Posted on 11/26/2004 1:05:21 PM PST by Chi-townChief
Good reply.
Amen.
I assume the "deliver votes for the Republican party" part was a reference to the bishops who urged parishes around the U.S. to follow the Vatican and the Church leadership regarding instruction on what to do with Catholics who overtly announce their pro-abortion stand, particularly politicians. If Greeley thinks that is a bad idea, why try to destroy the Church from within? Why not go start another sect? Lord knows there are plenty he could join up with, but maybe he could start another, like the "reformed pro-abortion church of amerika" or something like that.
Bl. John XXIII was in no way a radical liberal. If he had lived another five years, the situation of the Church would be very different. A cursory glance at Ad Petri Cathedram, Aeterna Dei Sapientia, or Veterum Sapientia demonstrates this, as does an examination of his handling of Stanislaus Lyonnet and Maximilian Zerwick.
Although I was young at the time of the council, my observation was that JohnXXIII had pushed through these changes all in the short years of his papacy. This present Pope, JPII, has been the Holy Father for almost thirty years, and cannot touch the mostly radical changes that JohnXXIII has affected.
That he was a liberal administrator is to me in no doubt.
I suspect that all those things you annotated in your first paragraph are the very same things you will find in the Episcopal Church, although there are some other differences not listed.
As far as other churches to which Catholics fled, just see how many former Catholics are in the Baptist and Assembly churches. I can assure you Catholics will be the highest percentage bar none.
The missal used by traditional groups is the Missal of 1962 - the Missal of Bl. John XXIII. John's beliefs:
And We also, impelled by the weightiest of reasons -- the same as those which prompted Our Predecessors and provincial synods 13 -- are fully determined to restore this language to its position of honor, and to do all We can to promote its study and use. The employment of Latin has recently been contested in many quarters, and many are asking what the mind of the Apostolic See is in this matter. We have therefore decided to issue the timely directives contained in this document, so as to ensure that the ancient and uninterrupted use of Latin be maintained and, where necessary, restored...Bishops and superiors-general of religious orders shall take pains to ensure that in their seminaries and in their schools where adolescents are trained for the priesthood, all shall studiously observe the Apostolic See's decision in this matter and obey these Our prescriptions most carefully.
In the exercise of their paternal care they shall be on their guard lest anyone under their jurisdiction, eager for revolutionary changes, writes against the use of Latin in the teaching of the higher sacred studies or in the Liturgy, or through prejudice makes light of the Holy See's will in this regard or interprets it falsely. (Veterum Sapientia)
We address Ourselves now to all of you who are separated from this Apostolic See. May this wonderful Spectacle of unity, by which the Catholic Church is set apart and distinguished, as well as the prayers and entreaties with which she begs God for unity, stir your hearts and awaken you to what is really in your best interest.May We, in fond anticipation, address you as sons and brethren? May We hope with a father's love for your return?...
There is never any need, therefore, to turn to proponents of doctrines condemned by the Church; for they only draw men on with false promises and when they obtain control of the state, try boldly and unscrupulously to deprive men of their supreme spiritual goods—the Christian commandments, Christian hope, and Christian faith. Those who adhere to the doctrines these men propose, minimize or eliminate all that our present age and our modern civilization hold dearest: true liberty and the authentic dignity of the human person. Thus they attempt to destroy the bases of Christianity and civilization.
All, therefore, who wish to remain Christians must be aware of their serious obligation to avoid those false principles, which Our predecessors—especially Popes Pius XI and Pius XII—have condemned in the past, and which We condemn once again...
There is one truth especially which We think is self-evident: when the sacred rights of God and religion are ignored or infringed upon, the foundations of human society will sooner or later crumble and give way. Our predecessor of immortal memory, Leo XIII, expressed this truth well: "It follows . . . that law becomes ineffective and all authority is weakened once the sovereign and eternal rule of God, who commands and forbids, is rejected." (Ad Petri Cathedram)
These are not the words of a liberal. Latin in the liturgy? The "ecumenism of return"? An "exclusivist" conception of the Church?
That he was a liberal administrator is to me in no doubt.
There should be. Consider how he had Lyonnet and Zerwick dismissed from the Pontifical Biblical Institute for their heretical theories, how he had books added to the Index instead of dissolving it like Paul VI, how he had conservatives like Msgr. Lefebvre appointed to the commissions to prepare for the Council...
Amd Msgr LeFebrve...was it not he who ran afoul of this Pope, and was virtually run off. Did he not insist on Latin remaining in the Church, and be condemned for not following Vatican II? If this was not LeFebrve, then I think it was some French churchman.
I am convinced this Pope (JPII) is a conservative churchman, asmuch as John XXIII was not. I do not believe that the two men's accomplishments can ever be called near compatible.
I was almost thirty when Humana Vita was promulgated. Many of my contemporaries fled in droves to protestant churches rather than submit to that encyclical issued by Paul VI. My friends,and I had been told by our confessors for some years that the Church was going to approve of the pill and relax the teaching on contraceptives. When that did not occur many,many left.
"So this teaching only represents the ideal right?"
The priest kind of stammered and said that was the case.
"Oh good," replied the man as if the matter was now settled to his satisfaction.
When Bl. John XXIII died in 1963, Latin was still the language of the Latin Rite Liturgy. It was only under Paul VI that that changed (in contradiction to the prescriptions of the Council's liturgy constitution - SC 36.1, which ordered that Latin be retained). The Missal used by traditionalists is the Missal of Bl. John XXIII, issued in 1962.
Pope John would never have allowed the vernacularization of the Mass if he had lived longer.
why does it contain a directive which was NOT maintained and/or restored
The liberals, even while magnifying the "Good Pope John" as a liberal hero, totally covered up the fact that he was completely traditional and ignored his directives. The same thing happened to Pius XII in a weaker manner - he was widely misrepresented as favoring liberal Biblical theology, even in La Civilta Cattolica in 1960!
Amd Msgr LeFebrve...was it not he who ran afoul of this Pope
Msgr. Lefebvre ran afoul of Paul VI - Bl. John appointed him to the Central Preparatory Commission for the Council and made him Bishop of Tulle over the opposition of the liberal French hierarchy.
Thanks for the heads ups. Seems the memory fades in these issues. It's nice to know there are those around like yourself to keep the facts straight.
>>If you say "Kyrie Eleison," you say it in its original Greek.<<
OOOOOOPS!
I'm new at this!
All of our Masses are Novus Ordo. The Latin Indult is on Wednesdays. We have a Mass in Slavic, everyday. Actually, I'm not sure why we have six priests. Our Pastor just turned 37 but every other priest seems much older.
As I said, I just got here. It's a little piece of heaven for me, growing up in a Polish parish!!!
And so many have forgotten! It is time to get back to the basics, before it is too late.
No. How did the autopsy turn out, Oh Smart One?
Let's just say that the autopsy never took place and the patient got better.
Do you mean 'sin' in general? Or 'sin' as in 'child molestation' as in 'FELONY'?
As a non-believer in an organized or disorganized religion, I mean sin as in harming someone.....anyone...particularly for the pleasure of it.
There are too many people, perhaps such as yourself, who seem to enjoy jumping on one religin or another for the condescending pleasure it gives them via the "I am perfect" syndrome....as though there have never been clerics or anyone asssociated with their own relgion who have harmed children.
Yes, I used the somewhat quaint religious phrase to make my point....but it is a very valid metaphor in this particular situtation.
By the way, my religion is nature and my bible is the golden rule and I can assure you that I am not some religious zelalot as you so gratuitiously infer. Moreover, I most likely understand the legalities, societal impact, and history of child molestation much better than you.
There are too many people, perhaps such as yourself, who seem to enjoy jumping on one religin or another for the condescending pleasure it gives them via the "I am perfect" syndrome....as though there have never been clerics or anyone asssociated with their own relgion who have harmed children.
At least _I_ can say with an absolutely clear conscience that _I_ never diddled a little kid - as have others, perhaps such as yourself; maybe.
Yes, I used the somewhat quaint religious phrase to make my point....but it is a very valid metaphor in this particular situtation.
Actually, I think it's "cast the first stone"; but your still works pretty well.
By the way, my religion is nature and my bible is the golden rule
Cool. Whatever floats your boat.
...and I can assure you that I am not some religious zelalot as you so gratuitiously infer.
I didn't infer anything; gratuitously, or otherwise.
Moreover, I most likely understand the legalities, societal impact, and history of child molestation much better than you.
I'm _so_ glad you told me that; learned as a perp, or as a victim? (yes, you deserved that diss)
BTW: y'mind takin' your teeth outta my @$$ now?
That's about as many as (very liberal) Bishop Untener's entire diocese produced during his tunure there.
And there lies much of the problem.
The way catechesis and liturgy have been debased (despite signs of some renewal), it is hardly surprising that fewer young men feel the call.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.