Posted on 06/28/2007 4:36:20 AM PDT by monkapotamus
How about "Rupertulus Babyloniensis"?
Amen.
OH Baghdad Bob we miss you at FR HEY BABY ROFL
Where is Monk???
OH ANNA you fav guy is backkkkkk
In other words . . . Episcopalians. EEEEK!
You don’t know what horrible things may have happened to these people before they joined this group, and you don’t know how their lives may have been ruined by the collapse of the Catholic Church after VatII. Many people’s lives were literally ruined.
Vatican II brought an explosion. I lived through it and I saw nothing but sudden divorces, people abruptly deciding they were gay, priests running off with young girls in their high school classes or sitting on the steps of the church smoking dope with young boys (with whom they clearly had an improper relationship, to put it mildly), and laypeople who complained about this being treated as pariahs by the bishops. I think the only thing it can possibly be traced to is Vatican II and the promulgation of the Novus Ordo. That was when things really got bad, and unless you were in one of these parishes, lived through some of the horrors of that time, you probably can’t understand how radical the change was for Catholics.
I think there is going to be blood on the hands of many a pink-palmed, fat and sassy bishop or Vatican “advisor” when he goes to meet Our Lord in person.
The sedevacantists and others would be much better won over by charity and understanding than by telling them they’re going to Hell. You don’t know that, because you don’t know how they arrived at that point, and in fact none of us knows the disposition of other souls. But we are all under the obligation to treat each with charity, and that is how we will win them back to the Church. Dispute their points, but don’t declare that they’re going to to Hell.
Sorry, I meant to ping you to my above post #64.
Ooops, I was pinging you to #64. Presumably, I don’t need pinging...
I believe I read somewhere that 7 is God’s perfect number. The earth was created in 7 days and so forth. There are other examples, but I can’t remember them...
Now you being naughty Monk shame on you BAD MONK BAD ROFL
I like itttt
Hilarious MP liberal press article template
This is too funny! The Curt Jester offers a… well… you read it. I tip my biretta! o{]:¬)
I have too say, he nailed this! Not quite sure what "MSM" is exactly, but it must have something to do with the modern liberally slanted media. My emphases.
With the upcoming release of the Motu Proprio liberalizing the Tridentine rite you can expect a surge of articles in the MSM getting things wrong. As a service to the MSM I will give them a Motu Proprio boilerplate that they can arrange as they want with just the right spin, or is that rite spin, so that it fits into their normal templates. This boilerplate has enough mistakes and biases it make it indistinguishable from any other MSM article that will be appearing in the coming days.
- Some people feel nostalgic for the Latin Mass.
- In the Latin Mass the priest faces away from the congregation and prays, sometimes in a whisper, in Latin, a language unfamiliar to most of the world’s one billion Roman Catholics. Unlike in the new Mass which is celebrated in the vernacular with the priests facing their congregations.
- Because two generations of American Catholics are accustomed to hearing the Mass celebrated in English, it’s unlikely most will want to switch to a liturgy that is longer, more formal and celebrated in a language they don’t understand.
- Pope Benedict is taking the church back to before Vatican II and removing the reforms of the Council. Liberal, reform-minded Catholics are concerned about these rollbacks to progress made.
- Some prayer for the Tridentine liturgy are offensive to Jews.
- The Rev. said .
- The groundbreaking Second Vatican Council opened the door to worship in the local vernacular.
- The Latin Mass involves a diminished role for women as altar servers and eliminates progress made in women’s equality since Vatican II.
- These changes will only aggravate declining Mass attendance by introducing a liturgy not relevant to the times.
- Insert comment by former America editor Thomas Reese now a fellow at Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University. (Make sure you mention he was forced out of the editorship by Pope Benedict.) If you can’t get in touch with Thomas Reese for a direct quote just mention something about clash of cultures between conservative priests and liberal congregations.
- Pope Benedict has been receiving resistance from the Bishops in France, England, and Wales who worry about the change dividing the church.
- But liberals are deeply wary because a number of the rite’s adherents are associated with ultra conservative groups that oppose the radical reforms ushered in by the Council.
- The proponents of the old Latin mass are said to number no more than 2 percent of Catholics, and polls show that the majority of Catholics embrace the reforms of Vatican II. There seems to be no demand for it.
- Insert a comment from a proponent of the Tridentine Rite at the bottom of your piece.
Just mix and match and you will have a story ready to go to press in minutes. If you need some more fluff you can always mention once again how no one knows Latin anymore. You can always do a man in the street interview outside of a Catholic Church after Mass. Though contrary to what you might think don’t ask younger Catholics their opinion on this, look for someone with gray hair to get a good quote on why this change is bad.
Isn’t this just right? I bet we can find some other things.
We could probably even come up with a sour-grapes template too.
I love John Paul II, I think he was about the holiest figure I’ve ever seen, and I still think the collapse of the Soviet Union after his visit to Poland was the closest thing to Moses parting the Reed Sea that I’ll likely ever see. But he was too liberal for my tastes in a lot of ways... he just wasn’t *too* too liberal.
As for the others, one can discuss whether a particular Catholic stricture is applicable to any particular situation, but one should examine what the Roman Catholic Church actually teaches on this issue first!
As just one of many examples, the following excerpts are taken from:
CUM EX APOSTALATUS OFFICIO, Apostolic Constitution of His Holiness Pope Paul IV, February 15, 1559.
1. In assessing Our duty and the situation now prevailing, We have been weighed upon by the thought that a matter of this kind [i.e. error in respect of the Faith] is so grave and so dangerous that the Roman Pontiff, who is the representative upon earth of God and our God and Lord Jesus Christ, who holds the fullness of power over peoples and kingdoms, who may judge all and be judged by none in this world, may nonetheless be contradicted if he be found to have deviated from the Faith. Remembering also that, where danger is greater, it must more fully and more diligently be counteracted, We have been concerned lest false prophets or others, even if they have only secular jurisdiction, should wretchedly ensnare the souls of the simple, and drag with them into perdition, destruction and damnation countless peoples committed to their care and rule, either in spiritual or in temporal matters; and We have been concerned also lest it may befall Us to see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by the prophet Daniel, in the holy place.
6. In addition, [by this Our Constitution, which is to remain valid in perpetuity We enact, determine, decree and define:-] that if ever at any time it shall appear that any Bishop, even if he be acting as an Archbishop, Patriarch or Primate; or any Cardinal of the aforesaid Roman Church, or, as has already been mentioned, any legate, or even the Roman Pontiff, prior to his promotion or his elevation as Cardinal or Roman Pontiff, has deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into some heresy:
(i) the promotion or elevation, even if it shall have been uncontested and by the unanimous assent of all the Cardinals, shall be null, void and worthless;
(ii) it shall not be possible for it to acquire validity (nor for it to be said that it has thus acquired validity) through the acceptance of the office, of consecration, of subsequent authority, nor through possession of administration, nor through the putative enthronement of a Roman Pontiff, or Veneration, or obedience accorded to such by all, nor through the lapse of any period of time in the foregoing situation;
(iii) it shall not be held as partially legitimate in any way;
(iv) to any so promoted to be Bishops, or Archbishops, or Patriarchs, or Primates or elevated as Cardinals, or as Roman Pontiff, no authority shall have been granted, nor shall it be considered to have been so granted either in the spiritual or the temporal domain;
(v) each and all of their words, deeds, actions and enactments, howsoever made, and anything whatsoever to which these may give rise, shall be without force and shall grant no stability whatsoever nor any right to anyone;
(vi) those thus promoted or elevated shall be deprived automatically, and without need for any further declaration, of all dignity, position, honour, title, authority, office and power, without any exception in respect of those to which they may have been promoted or elevated before they deviated from the Faith, became heretics, incurred schism, or provoked or committed any or all of these.
7. Finally, [by this Our Constitution, which is to remain valid in perpetuity, We] also [enact, determine, define and decree]:-
that subject persons, be they members of anysoever of the following categories:
(i) the clergy, secular and religious;
(ii) the laity;
shall be permitted at any time to withdraw with impunity from obedience and devotion to those thus promoted or elevated and to avoid them as warlocks, heathens, publicans, and heresiarchs(the same subject persons, nevertheless, remaining bound by the duty of fidelity and obedience to any future Bishops, Archbishops, Patriarchs, Primates, Cardinals and Roman Pontiff canonically entering).
To the greater confusion, moreover, of those thus promoted or elevated, if these shall have wished to prolong their government and authority,they shall be permitted to request the assistance of the secular arm against these same individuals thus promoted or elevated; nor shall those who withdraw on this account, in the aforementioned circumstances, from fidelity and obedience to those thus promoted and elevated, be subject, as are those who tear the tunic of the Lord, to the retribution of any censures or penalties.
Hey Monk I don’t know at my church we have female altar servers because boys refuse to belong to it anymore
Boys rarely like to do "girl things."
Actually boys don’t want do altar servers duties anymore at church I go to so my childhood church
The boys today I don’t know they rather do something else so LA Archidose allow 15 years ago to allow girls in being altar servcers
Oh sure, go ahead and show off your youthfulness! :-)
This was long, long before Teddy McCarrick!
This was when it was even WORSE: Peter Gerety!!!!!
There's a great story - I don't know if it's true - that Archbishop Gerety was in his office when "a group of Polish pilgrims" showed up to see the Cathedral. This was the Summer of 1976, and the Eucharistic Congress was taking place in Philadelphia. "There's a couple of bishops with them," Gerety was told. "I don't have time to go down and give a tour," he is said to have replied, "go show them around and give them my best."
You can probably see where this story is going.
One of the "Polish Pilgrims" was, of course, Cardinal Wojtyla of Cracow, who - just a few years later - during an ad limina visit of the Midatlantic region bishops to Rome, now as John Paul II is said to have remarked, "I'm especially glad to see Archbishop Gerety of Newark. I had hoped to meet him a couple of years ago when I was in Newark but he was very busy in the office that day. I'm glad our schedules coincided today . . . "
If the story isn't true, it should be!
I think charity has to be exercised all around.
Actually, I have always felt that Paul VI was almost a tragic figure. I have no idea what John XXIII was thinking when he called the Council in the first place, but he died before things really got rolling. Paul VI, on the other hand, saw it all, contributed to much of it, yet at the same time, said he saw “the smoke of Satan” entering the Church and was known to spend most of his private time at his kneeler in tears.
The only thing on which he ever held the line, artificial birth control, got him nothing but jeers and criticism from virtually everybody in the Church at that time, because the Church had already been taken over by the “sexual revolution,” since the shepherds had fled when they heard the wolves drawing near. Yet even so, he did nothing about anything else in the Church, and didn’t really even seem to try. He was like someone paralyzed.
I think that if the Church had remained the Church, that is, if the teachings had remained firm and if the liturgy had remained as a point of stability in an increasingly bizarre world, contemporary history would have been a lot different. But instead it ceased to offer any opposition, and the only bulwark against modern evils was breached.
I’m not saying I think everything in modern times was or is evil; simply that the only force that could have resisted the evil and sorted out and protected the good collapsed in the onslaught of the Devil, and the Pope at the time, obviously, bears much responsibility for it. I was part of a lay community for awhile, and we used to read Compline in the evenings. There was one line (1st Peter 5-8, in the old Office) from that stays with me: “The Devil like a roaring lion goes about seeking whom he may devour.”
The Devil certainly found good pickings. But I have always felt that there was something wrong before that, perhaps that modernism had not been sufficiently defeated but had just gone into hiding, or perhaps it was the quiet and insidious effect of Higher Biblical Criticism sneaking in with genuine and legitimate biblical criticism; but the Church was weakened before Vatican II, and I think we have to identify how this happened in order to be able to defeat the evil.
Really? Ecclesia Dei Adflicta was published in 1988. McCarrick was installed as Archbishop of Newark in 1986. [Aw man! I just noticed that McCarrick's birthday is July 7.]
Abp. Gerety was a problem in many ways. The story of Cardinal Wojtyla's visit is certainly believable with respect to Gerety.
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.