What other parts of the show were "awesome", did you give a big round of applause after the celebration ended? 
Posted on 07/24/2005 7:31:18 AM PDT by Teófilo
Am I mad today...
Friends, yesterday my wife received in the mail a glossy brochure from a self-proclaimed Catholic outfit called "Tradition in Action." One good look at the brochure told me who they are: people who hate the Church and who hold up an idol of the Church of the past that probably never existed, except inside their own minds.
- They seem to be devoted to "Our Lady of Great Success," who supposedly revealed to an Ecuadorian mystic in the 18th. century that the Church would grow corrupt in the 20th Century and asked the mystic to suffer to atone for what was coming. The folks from "Tradition in Action" are convinced the apparition was talking about our Church today, particularly, the post-Vatican II Church.So, I decided to pay a visit to their website to see more and among other trash, these are some of the things I found:- They had at least two books slamming the Servant of God, Pope John Paul II, for having gone to the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem.
- A page objecting to Pope Benedict XVI welcoming and meeting in the Vatican with "schismatics," that is, Eastern Orthodox hierarchs.There are others with captions of the worst taste, openly satirical, filled with innuendos, and downright lies.- A page, which they entitled, The remarkable intimacy of John Paul II with ladies hinting that Pope John Paul the Great was being unchaste, giving scandal, and behaving inappropriately with women.
- A page decrying Pope John Paul the Great's meeting with the Rabbi of Rome, describing it as a symbolic act denying the 2,000 years of Catholic teachings regarding the errors of the Jewish religion.
Folks, as you know, I am a Catholic who thinks with the Church. When I started going to Mass as a child and became conscious of what that Grand Event was, it was in the early 70's and it was to a Novus Ordo Mass. I never felt that I was missing anything. I didn't attend a Tridentine Mass until I was 37--three years ago--and even then, didn't feel that I was missing anything, any grace, any hint of God's presence in the Eucharist in the "New Mass" that the "Old Mass" had to offer. I respect the Tridentine Mass; if made available in my diocese I may even attend it occassionally, but it is not for me as a matter of day-to-day spirituality. The "New Order" Mass is now "the Old Order" to me. I travail, live, and with God's grace will die, in the Church of Now, which is also the Church of Yesterday and the Church of Tomorrow.
Does that mean that there haven't been any abuses committed in the name of Liturgical Renewal? No, it doesn't. Does that mean that some things could and should be made better in the Mass and in the Sacramental rituals? Yes it does. Does that mean that the Liturgical Renewal has to be tossed lock, stock, and barrel, in favor of a sentimental "Catholic Restoration"? Certainly not, particularly a "restoration" dominated by overly-scrupuled people who oppose transforming other Catholic cultures as cultures, and who, to hear them say it, would jump at the chance of redrawing the loincloths on all the risqué frescoes at the Vatican.
I didn't see the Mass abused until I moved to the U.S. Mainland and saw Father Roy Lee at Kelly AFB's chapel in San Antonio, Texas, back in the early 1990's celebrating the Mass dressed as a Muslim sheik, exchanging the Kyrie for Amazing Grace, and having Whitney Houston songs for after communion. The only part of the Mass he didn't touch was the Canon--otherwise, there wouldn't have been a Mass. That was his idea of how to make the Mass "Afro-Centric." Certainly, there's a way to do these things right, and a wrong way to do it. It is a sentiment I share wholeheartedly.
But I have seen some "innovations" too, which I've found beautiful and consistent with the spirit of the Liturgy. When I attended the episcopal consecration of the now Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver as Bishop of Rapid City in the late 1980's, I saw for the first time "liturgical dance." It was beautiful, meaningful, and absorbing. It did not detract from the Mass at all. I'd never seen liturgical dance before, and never since, but let me tell you, it was awesome.
Also, just before the beginning of the Liturgy--and therefore, outside of the Liturgy--the new bishop received a Lakota Sioux blessing from a Catholic priest who was also Sioux--as you all know, Archbishop Chaput is Native American. It was moving and primeval. I felt that at that moment, God joined together in one man, two peoples with the same destiny of Redemption and Salvation.
It seems that God approved of Archbishop Chaput and blessed his ministry. It certainly looks that way, and it all started at that Holy Liturgy that I will never, ever forget.
Christ came to conquer the world! He came to sanctify every human act and culture. The Church is not the property of a single culture or language set and is certainly not to be held hostage by a fringe group who dares to see sexual overtones in a simple, chaste kiss on the forehead that Pope John Paul the Great gave to a woman in mourning!
The "thinkers" at Tradition in Action are spiritually dead because they have refused to accept that the Spirit blows from where He wills. One thing I will tell you: the Spirit is not blowing in their direction, for sure.
Their site and literature is obscene. They blaspheme when they attribute to the Holy Spirit bad deeds--and we know all what that One Sin is called. No wonder why they're spiritually dead. Borrowing a phrase from their combat lexicon, I resist them to their face.
The extreme Trad fools need to be disregarded completely. There is no pre-V2 or post-V2 Church. There is only The Church. You're either in it, or you're a schismatic or a heretic outright.
I know the two people who run Tradition in Action very well: Attila Sinke G. and Dr. Marian Horvat. They're both great people, but I can't help but feel that they have gotten lost in a twilight zone world of Masonic conspiracies, quasi sedevacantism and integrism. Like I said, they're great people -- you'll never find two more upright people in every way except in regard to TIA's increasingly integrist tone and approach. I don't know what to do about it. Many of Marian's old friends feel that they have lost her to an almost cult like outlook.
What other parts of the show were "awesome", did you give a big round of applause after the celebration ended?
Missing something? You grew up in the Novus Ordo age, you were brought up in the age of ecumenism and anti Latin Mass and catholic tradition, nuns in pants and long hair, priests shooting baskets instead of doing sick calls, Father Jim instead of Father Smith, no more kneelers, no more receiving our Lord kneeling instead standing and in the hand from some old lady who thinks she is gaining grace by being a EHMC, preaching of Love and no-one goes to hell-even those who reject our Lord, Pope after Pope since Vatican II who have watched as the seminaries closed, covered for pedophile priests and Bishops, squandered away money, spent our money on their gay lifestyle, mass attendance down to 15% with church after church closing and being sold to pay for abuse victims....You dont feel like your missing anything?
It has to do with the Mass, that is a large part of it, but the church as compromised her beliefs, her doctrines and her teachings to try and be Politically correct to the disdain of 11 of the 12 apostles and countless others who died martyrs deaths for the protection of the faith and her teachings without compromise.
No-it is the post vatican II church that has "left the church" and it is those who still adhere to the teachings of Popes such as Pius V, IX, and X that are the real "Catholics". Like someone said before-either you are with the church are you are against it. No council is supposed to reteach previously taught and explained doctrine, Vatican II just disregarded everything every past council and Pope taught, and that makes it pastoral and not binding
God bless
You make many good points in this post. Many extreme traditionalists sound like very angry, hateful people. Some do give the impression of being more focused on an idol of a Church that never really existed than on Jesus Christ. It is very sad.
However, please do not condone liturgical dance. The Vatican has repeatedly said that dance is not allowed in Masses of the Roman Rite. To add dance to a Mass is an abuse, even if the dancing is pretty and well done (this is not usually the case). When those of us who prefer the Novus Ordo speak favorably of illicit liturigcal practices, it only gives more ammo to the rad trads to use against us.
Please cite where any teaching of the Vatican II Council contradicts any teaching of the ordinary and universal magisterium of the Church.
Oh, brother. First, I didn't find out what the gringo priests were doing until I moved into the Mainland. Even the gringo priests in Puerto Rico apparently behaved better than here, ok? Has it occurred to you that this malaise is something very restricted to English or French-speaking First World countries?
As for the rest, what are you doing to fix it? What are you doing to fix yourself? Persisting in throwing mud to the Church ain't gonna help any...
Expand your mind a bit, please. If you call your self "Catholic," be "catholic," ok?
-Theo
I submit my opinions on all matters of faith and morals to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church, to the Pope and the Bishops. If they have said that Liturgical Dance is not to be allowed in the Roman Rite, then that's the bottom line, that's the way it's gonna be.
Archbishop Pio Laghi, the Pro-Nuncio at that time, was the main celebrant in Archbishop Chaput's ordination Mass, btw. I'm just reporting what I saw and felt at the time. I may cringe if I see one today, particularly if it is a bad, hastily put together production, but man, that has been one of the most powerful and moving liturgies that I have ever seen. And this was not something that the whole public participated either. A dance troupe of young girls dressed in tutus did so.
I'm not sorry I saw it, nor am I sorry that I haven't seen one since. I'm just thankful that I witnessed it. I remember it like it was yesterday...
-Theo
PING
Sad, very sad, such hatred and contempt for the Catholic Church.
Beautiful, meaningful, absorbing liturgical dance by little girls in tutus that didn't detract from the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the unbloody sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross.
Somehow I don't recall little girls in tutus as part of the Suffering of Jesus on Calvary. Actually that picture in my mind is obscene.
Moving and primeval Lakota Sioux blessings? Did Jesus die on the Cross so we could make a mockery of His Sufferings?
Welcome to the 21st Century American Catholic Church where meaningfulness is found via prancing girls in tutus celebrating the unbloody sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross complete with pagan blessings but authentic Catholic practices are excoriated and villified.
The entire article contains choice condemnations which contain no historic veracity, which simply serve to reveal the author's lack of intelligent knowledge of the Catholic history of Christendom and the gift that is the Faith.
Where did this article ever surface, Teofilo? Was it actually published or is it simply one lunatics ravings?
No-it is the post vatican II church that has "left the church" and it is those who still adhere to the teachings of Popes such as Pius V, IX, and X that are the real "Catholics". Like someone said before-either you are with the church are you are against it. No council is supposed to reteach previously taught and explained doctrine, Vatican II just disregarded everything every past council and Pope taught, and that makes it pastoral and not binding
Not being a Catholic, I am having an extremely difficult understading that statement...On this website I have been told time and time again that the Councils are infallible...Vatican II was a council...something's not right here...please explain how it can even be mentioned that Vac 2 is only pastoral when the reality of it is that it was a council just like Trent...I'm quite certain you'll find a way to say it's not contradictory, but I respectfully would like to try to understand your point of view here...thanks...
That looks like a performance of the female Wiggles.
Of course, the vilification of JPII and B16 by hypertrads is a product "of intelligent knowledge of the Catholic history of Christendom and the gift that is the Faith." To respond to that pretension was the true origin of the article, and also my desire to report what I saw almost 20 years ago, in a galaxy far, far away.
You weren't there, I was; you didn't see it, I did. You may opine whatever you want, but yours is only an opinion from someone who hates the Church, not from an eyewitness who saw something unique, irrepetible, and beautiful. Say whatever you want, you will never be able to soil it.
-Theo
How about the following contradictions on past church teachings for starters:
The Pre Vatical II Church Taught:
"It is almost impossible to happen that Catholics who mix themselves with heretics or schismatics in any act of worship might be worthy to be excused from this shameful crime."
Pope Benedict XIV, De Synodo Bk. VI, Chap. 5, Art. 2, 1748.
Vatican II taught:
"It is allowable, indeed desirable, that Catholics should join in prayer with their separated brethren."
Decree on Ecumenism, #8.
Pre Vatican II it was taught:
[It is an error to say that] "in the worship of any religion whatever, men can find the way to eternal salvation, and can attain eternal salvation."
Pope Pius IX, Syllabus of Errors, Error #16, Dec. 8, 1864.
Vatican II taught:
"The brethren divided from us also carry out many of the sacred actions of the Christian religion... these actions... can be rightly described as capable of providing access to the community of salvation."
Decree on Ecumenism, #3.
On the "Modern World", Pre Vatican II taught:
"It is not fitting that the Church of God be changed according to the fluctuations of worldly necessity."
Pope Pius VI, Quod Aliquantum, Mar. 10, 1791.
Vatican II taught:
"the Church... can and ought to be enriched by the development of human social life... so that she may... adjust it [the Constitution of the Church] more successfully to our times."
Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, #44.
"
Pre Vatican II taught:
No man can serve two masters, for to please one amounts to contemning the other...It is a high crime indeed to withdraw allegiance from God in order to please men."
Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiæ Christianæ, #6&7, Jan. 10, 1890.
Vatican II taught:
"Christians cannot yearn for anything more ardently than to serve the men of the modern world."
Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, #93.
Pre Vatican II Popes taught:
"About the ‘Rights of Man’ as they are called, the people have heard enough; it is time they should hear of the rights of God."
Pope Leo XIII, Tametsi, #13, Nov. 1, 1900.
Vatican II taught:
"The Church proclaims the rights of man."
Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, #41.
On Religious Liberty, the Pre V2 church taught:
"They do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, especially fatal to the Catholic Church and to the salvation of souls...namely that ‘liberty of conscience and of worship is a right proper to every man, and should be proclaimed and asserted by law in every correctly established society.’ "
Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura, #3, Dec. 8, 1864.
Vatican II taught:
"The human person has the right to religious freedom...this right of the human person to religious freedom is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed. Thus it is to become a civil right."
Declaration on Religious Freedom, #2.
Pre V2 taught:
[It is an error to say that] "in this age of ours it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be the only religion of the state, to the exclusion of all other cults whatsoever."
Pope Pius IX, Syllabus of Modern Errors, Error #77, Dec. 8, 1864.
Vatican II taught:
"a wrong is done when government imposes upon its people...the profession or repudiation of any religion...government is not to act...in an unfair spirit of partisanship."
Declaration on Religious Freedom, #6&7.
Pre Vatican II it was taught:
"Men who really believe in God must... understand that differing modes of worship... cannot all be equally probable, equally good, and equally acceptable to God."
Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, #31, Nov. 1, 1885.
Vatican II taught:
"The right of all... religious bodies to religious freedom should be recognized and made effective in practice."
Declaration on Religious Freedom, #4&6.
Collegiality
Pre Vatican II taught:
"The authority of Peter and his successors is plenary and supreme ...the bishops... do not receive plenary, or universal, or supreme authority."
Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, #14, June 29, 1896.
Vatican II taught:
"Together with its head, the Roman Pontiff... the episcopal order is the subject of supreme and full power over the universal Church."
Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, #22.
On Truth, the Pre Vatican II church taught:
"Christ has entrusted His Church with all truth."
Pope Pius XII, Mar. 9, 1956.
Vatican II taught:
"Christians are joined with the rest of men in the search for truth."
Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, #16.
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.