Pages

Monday, October 15, 2007

You ain't seen liturgical abuse

Reactions 
until you see the sort of madness the Bishop of the Diocese of San Bernardino is prepared to preside over. He can be seen recessing, along with the Catholic faith, one might add.



AddThis Social Bookmark Button

15 comments:

Hail3N1 said...

Someone might want to e-mail this one to Fr Mitch Pacqua, a member of the K of C. Since he refers to it on the air, maybe he would want to consider showing it on his segment at EWTN. Now; let's get those Bongos goin'...everyone get up JIVE!... miserere nobis!

Charles Le Jeune said...

I feel physically ill.

Charles Le Jeune said...

I feel physically ill.

Unknown said...

I reside in the Bishop's diocese. He is a modernist, who forces his viewpoints upon the parishes. At any of his Masses, altar girls are used. He forced all the parishes to stand after the Consecration instead of kneeling. He prominently displays a link on the diocese website for the "Catholic Charismatic Movement." He offers ONE parish for the Tridentine Mass for a diocese that, I believe, is the largest and fastest growing diocese in the US. He has FORCED priests into retirement while having parishes without priest and parishes that share priests.

I am not afraid to put my name on the line and tell him, "My name is Christopher Mandzok. I live in your diocese. You are a disgrace to the Church!"

Quite honestly, I believe he is a closet homo, too.

EagleInDC said...

It's just liturgical dance. It appears to have been performed at the end of the Mass, after "the Mass Is ended" or "Ite missa est"/"Go it is the dismissal" was pronounced.

Make a joyful noise unto God, all ye lands: Sing forth the honour of his name: make his praise glorious. Psalms 66:1-2

Let them praise his name in the dance: let them sing praises unto him with the timbrel and harp. For the LORD taketh pleasure in his people: he will beautify the meek with salvation. Psalms 149:2-4

You are being reactionary western imperialists. This isn't liturgical abuse, it is just African performance art. How much different is this from the inclusion of the many eastern liturgical rites that differ radically from the Roman rite yet are in communion with Rome?

This Bishop apparently offers the Tridentine rite in his diocese. I would guess there are more Tridentine masses than African-influenced masses in that diocese.

Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam

ChrisG said...

This last comment was only saved by referring to me as a reactionary western imperialist. This hasn't happened since the glory days of the Cold War

EagleInDC said...

Why did the comment need saving, seriously? The imperialist comment was tongue in cheek. But I am quite serious about my point. Clearly you are a traditionalist with a western perspective. So am I for the most part, but why is it the conservative western way or no way? Jesus never said to his Jewish disciples "when I am going, team up politically with the Romans and incorporate their values into your worship of the father" or "when you do this, do it in the language of the officials and soldiers who are about to kill me instead of in our own language". Please, my point is serious, and I am interested in your argument.

Unknown said...

EagleInDC: the perspective of why the dance is wrong is not from a "western" perspective. It is a Church, Roman Rite perspective. I find fault with the dance on more than one level. First, half-naked men dancing, jumping and singing in front of the Eucharist, which is present even in Novus Order parishes, is appalling. This is a Church. A place for prayer and reflection of our shorting comings in Charitable works. At Mass, in church, in front of the Eucharist, we are to resemble the Ever Virgin Mary, Mother of God at the foot of the Cross while Jesus Christ was crucified. We are not to jump around and dance. Jumping, dancing and clapping belong in the parish Hall - not were the Eucharist resides. Secondly, and most importantly, the nature of the dance needs to be explored. For example, if it is an African dance praising waters ability to grow crops. Well, then you are taking away from the dignity of God, the Holy Trinity - for God provides water for crops, not some freaking rain god. If the nature of the dance is to usher in spring, then, again, it is taking away from the dignity of God for the Spring is something that pagans worship - not Catholics (at least not Traditional Catholics). If it is an African tribal dance, then you still take away from the dignity of God, because the Trinity is to praised in song, not some godless, African, patriarchal society.
EagleInDC, you seem to believe that as long as the Dismissal has been said and "Mass has ended" then Catholics are allowed to act like crackpots in church. It is this type of atrocity that makes me happy that I attend a traditional parish where the priest is not afraid to tell the parishioners, "Be quit! The Lord is present. Show some dignity and class!"
You can see the influence such a dance has a parish. How many of those Catholics in attendance, genuflected prior to turning their backs to the Eucharist and dancing their way out of the church? Just as bad, Catholics like EagleInDC are so influenced with protestantism and modernism that they don’t see the harm of a African tribal dance in front of the Eucharist. Hell, might was well put a buddha on top of the tabernacle....

Unknown said...

EagleInDC asked, "How much different is this from eastern liturgical rites that differ radically from the Roman rite yet are in communion with Rome?"
I have attended numerous Eastern Rite Masses. My mother is Byzantine. I have never, never seen an Eastern Rite Mass have dancing or "performing art" in any way associated with the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Eastern rites are more traditional than the Roman Rite. For EagleInDC to insinuate that Eastern rite offers such liturgical abuses shows no lack of ignorance.

EagleInDC said...

I am not going to stoop to ad hominem attacks such as your suggesting that I have "no lack of ignorance", but if we are going to discuss ignorance, then I really have to point out that many aspects of what we now consider Christian and sacred, were in fact borrowed from Roman and Greek religious practices. I think a devout Jew converted to Christianity would, after the conversion of Constantine, have been horrified to see aspects of paganism incorporated into worship. There is no shortage of examples of this in Christianity generally and in Catholicism specifically.

Also I was not insulting Eastern rites, in fact I am well aware that many, such as the Melkites do not even allow musical instruments. My point was not to compare this African dance to Byzantine or any other Eastern liturgy, but rather to point out that very non-Western traditions can be properly incorporated into Christianity.

Do you recoil at Christmas trees in church? By your argument you should. The Roman god Dionysus, a life death rebirth deity in ancient Roaman worship carried an evergreen as a symbol of eternal life. And evergreen was used in celebration of the Winter Solstice and Roman Holidays. Is it not wrong to bring that symbol before the Eucharist?

What about statues of Mary that look suspiciusly like the Roman goddess Venus?

I submit that adopting non-Christian art, traditions and symbols into what was once a Jewish sect is what made the Church. Had that never happened, wouldn't the Mass be in Hebrew and Aramaic and be held in a synagogue-like structure?

On another note, your comment about the dress of the dancers, in tropical cultures where traditional dress is not much more than a loincloth would a Maryknoll missionary be wrong to invite locals to Mass?

I don't know what the dance performed was, but to say they were acting like crackpots without researching what the symbolism and cultural touchstones of the performace were is in fact ignorant prima facia. And to condemn the Bishop when you are in fact simply assuming the performance was disrespectful is presumptuous.

You may not like liturgical dance, but it can be done resectfully, to bring joyful noise unto the Lord. In that context the performers are not crackpots, they are simply not convinced that the only way to worship the Lord is in the language of his tormentors and according to norms of piety taken from Europe.

Are not the Africans God's Children?

I think you should worship in a traditional style and I applaud the church for bringing back the Tridentine Mass for those who connect to it. But those of you who are comfortable with that, should not condemn other forms unless you have done the scholarship to know that what you are seeing is actually disrespectful.

Laurence G. said...

Hi, I was the one who filmed this madness, and uploaded it. Though I deplore such spectacles, I do not think it is a good thing to bad-mouth our bishop, PuxaAsturies... He is still our bishop.

AMDG,
Laurence

Unknown said...

There is nothing wrong with being ignorant, being stupid is another matter. All that aside, I will break down your statements piece by piece. “Many aspects of...[sacred] Christian[ity], were...borrowed from” the pagans. Sacred is the key term and has a wide meaning in Catholicism, so unless you narrow the term it is difficult to know your meaning and context. If you are talking of the Mass or the Sacraments, I disagree. There is no aspect of paganism in the Mass or the Sacraments, which is exactly what you stated. If you retort that, for example, the celebration of the birth of Christ, Christmas, was nothing more than placating the pagan’s winter solace celebration, I disagree. This is a common modernist argument, however you should research the origins of, for example, Christmas, through the Catholic Encyclopedia, available online at NewAdvent.org. Also, you state, “There is no shortage of examples of this in Christianity generally and in Catholicism specifically.” There is no “Christianity generally and...Catholicism specifically.” Catholicism is Christianity. The Church, capitalized, is Catholicism and is Christianity. Outside the Church there is no salvation.

“Do you recoil at Christmas trees in church?” I recoil at Christmas trees at Mass if they attempt to usurp the presence of the Eucharist. If a Christmas tree was paraded or danced around the church during Mass, akin to some African ritual, then I would be appalled. The mere presence of a secular object that symbolizes the birth of the Savior bothers me not. If it was used to symbolize the winter solstice, then, of course, I would be appalled.

“What about statues of Mary that look suspiciusly like the Roman goddess Venus?” First, show me proof, not mere conjecture or personal or professional opinions that Mary resembles a pagan goddess. This is modernism at its finest - an irrational argument built upon conjecture. However, the answer may be found in the Pope’s encyclical on the Ever Virgin’s Mary uncorrupted conception and birth. If the Pope stated that the Mother of God was protected by her Son from the beginning of time, then Mary preceded Venus, and thus, Venus appears like Mary. However, arguing over a statement such as “What about statues of Mary that look suspiciously like the Roman goddess Venus?” seems rather petty.

“I submit that adopting non-Christian art, traditions and symbols into what was once a Jewish sect is what made the Church.” What made the Church is the institution of the Eucharist as the unbloody sacrifice to God and the sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross and His resurrection, three days later. This is the faith, and this is what made the Church.
And actually, there is a “synagogue-like structure” in the Church, however not nearly as much in the post-Vatican II parishes or the Roman Rite, in generally. A Byzantine church still has a very “synagogue-like structure” behind the “big doors” (I forget the term) where the Eucharist is consecrated behind the doors and the curtain(s). This is symbolic of when the jewish priests went into the tents, once per year, to do whatever it was that they were doing. I believe the altar rails in a Tridentine-loving parish act as a quasi-shield, maybe symbolic of the hidden place in the tent where the jewish priest did there thing.

“On another note, your comment about the dress of the dancers, in tropical cultures where traditional dress is not much more than a loincloth would a Maryknoll missionary be wrong to invite locals to Mass?” Absolutely not. However, if the locals had “nice” loincloth - akin to a suit - and other loincloths - akin to tattered pants and unwashed shirt - then there would be nothing wrong with pointing out to the locals that the respect of God calls out for you to be appropriately dressed. However, you are twisting the argument from America to the bush.

“..without researching what the “symbolism and cultural touchstones” of the performace were...” This is exactly the problem. I could give a rat’s arse for the symbolism and cultural touchstone of the performance. I am at Mass to worship the Trinity. To combine with the Church Triumphant in the worship of Eucharist, to kneel or sit in quit prayer, to ponder my shortcomings in Acts of Charity. If I want performance art - and please don’t state that is what the Mass is - I will go to the theater or the parish Hall. Modernist never want to confront this - that what takes place in so many Vatican II, novus order Masses and parishes takes away from the dignity of the Trinity and the faithful’s ability to WORSHIP the Trinity. Worship? How do you worship the Trinity when a bunch of crackpots are mucking up the place - all in the name of inclusion, in the name of respecting other people’s culture while the culture of God, the Church is diminished.

“You may not like liturgical dance.” There is no such thing as “liturgical dance.” What a crackpot idea for a Catholic, liturgical dance. The only liturgical dance that I could possible fathom are the priest’s rubrics and movements he is to make during the Tridentine Mass. I am sorry, but “liturgical dance” is symbolic of the problem of the post-Vatican II, novus order Church.

“... they are simply not convinced that the only way to worship the Lord is in the language of his tormentors and according to norms of piety taken from Europe.” First, it is not the language of his tormentors. It is the language of the Church. I don’t believe that dance is “worship of the Lord.” I don’t believe that half-naked men parading around in a Church is the faith that I want passed to my child. I can think of only three ways to worship the Trinity: attending the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, prayer, and Acts of Charity. I don’t believe pagan dancing falls into the three categories.

“Are not the Africans God's Children?”..I must be a nazi, too, right? Give me a break - as though I stated or insinuated that any particular race does not have the right to the benefits of inclusion in the Church.
“But those of you who are comfortable with that, should not condemn other forms unless you have done the scholarship to know that what you are seeing is actually disrespectful.” It is like pornography - can’t define it, but I sure do know it when I see it.
This comes to the heart of the argument: you don’t see anything disrespectful to the Trinity, to the Mass with half-clad men, short-skirted, exposed shoulder women gyrating in front of the Eucharist. I do! This is not worship. It is half-clad dancing. It is disrespectful. It takes away from the dignity of God, and I cannot fathom how a Catholic cannot see the problems with this rubbish referred to as “liturgical dance.” Lex orandi, lex crendi
I apologize for one thing: I should not have called the Bishop a homo...he is just a complete moron.

Laurence G. said...

PuxaAsturies, whoever you are, I think you are way out of line. There is no justification for disrespecting our bishop.

-Laurence

Unknown said...

Laurence Gonzaga stated, "There is no justification for disrespecting our bishop" Actually, there are endless reasons for disrespecting a bishop. Am I to respect a bishop that advocates women as priests, gay marriage, the Eucharist is not the true body and blood of Christ or any countless other un-Catholic doctrines? Obviously, such a bishop deserves no respect (and I am not insinuating that this bishop extolls such ideas).
Unfortunately, lay Catholics believe that our bishops and priests are infallible representatives of the Trinity. They are not. Look at the Arian heresy. Bishops supported Arius. Should they have my respect?
Respect, especially religious, is earned through decisions and actions. As I originally wrote, "My name is Chris Mandzok. I live in Bishop Barnes' diocese. He is a moron." If he wants to know where to reach me, I attend the 10:30 (Trinedine) Holy Sacrifice of the Mass at San Secondo Church, Quasti.

Laurence G. said...

""My name is Chris Mandzok. I live in Bishop Barnes' diocese. He is a moron." If he wants to know where to reach me, I attend the 10:30 (Trinedine) Holy Sacrifice of the Mass at San Secondo Church, Quasti."

Unfortunately, I attend the same Mass you do. He is still our bishop and he deserves respect by virtue of his office, not because you like him. At the very least, your words are a sin against charity. If you mentioned this to Fr. Marx, he would tell you the same thing...

-Laurence