Posted on 09/24/2003 3:06:09 PM PDT by Lorianne
A heated battle has been joined in the Vatican between moderates and conservatives over a directive, called for by the Pope, that would bar altar girls and stop millions of Roman Catholics around the world dancing, or even clapping, in their churches. _________________
Anger at Vatican plan to ban altar girls
John Hooper in Rome Wednesday September 24, 2003 The Guardian
A heated battle has been joined in the Vatican between moderates and conservatives over a directive, called for by the Pope, that would bar altar girls and stop millions of Roman Catholics around the world dancing, or even clapping, in their churches. The document would also clamp down on adult, lay pastoral assistants. It would forbid priests during sermons quoting from ethical texts other than the Gospels. And it would rank services jointly celebrated with Protestant ministers or Orthodox priests alongside black masses as one of the four "most serious" abuses
In a clear effort to block, or, at least dilute, the measure, a leaked text of the draft was this week published in Jesus, the monthly review of the Society of St Paul, an international Catholic organisation.
One Vatican insider was yesterday quoted by the Rome newspaper Il Messaggero as saying it contained "idiocies so mad as to incite fear".
The document was compiled by officials from two Vatican ministries, responsible for doctrine and liturgy, after the Pope called earlier this year for new guidelines on the way masses are held. Many clerics had complained that liberalisation and experiment in recent decades had left them not knowing what was allowed.
Catholics in western, and particularly northern, Europe are likely to be most taken aback by the Vatican officials' determination to block one of the few means of participation in church ritual for women.
The draft text states that priests should only allow girls to help them at mass if they have a special dispensation from their bishop and there is "just cause", which Italian commentators took to mean an absence of boys. According to the leaked draft, priests ought "never to feel themselves obliged to recruit girls".
In developing countries, where the Catholic church now has most of its members, the most controversial injunction will be the one banning "applause and dance within the place of worship, even outside the celebration of [mass]".
Dance is an integral part of worship in Africa and Asia and has figured in numerous services attended by the Pope. Clapping is also commonplace in Italy at weddings, baptisms and even during funerals.
The draft "instruction" was reportedly tabled in June and came in for stiff criticism at a meeting of the two departments. A final version is due to be published this year.
And the overwhelming acceptance of the Church's position regarding abortion. Truth isn't found in counting noses.
Christ didn't appeal to too many folks when He was on the Cross.
Why should the Church, His Body on Earth, "appeal" any more than He?
You don't seem to get it: the Truth is the Truth, no more, no less. The problem that the Truth has in this world is that it's only a candle compared to the lights of Vegas, or D.C., or Hollywood--or money, dames, you-name-it.
But the Church cannot possibly be MORE than the Truth, that little candle, or that bleeding hulk, dying.
What do YOU consider Life to be?
Chesterton says it better--see my FR home page.
And by design. Religion has go to go so he new "idols" of our era can be manufactured and worshipped. No different than what Stalin, Mao and Lenin did. Speaking of which, ever seen the status of Lenin out in Seattle? If you don't know of what I speak.....
http://www.mwilliams.info/archives/000682.php
I sure hope so.
You're funny, ninenot. And surprisingly reactionary.
Neither will be "tossed." There will be the usual "guidelines" issued, but the Vatican will not restrict either.
How do you know that?
You draw an equivalency that I don't accept.
Christ didn't appoint a papal commission to study the institution of the Eucharist, as John XXIII and Paul VI did with birth control, thus instilling in the mind of the faithful the idea that contraception might be subject to revision.
I take it then that you dissent from Humanae Vitae?
Whether you do or not, I wonder if you've considered the implications of this particular example.
Why is Humane Vitae not accepted among most of the American laity? Many reasons, to be sure. One of which is of course the reluctance of prelates to teach it.
In our sex-crazed society, however, it's surely not an easy sell even so.
Given recent surveys that suggest many Catholics do not believe in the Real Presence, I might suggest that the problem of dissent in the prelacy is a lot more widespread than contraception. And that perhaps Rome shouldn't necessarily follow (once again) the path of least resistance - which is to say doing what seems to be popular.
The word is out that bishops and cardinals are largely in disagreement with the proposed restrictions.
The Vatican bureaucrats would have to buck the men who would have to enforce these retrogressions.
Rubrics are not matters of faith, and not worth risking wholesale disobedience, which I believe you would have.
Not really, because it is, at root, a medical condition--i.e., certain chemicals in the brain are not in balance, and this causes the brain to not work right. Treatment thus becomes a matter of prescribing the right medication in the proper dosage.
My concern is that the systematic exclusion of married life from the ranks of the clergy is not necessarily a good thing.
I think the Orthodox Church has the right idea: married men may be ordained, but ordained men may not marry. It seemed a good enough rule for the permanent deaconate; what is the problem with extending it to the priesthood? Answer: nothing, as celibacy is a disciplinary rule only.
These are Vatican bureaucrats attempting to pull back on practices of 10, 15, and 25 years. And meeting significant resistance, apparently.
BTW, the progress of the Church will not be impeded by your unhappiness with the new regulations. Get ready now.
I sleep comfortably in the knowledge that the Vatican will issue "guidelines" but nothing that will bind bishops one way or another.
Can't risk wholesale disobedience, which the "shot over the bow" this week from prelates portends.
Somehow I think the Greek Orthodox might disagree with you.
Yeah--10, 15, 25 years--practically the same as "immemorial tradition," right?
The Vatican has the authority and the Bishops, priests, and deacons have the liberty to disobey. Many will.
Touche, milady! (c8
Most will, if the reaction gauged this week is any indication, and if the Vatican issues a "do it because I say so" directive.
Cooler heads will prevail.
This is exactly why you should come back, and sooner rather than later. The True Church, (not the imposter outward structure we see today), needs you back. Your return would help make the Church healthy again because only conservative/traditional Catholics can show the rest what the faith is really all about. I attend the Latin Mass (indult), that is where the true faith lies in my opinion. There is no nonsense there. Thanks for taking the time to make this post,
regards,
Jim
This was not lawful authority, but the usurpation of authority by sinful perverts and their enablers. As for their lack of humility, I do not base my faith, or my humility on how well others practice theirs. That's just a huge copout.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.