude! Obviously this must be the holiness, piety, and concern for salvation that love for the Mass should bring out in you.[/quote] it's his ardent charity [quote name='Terra Firma' post='1308367' date='Jul 1 2007, 08:36 PM']It is one thing for Christ to be a stumbling block. He's what I'd call a necessary part of faith. It is quite another for us and our fixation on a particular form of liturgy to be a stumbling block. I'll just add that it seems disingenuous for traditional Catholics to be up in arms about even making a small change to the Latin liturgy. The Motu Propio is intended as an attempt at reconciling traditional Catholics who've split from the Church by compromising and allowing a broader use of an extraordinary form of celebrating the Mass. The Novus Ordo is still the ordinary form of the Mass in the Latin Rite. In other words, the Holy Father is flexing on a non-necessary point in order to further the dialogue with those who have willfully separated from Rome. He did not have to do this. He did this in order to further unity within the Church and to encourage faithless Catholics to return to communion with Rome. In other words, he was more concerned with salvation than with enforcing the normative form of the rite. I find it troubling that so many are apparently willing to switch those priorities.[/quote] i don't think that Benedict's priorities in this decision WERE having traditional catholics return. he is genuinely concerned with the state of the liturgy and he should be. it is unbelievable what some parishes get away with. [quote name='mortify' post='1308391' date='Jul 1 2007, 08:50 PM']Indeed. Cf: [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=69630&st=0&p=1303688&#entry1303688"]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?s...p;#entry1303688[/url] From the thread:[/quote] hear, hear! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatholicCid Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 On the actual topic, I voted no, no, and no. However, I would have little or no qualms with the updating of the wording if it's context has changed after time. Such as, I understand what is meant by "faithless Jews", especially when looking at the time it came into use. However, I could see how some scholars could request to 'update' the language to help thoroughly imply the true intentions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pio Nono Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 JMJ 7/2 - Thirteenth Monday You guys rock my socks off!!! I'll have to share this with Fr. Zuhlsdorf. I don't seem able to post it...how...? Can't find it in the smileys directory. And I said that it looked like a beret, but I withdraw the comment now. It looks perfect! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrockthefirst Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 The third poll question is a fairly loaded one: "Should the Church alter Her liturgical prayers because they offend some disbelievers?" Within the specific context of the use of the word "faithless," I humbly submit that that word could be removed without harming the intent of the prayer. As Era Might so eloquently stated, why let historical baggage undermine our true intent, which is that the "natural olive branches" be grafted back in? More broadly speaking, the Catholic Church must, of course, remain true to Her calling and mission. While we want to temper our message so that our audience can hear it, ultimately that message must have meaning. Some people may not like that message. At that point, we must respectfully say, "this is our message, we're sticking to it." But if one word would do as well as another, or if a word could be removed without diluting the intent of the message, why keep it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 [quote name='kenrockthefirst' post='1309351' date='Jul 2 2007, 11:16 AM']The third poll question is a fairly loaded one: "Should the Church alter Her liturgical prayers because they offend some disbelievers?" Within the specific context of the use of the word "faithless," I humbly submit that that word could be removed without harming the intent of the prayer. As Era Might so eloquently stated, why let historical baggage undermine our true intent, which is that the "natural olive branches" be grafted back in? More broadly speaking, the Catholic Church must, of course, remain true to Her calling and mission. While we want to temper our message so that our audience can hear it, ultimately that message must have meaning. Some people may not like that message. At that point, we must respectfully say, "this is our message, we're sticking to it." But if one word would do as well as another, or if a word could be removed without diluting the intent of the message, why keep it?[/quote] The word faithless has already been removed in th 1962 Missal. It now says "Let us pray for the Jews...O God, who dost not exclude from Thy mercy even the Jews..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatholicCid Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 [quote name='Pio Nono' post='1309323' date='Jul 2 2007, 10:53 AM']JMJ 7/2 - Thirteenth Monday You guys rock my socks off!!! I'll have to share this with Fr. Zuhlsdorf. I don't seem able to post it...how...? Can't find it in the smileys directory. And I said that it looked like a beret, but I withdraw the comment now. It looks perfect! [/quote] I made it so it won't be in the smiley directory. Dust can add it if he wishes. Otherwise, you can just img tag it from my photobucket [code][IMG]http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n188/PhatmassWall/biretta.gif[/IMG][/code] [img]http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n188/PhatmassWall/biretta.gif[/img] [code][IMG]http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n188/PhatmassWall/biretta-1.gif[/IMG][/code] [img]http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n188/PhatmassWall/biretta-1.gif[/img] [quote name='StThomasMore' post='1309352' date='Jul 2 2007, 11:18 AM']The word faithless has already been removed in th 1962 Missal. It now says "Let us pray for the Jews...O God, who dost not exclude from Thy mercy even the Jews..."[/quote] Well, that seems to work everything out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenchild17 Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 [quote name='StThomasMore' post='1309352' date='Jul 2 2007, 11:18 AM']The word faithless has already been removed in th 1962 Missal. It now says "Let us pray for the Jews...O God, who dost not exclude from Thy mercy even the Jews..."[/quote] So then if you guys are just going back to the 62 missae then why would there be a problem? That phrase seems to be quite in line with the recent attitude towards Judaism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 [quote name='goldenchild17' post='1309396' date='Jul 2 2007, 12:08 PM']So then if you guys are just going back to the 62 missae then why would there be a problem? That phrase seems to be quite in line with the recent attitude towards Judaism.[/quote] Even the old prayer didn't go against Holy Church's teachings about Talmudism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pio Nono Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 JMJ 7/2 - Thirteenth Monday Can you ask dUSt to add it to the smiley directory? I don't have much clout with him. :[img]http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n188/PhatmassWall/biretta-1.gif[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 can you make a nun one? I'm tired of using this one and would like a more traditional nun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenchild17 Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 [quote name='StThomasMore' post='1309406' date='Jul 2 2007, 12:20 PM']Even the old prayer didn't go against Holy Church's teachings about Talmudism.[/quote] sure though it seems much of the argument is over that one word. I guess the question now is would anyone have a problem with the prayer if just that word was gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 I voted "no", "no", "no." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now