Posted on 08/13/2019 8:12:28 AM PDT by ebb tide
This is pretty amazing. A couple of Portland readers have sent me this story about what happened when the Catholic archbishop of Portland sent a priest in to reform a wackadoodle progressive parish that had gone native. The Oregonian’s report on it is hysterically biased, making the priest look like a monster; the reporter never once appears to have considered that Catholicism is a religion that has clear norms, and this parish’s previous leadership had seriously violated them, for a long time. Anyway, from the story about St. Francis parish, identified by the newspaper as having “long been known as a bastion of progressive Catholic faith.”
The Roman Catholic Church is rooted in tradition and hierarchy. Jerry Harp, chair of St. Francis’ pastoral council, is struggling to understand how he relates to this structure of authority. It was this hierarchy that was roiling his parish.
Harp considers himself a devout Catholic. He starts every morning with mediation and prayer and prays the Hail Mary at least once a day. He tries to attend Mass every Sunday. When he was in his 20s, he said he wanted to follow every rule he could. Now he questions how those rules bring him closer to God.
“Some would say ‘Well you have to relate to the authority structure by following them to the letter,'” Harp said. “Well how do you know that? It’s perfectly legitimate for other people to have other answers.”
Long-time parishioners knew the answer. They didn’t like being told how to worship.
This was their church.
At least one Hail Mary each day! My gosh, this crypto-Protestant (“it’s perfectly legitimate for other people to have other answers”) is a lay Curé of Ars for our own time!
More:
Chapman retired in 2017. Monsignor Charles Lienert came out of retirement to take over as administrator, but only for a year. When his assignment was over, George Kuforiji was assigned to St. Francis by the archdiocese and took over July 2018.
Parishioners said the changes he made were almost immediate.
For years, St. Francis used inclusive language in its scripture readings. With references to God, for instance, they avoided using “he,” “lord” or “king” and instead used simply “God” or “creator.”
Kuforiji switched readings to traditional scripture, no longer allowing the new wording.
St. Francis outlined their values in a community commitment that parishioners would read after the Nicene or Apostles’ Creed. Kuforiji replaced the pamphlet and cut out the community commitment.
Parishioners brought their own copies and still said the words.
The parish’s handwoven altar cloth was a gift from a village in Guatemala the parish had helped. Parishioners showed up to Mass one Sunday last summer to find that Kuforiji replaced it with a plain white cloth.
Monsignor McHitler didn’t stop there — and neither did the brave parishioners of St. Francis. Then:
June 30 was a Sunday, and Mass was scheduled for 9:30 a.m. But before hymns could be sung, prayers could be said or the bread and wine consecrated, parishioners protested.
Days earlier, they’d found cherished items in a trailer headed for the dump. Now, 16 mostly gray-haired parishioners stood on the church steps facing Southeast 12th Avenue. Most were dressed all in white and held the large black and white photographs that had been stripped from the walls of the church.
And:
During the prayers of the faithful, a time for community prayer, parishioners prayed for what happened to the vestments, yelling from the pews.
Kuforiji stood at the pulpit with his arms outstretched, silent.
In the pews, one woman stood with her face buried in her hands. Another said the protesters should respect the church they were standing in. She walked off. A few others followed her out.
At the end of Mass, Karen Mathew, former music director at St. Francis, took the pulpit to lead the congregation in song. The song began, and Kuforiji walked away.
On one side of the aisle, parishioners shook maracas, hit tambourines and clapped their hands. They sang loud. On the other, parishioners were quiet.
After the song, Melinda Pittman, a parishioner who has been at St. Francis for 30 years, took the pulpit. She said she had walked out to talk with Kuforiji when the song began.
“I said that for the last year we have been wanting real dialogue,” Pittman said. “I said we are being abused. We are being abused in the Catholic church by this priest and by this archbishop.”
They interrupted and ended the holy sacrifice of the Mass. If this action doesn’t demonstrate why the Archbishop had to reclaim this renegade parish for the Catholic Church, nothing does.
Read the whole thing. Note that neither Archbishop Sample nor Father Kuforji agreed to be interviewed for the piece. It is impossible to protest that your side is not covered when you won’t talk to the reporter. Still, it seems from what’s there that the reporter had his mind made up at the beginning; that the archbishop and the priest did not want to talk to him is a defensible decision.
This past weekend, I was talking with a Catholic priest about obstacles to the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church reuniting. I didn’t know about his story then, but it’s a perfect example of why it’s not going to happen anytime soon. The fact that a Catholic archbishop would have to reform a parish that had gone so very, very far off the liturgical rails is the kind of thing that makes Orthodox Christians, who are extremely serious about liturgy, alarmed.
Here’s a short video of the elderly radicals disrupting mass and protesting. Poor Father Kuforji.
UPDATE: Let me add a more sympathetic coda. As a thought experiment, put yourself in the shoes of these people who have been living out this bizarre leftist semi-Catholicism for decades. As distorted as it is, this is what they’ve known. And now it’s been taken away from them. I’m not going to go full relativist here; they needed to have this taken away from them, because it’s not Catholicism, and the people of that parish deserve to have the Catholic faith. That said, I was just listening in the car to an interview with Sister Helen Prejean, the progressive nun best known for her work on the death penalty. She’s 80 now, and has a new memoir out. She is very, very much on the Catholic left, and if I were still Catholic, I would see her as a force of disorder and decline. That said, even when I was a Catholic, I’ve always had a heart for Sister Helen, who is from south Louisiana, and in whose voice I hear my neighbors. I think (have always thought) that she’s badly misguided on many things, but … well, I have a soft spot for her. I think her generation brought some really bad things to the Catholic Church, but it doesn’t take too much imagination to get an idea of where they came from with at least some of this.
It would be nice, though, if the people protesting at St. Francis would give a moment’s thought to all the orthodox, traditional people, now long dead, at that parish who saw what was happening to their parish, and who were not listened to, whose views did not matter, because all the progressives were busy singing a new church into being. It’s hard being on the other side, isn’t it?
UPDATE: Reader PW writes:
Rod, your title made me laugh! You have absolutely no idea how spot-on you are!
I once lived 3 blocks from this church about a decade ago. Admittedly I only attended Mass once. The parish was viscerally not a good fit for me. The picture drawn by the secular paper is somewhat accurate: a tiny parish filled entirely with aging flower children nearing the end of their life’s journey. The “liturgy” was almost unrecognizable and the heresy flowed like water. They were, however, friendly and welcoming folk.
Something not mentioned in the piece: for a long while, the parish was essentially run by a lay woman who would essentially contract out for priests as desired. It was a frankly bizarre arrangement even within the confines of the Portland Archdiocese. It’s fascinating that the parish was allowed to sail on for so long in that fashion. I think the piece doesn’t do justice to how totally outside the norm literally every aspect of the parish was, from governance to liturgy.
Another thing that I think should be mentioned: the good people of St. Francis have a true, honest, clear devotion to the poor. Truly they have a charism of sorts. The parish has run a dining hall for the poor for as long as I can remember. When I lived there, the parish grounds included a “park” that was basically an abandoned lot next to the church. They permitted homeless people to squat there. I believe the park has been replaced with low income housing, I presume with input from the parishioners. The amount of effort in helping the homeless put forth by these people cannot be overstated.
Rod’s post on this pretty much goes through my own range of emotions on the matter at hand.
On the one hand, this group of whacky liberals has been allowed to run, essentially, a rogue pirate ship under the banner of Catholicism for eons. It was unfathomable to many that it went on for so long. I don’t know how much of that was the sympathies of liberal forces within the diocese, or just a distaste for causing a scene like what you read about here.
It was just inevitable that something would change. If nothing else, the parish was going to just die out when the last of its geriatric congregation passed on. (Maybe that was the thought process of the previous couple of bishops?)
It’s also deeply ironic to see the parishioners react with such vitriol to a simple return to liturgical norms. I can think of countless local examples of the opposite: some ordinary parish is taken over by Fr. Limpwrist, and before you know it the church has been disemboweled until it resembles a Unitarian worship space. Oh how the wheel turns!
On the other hand, these people created a weird spiritual home for themselves. They put a lot of effort into it. I am a little sad for them. They’re just lost sheep, too stubborn to be shepherded.
I’m grieving that it appears you are unable to see.
I can’t help you with that one!
If that were true, you guys wouldn't be left flat-footed every time someone who was "saved" dies in obvious wickedness.
I can't see something you refuse to show.
You CAN help, or are you just a lazy servant?
“In the end, there are these three: faith, hope, and charity. And the greatest of these is charity.”
That’s funny. Alot of manmade stuff? Like what, the Creed? The liturgy is almost all scripture (5 diff readings), prayers and Canon, which is based on Last Supper, and words of Christ in the Our Father.
You may be one of those who have your ideas of Catholics framed by lack of actual knowledge and more by anti-cath.
A protestant service has a few scripture passages, and then one guy ranting about it for half an hour. Catholics have a multitude more of scripture and a more reverent attitude toward it.
A book for you to read:
A Biblical Walk through the Mass
by Edward Sri
So why do the Scriptures...to be more exact ...NT, gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John...consistently contradict one another? Which Jesus and which chapters and verses are you speaking about? You are a little confusing, and, might I add...a little confused.
The apostles and subsequent bishops preached Jesus’ message in the local language. That was the Holy Ghost’s message from Pentecost so they could reach those outside Judea.
Switching to Latin and having missiles printed when many couldn’t read closed off the gospel to only the aristocrats and the clergy.
THE traditional mass is in the local language, so people could convert to the church and understand the message Jesus came to teach us.
**missiles** Like traveling in space objects or weapons?
Or do you mean missals?
If they can't read, what difference does it make what language the missal is printed in? Catholics are flocking to Latin masses today, and they don't speak it either.
Furthermore, the homily is in the local language. The liturgy is in latin.
You really need to get some background before trying to diagnose someone else.
Hold on. I think the spirit is moving me to make a prophesy....
Background. LOL.
Suggested by a person who doesn’t understand the meaning of Pentecost. The world is upside down today with ignorance.
Most people couldn’t read before 1800. So if you say the mass in latin, then they can’t follow. Get it now.
Anyway local language was the first mass because of the miracle of Pentecost
Now that there are churches all over the world, I don’t care what language the mass is in now. But if I was leading missions in the jungle of Brazil it wouldn’t be in Latin.
if you don’t like it go to the next church. I don’t believe the popes should restrict the latin mass if the locals want it.
I was an altar boy with the Latin mass. Oh and i could read.
So where was the Eucharist in that Mass?
Being an altar boy does NOT make you a scholar....
I didn’t say it did. Your reliance on name calling me not a scholar indicates a projection of your own lack of knowledge. What degree does one need to understand Pentecost?
you keep avoiding your ignorance of that basic issue relevant to the language of the early preachings and mass.
I only ave one point you fail to admit to in your spin and attacks on me. The real TRADITIONAL mass was in local languages. Say yes and free your self.
Good night I leave you to spin again or admit the simple truth I have stated since the first post.
You don't need a degree to know "if it ain't got the Eucharist, it ain't a Mass." (i.e. you're talking out of your hat....)
More ignorance.,
you know they had bread and wine 2000+ years ago or did you miss that part of the liturgy since you read latin Your point seems to be that the apostles preached the word of Jesus to the people but did’t do what Jesus said, “Do this in remembrance of me.,” So no Eucharist.
They left out that part So alter the church a said, ah now we’re cooking we got a real mass in Latin now; those apostles were only partially on the ball. You see how ignorant you continue to be just to justify a wrong point you made 40 minute sago.
You want the latin mass so badly, you can’t admit historical truth and one of the most important event sin the history of Christianity.. I said i wouldn’t mind a latin mass unless I was on a a mission somewhere. What more do you want to make yourself whole.
You’re spinning indicates something troublesome inside of you.
I will pray for your enlightenment and to open your heart and mind to God’s truth..
.
irst Apology(155 A.D), chapter 66
And this food is called among us the Eucharist of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.
For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, “This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body;” and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, “This is My blood;” and gave it to them alone.
The disciples began to celebrate the Eucharist very soon after Pentecost. Immediately after he tells us about the coming of the Holy Spirit and Peter’s preaching to the people, Luke writes,
They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. (Acts 2:42)
Does the breaking of bread mean the Eucharist?
This undoubtedly refers to more than ordinary meals. The presence of the resurrected Jesus is noted at the ‘breaking of the bread’ in Luke 24:35. Luke emphasizes the connection between meals and Jesus’ presence (Luke 24:41-42; Acts 1:4, 10:41). The ritual is noted again in 2:46; 20:7, 11. (Luke Timothy Johnson, The Acts of the Apostles, Sacra Pagina Series vol. 5, ed. Daniel J. Harrington, Collegeville Minnesota: Liturgical Press, 1992, p. 58)
Paul in 1 Corinthians 11 and Matthew, Mark and Luke in their gospels tell us about the institution of the Eucharist at the Last Supper. These accounts were written 25 to 60 years after the event, during which time what actually happened would have been partly lost and each community remembered the event in the way it had been passed on to them. It would be natural for the authors to write into their story of the Last Supper the way the Eucharist was celebrated by the communities at the time of writing. We would like to know the details of the early Eucharists but, alas, the writers have not provided them.
One of the major difficulties faced by scholars with regard to the origin of the Eucharist is the question of how far the accounts of the Last Supper may be treated as reliable descriptions of an actual historical event and how far they have been affected by the later liturgical practices of the first generation of Christians. (Paul F. Bradshaw, The Search for the Origins of Christian Worship, Oxford University Press, 2002, p. 61)
The earliest Eucharists were home Masses (Acts 2:46 says ‘they broke bread at home’) with small numbers and one could safely presume they would have been very simple. Elaborate ceremonies would develop only later.
Yet these early Eucharists were establishing the traditions or should we say ‘Traditions’ with an upper case ‘T’. When we want to be truly ‘traditional’, we are looking not at the Church of the 1950s or the Middle Ages but at the very early Church of the first few centuries.
As the good news spread beyond the borders of Israel, there were Gentile converts and these too remembered Jesus’ death and resurrection in the Breaking of Bread. Luke tells us of Paul at Troas: ‘On the first day of the week, when we met to break bread … ‘(Acts 20:7–12)
This is the only account we have in the New Testament of a specific celebration of the Eucharist, and again it gives no details.
Note that they met ‘on the first day of the week’, that is, Sunday, the day of the resurrection, so these early Christians changed the day of meeting from Saturday, the Jewish Sabbath, to Sunday.
Eucharist with a Meal
Each community would have developed its own way of celebrating the Eucharist and for this reason we cannot generalize about how the ritual was performed. At least in some places such as Corinth, the Eucharist, here referred to as ‘the Lord’s Supper’, was celebrated together with a community meal. We know this because Paul rebukes the community there for not sharing their food as they should.
When you come together, it is not really to eat the Lord’s supper. For when the time comes to eat, each of you goes ahead with your own supper, and one goes hungry and another becomes drunk. (1 Corinthians 11:20–21)
Paul is quite severe towards the Corinthians and he asks them to recall how Jesus gave himself so unselfishly when he instituted the Eucharist at the Last Supper. He repeats for them the words that Jesus used: ‘This is my body that is for you…’ Paul then tells them that when they do not share generously they are eating and drinking ‘in an unworthy manner’ (v. 27) and not ‘discerning the body’ (v. 29), that is, the assembly of followers.
Precisely.
So when's the last time you were at Mass?
when is the last time you admitted you made a mistake?
I asked you to admit to it. You don’t have the honor of strength of character to do so. You deny a foundational event in the history of the faith.
I did your homework for you. I tried to remediate you. I stayed with you too long. Find someone else’s time to waste.
You’re disingenuous and dishonorable and you question my faith?
Ad nutricem aliam quaerite pectus!
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.