PDA

View Full Version : Vatican's ruffle. From Panama hats to yes, fountain pens.



Ondina
November 20th, 2014, 11:47 PM
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/19/us-pope-raffle-idUSKCN0J30YS20141119

And for a good cause, too.

Tony Rex
November 21st, 2014, 01:59 AM
Got nothing against you or your post Ondina, but no thanks.

Don't get me wrong. I'm a papist, and a serious one at that. Each year my Peter's Pence contribution alone is worth more than a really nice pen. I pray for his intentions and all that. And I'm also for the poor, but I will not be supporting his stupid media stunts, because they come at a great irony (http://pblosser.blogspot.com.au/2014/11/ironies-showers-for-homeless-in-st.html).

Poor calligraphists...

Ondina
November 21st, 2014, 08:05 AM
Thank you for the link to your thoughts on the dismissal of 500 painters, calligraphers and other staff dedicated till now to make the personalized parchments for blessings and papal bulls. I'm afraid I personally find the measure reasonable and even positive for reasons that are long to explain here and that include both personal and practical considerations ( the very idea of them just shakes my concept of basic fairness). Having volunteered long at many levels with the sad reality homeless people is, I think free public showers are not a bad thing. Not ideal. But better than nothing. Specially in Rome, Santiago or cities where it always existed a long, millenarian tradition of pilgrims and shelters for them.

Just wanting to pass on the news of a chance of having a brand new gift to the Pope that otherhow would gather dust in what must be an immense warehouse in the Vatican. There is a list of the items, but I have not reviewed them, although I've read real Ecuador Panamas and some fountain pens are in it.

Sailor Kenshin
November 24th, 2014, 08:12 AM
Got nothing against you or your post Ondina, but no thanks.

Don't get me wrong. I'm a papist, and a serious one at that. Each year my Peter's Pence contribution alone is worth more than a really nice pen. I pray for his intentions and all that. And I'm also for the poor, but I will not be supporting his stupid media stunts, because they come at a great irony (http://pblosser.blogspot.com.au/2014/11/ironies-showers-for-homeless-in-st.html).

Poor calligraphists...

And what will happen to the calligraphists/phers?

VertOlive
November 25th, 2014, 05:33 PM
I think the gorgeous Papal Blessing that we received from Pope Emeritus Benedict XlV for our marriage might have been done by such a calligrapher. It appears to be hand written and elaborately illustrated in a dozen colors. About 12" x 14".

Tony Rex
November 25th, 2014, 07:48 PM
Got nothing against you or your post Ondina, but no thanks.

Don't get me wrong. I'm a papist, and a serious one at that. Each year my Peter's Pence contribution alone is worth more than a really nice pen. I pray for his intentions and all that. And I'm also for the poor, but I will not be supporting his stupid media stunts, because they come at a great irony (http://pblosser.blogspot.com.au/2014/11/ironies-showers-for-homeless-in-st.html).

Poor calligraphists...

And what will happen to the calligraphists/phers?

Idk mate. But hey, at least they can have a free shower! I reckon this Pope has very little sense of the sacred. First, the calligraphers, next he'll probably rent out the Sistine chapel for events.

Wait. He did. For a Porche corporate party or something..

Personally, I wouldn't risk of committing simony by buying papal fountain pen with the bragging rights that come with it for "social justice". But that's just me.

This pontificate is more and more like that rubbish sixties book/flick "The Shoes of the Fisherman". Instead, may I suggest The Death of a Pope instead? Well, not literally. The novel (http://www.ignatius.com/promotions/death-of-a-pope-book/). A much better read.

Ondina
November 25th, 2014, 11:39 PM
Got nothing against you or your post Ondina, but no thanks.

Don't get me wrong. I'm a papist, and a serious one at that. Each year my Peter's Pence contribution alone is worth more than a really nice pen. I pray for his intentions and all that. And I'm also for the poor, but I will not be supporting his stupid media stunts, because they come at a great irony (http://pblosser.blogspot.com.au/2014/11/ironies-showers-for-homeless-in-st.html).

Poor calligraphists...



And what will happen to the calligraphists/phers?

They are 500 calligraphers on the Vatican's payroll that will no longer live just out of making papal bulls and marriage blessings ( for those who can pay them). The more skilled will continue to offer their services as freelancers to the Vatican's library for restoration services. And the bulls and blessings will continue to be issued but not from the Vatican but from an internet site.

Yes, there will be more showers, not just one for the tourist. And, yes, right on St. Peter's square. I agree on the use of any premises. Most don't.

Ondina
November 26th, 2014, 12:22 AM
[QUOTE=Tony Rex;105244



Idk mate. But hey, at least they can have a free shower! I reckon this Pope has very little sense of the sacred. First, the calligraphers, next he'll probably rent out the Sistine chapel for events.

Wait. He did. For a Porche corporate party or something..

Personally, I wouldn't risk of committing simony by buying papal fountain pen with the bragging rights that come with it for "social justice". But that's just me.

This pontificate is more and more like that rubbish sixties book/flick "The Shoes of the Fisherman". Instead, may I suggest The Death of a Pope instead? Well, not literally. The novel (http://www.ignatius.com/promotions/death-of-a-pope-book/). A much better read.[/QUOTE]

He and Christ had been called "comunist" before ( although he took it with a sense of humour. Probably the other guy did, too). So far only one was assassinated by his ideas. Or no?. Ioannes Paulus I had exactly the same and lasted just 33 days, but, he did live in the Papal's apartment surrounded by the Roman Curia. On the other hand, Franciscus programs his own agenda, lives surrounded by a multitude of students and pilgrims and even cooks for himself and others. Harder to get, perhaps?
Simony is trafficking for money in any spiritual thing. I'll devote some thoughts on selling all unwanted presents that, by law, must be piled up til the end of times to fund the act of charity described on John 13:1-17 vs. selling waivers on sins, crimes, or simply uncomfortable to follow precepts for a profit only, off course, to those who are able to pay for it. It looks Luke 18.22 versus a clear case of simony to me.

Tony Rex
November 26th, 2014, 12:44 AM
[QUOTE=Tony Rex;105244



Idk mate. But hey, at least they can have a free shower! I reckon this Pope has very little sense of the sacred. First, the calligraphers, next he'll probably rent out the Sistine chapel for events.

Wait. He did. For a Porche corporate party or something..

Personally, I wouldn't risk of committing simony by buying papal fountain pen with the bragging rights that come with it for "social justice". But that's just me.

This pontificate is more and more like that rubbish sixties book/flick "The Shoes of the Fisherman". Instead, may I suggest The Death of a Pope instead? Well, not literally. The novel (http://www.ignatius.com/promotions/death-of-a-pope-book/). A much better read.

He and Christ had been called "comunist" before ( although he took it with a sense of humour. Probably the other guy did, too). So far only one was assassinated by his ideas. Or no?. Ioannes Paulus I had exactly the same and lasted just 33 days, but, he did live in the Papal's apartment surrounded by the Roman Curia. On the other hand, Franciscus programs his own agenda, lives surrounded by a multitude of students and pilgrims and even cooks for himself and others. Harder to get, perhaps?
Simony is trafficking for money in any spiritual thing. I'll devote some thoughts on selling all unwanted presents that, by law, must be piled up til the end of times to fund the act of charity described on John 13:1-17 vs. selling waivers on sins, crimes, or simply uncomfortable to follow precepts for a profit only, off course, to those who are able to pay for it. It looks Luke 18.22 versus a clear case of simony to me.[/QUOTE]

"Franciscus" the Saint, not this Jesuit poser, was rebuked by his peers for buying expensive chalice and vestment for liturgy, which money could've been spent feeding the poor. He said the poor was always with him, not so The Lord.

Judas also objected about the expensive perfume poured just to wash the Lords feet, right? It's all about priority.

But if buying Bergoglio's undies get you warm fuzzy feeling inside, who am I to judge?

Ondina
November 26th, 2014, 12:45 AM
I think the gorgeous Papal Blessing that we received from Pope Emeritus Benedict XlV for our marriage might have been done by such a calligrapher. It appears to be hand written and elaborately illustrated in a dozen colors. About 12" x 14".

They can be requested here; http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/institutions_connected/elem_apost/documents/rc_elemosineria_doc_20130218_benedizioni_en.html The nuns and monks that are most of the calligrapher's body will keep on making them with ink, and pen on parchment. Just on commission instead of on payroll. They are indeed beautiful, and pieces of art. Not made with fountain pen inks, though, but with China's inks and real feather pens or dip nibs. Some people even supply their own so they can keep them, and later order a "plume dentelle" to collect and treasure. http://artimannias.blogspot.com.es/2011/02/plumillas-ornamentadas.html
From an artistic point of view, is interesting to see how the style and patters vary with each pontificate.

Tony Rex
November 26th, 2014, 12:46 AM
And why is this on "Market Feedback" anyway?

Jon Szanto
November 26th, 2014, 01:01 AM
I've suggested to Dan that this thread be moved to the proper sub-forum.

Ondina
November 26th, 2014, 01:22 AM
I've suggested to Dan that this thread be moved to the proper sub-forum.
Thank you, my excuses if posting about the fountain pen ruffle here is not correct.

Jon Szanto
November 26th, 2014, 01:27 AM
I've suggested to Dan that this thread be moved to the proper sub-forum.
Thank you, my excuses if posting about the fountain pen ruffle here is not correct.

No apology necessary. It just seems that, whatever the initial intent, the bulk of the discussion is centered on religion. We have made an area specifically for those topics, and it will be well at home there.

Ondina
November 26th, 2014, 02:26 AM
I've suggested to Dan that this thread be moved to the proper sub-forum.
Thank you, my excuses if posting about the fountain pen ruffle here is not correct.

No apology necessary. It just seems that, whatever the initial intent, the bulk of the discussion is centered on religion. We have made an area specifically for those topics, and it will be well at home there.

So the original post for a third party sale/ruffle was OK to be posted here? ( asking for future reference).

Jon Szanto
November 26th, 2014, 02:36 AM
So the original post for a third party sale/ruffle was OK to be posted here? ( asking for future reference).

Well, I'm just a forum member here, not running the place, so take this for what it is worth:

It seems misplaced to me.

First off, you'll note the description of the Market Feedback forum: "Share your experience, good or bad, with a company, restorer, or nibmeister. Read the rules before posting." And then you would want to read those rules (http://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/4-Market-Feedback-Rules) that are mentioned.

What you posted was a news article about this Vatican auction, which did not even include any details about how to actually take part in it. It was a news item, and while it may have had a peripheral element about pens, the bulk of the information was about all the other details; as such, the discussion here, with the exception of the calligraphers, has focused on the religion and institutional (church) aspects.

Being that it seems so far from the point of the Market Feedback section, as well as the fact that our forum had decided to put topics of a religious or political nature in a special sub-forum, I believe it should have started there, and stayed there.

It isn't the end of the world, and it certainly isn't my call.

Ondina
November 26th, 2014, 02:57 AM
It a third party ruffle, makes no difference if made by the Vatican, a Harvard fraternity or a school's fund raiser, at least to me. The Reuter's Agency article states the ruffle has been announced by posters around the City of the Vatican, which has also the short list of items and the prices of the tickets. Passing by lat week I saw there were a couple of fountain pens in it and the intent was just passing the information -I don't participate-.
I've read the rules of several subforums and none seems to fit well in this case. And as the OP I should have not tried to being courteous but but to cut out the drift the thread led to, as it has annoyed other members. This is not the first time I did publish internet finds or sales (right here), and still is not clear to me if there is an appropriate place. I appreciate the interest, though.

Sailor Kenshin
November 26th, 2014, 08:57 AM
[QUOTE=Tony Rex;105244



Idk mate. But hey, at least they can have a free shower! I reckon this Pope has very little sense of the sacred. First, the calligraphers, next he'll probably rent out the Sistine chapel for events.

Wait. He did. For a Porche corporate party or something..

Personally, I wouldn't risk of committing simony by buying papal fountain pen with the bragging rights that come with it for "social justice". But that's just me.

This pontificate is more and more like that rubbish sixties book/flick "The Shoes of the Fisherman". Instead, may I suggest The Death of a Pope instead? Well, not literally. The novel (http://www.ignatius.com/promotions/death-of-a-pope-book/). A much better read.

He and Christ had been called "comunist" before ( although he took it with a sense of humour. Probably the other guy did, too). So far only one was assassinated by his ideas. Or no?. Ioannes Paulus I had exactly the same and lasted just 33 days, but, he did live in the Papal's apartment surrounded by the Roman Curia. On the other hand, Franciscus programs his own agenda, lives surrounded by a multitude of students and pilgrims and even cooks for himself and others. Harder to get, perhaps?
Simony is trafficking for money in any spiritual thing. I'll devote some thoughts on selling all unwanted presents that, by law, must be piled up til the end of times to fund the act of charity described on John 13:1-17 vs. selling waivers on sins, crimes, or simply uncomfortable to follow precepts for a profit only, off course, to those who are able to pay for it. It looks Luke 18.22 versus a clear case of simony to me.

"Franciscus" the Saint, not this Jesuit poser, was rebuked by his peers for buying expensive chalice and vestment for liturgy, which money could've been spent feeding the poor. He said the poor was always with him, not so The Lord.

Judas also objected about the expensive perfume poured just to wash the Lords feet, right? It's all about priority.

But if buying Bergoglio's undies get you warm fuzzy feeling inside, who am I to judge?[/QUOTE]


Didn't Christ Himself also say that? I can't think of the passage... 'The poor you will always have among you...'

VertOlive
November 26th, 2014, 06:47 PM
"For those who can pay for them"--this sounds a bit like rhetoric.

We were not charged for the Papal Blessing mentioned above, anyone may request one.

dannzeman
November 27th, 2014, 08:33 AM
Thread moved to Politics, Religion, and Society subforum.

LagNut
December 2nd, 2014, 07:41 AM
Got nothing against you or your post Ondina, but no thanks.

Don't get me wrong. I'm a papist, and a serious one at that. Each year my Peter's Pence contribution alone is worth more than a really nice pen. I pray for his intentions and all that. And I'm also for the poor, but I will not be supporting his stupid media stunts, because they come at a great irony (http://pblosser.blogspot.com.au/2014/11/ironies-showers-for-homeless-in-st.html).

Poor calligraphists...
So, I'm assuming you're also a Catholic?

The College of Cardinals got it wrong this time? I mean, in your opinion, Pope Francis is just a "poser".

The quoting has gone askew, so maybe I'm attributing to the wrong poster.

Mike

johnus
December 2nd, 2014, 07:18 PM
Enjoy the thread. I read the forum on my iPhone under Timeline so it real doesn't matter to me were any of them are posted. Find that these types of thought are more interesting than the 'pen for sale' ads.

ps. Any here living or working at the Vatican that can get a ticket for me??

Tony Rex
December 4th, 2014, 02:23 AM
Got nothing against you or your post Ondina, but no thanks.

Don't get me wrong. I'm a papist, and a serious one at that. Each year my Peter's Pence contribution alone is worth more than a really nice pen. I pray for his intentions and all that. And I'm also for the poor, but I will not be supporting his stupid media stunts, because they come at a great irony (http://pblosser.blogspot.com.au/2014/11/ironies-showers-for-homeless-in-st.html).

Poor calligraphists...
So, I'm assuming you're also a Catholic?

The College of Cardinals got it wrong this time? I mean, in your opinion, Pope Francis is just a "poser".

The quoting has gone askew, so maybe I'm attributing to the wrong poster.

Mike

I am. Maybe. To put it mildly, yes.

I said maybe, because I truly don't know, but the conclave result (which was ultimately a human act, even though inspired and guaranteed* by the Holy Spirit) and his Holiness personal choices were two different matters and obviously are beyond my control, therefore my opinion matters little, really.

I do however will speak up (http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2013/10/10/some-catholic-traditionalists-have-about-the-same-relationship-with-the-catholic-tradition-as-the-bnp-with-the-english-conservative-tradition/)against things that are against my Christian conscience, even to the Pontiff's face if I must. It's an obligation. I can assure you, we the younger generation won't make it easier for Lord Denethor's passing generation.

He wanted ¡Hagan lío!? He got it.

* just think of it like a belligerent mutt on a very long leash.

Sailor Kenshin
December 4th, 2014, 05:20 AM
Lord Denethor's passing generation? VERY interesting comment....

LagNut
December 5th, 2014, 11:12 AM
Tony

I don't know the reference to Lord Denethor, except in Tolkein.

I wish you experiences like I have had with the Holy Spirit. I'm assuming you are honest in your fervor. I cannot put a metaphor on what they were like, except that I didn't know what was going on, or what my part in it was, until it had actually occurred. Subtle, deep, and not something I had intended.

I'll be going back to re-read the Gospels, just to see if I can see a shadow of what you're talking about in the Gospels. I do understand we all get to account for our actions, and I understand your point. However, if I'm going to be pointing at something at when I'm being called to account, I'll be digging from the Gospels, and not my contemporaries or the way I was raised. And to be brutally honest, I can't say I'm confident living up to the standard of the Gospels. Not a simple thing, at least the way I read it. (And I find more every time I go back to read them).


Regardless, Francis is our Pope. I understand having differing views, and the struggle to understand how this is what was supposed to happen, but I do believe it's all part of a plan that neither you or I can understand. I had a great deal more certainty about what that plan was when I was younger, but that's long over. All any of us can do is follow our conscience.

I do implore you to go back through the Gospels (with an open mind), and use them as your guide. If you decide you can't be a Catholic, I can understand that also, and sometimes that is part of the journey.

Mike

Sailor Kenshin
December 5th, 2014, 12:00 PM
From what I can recall, Denethor was prideful, but also despairing: he believed what he saw in the Palantir.

VertOlive
December 6th, 2014, 05:19 PM
We have survived other calamitous papacies, we'll survive this 'lio' as well.

Tony Rex
December 6th, 2014, 06:14 PM
If you decide you can't be a Catholic

Mike, care to explain as to why you think that I no longer "want to be catholic"? So from criticising the Pope one can't be catholic? So Sts Catherine of Siena, Fisher, More, Vincent Ferrer weren't a catholic right? :)

I had assumed it would be obvious for even a casual observer that there was more to it than just "fervor" for my grievances. Even peeps who read about their pope on Reuters or NYT would understand that. And not all Catholics are casual, some are serious about their faith more than just being a seasonal ultramontanist on fora. However, I accept your kind sentiments, but please do keep an open mind and try to keep up.. Please..


@SK maybe not so much despair first, but pride. The bad steward thought he could outwit Sauron. He also favours one child to another, sacrificing the good child to curry favor to the world. No wonder the world likes him so much.

@VO I gave this Jesuit benefit of the doubt out of our Card Pell's assurances, "he's a good son the the Church" whatever.. So I did look away over his silly off the cuff comments.. But concrete actions like the FFI heavy handedness and dirty tactics, the recent farcical Synod14, and Card Burke's demotion totally gave him away. The last one was strike three. Seriously, retirement at 66? Oh no, not enough, now the Wyrmtongues of the Curia want his cardinalate red hat back! "Will no one rid us of this troublesome priest from rural Wisconsin?", they say. They knew Herod was on their side and they want a head on a plate for defending Marriage.

Speaking of which, I kissed Cardinal Burke's black stoned ring, he then blesses my little family after a solemn high Mass last year. ecce quam bonum et quam jucundum, habitare fratres in unum!

Pax,
TR

Sailor Kenshin
December 7th, 2014, 06:36 AM
Well, I've got my pea-brain wrapped around Denethor and it won't let go.

You are probably right about Pride versus Humility. When Sam carried the ring, he was sore tempted. But his innate Humility saved him from Gollum's fate.

I loved the character of Faramir, and thought the movie did him a biiiig dis-service.

johnus
December 7th, 2014, 09:24 AM
50yrs of Conservatism hasn't done much for the Church. A different approach will be interesting. We need to wait and see.

Tony Rex
December 7th, 2014, 08:13 PM
50yrs of Conservatism hasn't done much for the Church. A different approach will be interesting. We need to wait and see.

Eh? Isn't it the other way around? I suppose things look like that from a [historically incomplete] worldview; where everything's polarised and the truth is determined by numbers. I can relate because I used to be like that too. No worries.

By the way, you need not wait. Here is from the horse's mouth in a recent interview:


-A recent survey (Pew) confirmed that, despite the "Francis effect", Catholics still keep leaving the Church.
-I am familiar with the figures disclosed at Aparecida, it´s the only information I have. There are evidently several factors of influence, independent of the Church. The theology of prosperity, for instance, just to quote an example, has inspired many religious propositions which people feel attracted to. These people, however, end up in the middle. But let´s leave out factors which are external to the Church. I wonder about ourselves, what is it that we ourselves do, what is within the Church that makes the faithful unhappy? It´s that people don´t feel we are close enough, it´s clericalism. Today , to be close means to reach out to Catholics, to seek people out and be close to them, to sympathize with their problems, with their reality. Clericalism, as I told the CELAM bishops in Río de Janeiro, stopped laypersons from maturing. Precisely, laypersons are more mature in Latin America when they express popular piety. Clericalism was always an issue for lay organizations. I spoke of it in Evangelii Gaudium.

Yes. For the populist point of view "happiness" is paramount, then he went on blaming this and that. SNAFU.

Salvation was paid dearly. Selling it with cheap tricks ain't right.

VertOlive
December 8th, 2014, 01:08 PM
If I neglected to clarify, I consider this papacy to be calamitous. At our house we:

Keep our heads down and keep going.
Keep the Faith.
Mention it, again, to the Immaculata on this her Feast Day.

LagNut
December 8th, 2014, 06:09 PM
Tony Rex,

I suppose where I got the "not warning to be Catholic" came first from the tone of your comments, but was cemented by the yes/maybe response.

I've lived through Popes who represented a sharp break with the church I grew up with. The entire process has crystallized, to me, what the church actually is, even if it is not as omniscient as I used to think it was.

I know my daughters feel much more at home under Francis. I could not explain some of the actions of Benedict, at all. When we approached our pastor for clarification, he assured us that I was mistaken, and my girls had understood correctly. This was the disposal of the non gold chalices and purchase of gold ones. No doubt quite in line with your beliefs, and out of line dramatically with mine.

I grew up with Vatican II. I spent my adult life watching it dismantled. So I see this papacy as a return to values I grew up with, and which I instilled in my kids.

I will keep you and VO, and your families, in my prayers. I would love it if you would do the same for me.

Mike

Tony Rex
December 8th, 2014, 08:29 PM
Absolutely. Last Sunday I prayed especially for you Mike... Ondina, SK, VO, and for the Holy Father and his intentions, and Pope Benedict's old age, and for a Jesuit priest friend who's mourning, ... after I received the blessed Sacrament under the usual condition.

I might have used a strong language to get my point across, but I can assure I wish none of you harm. Not a single dot. Not even to the Pope who had called us names and did violence to some of us just (real Fransiscans of all people) for being faithful to the Depositum Fidei, which he was entrusted to keep, not improvised. But I was not surprised by the audacity, I grew up and educated by the Jesuits for about fifteen years or so.

Dismantled? Funny, at our "traditional" Parish the documents of the last Council are often quoted in homilies because the were read, discussed, and implemented. As opposed the "Spirit of the Vatican II" banner used by the modernists ideologues, who supplanted them with hermeneutic bulldust and hijacked just the name. They're of many factions but mainly identifiable anthropocentrist as opposed to Christocentrist; what a Christian should be. I was born after the Council, and still busy unlearning plenty of material because of that.

Well, some think LAMY 2000 is the best pen and care for nothing else, while others went head first into the vintage world and found gems..

LagNut
December 9th, 2014, 08:27 AM
I had a Catholic education for most of my pre-university life, Christian Brothers, but no Jesuits. The grade schools closed as I was going through them.

My knowledge of what was not Vatican II comes from my oldest sisters, who were in their twenties when it came about. I was born in 1959, just before it. We have animated discussions still. One accepted, and loved the changes, the other would like to go back to the Latin mass, as just one example.

I think we are on opposite sides of this divide, but we hopefully learn much from each other, and keep each other honest in ways our respective choirs will not.

I also wish you peace in the coming years, as I have walked in your shoes for the past thirty. Not fun. But it did temper my faith in ways that would not have occurred otherwise.

I'm also not sure what will be happening next. We both have our conceptions of where this is going, but I suspect we will both be surprised.

Mike

johnus
December 9th, 2014, 10:27 AM
Continued reading of this thread yield a flash back to the 60's when I said something about the Vatican to my then elderly grandmother who replied: "If the Pope sins, it doesn't mean that you have to follow him."
Not sure what she meant then, and still aren't sure.

VertOlive
December 9th, 2014, 06:07 PM
I'm a Lay Dominican, educated by Dominicans in the '50's. I'm pushing 60 and have an 8 yr old boy. You bet I'm glad to be in someone's prayers, he in particular will need it!

Mike--you need a gold chalice, that's Our Lord in there!

Johnus--yes the Pope can sin and people can follow him there, that's why Jesus mentions millstones.

LagNut
December 9th, 2014, 06:10 PM
You and yours are definitely in mine.

LagNut
December 9th, 2014, 06:35 PM
OK, confused the carriage return and submit keys.

We'll have to differ on the chalice. I understand the sentiment, but don't agree with the conclusion.

I'm going back and forth over going down this debate. I suspect neither of us will end up with changed minds, but we might at least be clear on where we are coming from.

Though neither Benedict or Francis is likely to get their paths altered because of it.

You are absolutely in my prayers now, however. I am in awe.

Mike

Tony Rex
December 9th, 2014, 10:12 PM
Rather than second hand smoke, how about reading the documents yourself? It's not so bad. But I agree there won't be any agreement anytime soon. The "baptised pagans" march into the Church chin up and want to change her teachings to suit them, while repentant sinners with his eyes down begging for forgiveness and was willing to change himself to what Christ has commanded. They belong in two different worlds.

I'm actually optimistic. Benedict's prediction of the Church becoming more compact and pious has begun to shape. While the fruits of the failed experiment fell away, many young saplings who long for the true undiluted faith grew strong :)

Regarding the chalice; I don't know about you, but we believe in the transubstantiation. Some men (many Saints included) took the humiliation of the Papal tiara and red shoes in the liturgy to give honour befits to welcome the King, the red symbolizes the blood of the Martyrs along the centuries shed for Christ, and he walks on the red puddle including his first predecessor's St Peter. For me that is a sign of humility in honoring his betters --OTOH elevating one's brown shoes to a formal banquet, and in the process becoming popular in the eyes of the world is quite the opposite of that. Those are only shoes, what about the sacred vessels? Di was spot on, in the ciborium and chalice, the Lord's Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity is in there! In which no gold suffices, but at least we can try can't we?... Unless you don't believe in transubstantiation? or semi-believe or "believe" with reservations? In the "Gospel" you've mentioned a lot, a disciple was concerned about expensive perfumes poured unto the Lord's feet and so on.... :rolleyes:

Tell me. Would a fountain pen geek sign an important contract or certificate with a ballpoint? Yea that's right, because ballpoints are "practical and humble" right?

Regarding Benedict's "luxury" lifestyle vs Bergoglio's "humility": Did you know the "humble" Domus Sanctae Marthae is full on italian marble and oak of six stars luxury that cost a ton of money just for the security arrangement, while the plumbing and heating at Benedict's apostolic old "palace" were considered features? Did you know of the tens of thousands of euros spent for the conclave after party? I can go on and on here but I won't..

I am also in awe but it's unnecessary and unhelpful.

johnus
December 10th, 2014, 01:12 PM
Be not deceived; God is not mocked...

(Remember more than I thought from those 10yrs of Parochial School and the Masters from the Catholic College).

VertOlive
December 10th, 2014, 02:21 PM
Our Lay Dominican group studied the documents of Vatican ll after Pope BXlV suggested the practice as a yearly theme. They are not difficult and I was so surprised at what is not in them!

Various polls seem to indicate a large number of people who consider themselves to be Catholic do not believe in the Transubstantiation. Hence all those stoneware chalices and burlap chausables!

LagNut
December 10th, 2014, 09:43 PM
Tony,

You're attributing views to me I did not express. Lots of them.

I do believe in the transubstantiation. As you put it, "We can try", with gold, but gold's position in the hierarchy of elements is a human construct. Meanwhile, we used up church resources to honor this human conceit. And we know that we are held to account for what we do with what we are given.

On Vatican II, let's see. I think I've got a reasonable idea. Mass is now in the vulgate. Priest no longer has his back to the congregation. Greater participation of the laity (should that be capitalized?) in the life of the church. And a greater and more central role of the scripture in the spritual life of all Catholics. I can't say it's a small set of documents(Vatican II documents), or easy reading. but am I wrong in these? Of all these I've noted, the centrality of scripture is the most important of those I've listed to me. The bringing of the faith in a more direct way to the unwashed masses is central, and so I have to say the idea that we need to get a "purer church" by getting rid of those that aren't worthy isn't one of them. Having spirited, but respectful discussions amongst the church is.

I do understand your idea with the chalices, it's not the first round of these discussions I've had on this subject.

Finally, on the awe, maybe it was not clear, but that was awe of someone crazy(like Holy Spirit crazy) enough to be raising an 8yr old boy going on 60. Maybe this comment will be miscontrued, but there can be no higher praise from me.

Cheers, with the storm approaching. If it takes me a while to reply it's because our bad infrastructure can't take 50mph winds.
Mike

LagNut
December 10th, 2014, 10:19 PM
Tony,

I was mainly replying to Vert Olive, and did not quote, since I was doing that quickly on a tablet that doesn't have a keyboard.

If you took that as a jab at you or your views, it was not. I'm really trying not to raise the temperature. I would rather remain in light, and not heat.

Mike

Tony Rex
December 11th, 2014, 12:02 AM
On Vatican II, let's see. I think I've got a reasonable idea. Mass is now in the vulgate. Priest no longer has his back to the congregation. Greater participation of the laity (should that be capitalized?) in the life of the church. And a greater and more central role of the scripture in the spritual life of all Catholics. I can't say it's a small set of documents(Vatican II documents), or easy reading. but am I wrong in these? Of all these I've noted, the centrality of scripture is the most important of those I've listed to me. The bringing of the faith in a more direct way to the unwashed masses is central, and so I have to say the idea that we need to get a "purer church" by getting rid of those that aren't worthy isn't one of them. Having spirited, but respectful discussions amongst the church is.


Okay. Then let us know which part of the Council documents that say those things, the priest should face the people (thus sticking his behind to the tabernacle!), more scripture reading in the Mass etc.

Let's be specific.

I agree it's not an easy task, but let's pretend that we are not indifferent of the relevant document, and if I may point out we should be looking at Sacrosanctum Concilium on this. Say for example, our priests quoted the scriptures either from the Introit, gradual, or the readings, or Biblical commentaries, Church Fathers et al. in their homilies simply because there's


"sermon, moreover, should draw its content mainly from scriptural and liturgical sources,"

...there. Like I said, the Council is literally studied and implemented at our traditional parish. Heck, even the schismatics who disagree with the 5% of the Council, still agree with the 95%. Again, which part that say to replace ad Orientem to ad populum etc? In what way I'm not being respectful? All I'm asking is to call things by their proper names. It has been too long now people got away of quoting the Vatican 2 without actually quoting..

For how long now? Almost fifty years? All in the name of liberalism, sentimentalism, or indifferentism..

Sailor Kenshin
December 11th, 2014, 05:37 AM
Who was it told Christ the money which the repentant woman spent on that alabaster jar of perfume for His head could be 'sold to help the poor?'

LagNut
December 11th, 2014, 08:41 AM
Tony,

Still not in the teeth of the storm here.

So we do agree that the documents are not a simple clear read? This will not be quick on my part, I'm far more conversant with the Gospels.

On the centrality of scripture, and primacy of the Gospels, (as far as I understand this) in Christian life, not just in the Mass. I'm reasonably sure the scripture was always a important part of the Mass, but maybe not? The central point of mass is communion, at least in our part of the world.

From Dei Verbum: (Which is the first document on the website, hmm)

18. It is common knowledge that among all the Scriptures, even those of the New Testament, the Gospels have a special preeminence, and rightly so, for they are the principal witness for the life and teaching of the incarnate Word, our savior.


and a bit later, in section 25
The sacred synod also earnestly and especially urges all the Christian faithful, especially Religious, to learn by frequent reading of the divine Scriptures the "excellent knowledge of Jesus Christ" (Phil. 3:8). "For ignorance of the Scriptures is ignorance of Christ."(5) Therefore, they should gladly put themselves in touch with the sacred text itself, whether it be through the liturgy, rich in the divine word, or through devotional reading, or through instructions suitable for the purpose and other aids which, in our time, with approval and active support of the shepherds of the Church, are commendably spread everywhere. And let them remember that prayer should accompany the reading of Sacred Scripture, so that God and man may talk together; for "we speak to Him when we pray; we hear Him when we read the divine saying." (6)

On the chalice question, from Lumen Gentium(third paragraph of section 8):
Just as Christ carried out the work of redemption in poverty and persecution, so the Church is called to follow the same route that it might communicate the fruits of salvation to men.

On cleaning out the church so only the true part remains, again Lumen Gentium(end of section 28 )
Because the human race today is joining more and more into a civic, economic and social unity, it is that much the more necessary that priests, by combined effort and aid, under the leadership of the bishops and the Supreme Pontiff, wipe out every kind of separateness, so that the whole human race may be brought into the unity of the family of God.

Chapter IV of Lumen Gentium is entirely centered on the laity. Do we agree this was a substantial change from earlier church practice?

I'm shocked to not find the position of the gluteus maximus of the priest during Mass amongst the documents. I would think this would be spelled out clearly. I'll keep looking.

Mike

Also, this is the first time in a long time I looked at my post in a true brower, and I was shocked to find smileys embedded. I don't do smileys, at least not wittingly. I had joined the colon and begin parenthesis, and this was interpreted as a frown?

Tony Rex
December 11th, 2014, 11:56 AM
@SK: It was Judas.

@Mike: I see. We truly are on a different pages here. Pardon my brevity but I'm pressed for time as well as scope—You are probably better off reading the basics in the CCC #109-119 (http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s1c2a3.htm) rather than quoting DV, which ironically quoted by one of the paragraph there. That is how I approach the Holy Scripture, and it's non negotiable. Heck even Pope Francis and I would agree on that, so I won't descend into the basics. I understand that bible bashing is probably the most popular and the mainstream form of piety nowadays, at least among the "practicing" Catholics by the "evangelical" movements etc. but I've been there and it didn't work. Tbh, I'd rather go to one of those Prosperity Gospel joints as the Pope lamented ha!

No mate. There's a totally different world of Christian piety that's true to its roots. It was suppressed in the sixties, but slowly resurfacing because the experiment has shown its result. Will you let your son in a same room with a priest nowadays? I rest my case.

And Re: priest facing the people take a close look at the second last picture... http://www.stpeterslist.com/12223/facing-god-6-memes-on-celebrating-the-mass-ad-orientem/

VertOlive
December 11th, 2014, 02:24 PM
"but gold's position in the hierarchy of elements is a human construct"-yes what other construct would we use? I'm not sure why this is an either/or question. The Church has always been on the forefront of assistance to the poor, Francis is not covering new ground here with attention to them, but that does not need to obscure the honor due to Our Lord when He in His solicitude comes to us on the altar. There is room for both.

I can (and do) raise an abandoned infant [a task of the laity mentioned in Apostoliticum Actuositatem] and set a little cash aside to help the parish replace those chalices at the same time. I'm of the viewpoint that a lovely and reverent liturgy as well as the other sacraments is a tool of evangelization to "communicate the fruits of salvation to men" as much as is a bag of rice. One does not eliminate the need for the other.

Onward.

sharmon202
December 11th, 2014, 07:41 PM
I am not a Catholic but my college roommate was and I learned some about it. Regardless of where this was posted it is a very interesting thread. Thanks to all for the conversation. Happy Holidays or Merry Christmas and a happy new year to all.

LagNut
December 12th, 2014, 09:08 AM
VertOlive,

If this was not an edict, I am happy with congregations making this choice themselves. That was not how it was presented to us. We had to replace all non gold chalices, they had been deemed unusable. I just accepted this as a new position of the church, one that I wouldn't have done. Was this not a change required by Rome?

Maybe I am missing the meaning here, but I think we are in agreement that chalice material should be a choice of the local congregation?

Mike

LagNut
December 12th, 2014, 09:11 AM
Tony Rex,

You ask me to show me where this is in Vatican II, then claim it is beyond me?

Which is quoted ironically?

Mike

VertOlive
December 12th, 2014, 06:27 PM
From the GIRM [General Instruction of the Roman Missal, 2010]: see section lll, Sacred Vessels--http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/general-instruction-of-the-roman-missal/girm-chapter-6.cfm

In our Parish, we did not each vote; the Pastor and the Liturgy Committee [an entirely lay group] decided to replace the glass cups used for the congregation with gold plated ones. The main chalices were all of gold already.

Ours is an inner city parish founded and still made up of working class first and second generation Poles, there is little money here, but there was a crowd in the rectory the day the word went out and those cups were paid for by end of day. Each one cost far less than most of our pens here, not to put too fine a point on it (!)

I wasn't there, but this may have been what happened at your parish-- someone pulled out the GIRM and read the part about "do not easily break", etc. and changes were made.

Tony Rex
December 12th, 2014, 09:20 PM
Tony Rex,

You ask me to show me where this is in Vatican II, then claim it is beyond me?

Which is quoted ironically?

Mike

It's hard to convey something to the point without being perceived as abrasive via net. So first let me assure you that I'm calm. However, I took your suggestion of "return to the Gospel" as "you hate the pope" therefore "your type don't read the bible" .. as a veiled attack... But that's okay by me because I was neither. And berated (semi condemned?) me with "being accountable by the Gospels" did you not? Before saying nice things like "I'll pray for you."..

Those sentiments of yours condemn. While mine towards the Pope judges. They are totally different, Mike. Did you notice on the issues I mentioned (FFI, Synod, Burke) those were concrete actions on his Holiness behalf? Yet you "kindly reminded" me of Judgement... From my tone over the internet and on issues you were barely aware of! There's a real fine line between judging and condemning and judging hearts instead of acts. Only God can judge hearts, but we can and should judge our own actions.. Even the Pope when he's wrong!

Ironically, I became a traditionalist from an honest study of the Scriptures according to directives in the catechism. I read the Sacred Scripture now through the Sacred Tradition, but before that, I was with the catholic charismatics bible bashing Pentecostal style and felt they inadequately explained things up, and especially the cherry picking the "Gospels" whenever convenient. It's no wonder there's a "Prosperity Gospel" nowadays. So should I follow your suggestion it'd be a step back for me. I no longer roll that way. I can't serve two masters. And from your tone I assumed you were from that angle, charismatic renewal stuff, am I right?

Now about the V2 quoting. I brought it up because you said you "grew up seeing it dismantled", which makes you sound like a whining neo-modernist whenever they encounter anything "pre-Vatican2".. It is a bitter irony for us who love and nurture V2, while those who constantly use catchy catchphrases like that against us while cherry picked and supplanted it with something else.

Care to explain in what way it was being "dismantled"?

LagNut
December 13th, 2014, 12:03 PM
VertOlive,

Now I am really confused about what happened. I will try to figure out what did. Doesn't help that exact memory has never been my strong suit, and aging has just made it worse. It was after my youngest was confirmed, and we heard this in the homily, as far as I remember. I also recall it being attributed to far up the food chain - beyond our diocese, and I recall it as from Benedict, but I can't really be sure on that. We didn't have glass chalices, and any injury from them would be a broken toe, if they fell. We had gold and non gold.
It really sticks in my mind because I was sure she misheard, and went straight to our pastor to clear it up as we left Mass. Dad was wrong, she was right. She was the tough one who was pushing against being confirmed, but did get confirmed in the end.

Thanks much,
Mike

LagNut
December 14th, 2014, 07:43 AM
Tony Rex,

You ask me to show me where this is in Vatican II, then claim it is beyond me?

Which is quoted ironically?

Mike

It's hard to convey something to the point without being perceived as abrasive via net. So first let me assure you that I'm calm. However, I took your suggestion of "return to the Gospel" as "you hate the pope" therefore "your type don't read the bible" .. as a veiled attack... But that's okay by me because I was neither. And berated (semi condemned?) me with "being accountable by the Gospels" did you not? Before saying nice things like "I'll pray for you."..

Those sentiments of yours condemn. While mine towards the Pope judges. They are totally different, Mike. Did you notice on the issues I mentioned (FFI, Synod, Burke) those were concrete actions on his Holiness behalf? Yet you "kindly reminded" me of Judgement... From my tone over the internet and on issues you were barely aware of! There's a real fine line between judging and condemning and judging hearts instead of acts. Only God can judge hearts, but we can and should judge our own actions.. Even the Pope when he's wrong!

Ironically, I became a traditionalist from an honest study of the Scriptures according to directives in the catechism. I read the Sacred Scripture now through the Sacred Tradition, but before that, I was with the catholic charismatics bible bashing Pentecostal style and felt they inadequately explained things up, and especially the cherry picking the "Gospels" whenever convenient. It's no wonder there's a "Prosperity Gospel" nowadays. So should I follow your suggestion it'd be a step back for me. I no longer roll that way. I can't serve two masters. And from your tone I assumed you were from that angle, charismatic renewal stuff, am I right?

Now about the V2 quoting. I brought it up because you said you "grew up seeing it dismantled", which makes you sound like a whining neo-modernist whenever they encounter anything "pre-Vatican2".. It is a bitter irony for us who love and nurture V2, while those who constantly use catchy catchphrases like that against us while cherry picked and supplanted it with something else.

Care to explain in what way it was being "dismantled"?

You quoted my post, then failed to answer the single question within it. Again, Which of my quotes of DV2 is ironic?

Looking back, I do believe now it is Sailor Kenshin who committed the act of calling Francis a "poser", not you, though you did not correct that statement. I do believe I've got that correct now, and apologize for making that mistake.

I'm not a Charismatic, never have been. I had a friend I grew up with who went down that road, I think he came back since then, but I'm not sure.

I could go through your quoted reply above and correct what you are claiming I said, but it's pretty pointless if you can't even address my simple question.

Again, which of my quotes of the text of Vatican 2 was ironic?

Mike

LagNut
December 14th, 2014, 08:15 AM
VertOlive,

Thank you for those links, but what I see there is consistent with the way things were before that particular episode:
326. In choosing materials for sacred furnishings, besides those which are traditional, others are admissible that, according to the mentality of our own age, are considered to be noble and are durable, and well suited for sacred use. In the Dioceses of the United States of America these materials may include wood, stone, or metal which are solid and appropriate to the purpose for which they are employed.

Our chalices met that criterion. The one in particular I'm recalling was I think stone, but we had a number that all were replaced with gold.

I have another question, and that is how you like the change in the language of the Mass? I'm assuming you find it better than the language that was replaced? This was maybe a year or two ago?

I have a real problem with the new language, it is jarring to me and I have to speak softly now and look at the Missals to find out the passages I'm going to be out of whack on, which seem like most of them. I'm hoping the new language(which I understand is based on literal translation of the latin) is something a significant portion of the church finds an improvement.

Again, thanks for the pointer on the chalices.
Mike

Sailor Kenshin
December 14th, 2014, 11:02 AM
Tony Rex,

You ask me to show me where this is in Vatican II, then claim it is beyond me?

Which is quoted ironically?

Mike

It's hard to convey something to the point without being perceived as abrasive via net. So first let me assure you that I'm calm. However, I took your suggestion of "return to the Gospel" as "you hate the pope" therefore "your type don't read the bible" .. as a veiled attack... But that's okay by me because I was neither. And berated (semi condemned?) me with "being accountable by the Gospels" did you not? Before saying nice things like "I'll pray for you."..

Those sentiments of yours condemn. While mine towards the Pope judges. They are totally different, Mike. Did you notice on the issues I mentioned (FFI, Synod, Burke) those were concrete actions on his Holiness behalf? Yet you "kindly reminded" me of Judgement... From my tone over the internet and on issues you were barely aware of! There's a real fine line between judging and condemning and judging hearts instead of acts. Only God can judge hearts, but we can and should judge our own actions.. Even the Pope when he's wrong!

Ironically, I became a traditionalist from an honest study of the Scriptures according to directives in the catechism. I read the Sacred Scripture now through the Sacred Tradition, but before that, I was with the catholic charismatics bible bashing Pentecostal style and felt they inadequately explained things up, and especially the cherry picking the "Gospels" whenever convenient. It's no wonder there's a "Prosperity Gospel" nowadays. So should I follow your suggestion it'd be a step back for me. I no longer roll that way. I can't serve two masters. And from your tone I assumed you were from that angle, charismatic renewal stuff, am I right?

Now about the V2 quoting. I brought it up because you said you "grew up seeing it dismantled", which makes you sound like a whining neo-modernist whenever they encounter anything "pre-Vatican2".. It is a bitter irony for us who love and nurture V2, while those who constantly use catchy catchphrases like that against us while cherry picked and supplanted it with something else.

Care to explain in what way it was being "dismantled"?

You quoted my post, then failed to answer the single question within it. Again, Which of my quotes of DV2 is ironic?

Looking back, I do believe now it is Sailor Kenshin who committed the act of calling Francis a "poser", not you, though you did not correct that statement. I do believe I've got that correct now, and apologize for making that mistake.

I'm not a Charismatic, never have been. I had a friend I grew up with who went down that road, I think he came back since then, but I'm not sure.

I could go through your quoted reply above and correct what you are claiming I said, but it's pretty pointless if you can't even address my simple question.

Again, which of my quotes of the text of Vatican 2 was ironic?

Mike


WHOAH AND back up....I do not think I EVER called Francis a 'poser.'

If I did...I was being possessed by Wormtongue.

VertOlive
December 14th, 2014, 04:13 PM
Wait. Kenshin did not call the Pope a poser. Tony did, and I would. But Kenshin did not. :)

Tony Rex
December 14th, 2014, 11:49 PM
Wait. Kenshin did not call the Pope a poser. Tony did, and I would. But Kenshin did not. :)

lol thanks Di. Yes I did. And I do have a reason for that, which I'll explain in a moment.


Tony,
From Dei Verbum: (Which is the first document on the website, hmm)

Wrong document and quite irrelevant to back up your anger. Being the first doesn't necessarily mean Dei Verbum (not DV2, btw) is more important than other documents, each with own topic. Again the right one is Sacrosanctum Concilium for the ad Orientem issue; like I said we love and nurture those documents, but we don't cherry pick nor grasping.. Unlike those who barely read them but used them for silly purposes .... like ire :)

And I called this Jesuit Pope a poser because he calls himself FRANCIS for his anthrophocentrist agenda by means of popularity (certainly got praises from the secularists from outside and the casual papal apologists such as yourself), while behind all that he had driven real Franciscans (http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/search/label/FFI%20under%20intervention)destitute with heavy handed tactics. Traditional Fransiscan Friars among those what he calls "rosary counter" from praying for him daily, while tell me, how many times you pray for the Pope in a year?

That's right. Your great champion of poverty took a whole floor in the "humble" Domus, while those who vowed poverty denied even a home to pray as they used to. If that's not an irony I don't know what is..

Oh wait, I know.

An irate papolatrist defending the pope from the papists.

LagNut
December 15th, 2014, 06:56 AM
Sailor Kenshin,

Sorry. Deeply sorry.

Please keep me honest(correct me when I'm way off base like that), and please forgive me. The first few pages of this thread are hard for me to unravel, and I guess I got it right the first time, but wrong the seventh? Still no excuse on my part.

Mike



Mike

Sailor Kenshin
December 15th, 2014, 09:21 AM
Sailor Kenshin,

Sorry. Deeply sorry.

Please keep me honest(correct me when I'm way off base like that), and please forgive me. The first few pages of this thread are hard for me to unravel, and I guess I got it right the first time, but wrong the seventh? Still no excuse on my part.

Mike



Mike

Apology gratefully accepted. No harm, no foul.

While this Pope has said some things that are deeply troubling to me, I don't know that his words were correctly reported, and even while disliking certain things, would not call him a 'poser.'

VertOlive
December 15th, 2014, 06:43 PM
Mike, item 326 is in section ll, Sacred Furnishings. This refers to the materials of which the church is made and with which it is furnished. Section lll, to which I referred you, regards Sacred Vessles such as the ciborium, paten, and chalice.

You're correct in that I have no problem with the current translations. If you attend on a regular basis, it comes naturally soon enough. That said, about half of the Masses we attend are in Latin. Which has not changed.

LagNut
December 16th, 2014, 10:48 AM
VertOlive,

Thanks for the clarification, and indeed for the original pointer to that document.

I am glad these translations are to your liking. I'll survive the change, and the girls find it endlessly amusing to see me go off track, stop,. and get completely flustered. Repeatedly.

Mike

LagNut
December 16th, 2014, 10:49 AM
Tony,

Your request:


Okay. Then let us know which part of the Council documents that say those things, the priest should face the people (thus sticking his behind to the tabernacle!), more scripture reading in the Mass etc.
.
That was your request. You're already twisting my words, so maybe I should have started by correcting you. What I had said was:

On Vatican II, let's see. I think I've got a reasonable idea. Mass is now in the vulgate. Priest no longer has his back to the congregation. Greater participation of the laity (should that be capitalized?) in the life of the church. And a greater and more central role of the scripture in the spritual life of all Catholics. I can't say it's a small set of documents(Vatican II documents), or easy reading. but am I wrong in these? Of all these I've noted, the centrality of scripture is the most important of those I've listed to me. The bringing of the faith in a more direct way to the unwashed masses is central, and so I have to say the idea that we need to get a "purer church" by getting rid of those that aren't worthy isn't one of them. Having spirited, but respectful discussions amongst the church is..

You twisted my
a greater and more central role of the scripture in the spritual life of all Catholics. into
more scripture reading in the Mass Two very different things.

Here is my reply to your request, the one you're claiming is ironic.



On the centrality of scripture, and primacy of the Gospels, (as far as I understand this) in Christian life, not just in the Mass. I'm reasonably sure the scripture was always a important part of the Mass, but maybe not? The central point of mass is communion, at least in our part of the world.

From Dei Verbum: (Which is the first document on the website, hmm)

18. It is common knowledge that among all the Scriptures, even those of the New Testament, the Gospels have a special preeminence, and rightly so, for they are the principal witness for the life and teaching of the incarnate Word, our savior.


and a bit later, in section 25
The sacred synod also earnestly and especially urges all the Christian faithful, especially Religious, to learn by frequent reading of the divine Scriptures the "excellent knowledge of Jesus Christ" (Phil. 3:8). "For ignorance of the Scriptures is ignorance of Christ."(5) Therefore, they should gladly put themselves in touch with the sacred text itself, whether it be through the liturgy, rich in the divine word, or through devotional reading, or through instructions suitable for the purpose and other aids which, in our time, with approval and active support of the shepherds of the Church, are commendably spread everywhere. And let them remember that prayer should accompany the reading of Sacred Scripture, so that God and man may talk together; for "we speak to Him when we pray; we hear Him when we read the divine saying." (6)

If I'm pointing out the portion of Vatican 2 that supports my point, that the centrality of scripture in Catholic life is a key peice of Vatican 2. I think Dei Verbum would be the correct section. Not ironic.

If you are sure of your position, please don't re-craft my words to make them easier to refute. I want to have an honest discussion here.

On dismantling Vatican 2, from my point of view, it's been a steady drift back to practices that pre-date it, and I don't expect you to agree that this is wrong. I will agree that all those changes would have been consistent with the letter of Vatican 2. If I saw changes that were so egregious that I couldn't continue being a Catholic, I wouldn't be here arguing with you.

I'll have to educate myself on what happened with the Franciscans. My older sister is a lay Franciscan, but she is not capable of educating me on these points any more.

My guess is this is not the main problem you have with Francis, and at some point we should get to that discussion, if there is a discussion to be had. I am not going to be able to do this at a rapid rate, I have an overfull plate myself.

And yes, I'll agree there is irony here aplenty. I see the irony in a different light.

Mike

Mike

Sailor Kenshin
December 16th, 2014, 11:42 AM
VertOlive,

Thanks for the clarification, and indeed for the original pointer to that document.

I am glad these translations are to your liking. I'll survive the change, and the girls find it endlessly amusing to see me go off track, stop,. and get completely flustered. Repeatedly.

Mike

Are we speaking of the 'new' translation of the Missalette? We had one rehearsal, then cheat sheets, all of which are falling apart by now.

VertOlive
December 16th, 2014, 06:08 PM
Kenshin, yes.

In 2011, the International Commission for English in the Liturgy [ICEL] introduced a more accurate English translation of the Missal of Pope Paul VI from the official Latin text.

Pertinent to this discussion is the fact that, even in the '70's, it began to emerge that the translation then in use was banal and full of errors once both clerics and lay persons began to compare it to the Latin. In 1979, Christopher Monckton, then Editor of the "Universe" compiled a list of over 400 such errors.

Here is an example of the stark difference between the two Missals: The previous translation "He took the cup" is now rendered as "He took this precious chalice in his holy and venerable hands." When reading the Roman Canon ("accipiens et hunc praeclarum calicem in sanctas et venerabiles manus suas"), even an indifferent student of Latin can see that the old version was "dumbed down" and de-sacralised.

Words mean things.

Sailor Kenshin
December 17th, 2014, 05:24 AM
Actually, the only 'Latin' I know comes from my insane love of dinosaurs when I was a kid...but even I see the difference in what you posted.

Tony Rex
December 17th, 2014, 10:20 PM
Tony,
On dismantling Vatican 2, from my point of view, it's been a steady drift back to practices that pre-date it, and I don't expect you to agree that this is wrong. I will agree that all those changes would have been consistent with the letter of Vatican 2. If I saw changes that were so egregious that I couldn't continue being a Catholic, I wouldn't be here arguing with you.
-snip

And yes, I'll agree there is irony here aplenty. I see the irony in a different light.

Mike

Mike

Twisting your words? Franciscan lay sister? If this is just point scoring I'm not interested.

Beyond that, obviously it's irony upon irony. In your light of modernism, everything's upside down. Words don't mean a thing, even in your own vernacular. The above posts demonstrate that perfectly. Thanks for reminding me what's the typical Ordinary Rite sounds and looks like. Everything's a compromise of the real thing. And your language reflects your generation. Let me quote Sandro Magister here..


Today, by contrast, the stick is being shaken under the influence of imposed formulas by a secular falsification of Christianity, such as “love” and “mercy” against responsibility and right judgment, such as “life” against reason, such as “nature” and “happiness” against sin and salvation, such as “Council” against Christian Tradition. This is along the lines of too many homilies, where it seems we are re-hearing, watered-down and out of time, the worst of the post-conciliar seasons. Pietro di Marco (http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/12/prof-di-marco-for-magister-francis.html)

What's more to discuss? You call building V2 'dismantling' while only quoting it just for a stupid reasons, and your persistence on grasping by quoting Dei Verbum astounds me. But I'm not surprised by the show of humility of modernism. :rolleyes:

And of the fruit of that are the wrong translations, why resist the efforts to correct them? Why so afraid of leaving your comfort zone? Why call those efforts from people more qualified (and have more authority) than you "dismantling" or "reverting" as if the Church starts only after the last Council. In other words: discontinuity, right? So yours is the new "enlightened" Church right? "Reformed"? Ha! Anathema sit!

We call a thing by it's name. When the Pope's a tyrant, he's a bloody tyrant. Unlike the good Father of the prodigal son, the bad steward sold what's left and join the unrepentant son, then beat the elder with a stick for voicing his concerns. Tell me "Biblical" friend, why didn't the Father run after the prodigal son? Why not sell the rest and go after him like Pope Bergoglio? Because unlike the arrogant disciple the good Father, a master, knows better. He could have only retrieved his lost son, not his heart.

Let's suppose The Pope put up a charade before the children of the world out as a conclave prerequisite; if that so.. Can you imagine the Successor of Peter stoop that low to break your hardness of heart? I used to think that was the case, but alas, no more. Bergoglio's election was by design and now the lobbyist are demanding their ample reward. The victor has proven this by his zeal in rewarding them gladly, partly by sacrificing traditional piety, to the point of selling lotteries.. He'd be a great NGO secretary general but not Pontifex. Sorry.

Meanwhile let's go back to the topic of the thread:

Will this wooden chalice/paten (http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com.au/search/label/Don%20Michele%20De%20Paolis)gift from that openly pedo supporter be included in the lottery prizes or not? Perhaps not, I reckon they went straight to the the Pope's personal collection. People like him an Ricca (http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1350561?eng=y) and Wesolowski (http://t.co/teSpPm8k7Q) are free to roam the streets of Rome while Card. Burke was demoted, Fr Manelli is under perpetual house arrest.

Hmmm... Apparently if I say these things "God's name be mocked" right? While filth and their lobby inside the Vatican doesn't mock his Holy Name? But hey... Who am I to judge (tm)? :rolleyes: When the head of the Swiss guard raised his voice, about people coming and going at nighttime, he got fired immediately.

Did all that stop us for praying for the Pope? Nope. In fact we dialed it to eleven (http://the-hermeneutic-of-continuity.blogspot.com.au/2014/11/bishop-athanasius-cardinal-burke-and-st.html).

VertOlive
December 17th, 2014, 10:30 PM
Speaking of the above, it is Pope Francis' birthday today (12/17). Let's send up an extra prayer for him!

LagNut
December 21st, 2014, 10:49 PM
Tony Rex,

OK, I think we do inhabit different worlds. I'm done. I agree it's pretty pointless from here.

Mike

Tony Rex
December 22nd, 2014, 03:12 AM
I'm glad you and I can agree on something.