Skip to comments.
Recent Activity Between Rome and Society Saint Pius X (SSPX)
Diocese Report blog ^
Posted on 06/28/2002 8:08:06 PM PDT by Polycarp
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-86 next last
To: sinkspur
I agree, I pray for that daily. I must have misunderstood your intent. Mea culpa.
61
posted on
07/01/2002 7:43:13 AM PDT
by
narses
Comment #62 Removed by Moderator
To: narses
To: Editor TCRNews.com
If your concern is the negotiations, why anonymously trash those not publicly involved in them?
64
posted on
07/01/2002 9:09:30 AM PDT
by
narses
To: Catholicguy
To: narses; sinkspur
I've never seen black vestments worn at an ordination. Not a good sign.Wow, the color of the vestments bothers you, . . .
Liturgical colors have meanings; they are meant to reflect something about the nature of the Mass of the day. I don't know how old you are, but pre-Vatican II black vestments were worn at funeral Masses and Requiem Masses and only there. I've never seen them at any other time (or for the past 30-odd years, at all).
66
posted on
07/01/2002 11:33:27 AM PDT
by
maryz
To: maryz
I've never been to an ordination myself, so I don't know what colors are the norm, nor do I know what colors are in that picture. They appear black, but they could be deep purple or blue or the color setting on either the camera or my monitor may be off. A friend of mine was ordained there this year and when I see him, I'll ask about the vestments.
67
posted on
07/01/2002 1:34:59 PM PDT
by
narses
To: narses
They appear black, but they could be deep purple or blue or the color setting on either the camera or my monitor may be off. Purple is for repentance, i.e., Lent and Advent. Blue is not a liturgical color, except in Spain, which last I heard (some years back) had special permission to use it for Marian feasts. I would expect an ordination to have white (for joy, if I remember right) -- or gold, which counts as white liturgically, I think.
Do ask when you have the chance, though, and let us know.
68
posted on
07/01/2002 1:41:37 PM PDT
by
maryz
Comment #69 Removed by Moderator
Comment #70 Removed by Moderator
Comment #71 Removed by Moderator
To: Editor TCRNews.com
A classic example of confusing the accidents of history for the substance of Tradition. Well, you could argue it with Sr. Sylverius, 'cause that's how I learned it in high school; unfortunately, she's dead, so you'll have to wait.
It is passing strange though that a group that purports to be traditional would buck not only the traditional liturgical colors but the fact that in Western culture, black symbolizes death and mourning. (I know that there are nowadays brides who consider black a good color for their bridesmaids' dresses, but this new custom is not yet widespread, and I think some of them just like to shock the old folks, who consider it bad luck.)
Maybe because it's 92 degrees out, but I don't see any direct connection between your post and our little discussion. We're discussing tuna mixed with mayo vs. tuna mixed with mustard (ugh!), and you want to discuss the rationale behind the USDA food pyramid.
72
posted on
07/01/2002 3:03:55 PM PDT
by
maryz
To: Editor TCRNews.com
You say, "Beware the charismatic ones...". Have you MET Bp. Williamson? LOL, he is NOT charismatic. And yes, the SSPX has been trying for years for a resolution, as have elements in Rome. They are getting close, which is a good thing. I still don't see how that unverified, anonymous letter in any way reflects anything regards the topic of this thread.
73
posted on
07/01/2002 3:45:56 PM PDT
by
narses
Comment #74 Removed by Moderator
Comment #75 Removed by Moderator
Comment #76 Removed by Moderator
Comment #77 Removed by Moderator
To: maryz
Friends who wrer there said no black vestments were worn. Scarlet and gold were the colors they recall. I'll see pictures later this week and let you know.
78
posted on
07/02/2002 8:25:38 AM PDT
by
narses
To: Editor TCRNews.com
Even after your post, I see little point or value beyond calumny to your posting of that alleged letter. Certainly I see no charity. Further, Bp. Fellay has made it clear that the quarrel is NOT with the Catechism, not with Vatican II nor is the SSPX denying the validity of the Novus Ordo Mass -- it is with Modernism and the permutations of those same things that are so harming the Church.
Recall, when approached with one of the last letters from Bp. Fellay wherein HE described the reasons for the SSPX position -- the fight against modernism, heresy and freemasonry, HH replied with words to the effect "That is us!", meaning HH identifies himself with the same aims. The disagreements between Rome and the Society are on the cusp of resolution.
Reread the article -- He indeed received a letter of March 18 from Cardinal Ratzinger, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, where the Cardinal proposes a working group where theologists of the Vatican and Society will study the problem of the Mass. Another letter, April 5 and signed by Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos, prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy, proposes to make contact with Mgr Fellay. This last he is said to be ready " to answer positively ".
Rome acknowledges real, substantial problems with the New Mass (look at the ICEL scandals), Rome acknowledged every sacramental and juridical act of the Diocese of Campos (the SSJV) who were in the identical position the SSPX is now and Rome now says they are ready to " to answer positively " the last SSPX letter. Since the only thing holding the SSPX back is the issue regards the Indult, I read that as Rome is ready to allow all priests of the Roman Rite everywhere access to the Tridentine Mass just as they have (against their own agreements) made the Novus Ordo Mass available to all priests of the FSSP.
In my humble opinion, this should be cause for great joy amongst Catholics, not a cause for calumny and slanders.
79
posted on
07/02/2002 8:40:45 AM PDT
by
narses
To: narses; ELS
Apologies for my late reply, Ive been traveling a bit and unfortunately will be again over the next week. I asked you to document that the FSSP was:
(1) Promised. . ., their own Superior and eventually Bishop and (2)freedom from the New Mass,
And to support you claim that Rome was taking away the missal and pushing Communion on in the hand:
Moreover, the 1962 Missal is being taken away, Communion in the hand is being pushed
You provide evidence that the FSSP Superior General was changed from one FSSP priest to another. None of that supports your claim number 1, above. You also provide support that Rome has ordered that FSSP priests are allowed to concelebrate the
Novus Ordo. This, of course, is not forcing the Mass on them, but allowing a priest who wants to say it to do so. That is not the same thing. Nor is it the same thing as taking the 1962 Missal away, or forcing Communion in the hand (which is not required in the
Novus Ordo, in case you didnt know that.)
You have not supported any of the claims you made. You may not like how the FSSP has been treated, but be honest about what it is that is bothering you. The things that bug me are that the Superior General was changed. Should a Bishop force the Novus Ordo on a FSSP priest, that would also bother me, but I have never seen that happen.
ELS, What is it that you know has happened? I trust you, and if you tell me that you have seen X or Y, I will believe that. If you can only state that you have heard rumors of X or Y, that isn't worth any more than my stating that. If you tell me that many FSSP parishioners are annoyed by the things pushed on them by Rome, that I also believe. But a rumor that Communion in the hand is being pushed just isn't credible until a credible person comes forward and vouches for exactly that. Rome doesn't dictate how Novus Ordo Catholics recieve Communion, much less how its recieved in the various orders.
patent
80
posted on
07/02/2002 9:10:06 AM PDT
by
patent
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-86 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson