Posted on 01/31/2009 3:13:02 PM PST by NYer
Ping!
There were some surprisingly rational responses and comments in there.
And that remark, in turn, raises questions about the good treatment a regularized Society of St. Pius X might expect to receive in the Archdiocese of Boston.
“It certainly raises questions as to the caliber of the leadership that the Society has.
And that remark, in turn, raises questions about the good treatment a regularized Society of St. Pius X might expect to receive in the Archdiocese of Boston. “
Perhaps he should be just as concerned about the “caliber of the leadership” provided by pervert protecting bishops, such as Mahony, Moreno, O’Brien and all the others.
Would either of you care to post the 'teachings' of the sspx on the documents of Vatican Council II? We would all be interested in gaining a deeper understanding of what has been taught to sspx members over the past 40 years.
You wrote:
“And that remark, in turn, raises questions about the good treatment a regularized Society of St. Pius X might expect to receive in the Archdiocese of Boston.”
Not really. It and when the SSPX is regularized it will still have a great deal of freedom from the local bishop and will be protected by the Ecclesia Dei commission. The greatest problem the SSPXers have are themselves and their leadership.
Oh, dear. This is turning into quite a fuddle, isn’t it?
I guess nobody cares how offended I am that over 70% of the U.S. Jewish community voted for an American hating, Israel hating, Iran loving, socialist for president. Perhaps I’m less concerned about the holocaust than the coming catastrophe of a nuclear armed Iran. After Nov 4th, I must say couldn’t care less how they feel about Pope Benedict XVI.
I am not an SSPXer, so I have had no first hand knowlege of “the ‘teachings’ of the sspx on the documents of Vatican Council II”.
That said, the parishs in which I have lived for most of the last forty-five years taught me that the documents of Vatican II had:
Outlawed Latin;
Required Communion rails to be removed;
Required standing for Communion;
Required the priest to “face the people” during Mass;
Recommended/required that Traditional Hymns/organ music be discarded in favor of modern contemporary music with guitars, tambourines and pianos;
Required “grip and grin” sessions before and during Mass;
Recommended Communion in the hand;
Recommended that people not kneel at Mass;
Allowed liturgical dancers (or liturgical movement, whatever that is, I am afraid to ask);
and other things too numerous to mention, but you get the idea.
All of these things are BOLD FACED LIES by clerics in communion with their bishops who are in communion with Rome.
And this guy (O’Malley)has the gall to disparage the “caliber of the leadership” of the SSPX folks?
Very well said. I’m also not an SSPXer, but I can’t believe that the Archbishop of Boston has the chutzpah to knock them. His archdiocese has been in free fall for decades (closed churches, closed schools, dwindling vocations, etc.), so one should certainly question that “caliber of leadership” Boston’s Catholics have had, as well. He’s upset that Williamson is a member in good standing of the SSPX? Well, I’m upset that the Kennedys and other pro-abortion politicians of their ilk are members in good standing of the Archdiocese of Boston.
The whack-jobs in the SSPX need to have a bright light shone upon them so they’ll either retract their statements, or shut up completely.
That said, I wish our bishops were similarly embarrassed when their brethren go off the reservation on the far left.
Honestly! Give me a break. LOL. I think they are smarter than than that, they know nonsense when they hear it.
This goes to show how much detatchment is necessary from the utter seriousness with which we take oureselves.
They had plenty of forgiveness for chickenhawks.
. . . But enter now the villains! Firstly a glamorous Baroness previously engaged to be married to the Captain, who schemes to get Julie Andrews out of the way, back to the Convent (but didn't you know, "The path of true love never did run smooth"?). Secondly, villain of villains, a - a - a NAZI! (Original sin? - never heard of it! Isn't all sin Nazi sin?) . . . .Shiny white wedding dress (of course), wedding bells all over the place and a lovely ceremony (of course), to be spoiled only by the brutal re-appearance of the nasty Nazi - the Captain must report for duty to the Third Reich!
The family tries to sneak away. The nasty Nazi spots them, so now they all break out into singing Edelweiss. The nasty Nazi is foiled when the family escape to the convent (where else?), but drama rolls as the nasty Nazis close in on the convent. (But didn't you know, "Life is not just a bed of roses"?) The Captain is heroic (of course), but the dastardly villains are only foiled for good when their car is incapacitated by the nuns turned into mechanics (of course), and the last shots show the "family" climbing a mountain path to get out of the Third Reich, amidst hills which are once more - go on, don't tell me you couldn't guess! -- "alive with the sound of music". How truly heart -warming. . . .
As for cleanness, many films may be worse than the Sound of Music, but stop and think - are youth, physical attractiveness and being in love the essence of marriage? Can you imagine this Julie Andrews staying with the Captain if "the romance went out of their marriage"? Would she not divorce him and grab his children from him to be her toys? Such romance is not actually pornographic but it is virtually so, in other words all the elements of pornography are there, just waiting to break out. One remembers the media sensation when a few years later Julie Andrews appeared topless in another film. That was no sensation, just a natural development for one rolling canine female.
As for being a family film, by glorifying that romance which is essentially self-centred, The Sound of Music puts selfishness in the place of selflessness between husband and wife, and by putting friendliness and fun in the place of authority and rules, it invites disorder between parents and children. This is a new model family which in short order will be no family at all, its liberated members flying off in all different directions. . .
You have a point there, ALPA. It’s not only Jews, just about everybody seems to feel entitled to react with outrage if the Pope or a Catholic leader says something they don’t like. Hey, it’s not THEIR religion. Imagine if the same amount of press coverage were given to the anti-Catholic jokes, smears on sacred Catholic beliefs, and nasty comments against the Holy Father, and even Mary and Jesus, on a daily basis. We could hardly have room for anything else in the news. Imagine if Catholics freaked out every time someone made a comment that did not concur with their view of history or reality. It’s so commonplace and socially acceptable, in the news, in literature, in pop music, that only the most egregious insults get a response, and then usually only from The Catholic League, an independent organization, not a bishop or Vatican official. The bishops jumping on Pelosi and Biden for their unique interpretations of Catholic theology was a very rare exception, but there’s enough of that garbage happening it could be a daily occurrence.
He obviously does not realize that the “Sound of Music” is a TRUE story!
Actually, he does note that is based on a true story early in the letter. I posted only a portion of his comments, as the letter is rather long. You can read it by clicking on the link.
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.