Posted on 11/10/2004 12:59:06 PM PST by Canticle_of_Deborah
It is beyond doubt, Bishop Rifan did take active part in the New Mass. I watched the 3-hour video tape. This Mass was of the most modern and of an extreme liturgical poverty in spite of the presence of the cardinal representing the Pope. This cardinal was beside often hesitating, not guessing what one or the other of the assistant priests or bishops or the acolytes would be doing next. The miraculous statue was brought at the beginning of the ceremony in a spectacular procession recalling how 3 fishermen miraculously drew in this little 36 cm-high statue in 1717. A beautiful procession indeed, but not suited to a church. Imagine a boat with three fishermen coming up the aisle all the way to the sanctuary… One of the fishermen then placed the statue on its pedestal after having shown it to the different rows of the faithful… each time to the general clapping of hands.
When it was time for the epistle, the governor of Sao Paulo, (center-right politically), came forward to read it.
For the crowning of the statue, a woman – seated next to the bishops in the sanctuary during the ceremony – fetched the statue and presented it to the cardinal to be crowned. Once the statue was crowned, she presented it several times to the clergy and the faithful who were warmly applauding, while confetti were raining down on the heads of the cardinal and the bishops in the sanctuary.
At the offertory, two young acolytes came to pour the wine to be consecrated into the chalices as casually as if they were pouring themselves a glass of water.
The words of consecration pronounced aloud by cardinal de Araújo Sales were, of course, those saying : "…shed for you and for all." The eucharistic prayer n° 2 had been chosen by the bishop.
Then one could see Bishop Rifan joining the bishops’ procession to communicate at the altar. As for the communion of the faithful, no priest or bishop were seen distributing it.
However, at least three women were giving communion… and we saw priests (maybe even bishops) receiving communion from one of them!
Immediately after the Postcommunion, Petrus Ananias, minister for social development (Marxist Workers’ Party), representing Mr. Lula, president of the Republic, began some kind of sermon-discourse from the very sanctuary. All the bishops sat there without flinching! He praised the ecumenical trend of his party, made reference to Jacques Maritain and stated that democracy had evangelical roots, that Our Lady of Aparecida was in solidarity with the movement of liberation and emancipation, and that she was a figure even more human than the Virgin of the Gospels because she was black… and so on, and so forth!
There seems to be marked uneasiness in Campos on this subject because today a priest from Rio who asked about this concelebration to a priest from Campos received as answer that it was not a concelebration but a bishops’ meeting at the shrine of Our Lady of Aparecida.
It is difficult not to speak of lie!
Indeed, CNBB, the Brazilian National Conference of Bishops, announced the following on its website on September, 8: "Hoje, dia 8 de setembro, às 9h, no Santuàrio Nacional, solene concelebração eucarística presidida pelo enviado especial do Papa. Dom Eugênio de Araújo Sales, e concelebrad pelo Núncio Apostólico, Dom Lorenzo Baldisseri, pelo arcebispo de Aparecida, cardeais, arcebispos, bispos e presbíteros – Today, 9/8/04, at 9:00 am, at the national shrine, solemn eucharistic concelebration presided by the special envoy of the Pope, Dom E…, and concelebrated by the Apostolic Nuncio, Dom L. B…, by the Archbishop of Aparecida, the cardinals, archbishops, bishops and priests."
What remains of the booklet published by the priests of Campos : "62 Reasons Why In Conscience, We Cannot Attend the New Mass."?
Fr Joël Danjou, Prior in Santa Maria, Brazil
date : 6/11/2004
Earlier in the thread you wrote that the pope had said and written some heretical things. Sinkspur asked if you actually believed this. Your answer implied that "sheer volume" necessitates heresy. I am reminded of the play "Amadeus" in which at one point, the composer Salieri criticizes Mozart for "too many notes". Maybe that's not quite what you meant, but, if not you didn't answer Sinkspur's question.
Of course the pope is the most prodigious in history. I would expect him to be in this information age we live in. His longevity also accounts for his enormous output.
You say buried, I would say enriched, not under a mountain, but rather with a treasure chest. It's one thing to criticize the volume, quite another to justify a charge of heresy by citing volume.
Even JPII is now realizing that the Catholic Church has made itself entirely irrelevant (i.e. his recent comments on the EU).
First of all the Church is emminently relevent to practicing Catholics who believe in the efficacy of the sacraments, cherish Her historical patrimony, and are edified by Her eternal wisdom.
Secondly, I would tell the pope and anyone else that suspects the Church is irrelevent in the political and cultural sense to buck up and not be discouraged. President Bush doesn't think the Church is irrelevant, as he has met with the pope three times in his first term. The left wing media doesn't think the Church is irrelevant. Last night on "Now with Bill Moyers" a story on the religious right insinuated that Mr. Bush had pressured the Vatican to prod American bishops to do more to aid Mr. Bush's pro-life agenda, citing Archbishop Chaput's words and deeds specifically, as an example of the Church's alliance with the Bush agenda.
Furthermore, the phrase "culture of life" has become part of our political and moral lexicon. This also speaks to the enormous relevancy, not only of the Church, but to his Holiness, John Paul the Great. The Church is relevant. Don't doubt it for a minute.
Bump to 221
It's John Paul II. Not "John Paul the Great". Maybe the Pope would be "greater" if he denounced the U.N.'s policy regarding "reproductive health" and critcize Liberalism and Modernism with the vigor of St. Pius X.
*Good grief. What total nonsense.
Hey, no fair making sense :)
can you prove it's nonsense? novusordians (new word here lol) have, in the past, demanded proof, so I think its perfectly logical to explain your comment.
Can't prove a negative. The original poster should prove that JPII has written and spoken heresy.
does action come into this as well? The Assisi incident and the kissing the Koran was particulary offensive, but was it heresy or just plain stupidity (not stupidity, but another word I cant think of right now)?
Here's just a few of them:
Buddhism is a religion of salvation.
Crossing the Threshold of Hope, by John Paul II, Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. 1994
84-85, 1994
Outside the Church there is remission of sins.
L'Osservatore Romano, Vatican City, Italy, English edition 11/20/89
The UN is the supreme forum of peace and justice.
Path to Peace: A Contribution. Liturgical Publications Inc., Brookfield, WI, 1987
112, 10/02/1979
Goodness and truth are found in false religions.
Catechism of the Catholic Church, of John Paul II, 1992, Liguori Publications
842, 10/11/1992
Muslims worship the One True God.
Crossing the Threshold of Hope, by John Paul II, Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. 1994
141, 1994
Assisi and kissing the Koran were neither. I know both of those get the traddie panties in a wad, but they were just occurrences.
LOL. That's a doozy. If that ain't heresy then nothing is.
Quotes and links are proof. Your post is not.
Was Judas betraying Jesus, just an occurrence?
He cited the publications and page numbers. Just because you have probably never owned or read a book in your life doesn't mean the only form of acceptable proof is a link to a web site.
It's my understanding that he has fought against the UN's "reproductive health" policies. As for modernism, calling its consequences a "culture of death" seems pretty gosh awful vigorous to me. I agree the pope could be greater as you suggest, who couldn't be? Nonetheless, I am grateful for God having put Karol Wojtyla where He did.
"Quotes and links are proof."
“We shall praise St. Gregory the Great who expressly testifies that this indeed is the teaching of the Catholic Church. He says: "The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her and asserts that all who are outside of her will not be saved."
The Papal Encyclical
"Summo Iugiter Studio"
Given by His Holiness Pope Gregory XVI
May 27, 1832
http://www.kensmen.com/catholic/summoiugiterstudio.html
Huh-huh. Without a link, there's no way to verify that LOI is giving us the correct information.
What I've read and not read is not relevant, nor is your snottiness.
But what does that mean? Even Pius IX taught that actual membership in the Catholic Church is not the only way to salvation.
Gosh LOTI, you, or your sources are so diengenuous....and error prone. It's 843, not 842, of the catechism that says "Thus the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as " a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens men that they may at length have life." You may be susceptible to half-truths, out-of-context quotes, and pure imaginings of your marionette masters but most won't be fooled by your cut and pastes. Please, verify what you read on those consistently debunked sites you frequent and think about it before you post.
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.