Posted on 09/15/2006 8:49:34 AM PDT by NYer
"Pointing out the hairsplitting highlights the weakness of the rcd claim to being unified."
It is one of the great strengths of The Church that it doesn't require absolute agreement in every least thing by every Catholic.
John Paul II can mistakenly oppose our war in Iraq, while I support it, and neither of us has to be thrown out of The Church.
The only people within the Roman Catholic Church that I hear prattling about being "unified" are the modernist swine that Pope Saint Pius X called "enemies of The Church."
There's no such thing as a Roman Catholic denomination. There's Catholicism and heretics. You must have fallen into the latter category.
Denominationalism started with the Protestants, not the Catholic Church. We are not a denomination.
"The term "denomination" in general refers to anything distinguished by a name. In religious contexts the designation has traditionally applied both to broad movements within Protestantism, such as Baptists and Methodists, and also to the numerous independent branches of such movements that have developed over the years primarily because of geographical expansion and theological controversy.
Denominationalism is a comparatively recent phenomenon. The theological distinction between the church visible and invisible, made by Wycliffe and Hus and elaborated by the Protestant Reformers, underlies the practice and defense of denominationalism that emerged among seventeenth century English Puritans, who agreed on most things but not on the crucial issue of how the church should be organized. The eighteenth century revivals associated with Wesley and Whitefield greatly encouraged the practice, especially in America, where it became dominant.
Dear vincentjay,
We acknowledge the existence of non-Catholic Christians. However, we see that non-Catholic Christians are more precisely Christians with profoundly broken communion with their real spiritual home, the Catholic Church.
Furthermore, we don't recognize Christian "denominations" as real churches or parts of the real Church. The Catholic Church teaches that human institutions such as the Church of England, or the Lutheran Church are "ecclesial assemblies," but not properly called particular churches of the one Universal Church.
We recognize the Orthodox Churches as particular churches of the one Universal Church, but in schism from Her.
Thus, the Catholic Church is not a "denomination," but rather the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church founded by Jesus.
sitetest
Personally, I think "twit" is better in the case of Bp. Tod.
But "smarmy twit" is good, too...
Yes, communion was received kneeling at the Tridentine.
Point is that the kneeling tradition is customary (at least in the US, and to my knowledge parts of Germany) going back around 100 years.
That makes it an 'immemorial custom,' (100 years) and not subject to manipulation by snot-nosed Committee academics.
There were a couple of greasy little lies in Brown's letter. See:
http://dad29.blogspot.com/2006/09/anent-cuf-advice.html
and the post immediately preceding, which by coincidence surrounds the same issues:
http://dad29.blogspot.com/2006/09/some-questions-for-cufs-suprenant.html
Reminds me of Longstreet's comment about the Confederacy, where the governors sometimes refused to supply the army that was keeping it alive: Died of a theory.
May be a while.
Looks like B-16's going to knock off the Mohammedan heresy before he moves in on twits like Brown.
Prayer works.
Prayer and pointing a gun at the offender works faster.
Luckily, the pope agrees with you. Precisely: this is the kind of clericalism that leads the Church toward ruin.
So far no one has related a very important point made by the Holy See regarding kneeling to receive Holy Communion. If people want to know more, go to http://www.adoremus.org/Notitiae-kneeling.html. You will find that the United States Bishops were given permission to demand standing for Holy Communion with the proviso that no one receiving It kneeling was to be denied, nor were they to be made to feel that he is being disobedient. Bishop Brown is indeed smarmy in the extreme.
I respect the East in terms of liturgy, but as being someone who was brought up in a Western cultural context, I strongly prefer the Wests liturgical historty, and as much as Eastren Rite Catholics were abused by having Latinizations forced on them before Vatican II, many Catholics like me are sick of the Eastren influences such as standing for communion and the attempt to eliminate all kneeling during mass being forced on us.
People kept the sacrament reserved in their home because the church at the time was underground, and in an emergency situation. Even then, institued acolytes, who were all males in a minor clearical state, were the only non ordained allowed to distribute the eucharist, and again, even then, only in emergency situations.
Absolute horse sh!t!!
The Diocese of Orange is under no obligation to observe any sort of directive from USCCB. You are the ordinary of this diocese and you are responsible for its proper liturgical norms, not a committee of bureaucrats at USCCB.
I stopped reading right there but the rest of the letter probably runs along similar lines.
Kneeling for communion in the West goes back in some cases before 1000AD. It was the common posture in the West by the 1200s, and it still is the common posture, ironically I may add, for Lurtherans and Episcopalins.
Did he really spell it that way?
When I first started dating my wife, I could not understand why we (the LCMS) had altar rails and knelt for receiving Communion, but her parish didn't.
Still seems odd to me.
My 16 year old daughter escaped from her father and me and led a harrowing life on the streets.
Sometimes we deceive ourselves!
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.