₦airaland Forum

Sal C: I wish I very well understand what both Syncan and Uben are talking about, but since it was the community who took their case to vatican, and the pope took such action to remedy the situation, I won't say he's entirely wrong if it's only going be temporal. But let this no be permanent.

You see Sal C, the Pope is the Judge, he has given his judgement in over a case brought to him. It is expected to be "Rome has spoken;and it is final", but no, since it is Pope Francis, the one we are looking at suspiciously based on so many "weed" sown in our hearts, we must question it as if we could do better.

Ubenedictus: this is a interesting point, modernism has crept into the church and everybody has to be mordenise. The ambiguity of his statement is also increasingly alarming. Most times he seems walking on an edge, as far as i can tell he doesnt teach error, but he certainly doesnt care either to put down clearly and with defined parameter.
If you follow the net regularly u'll find that many people are thinking that he is purposely puting the truth with ambiguity.

The bolded says it all. Methodology may not be the same, even Benedict XVI wasn't clear at all times, nor did the actions of Pope John Paul II palatable to all. Modernism in the church is when gay lobbyists takeover the Vatican and sexually abusive priests are protected, when corruption is the order of the day in the headquarters, When the poor are neglected and the hierarchy frolic with the rich thieves. Look if the vigor used in raising fund for church building is used for aiding St. vincent de paul society for example, we would have had a better church that looks like what Jesus wants. This is the message of the Pope, he does not think it has something to do with which mass you celebrate.

Sal C: Good morning to you brethren.

Good morning to you Sal C, and Good morning to you all others too. May your day be richly profitable.

Ubenedictus: be rest assured i'm not trying to avoid any facts, u assumptions are heavyly mistaken



b4 i bgin i wish to state clearly that the above qoute is not a part of the mortu propio.
2nd the above quote only prevents the novus ordo from being rejected in principle, a congregation can exclusively celebrate the vetus ordo without rejecting the novus ordo in principle, the fssp is a good example.
3 the franciscans didnt reject the novus ordo in practice as is clearly and licitly done by the fssp, and it didnt reject it in principle either and so ur quote above doesnt affect them.

It would interest you to note that d quote above does not in any way touch the franciscans of the immaculate as they celebrate both ordo!

This is the relevant portion of the morto propio that concerns the franciscans.

Art. 3 Communities of
Institutes of consecrated life and of Societies
of apostolic life, of either pontifical or
diocesan right, wishing to celebrate Mass in
accordance with the edition of the Roman
Missal promulgated in 1962, for conventual
or "community" celebration in their
oratories, may do so. If an individual
community or an entire Institute or Society
wishes to undertake such celebrations
often, habitually or permanently, the
decision must be taken by the Superiors
Major, in accordance with the law and
following their own specific decrees and
statues. Art. 4 Celebrations of Mass as
mentioned above in art. 2 may – observing
all the norms of law – also be attended by
faithful who, of their own free will, ask to be
admitted.


I submit once more that the said franciscans, clearly and licitly followed the above mortu propio to the letter

I thought you knew where I got my quote, for I never claimed it came from the mortu propio. Those were Pope benedict XVI own letter to the bishops on the occasion of its publication. It is his further clarification to them on its use.

Your claims on the Franciscans is entirely your opinion, based on what bits and pieces of info you've been able to gather; and who you're listening to,You did not see the report of the commission, neither did you see the protest letter from some of her members to Rome which initiated this process(I may be wrong, so correct me). Nipping a problem in the bud is better at all times is my take.

I look at things like this:

“More than 80% of the friars appreciate the intervention of the Church,” Father Alfonso Bruno, a spokesman for the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, told Catholic News Agency.

And I feel like PLEASE LEAVE THE POPE TO DO HIS JOB.

Read more: http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/no-rejection-of-benedict-in-franciscans-of-the-immaculate-decree-say-leader#ixzz2pyuslfc3

Ubenedictus: Just a little background info.
The vetus ordo (also calld traditional latin mass, tradentine, extraordinary form) predates d novus ordo (d ordinary form) by at least 14 centuries, it was compiled by pope st gregory abt d 6th cent AD and codified at trent. It isnt a provisional form, or a defective form and thus as per summorum pontificum every priest has d universal right to celebrate it.
Actually as per sumorum pontificum both forms "are first of all to be accepted by all".

Just to make it clearer. It is not fair to date the tridentine mass back to the 6th Century of Pope Gregory. The mass has undergone revision starting from the first century. The tridentine mass as we know it, is the revision made by Pope Pius V and authorized for the Universal Church (western rite) in 1570. Prior to this, the entire Latin rite did not have a unified form. The tridentine therefore only predates the new one by 4 centuries and not 14.

POPE II: This doesn't smell good, this pope should b very cautious with all the media hype surrounding him and talking about modernizing Catholicism, we are not cars and some use embraced Catholicism because of those things. This pope is scary to say the,least. I hope one day he won't wake to Change/remove/add any Canon.

My brother pope, this is exactly what I am talking about. We view this Pope with too much suspicion, here is a pope who has successfully so far helped the image of the catholic church as a religious organization worthy of being called christian. I knew how ashamed I was, before his election, of the Vatican and almost every news that came from there prior to him. Even Pope Benedict XVI felt too embarrassed and overwhelmed by the magnitude of ignominy, yet we now feel we were doing well. He is doing some changes, It may not appear all right at all times, but I am prepared to give him the benefit of doubt I gave his predecessors. I remembered arguing with some Catholics after the election of Benedict XVI, who said he was an anti-pope due to his stand on Fr.Grunner case in the Fatima crusader saga. Today, the actions of same Benedict XVI is now used to Judge Francis...even by same persons (can you beat that?). He is the Pope! Let him work, lets not be so ready to accuse him of working for someone else and not God, the doubt sown in our hearts by the devil is so much that we are losing confidence in the power of God to keep His sheep protected.

Ubenedictus: Lastly this is what d so-callld dissent consists of:

the superior general implimented a clear papal declaration in his congregation, which is totally in line with both spirit and word of the mortu propio, abt 5priest claimed the superior had a preference to the vetus ordo which they didnt like. And the solution to that non problem was.
1 stop all the priest from exercising their given right of celebrating d vetus ordo.
2 close all their seminaries
3 make them all sign writtten proclamation like heretics
4 send d superior general to a religious home and appoint a non-franciscan to run d affairs of a franciscan congregation.


No punishment was giving to the priest wu rebel against their superior general.

That seems like a clear handwriting in the wall and a clear message to all those wu hold d papal statement of pope ben. A whole congregation was axed because they obeyed and implimented the decision of pope ben and instead of cautioning desenters u withdraw priestly rights, close seminaries and dump the superior general.


That is an abuse of power.

Now that is your own take on the matter.

Facts arising from your posts.
1. There was a problem in the community with appeals to Rome for intervention.
2. Non of the priest was denied the right to celebrate mass. If all accepted the novus ordo, then they will have no problem celebrating it for now.
3. Their being in full communion was in doubt

4 Is a disciplinary actions taken in line with recommendations made to him. Do not get me wrong, I had similarly said earlier, his punitive measures may not be palatable to all, but I will blame him more if he had failed to act.

Every action of this pope is scrutinized with suspicion, even actions taken against a small religious order that is in turmoil. Give him a break, his pontificate is no less than his predecessors.

Ubenedictus: Syncan, the fact that u posted that article out of many available shows you know little about this particular issue.

Your statement about "extraordinary" form shows you didnt read summorum pontificum, because if u did u wouldn't make dat statement.

Dear Uben, now you sound like the "Pentecostals" when they accuse us of many things in a bid to avoid facts.


"Needless to say, in order to experience full communion, the priests of the communities adhering to the former usage cannot, as a matter of principle, exclude celebrating according to the new books. The total exclusion of the new rite would not in fact be consistent with the recognition of its value and holiness".

"Already from these concrete presuppositions, it is clearly seen that the new Missal will certainly remain the ordinary Form of the Roman Rite, not only on account of the juridical norms, but also because of the actual situation of the communities of the faithful".

I hope you know where I got this from.

Ubenedictus: this particular matter actually really interested me. Would you like to table the said dissent?
And really where you have dissent d solution is to restrict a whole congregations right to celebrate d extraordinary form.

I am only obliged to show that there was such a situation, not "table the dissent". We are not re judging the matter. So here it is:

"The Vatican intervened only after several
respected FFI members appealed to Rome for
help, citing difficulties with the leadership of
the order. A subsequent apostolic visitation
confirmed the troubles. In response to a
questionnaire submitted to FFI members as
part of the Vatican inquiry, 61% of the
respondents said that there were significant
problems with the FFI leadership, and most
said that the problems were not likely to be
resolved without Vatican intervention"

http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=20016

I am happy you called it extraordinary form, It means there is an ordinary form which first of all must be accepted by all. It is good judgement to fall back to this in crises period until the tool of obedience is used in restoring harmony. Moreso, if I am not in the congregation of the doctrine of faith nor in the commision that did the actual investigation, why will I doubt their judgement?

Just imagine the way people explain their own scripture. After Jesus told nicodemus about water and spirit, was he still surprised? He was only surprised because Jesus said "Born again". All these talk, yet it was water the ethiopian eunoch saw and requested baptism. Continue in rhetorics, Jesus said something, it was water and spirit, the apostles understood it, their own disciples understood it. You may do well to tell me when it changed.

POPE II: Life expectancy in Nigeria is 52

Hahaha, my brother pope, in nigeria we defy all such oyibo statistics.

Ubenedictus: interesting question, i wouldn't want to push it.
A more interesting question will be why he has restricted d francns of d immaculate from celebrating a mass all oda congregations are celebrating

The congregation on the doctrine of faith advices the pope on such matters.

1. There was a problem of dissent in the community.
2. There was investigation done with recommendations made.
All his actions cannot be seen to be right by all and at all times.

As per Africans priests living up to 65yrs, where I come from, they do not die younger than the lecturers, and the retirement age of lecturers is 70yrs or is it 75yrs now.

Sal C: Greetings to the brethren

Greetings to you Sal C.

May the Lord bless your going and coming, and may He uphold the good works of thy hands.

A splendid day ahead dear brethren.

italo: Nowhere in those verses does it say that "water=word."

Stop the desperation.

Bro, I tire for these people o. Even Jesus clear words are forced to mean something else. Lets take a look.

Jesus : Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
Lets see if the disciples understood water as water or something else.

Philip :And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? Note that Philip had been feeding him the word,and must have told him the necessity of baptism with water to evoke such exclamation.

Paul : And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost. And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.

Ubenedictus: on a 2nd thought i'll stop this discussion here, anything futher will raise serious dust on vatican 2, for d sanity of many i wont go that far.
Peace

Ok.

Ubenedictus: talking abt cart and horse, b4 and after; u didnt ansa my question

I did it well enough with examples. You do not become a monsignor to be deemed experienced. Many are experienced, yet are not monsignors and they can be given whatever faculty is deemed fit.

Ubenedictus: Careful dear this arguement can b used to distroy all non apostolic traditions and discipline. It is a slipppery slope let me apply this ur logic so we can see hw distructive it can be.
The clerical vestments were invented by a pope to copy the emperors they are only symbolic. Priests can validly celebrate d mysteries witout those dress. They are thus unnecessary. If the pope decides to abolish the clerical dresses to foster beta participation then it is no big deal.

Hw did u like d application of ur logic?

Though the pope has not made an outright abolishment, but lets look at this anyway.

Question: Is it within the power of the Pope to abolish the vestment? Does none use of these vestment limit grace from God on the people? Note that I am basing it entirely on your submission about the vestments above.

Ubenedictus: the sacraments dnt need clerical dresses too. Infact all non apostolic traditions will be removed according to ur logic.

There is a huge difference between can be removed and will be removed. If it can be removed, then it will be removed when the circumstance calls for it.

Ubenedictus: profitable service to the church!

Exactly. The pope says at 65yrs, you can now say Fr XYZ has served the church profitably enough to be called a papal chamberlain.

Ubenedictus: just a simple question to buttress my point, have u ever seen in d latin rite church where e 2yr old priest was granted such faculties?
U dnt just get d faculties because u are a priest but because u've been deem expirienced enuf nd suited to have dem.
Actually been a monsignor is a gud reason to b granted those faculties.

Uben, lets not say the cart is dragging the horse. Monsignor is a title. Priest are made Vicars and chancellors in dioceses without being monsignors. When Bishop Solomon Amatu in Awka was chancellor, he wasn't a monsignor, when Msgr.Cyprain Onwuli became Vicar in portharcourt, he was just a priest. When Bishop Obinna was appointed, he was just a priest lecturer in the seminary, not a monsignor. If you have any faculty which a priest cannot be given except he is a monsignor, let's know.

Ubenedictus: a monsignor is a respected clegy, usually holding an special function in d diocese. Most times they are those wu are qualified for the episcopate, they usually represent d bishops and are usually granted extra faculties like administering confirmation.

Whatever extra faculty granted to a monsignor by the bishop, was not because he is a monsignor, but because he is a priest. His monsignor title is by the way. I stand to be corrected.

Ubenedictus: he didnt just raise the age limit.
Monsignors are currently of abt 3 types (excluding d curia and d vicars), he totally abolished two types and left just one, i.e d chaplins to the holy father, d then said only those of 65yrs old may b nominated for it.
At 65 most priest are talking of retirement, and to be honest in my experience granting monsignors is hardly political or prone to abuse.

Those three types were created at some point as Honorary titles. I've seen Bishops selected from priests who aren't monsignors, while those who are monsignors remain. So it's not an important a stage in church hierarchy. If the Pope decides to change the criteria for better focus on clerical duties, no big deal.
Yes they can retire with their monsignor status, it dosen't disturb anything. My point is that a diocese does not need a monsignor for anything. It is a honorary title and can now be for one who has done his duty meritoriously.

We have seen bishopric appointments seemingly political and we want to talk about monsignor? What criteria is used for monsignor selection?

Ubenedictus: I just clarified the communique has no retroactive effect. D previous miosignors will maintain their titles

Just about saying this is what i understood. I however did not understand it as abolishing. He raised the age limit, kinda restricting things a little bit from becoming political and prone to abuse. I understand there are three different categories of monsignors and this affects only one.

Yes, we'll continue to pray for Pope Francis, but he's got my aye on this.

woky: Are you a Rev. Father??

Haba, blessing no de for lay men again?

Who know wether Sal C wake fine this morning?

May His faithfulness protect and defend us.

A blessed day ahead brethren.

POPE II: Indulgence as in ? And where ? Any pilgrimage or there is a specific place where Catholic needs to go ?

Oya okay oo I said nothing

From the Enchiridion (handbook) of indulgence.


"Visit to the Patriarchal Basilicas in Rome. A
PLENARY INDULGENCE to those who
devoutly visit one of the Patriarchal Basilicas
in Rome and recite one Our Father and the
Creed,
A. On the titular feast of the Basilica;
B. On any Holy Day of Obligation;
C. Once a year on any other day of one's
choice. (Remember the three constants are
also required to obtain ANY plenary
indulgence.)"

"Visit to a "Catacomb" (early Christian
cemetery.) Partial indulgence."

These are examples of pilgrimage encouraged firmly by the church.

vickyO: I did come here to raise any controversy.
I came here in peace, you can check my previous posts before this issue.
The annoying thing thing is the fact that you all are painting my intentions black. I came here cause i noticed Sal C, Pope II and Woky were frequent here.
All these would have been avoided if you cautioned (not ignored) me earlier instead of counter arguing.

Two wrongs can't make a right anyway.

I'll just unfollow this thread and get off it the same way I entered

I'm sorry I derailed your thread, Mr. Aladin

Don't worry, message's been sent and delivered already..
You can have your thread to your self and your catholic peeps.

I will let this slide because of what Uben said....Just that I expected you to know better.

POPE II: I was actually looking for holy places which aren't churches

Well bro from the best of my knowledge the church never taught us about pilgrimage or the need of pilgrimage , esp in Israel ,do you know how they treat Christian and mock Christianity in Israel?
Also the fact is the water and those leaves are not the same which existed during the time of Christ . So what's the point? At this rate people will start collecting sand from Palestine/Jerusalem/Bethlehem because Jesus walked over there. I think this is a new trend , and the money people spend there goes in a Jew state , this is just like Christians going to the Mecca.
Maybe I'm mistaken are the places mentioned (Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Israel, Palestine) holy places in our doctrines) ?

You'll hadly find a site deemed holy by catholics without a church present there. The churches are built most often to commemorate the event.

As per the things from palestine anf israel, they are not sacramentals if they are not "sacramentals". They are simply souvenirs, leave whoever wants to identify with the birthplace of our lord to do so in whatever way is pleasing to him. People do crazy things for love, we don't get mad at them, intent is key here. It matters not how they see christians, it pleased the lord to trod that land.

...and sorry, you are wrong, there is indulgence attached to some pilgrimages, so the church encourages it.

POPE II: Good morning people, blessings from the Vatican .

Questions of the day : what are Catholic holy places ?
And what are your views on religious tourism and people keeping water, leaves from Palestine/Israel etc . Last but not the least, what do you think of catholics going in Israel for pilgrimage?

Catholic holy places are those places associated with holy people ( saints, matyrs) or events of Divine intervention. Eg includes the catacombs, basilica or churches with saints relics and places of our lady's apparitions.
;
There is nothing wrong with pilgrimages, in such pilgrimages, the mind of the pilgrim is filled with thoughts of Jesus and events related to him. This is good by all standards. water or souveniers from palestine are good as long as they keep the individual focused on Jesus. Anything outside it...my hand no de o.

woky: well said, i pray she undstnd

Again, I pray so too.

@ vickyO, pls I made my point clear. If you avoided continued discuss with me on another thread, coming here to raise one is out of order. It matters not how you feel about what is said or not said here, we deserve to be let alone in just one out of the numerous threads. If you want to discuss, pls lead us to any thread outside here. There is a saying that one does not enter trouble for what he said in his house. It doesn't matter if you pick offense or not on what I said, I have just said the truth and that is it. You met a fraternity worth encouraging, do not allow your presence bring bad air.