The following comes from a Mar. 17 post on Rorate Caeli blog site.
This video is that of yesterday’s Closing Mass for the Religious Education Congress of the Los Angeles Archdiocese, which took place from March 14 to 16 of this year. Making this Mass even more special was the presence not just of Cardinal Mahony — who had been barred from public duties for all of one day in 2013 before Archbishop Gomez had to retreat — but also of Cardinal Maradiaga, the powerful Coordinator of the Council of Cardinals.
Among other things: lots of dancing, a denuded altar-table for the duration of the “Liturgy of the Word”, a glass plate for the main host, the wine consecrated while still in glass pitchers prominently distributed around the table, baskets for the hosts, the whole congregation singing the doxology at the end of the Eucharistic Prayer. Business as usual … and this year right in the presence of the one of the Holy Father’s most influential advisers.
To read the original posting, click here.
The archbishop has had years now to correct things, but, alas, nothing has been done.
Of course the bishop has been terribly busy trying to push what amounts to Amnesty II, in Rome, Washington, D.C. and elsewhere.
Perhaps he was just sleeping when all the dancing was going on and the tinkling of the glass vessels on the altar.
Then again, perhaps this was all for the benefit of Cardinal Maradiaga – who can see how far the Church in the U.S. has fallen. Given the archbishop’s world travels, perhaps this was to demonstrate to the cardinal how no one can “judge” him, either. (Psst, you should have taken him to some of the schools you’re responsible for – the ones with pro-abortion politicians or perhaps LMU, which has Lavender graduations, etc). The bishop will make cardinal yet.
It doesn’t take an expert in liturgy to note the abuses in this video—abuses proudly published on the Internet for the world to see and copy because they bear the tacit endorsement of TWO of the Church’s most powerful leaders. The “in-your-faceness” of this event is appalling.
I’ve lived too long!
sometimes I feel the same way.
The optics of these liturgical dancers is not pleasing to the Catholic mind, I know. But please keep in mind that in these two years under Abp. Gómez the new translation of the Mass has been fully implemented. As a result, the Ordinary form is more reverent. The keynote speaker Fr. Barron gave a great speech on the consequences of Vatican II. Little applause but lots of read meat. To top it off, Abp. Gómez is close to deciding on a petition by 1600 Angelenos requesting a personal parish downtown for the restoration of the EF. I think we should be well pleased with the bishop we were given by Benedict XVI. Remember, he is in the unenviable position of having to put up with Roger Cardinal Mahony the pederast protector and Cardial Madariaga of Tegucigalpa, Pope Francisco’s pet. So let Mahony get his liturgical dances out of his system while our Archdiocese improves the pastoral care of the 4,000,000 baptized Catholics entrusted to Arb. Gómez.
The entire CCD congress should be described as a heretical ecclesiastical romper room.
First of all, Archbishop Gomez’s words regarding the sanctioning of Cardinal Mahony (ie aiding and abetting in child sex abuse, and costing the the Faithful in the Diocese over $700 million dollars) were merely to placate Catholics who care about sexual abuse of children.
On his LA Diocese web site, Abp Gomez features Mahony under the first pull down “Archdiocese” – https://www.la-archdiocese.org/cardinal/Pages/default.aspx
This is what Abp Gomez told Faithful Catholics what he was doing – releaving Mahony of ALL public duties – effective Feb, 2013.
https://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=16960
Secondly any violation of GIRM – “General Instruction of the Roman Missal” for the Ordinary Form of the Mass must be reported to Abp Gomez.
List each date, time, location, clergy officiating, and each violation.
Attach a copy of GIRM, and highlight violations.
He has the responsibility to correct all errors.
GIRM from USCCB web site:
https://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/general-instruction-of-the-roman-missal/
GIRM from Vatican web site:
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20030317_ordinamento-messale_en.html
Abp Gomez needs to start doing his job within his own Diocese. And keeping his word to the Faithful.
Since Abp Gomez merely seems to pay lip service, be certain to copy the US Papal Nuncio in Washington DC., and the Vatican. Include highlighted attachments with the copies as well.
These links say it all.
What is Abp Gomez doing in his Diocese these days, other than supporting ILLEGAL aliens, and Democratic politicians who love abortion and sodomy marriage ?
Can those trying to be Faithful Catholics expect nothing from him?
Well, write to him anyway, especially the abuses of the Mass using GIRM documentation. Since it probably will do no good, copy the US Papal Nuncio and the Vatican.
MIKE, make sure you know what you are talking about. Remember this was Mass for 40,000 people in a non-liturgical setting. The liturgical dance at the “prelude” was not during Mass and the liturgical dance at the end was at the time where it is permitted to make announcements. Since the local ordinary obviously approved it, I don’t know if there is a case against it. The denuded table-you could try. The main thing that concerns me would be the use of glass pitchers-but I can’t tell if they are glass. And the pouring of the consecrated wine into chalices. I think the prudent action would be to only have communion under one species. As for the glass communion plate- you could complain about it but necessity may have dictated it. It is best to ask rather than tell. (And don’t attach a copy of GIRM-that is tacky.)
Why don’t you like GIRM. Because it has SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS ?
Mass must be the same no matter where it is held as approved by the Vatican.
It does not matter if a million people are present.
If there are any variences between Countries, changes to the Mass must be requested by the National Bishop’s Conference and approved by the Vatican. (This very specific and special approval for that CVountry only is called an indult.)
In LA especially when (Cardinal Mahony and Fr. Baron are present) there is no excuse for using common glass for the Body and Blood of Our Lord.
This one lands squarely on the table of the Vatican. Why was Abp. Gomez made “to retreat” in removing C. Mahony from any “public duties?” Why is Mahony given any role at all in the Church? This type of event, so redolent of the offense of scandal brought forth from complete misinterpretation of Vatican II and of the Tradition of the Church, never seems to end. Why even go through the pretense of having a “Catholic” Church when men like C. Mahony appear to have continuing power and influence. And what of Cardinal Maradiaga? This man is little more than a political emissary of socialism and of a church that is complicit in it. Much good literature exists on Maradiaga’s grave weaknesses and how his advice could lead to calamity for the Church. See, e.g., “Cardinal Maradiaga’s Poisonous Fruit,” John Zmirak, The Catholic Thing (11/10/13). But, as Michael Voris suggested recently (for different reasons), it all comes down to the Pope. Quo Vadis, Holy Father? The Holy Ghost perhaps needs a sludge hammer to have attention paid to the Church’s coming storm, and the need for St. Peter to return to Rome.
No it does not. Abp Gomez by teachings of the Church in the CCC, and Code of Canon Law – is fully responsible for everything Catholic within his own Diocese.
Do not make excuses.
“Allie”: The Vatican, through the Pope (and just look at how he is ignoring the rules for canonization) can direct and correct anything at the diocesan level, including liturgy, priest and pastor and bishop assignments (and sackings, too), all of that. Scandal is virtually ignored by the Vatican, unless it has a Traditionalist scent. Then, Katy bare the door, here come the N.O. Gestapo: (1) Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate; (2) Bishop Olson and Fisher-More College; and (3) many, many re-assignments and demotions and humiliations of courageous priests, like Father Rodriguez (El Paso, TX) who dare to stand up and demand fidelity to Catholic beliefs. Abp. Gomez is no prize, certainly, and he is responsible at one level. However, he is not immune from Vatican oversight. The problem is that the overseers are increasingly blind to the ridiculous and overtly scandalous behavior going on at the diocesan and parish levels. One thought that with the “Benedict Restoration” this sort of thing was over; but a man in active power, Cardinal Maradiaga, was in attendance and no word of criticism was heard from Rome. Nope, a major and growing problem.
St. Christopher, when did you write to 1) Archbishop Gomez about his behavior, and
2) when did you write to Pope Francis about Abp Gomez?
What kind of documentation did you provide?
3) did you write to the Vatican prior to the REC 2014 about Cardinal Maradiaga attending?
Please provide a list Abp Gomez’s offenses that require Vatican oversite, per the Code of Canon Law. Canon Law is very specific.
Lying to his Diocese members about sanctions against Cardinal Mahony is not one of them.
https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_INDEX.HTM
What have you personally done to solve the problem prior to this year’s REC. Or can you read minds and know what the Pope knows about every function throughout the world?
Meet the new boss,
Same as the old boss.
Gnostic Non-sense
But this promotion of the contradictory is indeed business as usual according to the precepts set down by Vatican II. Just reference Cardinal Walter Kasper’s comments to L’Osservatore Romano, April 12, 2013:
“In many places, [the Council Fathers] had to find compromise formulas, in which, often, the positions of the majority are located immediately next to those of the minority, designed to delimit them. Thus, the conciliar texts themselves have a huge potential for conflict, open the door to a selective reception in either direction.”
Notice we’re discussing positions of the majority versus that of the minority. Not tradition versus modernism. Not truth versus error. And it is not a so-called ‘schismatic’ pointing toward Vatican II.
I might not like Kasper’s positions, but I do appreciate the honesty.
Sorry Ann Malley but you got it wrong.
1) the Ordinary Form of the Mass MUST adhere to GIRM (General Instruction of the Roman Missal).
https://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/general-instruction-of-the-roman-missal/
and
https://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/general-instruction-of-the-roman-missal/
These are the requirements as must be approved by the Vatican. (No Diocese Bishop or Priest can allow variances from GIRM.)
2) There is nothing in Vatican II that the minority should give way to sinful behavior of the majority.
If you know of such things please quote the exact Document of the Vatican II Council, along with paragraph number.
Here is the link to the 16 Documents of Vatican II. https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/
Many people attribute things to Vatican II that are false. Always check the source of your information.
I wish you were correct, MADDIE, but sadly there are inherent disconnects in Vatican II documents (have your cake and eat it too scenarios). Otherwise there wouldn’t be such a need to study documents and/or interpret them in light of Tradition. That which is clear is clear. That which isn’t needs interpretation. If you won’t take Cardinal Kasper’s handle on it, that’s your issue. The following might help you to understand better:
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2012/09/vatican-ii-discussion-that-can-no.html
That said:
1) Bishop’s are given increasing liberty in practice to run their diocese ‘as they see fit’ under the auspice of being pastoral. And they do as evidenced by reality.
2)No, there is nothing I am aware of in Vatican II that says the faithful, minority or majority, must give way to the other (and that’s kind of the problem here). Cardinal Kasper was referencing the modernist and traditionalist factions of Bishops present at the Vatican II council.
That said, many people attribute nothing but wonderful to Vatican II without discerning the spirits and fruits that resulted. Always check the fruits and discern the resulting spirits when assessing anything.
God bless :)
Ann, do not take what other blog sites say or do not say.
Take your Vatican II documentation directly from the VII Docs on the Vatican web site to prove your point. Other people’s opinions do not matter. Many times but not always they are merely biased.
Yes, there are a couple of areas in one of the Vatican II docs that I wish was more crisp, but no one has been able to point out any errors by directly using the specific doc, page number, and paragraph number.
MADDIE, there is much bias out there to be sure. And you are correct in that ‘other people’s opinions do not matter.’ The opinion and the interpretation of assorted priests and Bishops do matter, however, as the reality on the ground is that those very same priests and Bishops are interpreting that which should be clear in very different ways. THAT is the problem.
The ‘not being crisp’ is error in and of itself when dealing with something that has the potential to shift the exercise of Faith.
Imagine leaving your adult children home to ‘maintain order’ in your absence, assigning each their own room. When you return to the house the disorder you will undoubtedly discover, especially if the little ones have slipped from room to room only to discover that each is its own world with different guidelines that shift, will be your fault. By nature of ambiguity the little ones will begin to lose the sense of what is ‘right’ and what is ‘wrong.’ They will be taught that good is subjective depending on which room you’re in or which ‘adult’ they approach.
Add a dash of human nature and you get the little one’s pushing for their idea of order. Again, whose fault is it? Yours. Not because anybody can point to paragraph and verse of exactly what was in error in your instructions, but rather because you sadly left the running of your house open to interpretation. That is the interpretation of those adult children whose egos you indulged instead of being clear. Getting defensive about how nobody can point to precisely what you said being *wrong* is counterproductive and not the mark of a true leader who should take ownership for their own messy house.
So pointing to VII isn’t a matter of laying blame for the sake of laying blame, MADDIE. It is a necessary process to clean up the mess and clear things up and redefine (clarify) the charter statement for the salvation of souls.
God bless.
The problem with GIRM has been lessened by its more recent revision(s), esp. from 2003 onward, but many problems have been let out of Pandora’s box starting from 1965 on:
As of 2003, GIRM stresses “The Lord’s Real Presence under the Eucharistic species (n. 3)”, which the original Consilium 1960’s era GIRM wording wrongly called a memorial meal—not a Catholic notion of sacrament at all, but of course Protestant. Sacrosanctum Concilium itself never uses the exact, and traditional, Catholic phrase “Real Presence” in fact: it stresses the presence of Christ under many [virtually co-equal] forms: in the person of the priest, in the word of the Scriptures, in the assembly, and yes, we almost forgot, “especially” in the species (see n. 7). (see GIRM 2003 ed., no 29, which continues this confusion). Also, the new GIRM expressly states the Mass is to be “communitarian” (n. 34)—virtually eliminating the need of priesthood (another essential Protestant aspect). [Duns Scotus observed that we are in fact spectators at the True Mass to the act of reparation of Jesus Christ to God the Father for the divine insult of sinful humanity—no: we are not an “active-communitarian” celebrants in this drama. And, remember, Duns Scotus also “got it right” on the Immaculate Conception, so perhaps we should listen to him on this matter.]
Another inherent problem with GIRM is what is inherent in the N.O. Mass: the permission to create “adaptations” by the priest.
Another inherent problem with GIRM is what is inherent in the N.O. Mass: the permission to create “adaptations” by the priest (“…the celebrant is permitted to “adapt” ” explanations” throughout the rite [n. 31])—-a disastrous innovation. So you see in GIRM the use of the word “may” (“may”, meaning no obligation at all) used well over a dozen times in GIRM, “The Individual Parts of the Mass”, nn. 46-90,as well as several “should be’s” and “if it is appropriate” expressions—meaning really there is no necessary “form” at all to the “Ordinary Form”.
As a result, a priest may improvise his “explanations” as well as his action of what the N.O. Mass is and means anytime he wishes — whether it be a Clown Mass, or a wild Fr. Brian Joyce improvisation, or, perhaps as the late Fr. Richard Purcell OFM did here in San Francisco, invite the congregation to participate in the Annual Gay Pride March that day after Mass (as he explained) as an expression of what the Mass is really all about. How nice!
I think Ann Malley is much more on target with the madness of the N.O, which is integral to its very operational documents and its very structure, much more so than many contemporary Catholics are willing to admit.
Thanks for the more detailed explanation, Steve Phoenix, about the troubles with the GIRM. Being able to point to the ‘why’ behind what appears absurd and unbelievable helps one to keep sane. That last being the best position from which to seek truth.
God bless.
The Priest is very limited in adaptions, such a a choice of only 4 Eucharistic Prayers all of which are in the Missal.. Everything (a few additional permitted changes) is specific, and if it is not included in the Missal, it is not permitted.
Steve, go back and read GIRM. You are making false statements.
Priests only have the choice amongst a few prayers – which are very specific.
The word “may” is used between 4 specific prayer choices, etc., only.
You need to read or re-read your Daily Missal as updated in Nov 2011.
Adaptions are very specific and limited to 4 specific prayer types during the Mass. – Priests can not do whatever they feel like as you are trying to portray in the public media.
Stop bad mouthing the Mass, in either form.
You are trying to instruct people with false statements.
Steve Phoenix is not bad mouthing the mass, MADDIE. He is reflecting the motivations that are used to offer innovative services. As for the public media, the mass is open to the public and therefore discussing the whys behind what appears ‘creative’ is perfectly acceptable.
Trying to explain away what is actually seen and executed by restating what priests can supposedly do or not do as opposed to what they actually are doing and/or not doing is counterproductive. We all stand witness to the game being played on the field despite what is written in the playbook – and that disconnect is the problem. THAT is what needs to be addressed and called out, MADDIE. So please stop waving the playbook in people’s faces and telling them to stop watching the game.
What you see is most often what you are getting.
Steve, Unless you want to go back to the time of Christ and the last supper when everyone sat around a table –
This is what is in effect as of Nov., 2011.
This is what we all must adhere to today per the Vatican, not some blogger complaints or blogger statements: “GENERAL INSTRUCTION of the ROMAN MISSAL”
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20030317_ordinamento-messale_en.html
I love it, Steve Phoenix, how folks assume that ‘complaints’ are all from some blog instead of real life. It’s as if folks live in the GIRM or the Vatican II docs instead of getting out and living and learning and experiencing reality. Like Vatican II the video game.
God bless you for giving credence to reality.
Kasper’s statements are flawed, not truth.
No where does it state that Pastoral means confirming anyone in mortal sin, and that is what he is trying to do.
Why doesn’t Archbishop Gomez include the aiding and abetting of the sexual abuse of children, and the loss of the $700 million dollars from the Faithful to pay for Mahony’s legal fines ?
Shouldn’t these Mahony accomplishments be on the LA Diocese web site as well under his picture ?
Maybe Cdl. Mahony should reimburse the Archdiocese for part of the costs incurred as a direct result of the Cdl’s actions . He’s very wealthy.
Archbishop Gomex broke his word regarding sanctions against Cardinal Mahony within his LA Diocese –
and then he allows abuses of the Mass that do not adhere to the ‘General Instruction of the Roman Missal’ within his Diocese.
Not good. Violations of truth and trust. Not to mention GIRM.
What is happening to many Church leaders?
in most parishes today, the priest has little or no power to regulate how the Mass is being offered. Liturgical terrorists are everywhere, and their gestapo practices keep turning the Mass into a three ringed circus. At a small parish I was at, I decided that only two extraordinary ministers distribute the Precious Blood while I alone distribute the Body of Christ. Well, all hell broke loose. I believed the hank shake of peace lasted too long, so I would wait a little while and then begin the Lamb of God. Do you know people were still kissing and shaking hands at Communion time? And, when I was proclaiming “Behold the Lamb of God”, the extraordinary ministers at the altar, are themselves giving each other the sign of peace. At another parish, when only a few were present, I did not consecrate the whole jug of wine, but left it on the side table. At Communion time, the extraordinary minister, who was to distribute the Precious Blood goes over to the table, and pours the unconsecrated wine into the chalice. The people know nothing about the Mass, and the evil liturgical police are everywhere. As you can imagine, the bishop did NOT back me up, but continued to praise the parishioners for their lively liturgies. These are looney liturgies, and give no glory or honor to God. They are man centered, and are driving souls out of the churches. I am so pleased that Pope Benedict opened up the TLM, as with that Mass, there is no playing around and no nonsense. With the TLM I will not be subjected to the liturgical gestapo, and will not get angry while celebrating the sacred mysteries.
God bless you for persevering, Fr. Karl. And you are spot on about man-centered nonsense driving souls out of the Church. People these days may not know everything there is to know about the Mass or the Faith – but we do know bad theater and reject it when push comes to shove.
So while a complete and automatic reversal to all Latin Mass may not seem to be the answer to some, it would surely correct a lot of what ails us.
God bless :)
Dear Father Karl, Thank you for defending the reverence due to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and for your faithfulness to Christ! It seems that it has now also become business as usual in some parishes for precious hosts to be discarded on the floor. Fifteen years ago, our pastor used to ask his new parishioners a question. He would ask them what they thought was the most important part of the Mass. Many would respond, “The handshake of peace.” This good pastor would then take the necessary time to help them to understand the primary reason and importance of the real miracle taking place on the altar. The Servant of God, Father John Hardon, SJ said that the real intended target of the father of lies is an all-out attack to destroy the belief in the Real Presence. What better way is there than to remove the power of our good priests? If a diocese allows policies that take away the power of our good priests to regulate how the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is being offered then the abuses that you describe will remain. Three weeks ago my own sister found a precious host in the envelope section while attending Mass at a parish in our diocese. There are some relatively new priests at this particular parish but this problem has been taking place there for many years and hosts are often being found under the pews and in the envelope sections.
Father Karl, In regards to the particular parish where the hosts are always being found, I did once hear the good priest speak up about purchasing Catechisms but there STILL seems to be an ongoing problem with finding disregarded hosts. Why is that, some people may ask? Preserving respect for the Blessed Sacrament comes with preserving respect for safeguarding all Church teaching. It means preserving the whole entire enchilada plate and not an al la carte cafeteria style of pick and choose. A few years ago the previous pastor of this very same parish even placed a comment in the bulletin about this ongoing problem of finding hosts on the floor. This same parish school had also allowed sex education that removed the innocence of children. A few years ago, a grandmother asked me to go with her and speak with the pastor about the material that was in her grandson’s book . We brought the book to the then pastor of this same parish that was and still IS experiencing the problem of finding consecrated hosts in the pews. We asked the pastor at that time to please read the graphic secular explanations being taught as sex education to the children. This pastor took the book and started to read it and even his face turned scarlet red and yet these liturgical and educational policies are always defended.
PRAYER FOR PRIESTS
Keep them I pray Thee dearest Lord,
Keep them for they are Thine, Thy priests whose lives burn out before Thy consecrated shrine.
Keep them for they are in the world though from the world apart, when earthly pleasures tempt, allure, shelter them in Thy Heart. Keep
them and comfort them in hours of lonliness and pain, when all their life of sacrifice for souls seems but in vain.
Keep them and oh remember Lord, they have no one but Thee, yet they have only human hearts with human frailty.
Keep them as spotless as the Host that daily they caress.
Their every thought and word and deed Deign, dearest Lord to bless. Amen
Thank you, Catherine, for relating these glimpses of reality of life on the ground. Not a scholarly pursuit of what the document actually does or doesn’t say.
The whole enchilada is where it’s at!
With prayers of reparation.
Catherine, Ask your sister to document, when, where, etc.
She has an obligation to contact the Parish Pastor, and the Diocese Bishop. If this sacrilege continues – the Vatican.
So all of you who wish to complain about priests take note: they see you as terrorists and gestapo. That Bishop in Australia that was removed by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI complained about spies in the pews.
So…Blindsiding them by going to the bishop is not the best way to handle it.
The best way is to obey your priests in all matters that are not sin and pray for the change you want to see.
We had a priest who made people mad like Father Karl did. He announced at Sunday Mass “Don’t write the bishop. The bishop gets a hundred letters a week complaining about priests.”
Fr. Karl, it is your job to control what happens at Masses you say to the best of your ability.
If you say Mass according to GIRM your Bishop will not / can not reprimand you.
If you are in a Parish that Has not been following GIRM over a long period time, some people will resist. It is up to you to educate them by use of the Parish bulletin and announcments prior to Mass as needed.
In addition Fr. Karl, when you educate your parishoneers, it will be better for you to quote specific sections of GIRM that they are required to adhere to, since then they can not blame you. These are the instructions of the Vatican and the US Bishops.
Good grief, MAC. Fr. Karl knows what his job is. As to the reprimand of a Bishop, get real. Have you never worked in Corporate America? How about a family owned company where the ‘boss’ can never get fired. Quoting a guidebook will often only get you laughed at, targeted, and often moved to a real nasty assignment. Message being – do as you’re told. Many good priests are sadly forced into getting that message.
This naive clinging to what the rules say is overwhelming.
God bless you, Fr. Karl, for having to deal kindly with an entire spectrum of loveliness. Your sacrifice and suffrage will be rewarded, I am sure.
Ann you merely support the wicked status quo in most of your posts.
The worst that could happen is a transfer, which could even be a blessing.
What do you want to let evil stand, and give excuses for doing so?
Paul, the idea is that fighting these issues that Fr. Karl points to is far more complex than just quoting the GIRM or the CCC Second edition or writing the Vatican. By no means do I advocate just rolling over and taking it. But I do not advocate just telling a good priest that, “No, you do not know your job. You must do this and all will be well.” That is naive.
God bless.
Fr. Karl, what Bishop told you to violate GIRM ?
How recent was this?
God bless you, Fr. Karl! You describe some of my pet peeves, that are really more than that when they are spiritual crosses. At the Masses I attend the EMHCs are, as you state, standing around shaking hands. What’s wrong with these people! Can’t they imagine that they stand at the foot of the Cross, not to mention that the sign of peace is over. I am grateful for my age, in that I was raised when there was reverence at every Mass. We knew that we were at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
Taking your eye off the ball allows the devil to win – –
I find it amazing that people want to talk about issues and experiences that they have had rather than take the responsibility to notify Archbishop Gomez, about his broken promise to the Faithful regarding the sanctioning of Cardinal Mahoney and his honoring Mahony by giving him a prominent place on the Diocese web site; and abuses that took place at the REC and the REC conference itself that took place inside his LA Diocese.
Those who purposely take people off course of what needs to be done are ususally the first to complain when something goes wrong,
or are agents of the devil so the abuses can continue.
Code of Canon Law regarding OBLIGATIONS and RIGHTS of ALL the Christian Faithful:
” 212 §3. According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the DUTY to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church
and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful,
without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons.
Have you done your DUTY ? (I have, but it usually takes more than a few to get appropriate attention),
Quit complaining folks – ACT.
Your complaints in a blog site without action, merely discourage people from returning to the Church, and/or can discourage others from becoming Catholic.
Everybody should keep quiet please.
No Steve, you are being silly.
Code of Canon Law: ” 212 §3. According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church
AND to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful,
without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons.”
Note the word “AND” not ‘or’.
If anyone criticizes the Church in public, it must be important enough to notify the appropriate Diocese Bishops and/or the Vatican first. :)
Ed, that’s patently not true. Truth is worth fighting for. And being Catholic isn’t just about being able to call oneself Catholic or to believe oneself to be Catholic, but to actually BE Catholic. A seeker of Truth. A lover of Truth. A non-compromising protector of Truth.
Zeal is actually attractive – especially to the young who experience apathy all too often and /or the delusion of false positives. The wholesale devaluing of that which is potently Catholic for ‘fear’ of turning people off is in itself a huge turnoff.
Young people don’t appreciate being lied to or talked down to or pandered to – not in the long term. It’s patronizing and too reminiscent of the governments current approach to ‘reach out to the young people’ by that which is clownish and disturbing.
A lot of the job of getting things done is getting the word out that the problems you see aren’t necessarily in one’s head.
God bless
Ann, and Catherine, may God reward you for your kind words. I would like to also mention about another priest. He always said a pious Mass, and weekly would celebrate the TLM. Five parishioners hated him, and complained to the bishop. They also threatened to kill the organist and his wife’s dog, because these two were very active at the Tridentine Mass. One day, these five parishioners were responsible for depositing pig dung at the door of the rectory, as well as erecting an inflammatory billboard in order to disgrace this priest.. The bishop listened to the gang of five, and the priest is in exile many miles away. This shows that the Catholic Church is quickly morphing into the Congregational church, where the lay people tell the priest how to celebrate Mass and the other sacraments.
Fr. Karl, the Bishops most effective weapon against the EF Mass is to ostracize the good priests. I have seen it happen three times.
OK this is really absurd. You really really expect us to believe this post? Get a clue: Nobody is threatening to kill an organist or a dog over whether the TLM is celebrated. Stop these defamatory and false attacks. CCD attorneys, where are you???
What is absurd, YFC, is adults not recognizing that people, even Catholics, are capable of all manner of unsavory behavior when dealing with people they don’t like or want to harass into going elsewhere. Have a sit down with a cop. Police files can be extremely illuminating. The military refers to it as PsyOps. That is psychological operations – very effective and used all the time. Heck, even mean girls in high school use these methods.
Where have you been, YFC?
Your Fellow Catholic, that is the one sitting next to you in the pew or anywhere else or that matter, can and is often guilty of the most grave and immoral grotesqueness. Pettiness too. Discounting that reality is naive in the extreme. Ever hear the one of the mom who killed the competition to get her daughter on a cheer-leading squad?
Forget the lawyer and call for a reality check.
So do you have proof of your accusations? If you do, then I retract my statements. If not, I double down upon them.
I’ll double down for you, YFC, in stating that you seem to want us to take your word or those of others regarding their persecutions, but you will not give the same credence to another. Not very Christian of you, YFC, for you should give the benefit of the doubt.
I would think of all people on this thread, you’d be the very first to call for compassion and charity at the suffering of others. As to legal action and/or police reports, I wonder if those who doubt Fr. Karl and his confrer would offer the same to a homosexual young man who showed up at your door. That is a very cool – where’s your proof.
No, Father. All Faithful Catholics must adhere to GIRM (OF Mass), or 1962 Missal (EF) Mass. I’m not stating that your story about the 5 is not true.
I am stating that when GIRM or the 1962 Missal is not followed there is recourse at the Vatican.
Those who do not know about the recourse posted on the Vatican web site because they do not check things out, or choose to sit on their hands rather than follow through have nothing to complain about.
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_GM2SKDGfe4/UxJZLqumTGI/AAAAAAAAA6c/RAOfP-H2WG8/s1600/img012.jpg
There will always be some injustice in this world – that is why all good Catholics must demand that things be done according to the Church, not according to an individual Bishop(s) or Priest.
We must always use the Church’s own documentation.
In the case of Fisher-More College, they did not bother to follow through with Church law at the Vatican.
So therefore it is ultimately their fault. The ball was in their court.
We can only assume then that the College was doing something they were not supposed to be doing, or they did not care enough.
We don’t have to assume anything, Beth. If there were teaching irregularities at Fisher More, then that could have easily been taken care of by addressing the teaching issues, not disallowing the Latin Mass to be said on campus. It is my understanding from reading local papers that the parishioners from the local diocesan EF group were making use of the daily mass offering as well.
So we’re talking about stripping daily mass attendees from the EF to which they have every right. Seems a tad Draconian. But hey, the Bishop is at liberty to interpret and exercise authority as he wills in his diocese.
Beth, Fr. Karl is not a new priest. He knows his job, but more to the point he ‘knows’ the inner workings of the Church. You can read documentation until the cows come home, but in most instances, until you actually walk the walk and live the life, that is of a priest, you don’t quite understand the nuances of the job.
God bless you for your faith.
Stay strong, Fr. Karl. You are very much supported in all your suffrage, to include being witness to the scandal of your confrer. God bless him, too.
As to the specific persecution you mentioned, praise be to God. I say this because I cannot imagine any greater confirmation that the pursuit of Tradition is pleasing to God. Much like Christ who was persecuted by those who should have embraced Him.
But no doubt there are those who will say, who would want to join a group where members are being persecuted or visited with pig dung. Likely they would be those who would follow Christ to Jerusalem.
God bless. You are most assuredly in my prayers… as well as this other priest whom you have brought to our attention.
Ann Malley,
Thank you for so eloquently expressing my very own thoughts to Father Karl. Your post was beautiful and grace filled with truth. Christ loved us to the fullest extent and yet there are still those who will tragically choose to reject His love. It was precisely in Christ’s obedience to His Father and His willingness to suffer for all of us that allowed us the greatest gift of sharing eternal life. “If you love Me me you will pick up your cross and follow Me.” Father Karl and the priest that he is speaking about have chosen the better portion which means the willingness and the acceptance of suffering. I will repeat Father John Hardon’s words spoken at one of his last retreats given in Southern California. “One of the greatest sufferings on this earth is to love those who do not love you back. “
Suffrage is a blessing and wicked persecution, often the surest and most marked sign of God’s choicest gifts.
God bless you, Catherine.
Ann M.
What have you personally done that has the possibility of getting positive results for the Church – for abuse of the Mass, and other violations of Church law and teaching.
You merely seem to complain, and offer very little if any constructive advice at all.
In addition your constant attack of Vatican II is heretical and schismatic.
Apparently you think you know more than Popes John Paul II, Benedict and Francis.
Bill, God bless you for expressing your views here on CCD. That is what this forum is intended to do, give folks an opportunity to express their reactions, viewpoints, experiences, and opinions.
Personally, I have opted out of career mode to home-school my children in addition to taking the lead in their religious education and that of my convert husband. This may be nothing to you, but as wife and mother, it is the primary duty to which I am called for love of God and future generations. This has been no easy job, Bill. But that is precisely why I do have very decided opinions with regard to Vatican II. Especially now with my home-schooling days coming to a close.
As to Vatican II, there is nothing schismatic or heretical in addressing that within the council which requires clarification. And the identification of root sources when it comes to solving problems is paramount – something I learned back in my business days. Something confirmed in raising children and watching the effects of bad policy and/or unclear objectives.
That observable reality doesn’t render one smarter than anybody, not even a Pope. But whereas a Pope may not be in the position to speak openly about such inherent ambiguities, I am.
God bless
Thank you Father Karl for LIVING the Catholic Faith! You are in my prayers and I will also pray for the priest who you spoke about. I once spoke on the phone with a priest in Oakland who was exiled for simply being faithful. There is no priest shortage in the sense of just by accident or lack of planning. There has been a deliberately manufactured priest shortage by design and from a great lack of Faith. It was incredibly edifying to hear this particular priest’s willingness, his joyful understanding that removed all fear and doubt and his acceptance of the cruelty that was being severely hoisted upon him. Woe to those lukewarm on the sidelines who are unprepared and who do not think that this particular cross may be asked of them one day. What will they be willing to compromise? How will they respond? Many have forgotten the real meaning of “No servant is greater than the Master.” May God continue to console, to strengthen and bless you Father Karl and all of our faithful priests for your most valuable witness in Christ.
“When we say that one of the ways that we are to re-evangelize, which means to reconvert our nation – mostly Christianity and to the Catholic Faith – is suffering. I mean not only suffering for the Faith but suffering the Faith. Living a Faith which not only experiences pain, but realizes what I’ve been enduring, wants to endure it but even – what are we saying – chooses to suffer. And – here – you better be you better be not just a Catholic but a very deeply intelligent Catholic – I mean it – to believe – only experience can teach it! No books you can read will prove it to you. The deepest joy on earth is to choose to suffer out of love for God. You don’t find that in Adler or Freud or modern psychologists. All of this is locked up in what we are talking about. Namely, that by our suffering we evangelize of for our purpose re-evangelize those who have abandoned their Faith because how many people have told me it is the lives we live as Catholics that are the most powerful magnets for attracting other people to the Faith we profess. But you have to profess it, not just with your lips – oh no – you’ve got to profess it not only in your life but by your patient and, indeed, sacrificial, loving – not only acceptance – but even choice of suffering because then, then we make sense to the unbelieving world that Christianity must – it must be very deep. Look at what it does to human beings. It changes them from selfish persons to those who out of love for God even choose to suffer because they love Him” ……The Servant of God, Father John Hardon SJ
Fr. Karl .. Were the police called? What was the outcome of the investigation?
Catherine ~ Excuse me but this parish must be very unusual I’ve seen hosts dropped a couple of times but someone always picked it up and consumed it. I did once. If this really happens often people should be taught in announcements or the parish bulletin how to respect and handle the Eucharist.
Really they are finding hosts in the missals? Really? Who believes this?
Likely the same people who actually find the hosts.
That said, you want others to believe that people are targeted simply because of their misunderstood gender identification issues. We are to take your word for it or the word of others. We are to be sympathetic to these horrific abuses of charity etc.
And yet you do nothing, YFC, but negate the experiences of others regarding abuse of the Blessed Sacrament. Why is that?!
Those who support the Extraordinary Form (Latin) of the Mass (EF) – had better stop trying to state or insinuate that their preferred Form of Mass is better than the other, or your privileges could be removed.
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_commissions/ecclsdei/documents/rc_com_ecclsdei_doc_20110430_istr-universae-ecclesiae_en.html
13. ” Diocesan Bishops, according to Canon Law, are to monitor liturgical matters in order to guarantee the common good and to ensure that everything is proceeding in peace and serenity in their Dioceses,…)
17. ” 17. § 1. In deciding individual cases, the pastor or the rector, or the priest responsible for a church, is to be guided by his own prudence, motivated by pastoral zeal and a spirit of generous welcome.”
” 19. The faithful who ask for the celebration of the forma extraordinaria must not in any way support or belong to groups which show themselves to be against the validity or legitimacy of the Holy Mass or the Sacraments celebrated in the forma ordinaria or against the Roman Pontiff as Supreme Pastor of the Universal Church.”
Both the Ordinary Form (OF) and the Extraordinary Form (EF) of the Mass are Holy and should be treated as such by all Catholics with peace and serenity.
The Ordinary Form (OF) MUST adhere to GIRM –
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20030317_ordinamento-messale_en.html
and
https://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/general-instruction-of-the-roman-missal/
The Extraordinary Form (EF) MUST adhere to the 1962 Missal. (Not previous Missals).
When there are abuses or changes by any Priest (or Bishop), it must be reported to the appropriate authority. Include documentation whenever possible.
There is absolutely no provision for “punishment” of those who believe that the Mass of Trent is preferable to the Novus Ordo Mass, as stated quite wrongly above (“Those who support the Extraordinary Form (Latin) of the Mass (EF) – had better stop trying to state or insinuate that their preferred Form of Mass is better than the other, or your privileges could be removed.” post 3/21/14.
This is a fabulous and false statement, and it begs the questions that have been propounded, namely that the GIRM (2003 edition) can be altered at will by a willingly rebellious celebrant—something completely impossible with the TLM.
The Church uses the one that has the copyright of 2011.
After several representatives of the chancery office, explained the rubrics of the GIRM, the silly practices still continue, and are still going on today! The people at this parish are their own popes and bishops! They have been Protestant now for over 40 years, and do only what they want to do. Never once did I tell the parishioners to write or not to write the bishop. I was trained in Rome, Italy how to celebrate Mass, and have never deviated from the liturgical laws, and have known them for over 35 years. Most of the bishops could care less about the rubrics as their minds are on other matters.
Fr., the Bishop can even close the Church if it has become pagan.
There are zero excuses for a Priest or a Bishop to violate GIRM. Please do not make excuses for either.
The Bishops indeed CAN close a Church if it has become Pagan, but it is what they choose to do about the matter that is the rub. Nobody is making excuses as there are no excuses. But the authority given must be acted on properly or else nothing will be fixed.
Then report the offending Bishop to the proper Vatican authorities. Those who allow abuses to stand are also guilty.
Here is just one case, but the College did not follow up.
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_GM2SKDGfe4/UxJZLqumTGI/AAAAAAAAA6c/RAOfP-H2WG8/s1600/img012.jpg
The Church will do what it has to for Unity, Peace and Harmony, including modifying the Motu Proprio allowing the EF form of the Mass, because of those who PUBLICALLY DISSENT from the OF form.
They are going to spoil thngs for many.
It is almost silly that some who post on this blog call the 1962 Missal (which was changed/updated in 1962) “traditional” rather than the 1970 changes.
8 years does not make something more traditional than something else.
The correct terminology is Ordinary Form (OF) or Extraordinary Form (EF) for the Latin.
It’s not the 8 years difference, Beth, but the reality that the mass and Missal of 1962 is different than that of 1970. You speak of unity, peace, and harmony – but what of Truth and what of true Unity?
Christ Himself could have been described as publicly dissenting, disturbing the peace and spoiling things for many. The Pharisees like things just as they were and didn’t want anyone to rock their boat – not even Our Lord.
Is that the kind of harmony you’re advocating?
It’s fair to judge the bishop on what he allows at an event like this. As someone else said, he has had ample time to give at least a few minutes to thinking about the content of what is “taught” there. But he seems to be at least in some ways a Mahony clone. That’s proven by that annual event which is a festival of heterodoxy.
Report it to the Vatican.
Do not let evil stand, like some posters want to do.
By all means, report it to the Vatican, but don’t expect a miracle. Suffering is what Christ’s friends are called to do, especially suffering that is had at the hands of those who should otherwise be your friends.
God bless, Bill.
Your Fellow Catholic, All I have written is true, so help me God. The event did NOT happen to me, but to another priest whose name will not be divulged. I heard this story from many sources, including the priest himself. Sometimes, if a story is stranger than fiction, it is STILL TRUE. Believe it, because things like this are happening!
https://www.catholic.org/featured/headline.php?ID=744
Murdered Catholic Priest Knew Too Much?
3/3/2004 – 7:22 AM PST
by Matt Abbott
The Rev. Alfred J. Kunz was a priest known and consulted by many in the Catholic Church. He was a canon lawyer, meaning he had thorough expertise in the laws of the Church -the Code of Canon Law, as it is known. He also was a staunch defender of orthodoxy, not much liked by Catholic liberals (at least, those who actually knew of him), and a thorn in the side to those who desire to see authentic Christianity wiped off the face of the earth.
In March of 1998, Fr. Kunz was found murdered. Brutally murdered. And his murder remains unsolved. For a little background of the case, I give you the following text, provided by Detective Kevin Hughes of the Dane County Sheriff’s Office:
“On March 4, 1998, at 7:00 a.m., the body of Fr. Alfred J. Kunz, DOB 4/15/30, was found in the hallway of St. Michael School. The school is in the Village of Dane, population approximately 600, located in rural Dane County 5 miles northwest of Madison, Wis., the state capital.
“Fr. Kunz was the victim of a homicide. His throat was cut with an edged weapon severing the carotid artery. He died as a result of blood loss. The body was discovered by a teacher arriving at the school and was found lying in the hallway near the door to the father’s living quarters in the school. All the doors to the school were locked and there was no sign of forced entry.
continued from March 22, 2014 at 8:30 am
On the night prior to the homicide, Fr. Kunz participated in the taping of a religious radio talk program, which was to be aired at a later date. After the taping, at 10:00 p.m., he was dropped off at St. Michael Church/school by another priest. Subsequent to that, at about 10:30 p.m., he had a phone conversation with another priest.
“Investigators believe the killer is someone that Fr. Kunz knew and is familiar with the village and St. Michael’s. Fr. Kunz was probably not fearful of the killer. The attack was cowardly, unprovoked, and unexpected. The particular motive is unknown but may be related to jealousy, revenge, betrayal, or any other issue which was personal to the killer….”
There are, of course, at least a few theories about who, or what, might have been behind Kunz’s murder. The prominent theory is that Kunz was killed because he “knew too much.” About what? About the sexual misconduct of some men of the cloth. Men who were able to cover up their misdeeds for years, even decades. Men who formed the underbelly of the American church.
A significant aspect of that underbelly is the homosexual network, a network that has existed for a long time but is seldom if ever discussed in politically correct circles. Actively homosexual priests who seek to destroy the Church from within. This is the homosexual network. “Never underestimate the power of this network,” Kunz reportedly once told a close associate.
So, celebrants may offer subjectively interpreted narratives, called “certain explanations” (n. 31). (such as: the Intro to the liturgy; the penitential rite; each of the readings; at the preface of the Mass, etc) to “adapt” (GIRM’s words) the liturgy.
This is why one priest introduced the liturgy on the feast of St. Therese of the Child Jesus (Oct. 1st: “The LIttle Flower”) as “St Therese was a woman who wanted to be a priest”, thus initiating his argument for womyn’s priesthood (exact quote: the priest affirmed it in later correspondence.) This is why and how the late Fr. Richard Purcell, OFM abused the liturgy, stating that the proper response to the Mass now “was to join the Gay Pride March this afternoon.” This is why one deacon, after pronouncing the Gospel [“This is the Gospel of the Lord. P: Praise to you, Lord Jesus Christ.”] shouted out “AND SO WHAT!!” to the shock of the congregation. Just some examples, but they are actually endless. And anytime one attends a N.O. liturgy, they must be prepared to endure any kind of subjective-narrative innovations.
No Steve, you are being silly again.
Abuses of the Mass (when not in full accord with GRIM) should be reported to the Diocese Bishop and/or the Vatican as appropriate.
The few choices a Priest has are specifically listed such as a choice of 4 different Eucharistic Prayers.
Apparently you have not read or do not own a Missal, because that includes any choices a Priest has. Nothing else is permissible.
Yet what is interesting to note is that Sacro. Concilium actually stipulates that the norm of the liturgy is to be in Latin (n. 36), Gregorian chant is to be the “typical” music (n. 117) and the organ is to be the instrument of accompaniment (n. 120). GIRM also contradicts this and allows other instruments, including drums in church (n. 393, read it).
Card. Alfons Stickler, an actual liturgical expert at Vat II has stated in a 1997 lecture, that he was astonished at the abolition of the “Roman Missal” of Trent and that “it contained much that broadened, changed, or even was directly contrary to the Council’s provisions.” But now if you go to a Sunday Mass in Latin, with the Mass of Trent, with Gregorian chant, and organ supporting the singing—all of which is actually prescribed by Sacro. Concilium — well, you must be going to a “schismatic” Catholic chapel. Do you realize what is being said?
So, clown-masses are more the N.O. approved norm, as one Italian blogger notes:
https://www.conciliovaticanosecondo.it/foto/#gallery/1358/515/0
Steve, you are mixing the requirements for the:
Extraordinary Form (Latin) of the Mass which is governed by the 1962 Missal,
with the Ordinary Form (Vernacular) of the Mass which is governed by GIRM.
The rubrics are different.
As an FYI – The Mass of the Council of Trent has been amended 3 times to date.
Only the 1962 Missal is permitted, not previous versions.
A critical word- analysis of the 2003 (4th ed.) of the General Instruction (GIRM) shows that, in its about 400 paragraphs, the use of the words/phrases: “may-be”, “should be”, “celebrant is permitted to adapt”, or “if appropriate” occur over 15 times in Ch. 2, the “Structure” of the N.O. Mass (n. 29-45) and at least 18 times in Ch. 3, “The Different Elements of the Mass.” (n. 46-90). This is important: even the very structure and elements of the N.O. Mass — the “form of the Ordinary Form”—can be changed at the discretion of an abusive celebrant.
In total, throughout all of the GIRM document, these subjunctive phrases predominate, occuring over approx. 80-100 times. You can count these “trap doors” for yourself.
By contrast, the legal word/phrases “must be” occur(s) perhaps 5 times in these two key chapters, and perhaps 15 or so times in all of GIRM. There never is the use of the words “it is prohibited”, “it is forbidden”, nor any definition of a penalty for an abuse in GIRM. GIRM, therefore, which is supposed to be a legal controlling document, has virtually no force.
The use of wording such as “may be” or “should” legally means there is no obligation to perform these words or actions. The actions or orations are able to be changed at the discretion of an unruly celebrant. Even the texts (see n. 356-362) generally can be changed (use of “should be” wording throughout this very important section: read it) at the subjective determination of the celebrant.
Many good priests recite the N.O. Mass in obedience to their ordinary and intend what the Church intends. That however is not the point. The point is that the very legal document that is supposed to govern the N.O. Mass and prevent the people from being randomly subjected to liturgical abuse by a rebellious cleric actually permits and authorizes its deviation and subjective improvisation.
We know this is not the will of the sovereign pontiffs since Vat II. In fact, P. John Paul II in his letter Dominicae Cenae (1980) in an unprecedented step publicly apologized for “the erroneous application of the directives of the Second Vatican Council, [which] may have caused scandal and disturbance concerning the interpretation of the doctrine and the veneration due to this great sacrament.” (n. 12) Yet GIRM, which has gone through at least 4 revisions since its inauspicious launch in 1969 by Abp. Annibale Bugnini and the Consilium committee, still contains the time-bombs that almost insure that a deliberate-minded celebrant may impose his heterodox will on any congregation he chooses to so inflict.
Some above stated, “You must report abuse”. I promise you, little or nothing, and usually nothing, is done. It took years for Oakland’s Fr. Brian Joyce to be reined in; think of all the minds and hearts he affected: it is too late for those people now. Fr. Gus Krumm, a notorious abuser of children (who has now been permanently suspended), was also a notorious abuser of the N.O. liturgy — he seemed to revel in shocking and insulting statements and actions. His actions were reported for years, but nothing was done.
Some above stated, “You must report abuse”. I promise you, little or nothing, and usually nothing, is done. It took years for Oakland’s Fr. Brian Joyce to be reined in; think of all the minds and hearts he affected: it is too late for those people now. Fr. Gus Krumm, a notorious abuser of children (who has now been permanently suspended), was also a notorious abuser of the N.O. liturgy — he seemed to revel in shocking and insulting statements and actions. His actions were reported for years, but nothing was done. When the late Fr. Richard Purcell OFM passed away—even tho’ he publicly stated before his death that he had left the Church, didn’t believe in God, didn’t think the Gospels were true events—after causing so much contention, so much loss of faith, and disaster for years (You can read it for yourself in his semi-autobiography, “Adventures and Recollections of a Renegade Priest”) had a fabulous funeral send-off at St. Boniface Church here in SF in August, 2011, abundantly attended by many of his order as well as by his provincial, all of whom spoke of him, lauding his exemplary conduct and praising him as a priest.
So, the scandals will not stop and the abuses will not stop, and it is utterly naive to believe they will do so, until something more serious is confronted in the N.O. liturgy, its history and its developmen; And the various phases of GIRM will continue to be a time-bomb ever ready to be exploited.
FATHER KARL, YOU WROTE:
“I would like to also mention about another priest. He always said a pious Mass, and weekly would celebrate the TLM. Five parishioners hated him, and complained to the bishop. They also threatened to kill the organist and his wife’s dog, because these two were very active at the Tridentine Mass.”
This is the first time I have heard of dogs being “very active” at the TLM Mass.
What could the pooch possibly do at the Mass — except maybe take part in the washing of feet? :)
Michael, the dog stayed in the rectory during Mass. I am sorry for the confusion, but I enjoyed your humor. Thank you for pointing out my error.
The 2003 version of GIRM is the official version on vatican.va. The 2011 USCCB version is a “new translation” but all the criticisms that have been noted above apply to both editions, because all of 2003 GIRM is contained in the 2011 edition: each is 399 paragraphs long; each in n. 31 allows for “explanations”, subjective-interpretive extemporizing comments by the celebrant; each allows “certain adaptions of the rite and texts” (n.24-26) and “variations and more profound adaptations” are allowed.
Again, the point here is that good Catholic priests offer a reverent and obedient N.O. liturgy, intending what the traditional Church intends. However, rebellious priests (as only a few examples noted above: there are many more) continue to use the “trapdoors” in the GIRM and the N.O. Missal to justify their free-lance applications of womyn’s ordination agendas, God as Mother, universal salvation, advocacy of alternative sexually active lifestyles, and on and on. Anyone who attends regularly a N.O. liturgy, as I do and many who read CalCatholic do, know this happens all the time. Just attend a “mass” at St. Ignatius Church in SF and be sorry that you did.
Oh: and both “GIRM’s” allow for drums in Church liturgy (n. 393)—completely a break with Catholic tradition and the explicit prescription of Sacro. Concilium of Vatican II—as if Vatican II mattered at all.
There is yet another misunderstanding that these criticisms apply to variations in the 4 Eucharistic Prayers that evolved from the Consilium committee in 1969-1970 after Vatican II.
[By the way: changing the Roman Canon of the Mass was never prescribed for in Sacro Concilium either. Card. Alfons Stickler is a witness to this, as well. He says all the Council Fathers assumed the Mass of Trent would remain intact, except for perhaps some new prayers or scripture texts added to the Missal . See the notes on his 1997 lecture, “Die Heilige Liturgie”/”The Holy Liturgy.]
Well, first of all, as of this date, in actual fact there are 10 Eucharistic prayers: 4 in the Missal, 3 for Reconciliation, and 3 for Children’s Liturgies. No one is arguing that these EP’s are not “valid”; however, since we are on the topic, Michael Davies has conclusively shown there is no historic basis for EP’s 2-4. The Children’s Liturgy EP’s are often abused by employing them for ordinary Sunday and weekday Masses when predominately adults are in attendance—a specific violation of the protocols for these EP’s. However this option is preferred by some celebrants who want a docile, child-like congregation when it serves their agenda (I guess they were a favorite of Fr. Bryan Joyce). It is still possible, with all the many extra EP’s for a rebellious cleric to substitute their own EP, and if you check with what is happening at many of the theology schools, this is not uncommon practice, as well as in some divergent parishes.