A reader writes:
I have a baptized daughter who is a few months old. My wife and I went home to my parents this weekend. They went to Church Saturday night as we were visiting other relatives. On Sunday morning my mom offered to watch our daughter while we went to Church. I agreed.
On the way to church I began to wonder if not brining my daughter to church was a sin. Was it? And how grave was it? I abstained from communion because I wasn’t sure.
I’m not clear from your answer whether you took your daughter to Mass Saturday or if it was just Sunday morning when you didn’t take her to Mass. Either way, it doesn’t matter, because a child that young is not required to attend Mass. The Code of Canon Law provides:
Can. 11 Merely
ecclesiastical laws bind those who have been baptized in the Catholic Church or
received into it, possess the efficient use of reason, and, unless the law
expressly provides otherwise, have completed seven years of age.
The law regarding who has to go to Mass on Sunday (or Saturday evening; either satisfies the Sunday obligation) does not specify an age. It simply says:
Can. 1247 On Sundays and other holy days of
obligation, the faithful are obliged to participate in the Mass.Moreover, they are to abstain from those works and
affairs which hinder the worship to be rendered to God, the joy proper to the
Lord’s day, or the suitable relaxation of mind and body.
Since there is no specification of age here, canon 11 means that children under 7 years of age (or people who lack the use of reason or people who are not baptized) are not bound to attend Mass.
It thus was not a sin to leave your daughter in the care of your mother.
Parents do have a moral obligation to ensure that as their children age, they get in the habit of going to Mass so that once the obligation kicks in at 7 years of age they’re used to it, but this is not an obligation that means they have to be there every single Sunday, and it certainly does not mean that children less than a year old have to be taken to Mass. Children that young are incapable of forming the habit of going to Mass.
We had a priest who would occasionally tell the congregation, “Don’t mind the crying babies; it might remind you married couples to HAVE SOME.”
I agree with your answer, in the terms stated.
That said, I do encourage parents to bring their children, undeterred by concerns about their crying, because I think it helps get them going in the right direction. And if it is true that children bond with their parents from what they hear in the womb, then who knows how early they start bonding with the experience of Mass?
Respectfully, Jimmy, I paritally disagree that a baby a few months old cannot develop a habit of going to Mass. Babies, like all humans, are creatures of habit.
If parents consistently bring their babies and toddlers to Mass at the same time every Sunday and couple that with an hour of quiet time at the same time every day for the rest of the week, during which they look at religious books, cuddling next to Mom or Dad, it really does help “train up a child” to get into a habit of being quiet and thinking about things of the Lord. That’s a good foundation for Mass behavior, don’t you think?
Now of course, every child is different and it is more difficult for some than others to get the hang of attending Mass with the level of decorum that society generally demands. My middle child, for example, is very quiet and observant by nature, so Mass has never been a chore for her — she’d just sit on my lap or my husband’s and watch everybody and everything very intently. My youngest is a tactical-kinesthetic learner, which means she wants to touch everything and experience everything for herself in order to be fully engaged. This has cause disruptions during Mass at times (where she was immediately whisked out so as to minimize distraction to others), and it certainly is taking her longer to develop the self-control to sit quietly. Mass has been like an hour of time-out for her, and no parent in their right minds would put a toddler or preschooler in time-out for an hour. But we persevere because she has to learn by DOING. If we kept her home and didn’t get started until age 7, she’d be in very sorry shape.
Better to start ’em young.
But let’s reiterate: it’s certainly not REQUIRED until the child is at the “age of reason”.
In this context, it may be helpful to recall that the care of infants is one of the serious reasons that the Catechism lists as excusing one from the Sunday obligation (no. 2181): “… the faithful are obliged to participate in the Eucharist on days of obligation, unless excused for a serious reason (for example, illness, the care of infants) or dispensed by their own pastor.”
I agree with Sparki, but it is really nice to know there’s no guilt attached when you’re in need of alternative arrangements.
Although this goes in another direction and starts another side topic, many parishes have “Childrens Liturgy” for those that are before the age of reason (I know, some expand it to include more children that they ought to but lets not look at that for the moment). I used to be rather squeamish about the use of them but pondering this in light of Canon law now perhaps makes me somewhat less so, only in the cases that we might consider the use of this form of the Liturgy as a good chance to build a habit of attending mass. Yes? No?
We’ve never sent our children to one and always kept them with us so that helped to define my squeamishness up until now, but as I move forward toward ordination to the Permanent Diaconate this year and am at a parish now that has one, I’m trying to remain somewhat open.
What about the “childrens liturgy/homily”? Children in our parish leave before the readings and return after the homily. Do the adults who participate in this have to go to mass twice since they didn’t hear the priest/deacon homily? Just something that’s bugged me for a while.
What about the “childrens liturgy/homily”? Children in our parish leave before the readings and return after the homily. Do the adults who participate in this have to go to mass twice since they didn’t hear the priest/deacon homily? Just something that’s bugged me for a while.
I was going to say what Sparki…
…My 11 month old knows that church is a special place that requires special behavior. Of course one of those behaviors is to point to Jesus (on the Crucifix, represented my an icon, or as the Eucharist) when ever she is asked. I have been training her to do this since she was four month old. She smiles whenever she points to him. My wife takes her to adoration every Friday in addition to going to Mass.
When I was a CINO (Catholic in Name only), my two little ones did terribly in Mass and so did I (meaning complete irreverence-and we used the cry room which was a complete crazy place). We would go to different Masses in order to not take the kiddos.
Well, the Lord moved us to a very small Parish that didn’t have a cry room and has only one Sunday Mass and we had to shape up. Now with our four kids we sit in the front row and the kids are very reverent. I never have to take out my two year old who can be a complete terror at home. They are very aware of Jesus’ presence!
I am constantly being told how well behaved they are. It hasn’t even taken much work. Consistency is the key.
Saint&Sinner,
From what I know, many of the “children’s liturgies” that you mention, are possibly being conducted contrary to Church liturgical ‘norms’, and for the primary reason that ONLY a ‘priest’ or a ‘deacon’ is permitted to give a homily at ANY Mass.
ON the Adoremus site, they address this issue pretty extensively, of which below is only 1 part:
“The DMC gives few details on how the separate Liturgies of the Word for children are to be conducted. Thus, the only reasonable procedure would be to follow the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) for Sunday Masses, with such adaptations as are permitted by the DMC. Yet many practices common in these Liturgies are not mentioned either in the GIRM or the DMC.
Consider a Liturgy described in an article in the August 2003 issue of US Catholic magazine:
Led by two boys bearing poles with dangling purple streamers, about 60 children head across a covered walkway to a nearby building where they light a candle, sit on the floor in a classroom, and listen to a gospel reading from the 9th chapter of Mark – the same passage the adults are hearing back in church next door, although in somewhat simpler words….
The children then act out the story (a girl in a blue headband is Jesus, and God’s voice, booming out from a deep-voiced father on the other side of the room, comes as a surprise). Jesus had been dropping hints about rising from the dead, says the leader … but what does that mean? They talk about the word transfiguration, then about metamorphosis…. (Leslie Scanlon, “How to Draw Kids into Mass”)
In many ways the service described in US Catholic is typical: The children leave their parents and older siblings at the regular Sunday Mass and go to a separate place to hear simplified readings and some sort of explanation. This incident illustrates several questionable practices.
Who “Presides” at the Liturgy?
No priest or deacon is present, apparently. But the GIRM requires that a priest or deacon read the Gospel at Mass, and the DMC does not change this requirement. From the BCL survey it appears that over 90% of separate Liturgies of the Word for children have a “presider” who is not a priest or deacon. The leader is usually a catechist or a volunteer, sometimes a student. Commonly, as in the service described above, the leader is a woman.
Who Preaches the Homily?
The Liturgy of the Word described in the US Catholic story above does not include a homily, but rather a discussion with the children led by the woman who “presides”. Yet the DMC lays great emphasis on the homily for children:
The homily explaining the Word of God should be given great prominence in all Masses with children. Sometimes the homily intended for children should become a dialogue with them, unless it is preferred that they should listen in silence. (DMC §48)
Note also that DMC §17, quoted above, specifies that the separate Liturgy of the Word must be one “including a homily”. The DMC definitely requires a homily, using the Latin word homilia in this paragraph. The GIRM requires that the homily be given by a priest or deacon, and DMC nowhere eliminates this requirement. However, it says this:
With the consent of the pastor or rector of the church, nothing forbids one of the adults who is participating in a Mass with children from speaking to the children after the Gospel reading, especially if the priest finds it difficult to adapt himself to the mentality of children. (DMC §24)
It should be noted that in this section the word for “homily” is not used. The Latin text of the DMC says that it is permitted that a lay person post Evangelium verba ad pueros dirigat. Literally, the lay person may “direct words to the children after the Gospel”, but these “words” do not constitute a homily as required by the GIRM for Sunday Mass.
Canon law is quite definite about who may give the homily:
Can. 767 §1 The most important form of preaching is the homily, which is part of the Liturgy, and is reserved to a priest or deacon….
§2 At all Masses on Sundays and holy days of obligation, celebrated with a congregation, there is to be a homily and, except for a grave reason, this may not be omitted.
A children’s Mass or separate Liturgy of the Word, according to DMC, must always include a homily. By canon law this must be given by a priest or deacon. Thus, if no priest or deacon is available for a separate Liturgy of the Word for children, it seems clear that according to the requirements in DMC 17 the circumstances of “the place itself and the nature of the community” are not fulfilled.
What, then, does the DMC mean when it says that one of the adults may “speak to the children”?
We can find clarification on this point in Article 3 (on the homily) of the 1997 Vatican Ecclesiae de mysterio – “Interdicasterial Instruction on Certain Questions Regarding the Collaboration of the Non-ordained Faithful in the Sacred Ministry of the Priest”.
First, the Instruction stresses that the homily is reserved to the ordained:
§1. …The homily, therefore, during the celebration of the Holy Eucharist, must be reserved to the sacred minister, priest or deacon to the exclusion of the non-ordained faithful, even if these should have responsibilities as “pastoral assistants” or catechists in whatever type of community or group. This exclusion is not based on the preaching ability of sacred ministers nor their theological preparation, but on that function which is reserved to them in virtue of having received the Sacrament of Holy Orders….
All previous norms which may have admitted the non-ordained faithful to preaching the homily during the Holy Eucharist are to be considered abrogated by canon 767, § 1.
It then explains what a lay person may do:
§2. A form of instruction designed to promote a greater understanding of the Liturgy, including personal testimonies … is lawful, if in harmony with liturgical norms … as a means of explicating the regular homily preached by the celebrant priest. Nonetheless, these testimonies or explanations may not be such so as to assume a character which could be confused with the homily.
§3. As an expositional aide and providing it does not delegate the duty of preaching to others, the celebrant minister may make prudent use of “dialogue” in the homily, in accord with the liturgical norms.
That is, it is permitted by both the DMC and canon law that a catechist “speak to the children” and even conduct a dialogue with them, but only as an aid to their understanding of the “regular homily preached by the celebrant priest”.
Note that the DMC assumes a priest will be present, authorizing a catechist to speak only “if the priest finds it difficult to adapt himself to the mentality of children” (DMC §24).
Furthermore, if the catechist “speaks to the children”, this explanation must not be confused with a homily.
Clearly, there is considerable confusion in this matter. For instance, Sister Catherine Dooley, OP, in her introduction to the DMC in the third edition of Liturgy Training Publication’s The Liturgy Documents states:
“With the consent of the pastor, the homily may be given by the catechist or an adult other than the presider” (p. 231).
The late Benedictine liturgist Father Aelred Tegels commented in 1974 that the DMC “sanctions” non-ordained homilists:
The Directory also sanctions the practice of having someone other than the celebrant (or another priest or deacon) give the homily on occasion, such as a catechist, presumably more skilled in communicating with children. (Worship, vol. 48, #6 “Chronicle” p. 370)
Father Edward Matthews, the only English-speaking member of the Consilium committee that compiled the DMC, in discussing a separate Liturgy of the Word for children, stated that the children are to go to a separate place for the Liturgy of the Word, where a “priest or catechist” presides:
There they are in the charge of another priest, or catechist, who presides at the simplified readings, delivers the homily and directs the Prayers of the Faithful. (Celebrating Masses with Children, p. 74)
Either the priest or a lay person, he implies, can read the Gospel and deliver a homily to the children.
If even influential liturgists consulted by the Vatican as experts are confused (the Consilium was the group of experts appointed by the Vatican to implement the Constitution on the Liturgy), how could ordinary catechists — much less the children — understand that a priest is not interchangeable with a lay person?
If a separate children’s Liturgy of the Word on Sunday is to be in accord with the DMC — interpreted in the light of the GIRM and canon law — it is clear that there must be a priest or deacon to read the Gospel and give a homily. Yet, the vast majority of respondents to the BCL’s 2000 survey list religious education personnel, volunteers, liturgy personnel or students as “presiders” for children’s Liturgy of the Word. Only 4% responded “priest or deacon”.
Can volunteers or students explain the Scripture to children better than a priest or deacon? Does the pastor oversee what is done at the children’s Liturgies? Why, for example, does the leader of the children’s Liturgy of the Word described above introduce a discussion of metamorphosis? Remember, the reason given for separating children from the main celebration of Mass is that they will be able to hear a simplified reading from a Scripture that avoids sacral vocabulary, like “redemption” and “grace”. Is metamorphosis more likely to be understood by children than redemption? Doubtful. But if so, something is badly askew with the pedagogy.”
But if you take children who don’t have even a vague idea of what goes on at Mass to Mass everyday, won’t they find Mass boring?
That was only a rhetorical question. They will find it boring (unless there’s some crazy upbeat music, perhaps). I know I did. And all I knew about the Mass back then was, that when people started to greet each other, it was almost over, and that when it were over, we would go home, change, and go visit grandma. My youngest sister must be wired to think, after Mass, we’re going to a mall for lunch, because that’s what we do now.
That habit of thinking “we’re almost there!” when the Sign of Peace comes is a very hard one to shake off. So I say, when you take your young children to Mass, make sure to get them excited over it.
Nutcrazical–
You can also shake it up a bit and take your kids to a TLM. My kids are even MORE reverent at the TLM–and it’s very difficult to tell when it will end because there is no shaking hand situation! The key is to teach them to “be still and know I AM GOD”!
That said, I do encourage parents to bring their children, undeterred by concerns about their crying, because I think it helps get them going in the right direction.
I don’t mind parents bringing their very young kids to Mass, so long as they, as best they can, control them.
In one particular Mass, I remember parents having allowed their young kids (probably 3 three years old or younger) run loose throughout the Church while the priest was saying his Homily.
Not only is it distracting, but it’s just plain disrespectful.
The kids kept running back and forth, here and there, all the while, their parents hardly budged to stop them.
A Williamsm in your response to “Saint and Sinner”-With that long cut and paste-are you getting the Esau bug?
As far as the children’s mass-are you actually saying that there are more abuses in it than the present Novus Ordo Mass which lasts for a whopping 45 minutes?
My family and I (I have infants) attend the Traditional Latin High Mass each and every sunday which is almost 2 hours. The church is packed always, as well as for the following low masses and it is packed with children (so amazing to see 4 and 5 children to such young parents, who obviously do not practice birth control and want large families as most Traditional Catholics do today) and somehow they all make it through so that you can hear a pin drop. The children are all dressed in their little dress pants and dress shirts for boys and dresses for girls and little 5 year olds as they pass the aisle each genuflect
I think if you really want to start them young and give them the defenses they are going to need as Catholics in this secular anti Catholic world, show them you yourself are willing to make the sacrifice and go the extra mile and go to the True mass instead of some half baked 45 minute at best mass with no reverence
A Williamsm in your response to “Saint and Sinner”-With that long cut and paste-are you getting the Esau bug?
At least in ours, they’re cited excerpts and, further, they’re from reliable sources that are FAITHFUL to the TRADITIONAL TEACHINGS of the Catholic Church and, above all, to Christ!
Unlike the excerpts you’ve disguised as your own:
… and now, back to our scheduled program.
How long, O LORD? How long!?!
Jimmy,
If I may say so, your mercy towards a certain comboxer goes beyond charity!
John, where are you getting this 45 minute Mass??? I’ve been going to Mass for over 40 years in archdioces under the most liberal bishops in the country (by accident of birth, not by choice) and have NEVER been to a 45 minute Mass. Not even in TINY mountain parishes where the church holds barely 100 people and communion will take much less time. I guess this is another of your phantom ‘abuses’ that you insist are ubiquitous. You have so little credibility because of silly comments like this.
Too bad Pope John SuperNova couldn’t pre-empt him on this thread!
He was actually able to keep him from posting on the ones yesterday with:
it is uncharitable for reader of this useful blog to be subjected to the rambling thoughts of a judgemental jerk!
I don’t generally like referring to people by such names, but when a so-called ‘catholic’ speaks calumney against BLESSED John XXIII and the SERVANT OF GOD , John Paul II, I think it calls for it!
JP II was a Heretic!!!
the Novus Ordo is EVIL!!!!
Vatican II is EVIL!!!
John, where are you getting this 45 minute Mass??? I’ve been going to Mass for over 40 years in archdioces under the most liberal bishops in the country (by accident of birth, not by choice) and have NEVER been to a 45 minute Mass.
THANK-YOU MONICA!
In fact, the TLM only has one Reading and one Gospel!
In the Novus Ordo, we have two Readings, the Psalms, and the Gospel.
Plus, there is the long Homily our Parish priests usually gives on all three Scriptural readings. This lasts anywhere from fifteen to thirty minutes!
Typically, the Masses in our parish lasts anywhere from 1 Hour and 30 Minutes to 2 hours, in fact!
Esau,
Repent, thou Sinner!!!
opps
Esau,
Be careful what you wish for!
Pope John supernova will probably flood the comboxes now! 😉
Pope John XXIV (SuperNova),
A question: Were you elected in a cellphone conclave while you lived in your parents attic…? just curious :<)
Thanks for the notice, David B.!
Who is he?
Do you know?
I thought it was someone we both knew, but it doesn’t appear to be him though.
John,
If you count all the words in the various resources cut and pasted throughout all of these blog topics, I think you will find the total sum to be much less than the total sum of your continually repeated ‘Papal heresy’ comments w/ their subsidiary rebuttals.
Moreover, the cut and paste references, both by myself, and many others here, are usually highly related to the topic being discussed, and in this case, referred to somewhat confusing regulations regarding the allowability of ‘lay’ homilies at Childrens’ Masses.
So, if it’s a long post, it still has some value for it’s new information provided, and not just repetitions of old subject matter.
..and especially old subject matter about anything related to papal heresies, or, ‘lessons on the limitations and extent of papal authority’, authoritatively proclaimed by radical traditionalists (ie. ‘RADTRADS’).
back to children..
I think the most important lesson for children at Mass is to devoutly genuflect before the Tabernacle, and then to ALWAYS have their hands folded, in one way or another, while standing or kneeling.
These simple disciplines can go a looong way in keeping EVERYONE, children and adults alike… to be focused and prayerful at Mass.
Remember.. it was Jesus who said: “It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but you have made it a den of thieves.”
And so, by folding the hands while always standing or kneeling, brings our minds continually back to this teaching of the Lord. This is the first lesson I teach to any child( as it was taught to me in the past) upon entering a Catholic church.
Can we have ONE, just ONE place on Jimmy Akin’s blog where mirror worshipping schiz trads are not railing against JP2 or other Popes?
And what is this Pope John XXIV? Is this yet another anti-Pope elected by schiz trad groups, using a conclave of mirrors? We already have like what, 4 of these?
This is ridiculous.
There is a church here in Dallas that has a 10 min daily Mass. I went there the week before Christmas for a Sunday Mass with my husband and a good friend. We went from the car, to Mass, back in the car in 46mins, and that includes saying hi to another friend in the hallway. What really surprised me was that people practically jogged up for communion. The parishioners were mostly elderly individuals so I would think that this is not new to the parish. My friend has been going there for the past 3 years ad she says that it is always like that.
Rebekah, I don’t see how it can be physically possible to say any Mass, even a daily one, in 10 minutes. Sometimes daily Mass at college, attended by <10 people, would run 20-25 minutes. Unless the priest was pronouncing the words ridiculously fast, I don't see how the time could get shaved any lower...
As far as instilling reverence-- teaching kids the "outward stuff" helps a lot. Genuflecting, crossing oneself with Holy Water, making the people's responses, etc. We've also found insisting on "Sunday Best" dress, no chitchat inside the body of the church, and NEVER missing Mass except for illness to also be very helpful.
This is not to say that infants have to be at Mass. Clearly they don't. But it is helpful in the long-run for parents to start instilling good, pious habits well before the age of reason.
When my friend told me about the 10 min daily Mass I did not believe her, until I personally attended one. the Priest does talk fast but I feel he must be cutting corners, but I can’t quite figure out where.
I totally agree with taking children (even rowdy ones) to mass. Most of the time it is the parents to blame for ill-behaved children. Now I have and infant and I know that every child will act up from time to time, but for the most part Irreverent parents lead to irreverent children.
There is a church here in Dallas that has a 10 min daily Mass.
Rebekah,
Are you sure it was 10?
That priest must be like that speed-announcer they had for that micromachine commercial way back when where he was doing approximately 20000 words per minute!
Just imagine — he would be like saying all the readings, performing the consecration, and blessing the folks, etc. like a machine gun!
THANK YOU REBEKAH AND MONICA!!!
I was actually being generous with my 45 minute estimate, when growing up, if we came in right before the gospel (still allowed to receive per the churcb and new mass) and left right after receiving, we had it down to about 20 or 25 minutes!
What a great reverent mass that is being promulgated for our children to grow up in, what a great group of young catholics we have to look forward to!
That is why one must bring back the TLM and true sacred and reverent customs in their entirety,the experiment has been a failure and our childrens salvation is at risk
John,
Didn’t you even read Rebekah’s comments?
the Priest does talk fast but I feel he must be cutting corners, but I can’t quite figure out where.
Or do you, as usual, glance over such significant details?
And please don’t act so innocent!
As if Rad Trads don’t have such Masses!
I can cite several instances where TLM masses were celebrated less than 45 minutes and the traditionalist priest was also cutting corners!
They happen frequently on the East coast!
I believe that the 45 minute Mass was invented in the Good Ol’ TLM days!
Thank you, Dr. Eric!
… and that’s from somebody who’s impartial to both the Novus Ordo and the TLM, as Dr. Eric attends the Divine Liturgy!
Yes, I am sure that it was only 10 min. My friend and I were taking a course together at a community college that was a 5 min. drive from the church. The church is a 7 min. drive from my friend’s house.
I had spent the night at her house the night before a test. When we left her house the next morning we had 30 min to get class. We went to mass and made it to class on time. Now if you do the math that is 7 min. to the church plus 5mins from church to school, and 5 min to walk from the school parking lot to class (We always parked in the same spot so I know that the time is correct). That leaves just 13 min. to walk from the parking lot of the church, go inside have mass, and get back into the car.
By the way, Dr. Eric, I’m curious, how long is your Mass?
I heard from certain sources that it actually ranges from 2 1/2 to 3 hours, is that even true?
Yes, I am sure that it was only 10 min.
If it’s the Daily Mass, as Rebekah had mentioned, I guess I can see how the time can be abbreviated since you only have 1 reading, no homily and, plus, there’s hardly any people receiving Communion, which shortens the length of time even further.
Still, it’s difficult for me to accept 10 minutes.
Though, I guess depending on the priest, it can be made possible.
Let’s see the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom usually is about 1 1/2 hours. The Divine Liturgy of St. Basil the Great is maybe 2 hours (which is reserved for the Sundays of Lent and other Great Feasts.) Although I hear that some Russian Orthodox go about 3 hours every Sunday for the DL of St. John.
For Theophany (The Baptism of the Lord) we were at church for 4 hours (counting the agape meal afterwards, which we have after every Liturgy.)
Properly done: Vespers on Sat night, Matins on Sunday morning and Divine Liturgy after Matins, so theoretically a good traditional Eastern Catholic (Byzantine Rite) Church would give you about 3-4 hours per weekend if you attended all three services as you should. Many parishes have sadly done away with the traditional services and only offer the Divine Liturgy, which is a whole other bag of worms for a different website.
Keep in mind, I’m no expert and haven’t yet switched to the Eastern Catholic Church that I have been “courting.” 😉
EHHHHH! My winky face didn’t turn out!
Keep in mind, I’m no expert and haven’t yet switched to the Eastern Catholic Church that I have been “courting.” 😉
I could see why!
I greatly LOVE and ADMIRE that sense of piety and devotion!
The reason I asked is because a relative of mine had actually attended a Divine Liturgy (I just didn’t know which though) which actually lasted for 3 hours he said.
If I weren’t so steeped in ‘Latin Rite’, I’d probably switch!
(yeah, like talk about selling your birth right yet again!) <=^)
If you switch, you still are a Catholic.
As I’ve written before many of the Eastern Patriarchs are Cardinals. His Beatitude Lubomyr Cardinal Husar was even a papabile before the election of Benedict XVI.
No need to sell your birthright (or is that Birth Rite) Esau.
If you want you can e-mail me and I can tell you a good one to go to in your neck of the woods.
When I was in high school, our principal was clocked saying the N.O. weekday Mass in Latin in 14 minutes. I think Latin helps speed it along, as with the TLM sometimes.
Ok, I am kind of confused, is and 1 1/2 to 2hrs a long time to be in Mass? At my home parish the English Mass usually last for 1 hr15 min, the Spanish Mass 2 to 2 1/2 hrs. And it is a smaller parish with only about 300 people attending each Mass.
When I was Baptist a 2 hr service was considered short and it usually only happened if he Cowboys were playing an early game.
I didn’t realize mass was optional for children under the age of reason. But it is a good idea because if you don’t start going every week, you’ll have to start the habit later and the longer you wait, the harder it will be. (Babies are easy at mass; it’s toddlers that prevent a parent from participating fully and actively even when they join in on all the parts.)
The rule in our house is all baptized people (this excludes my husband) must go to mass every Sunday, unless there is a signficant reason not to. It’s like being strapped in a car seat – they don’t know they have another option.
If circumstances cause a toddler to miss a mass, it will set you back a month or more in your efforts to get them to behave like the grownups should (a multi-year project). Mine have done best when we go to the same mass and sit in the same seats every week – as close to the front as is feasible.
When I was in high school, our principal was clocked saying the N.O. weekday Mass in Latin in 14 minutes. I think Latin helps speed it along, as with the TLM sometimes.
Thanks, Mr. Kinsale for pointing that out!
I know a Traditional priest who can recite Latin prayers so fast (faster than would be if actually done in English), it makes the Micromachine announcer look like mush!
He’s even done so in an Indult Mass!
In fact, unlike reciting in English, there are connections between words that are easily contracted in Latin (for lack of a better word — perhaps those who intimately know Latin can articulate this even better), which makes them run even more quickly (and smoothly) unlike in English!
On the TODAY SHOW, they had a SPECIAL on POPE BENEDICT, which might be a foreshadowing of things to come:
POPE GETS TOUGH OVER CHURCH DOCTRINE
Pope B16 Today Show Segment VIDEO: Bringing Back Tradition in the Church
Can I ask a question on the “Children’s Liturgy” service?
Our church dismisses children “Ages 5 to 12” for ‘Children’s Liturgy of the Word’ and they often don’t come back in until the Offertory or later.
Is this allowed? All of the older kids have received their first communions already, but they still leave.
Thanks if anyone can answer this.
Red,
You can read this for a little insight:
ROME, 5 APRIL 2005 (ZENIT)
Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University.
Q: At many U.S. parishes there has been the practice of “Children’s liturgies of the Word,” when, after the opening rites, the young children leave to a church hall to have their own version of the Liturgy of the Word. At the beginning of the Liturgy of the Eucharist, the children return to the church. In “Redemptionis Sacramentum,” No. 60, it says: “In the celebration of Mass, the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist are intimately connected to one another, and form one single act of worship. For this reason it is not licit to separate one of these parts from the other and celebrate them at different times or places.” Does this mean that such a practice of a children’s Liturgy of the Word cannot continue as it has been? — R.L., Lowell, Massachusetts
A: I do not believe that “Redemptionis Sacramentum” was referring to this practice but to a grave abuse propagated by some groups in which the celebration of the two tables, that of the Word and that of the Eucharist, was carried out at different times and in different places — sometimes even separated by several hours and interrupted by other activities.
The practice of separating young children, above all those who have yet to receive first Communion, for a special Liturgy of the Word is an entirely different case.
First of all, we usually are dealing with children who are not yet obliged to assist at the Eucharistic celebration, and the special Liturgy of the Word is more resonant of catechesis which prepares them for full participation later and opens them to the treasures of Scripture.
Second, and I would say decisively, this practice is legitimate because it is actually foreseen in the liturgical norms.
The “Decree and Directory for Masses with Children” published by the Holy See in 1973 speaks of this topic in Nos. 16-17 regarding “Masses for Adults at which Children are Also Present”:
“16. In many places parish Masses are celebrated, especially on Sundays and holy days, at which a good many children take part along with the large number of adults. On such occasions the witness of adult believers can have a great effect upon the children. Adults can in turn benefit spiritually from experiencing the part that the children have within the Christian community. The Christian spirit of the family is greatly fostered when children take part in these Masses together with their parents and other family members. …
“17. Nevertheless, in Masses of this kind it is necessary to take great care that the children present do not feel neglected because of their inability to participate or to understand what happens and what is proclaimed in the celebration. Some account should be taken of their presence: for example, by speaking to them directly in the introductory comments (as at the beginning and the end of Mass) and at some point in the homily.
“Sometimes, moreover, if the place itself and the nature of the community permit, it will be appropriate to celebrate the liturgy of the word, including a homily, with the children in a separate, but not too distant, room. Then, before the Eucharistic liturgy begins, the children are led to the place where the adults have meanwhile celebrated their own liturgy of the word.”
In later numbers this document makes other practical recommendations, such as “It may also be very helpful to give some task to the children. They may, for example, bring forward the gifts or perform one or other of the songs of the Mass (No. 18)” and “If the number of children is large, it may at times be suitable to plan the Mass so that it corresponds more closely to the needs of the children. In this case the homily should be directed to them but in such a way that adults may also benefit from it.”
Esau,
“Who is he?
Do you know?”
I *think* I know him. But I *could* be wrong.
Esau posted earlier in his attempt to insinuate somehow that the Traditional Latin Mass, or even Latin in general makes the mass shorter. Well Esau, if one cuts out 35 prayers and shortens and mangles the translation of whatever is left when the creation of the new mass was finally introduced, I would think somehow the new mass is to blame for the 10 minute mass
Well, to settle this once and for all, the following link is a comparison of the Traditional Latin Mass on the left as compared to the new mass on the RHS
For those that dont have the time to actually spend the time looking at the bangled translations, just browse on down and notice the continued BLANK white spaces in the New Mass where actual prayers to GOD and the SAINTS used to actually be
Enjoy and God bless
http://www.geocities.com/Vienna/Strasse/5816/compare.html
Another nice link which is more of a summary/comparison of the Dominican, TLM (1962) and New Mass by Shawn of the NLM
Esau-the blank space is hard for even you to debate!!!!!
http://www.execulink.com/~dtribe/blog/Missals_Comparison2.html
John,
Really it’s is a pretty lousy Christian argument to claim that ‘longer’ is inherently ‘better’. This might be a case raised by a ‘Pharisee’ of Jesus’ day, or even a disciple of ‘St. John the Baptist’, holy as they were. But this is not a good argument for a Christian who has the teachings of Christ at his ready disposal.
Everyone who loves the Lord recognizes that Jesus didn’t demand ‘long prayers’, even as the Pharisees boasted of! Yes, if they ended up long, GREAT!..but never was it, or is it, right for a Christian to brag, much less to fight and ‘bicker’ over such things!
And to stress this point, the Lord taught the disciples to say “Our Father, Who art in Heaven..”!
This is the Wisdom of our Divine Lord and Master!
Furthermore, read on to what He says to those who would teach differently!:
“11 He that is the greatest among you shall be your servant. 12 And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be humbled: and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted. 13 But woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you shut the kingdom of heaven against men, for you yourselves do not enter in; and those that are going in, you suffer not to enter. 14 Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites: because you devour the houses of widows, praying long prayers. For this you shall receive the greater judgment. 15 Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you go round about the sea and the land to make one proselyte; and when he is made, you make him the child of hell twofold more than yourselves.
16 Woe to you blind guides, that say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but he that shall swear by the gold of the temple, is a debtor. 17 Ye foolish and blind; for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold? 18 And whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gift that is upon it, is a debtor. 19 Ye blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift? 20 He therefore that sweareth by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things that are upon it:
21 And whosoever shall swear by temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth in it: 22 And he that sweareth by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon. 23 Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you tithe mint, and anise, and cummin, and have left the weightier things of the law; judgment, and mercy, and faith. These things you ought to have done, and not to leave those undone. 24 Blind guides, who strain out a gnat, and swallow a camel. 25 Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you make clean the outside of the cup and of the dish, but within you are full of rapine and uncleanness.
26 Thou blind Pharisee, first make clean the inside of the cup and of the dish, that the outside may become clean. 27 Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you are like to whited sepulchres, which outwardly appear to men beautiful, but within are full of dead men’s bones, and of all filthiness. 28 So you also outwardly indeed appear to men just; but inwardly you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity. 29 Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; that build the sepulchres of the prophets, and adorn the monuments of the just, 30 And say: If we had been in the days of our Fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
29 “Build the sepulchres”… This is not blamed, as if it were in itself evil to build or adorn the monuments of the prophets: but the hypocrisy of the Pharisees is here taxed; who, whilst they pretended to honour the memory of the prophets, were persecuting even unto death the Lord of the prophets.
31 Wherefore you are witnesses against yourselves, that you are the sons of them that killed the prophets. 32 Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. 33 You serpents, generation of vipers, how will you flee from the judgment of hell? 34 Therefore behold I send to you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them you will put to death and crucify, and some you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city: 35 That upon you may come all the just blood that hath been shed upon the earth, from the blood of Abel the just, even unto the blood of Zacharias the son of Barachias, whom you killed between the temple and the altar.”
…And for a ‘cut and paste job’, this has some very pertinent information, directly from our Divine Master, Himself!
Please John, start including something of Christ in your posts! Something inspirational…not just more bickerings and empty argumentation, very much more suited to these ‘Pharisees’ of Jesus’ times, then the humble followers and ‘imitators’of Christ, today!
“Esau-the blank space is hard for even you to debate!!!!!”
Yes, John, one thing you have demonstrated again and again is that it is hard to debate a blank space.
There used to be a ten minute Latin Mass back in the old days at Holy Angels in my city. “Fast priests” were a known and useful quantity to those in dire straits, or with patience problems. 🙂
If you go to an airport Mass at O’Hare in Chicago, you can hear a Sunday Mass reverently celebrated in 7-10 minutes, including a short but pointed and well-thought out homily. _Nothing_ is left out, nothing is even particularly rushed. It’s just very steadily paced. (And I’m sure it required the priests to practice quite a bit at first.) Sometimes you even sing really short hymns (one verse), although usually it’s musicless.
It’s a skill, and it has its place.
Back on topic….
It’s a lot easier for kids to understand what’s going on at Mass if you teach them to read, or if you do a lot of explaining. Picture or photo books of the Mass action help, too. (Although, actually our book was my mom’s childhood one which showed the Tridentine Mass, which was a bit puzzling on exact order but useful on whys and wherefores. Maybe this is why I find it difficult to see the vast difference between Masses.)
I don’t think I ever went to one of those “children’s liturgy of the word” things. We didn’t have ’em at our church. I think once when we were visiting a relative, they had one, but my older brother and I didn’t want to leave Mass so our parents didn’t make us. (My little brother did go, IIRC, but he was little.)
It always seemed kinda discriminatory to me. Also, creepy to leave your parents in the middle of church and then have to find them again in a running mob. If people were really worried about this, they’d give the kids a rundown on the readings in real Sunday school, not during Mass.
Esau posted earlier in his attempt to insinuate somehow that the Traditional Latin Mass, or even Latin in general makes the mass shorter
John:
Do you actually attend a Traditional Latin Mass, by the way?
From your very post here, it seems that you don’t, since even by your comment here, it appears you weren’t even familiar about what I was actually referring to!
It’s not the Latin, idiot; it’s the recitation!
I’m glad you posted your reply here since now I know that, clearly, you don’t actually attend the Traditional Latin Mass or else you would’ve immediately known what I was referring to in terms of the Ecclesial Latin recitation of th prayers in the TLM!
So, I guess, now we have not only a ‘Judas’ in our midst; but a ‘faker’ at that!
Maureen:
Thanks for your comment here!
I actually tape-recorded the TLM I attended way back when (I was trying to familiarize myself with the rubrics) and so I actually know what you’re talking about here.
There used to be a ten minute Latin Mass back in the old days at Holy Angels in my city. “Fast priests” were a known and useful quantity to those in dire straits, or with patience problems. 🙂
Also, I was trying to figure out what the priest was saying in Latin as well and because he recited the prayers so rapidly, I couldn’t help but resort to recording the Mass.
Plus, I was still trying to get used to the Ecclesial Latin as I was more familiar with Classical Latin pronounciation.
Esau,
It’s good, I think, to lay off name calling, as it really doesn’t help anybody. Really, God is the Judge, and He has a time and place for everything, and everyone..’under the sun’. We should accept the good that John, and all others, too, bring..and refute the bad, but leave the judgements..Judas stuff..to the Lord! Remember, even He didn’t call Judas anything..except ‘friend’. He did term Him a ‘devil’ once though..”Is not one of you a devil?” but he didn’t point out Judas specifically at that time.
So, really, there is great mystery in everything and everyone, and great changes can be made by all people, some virtuous souls fall and become lost and some great sinners convert and become Saints. But when, where and why these things happen are very mysterious and are really the working of God and Divine Providence.
So, I hope never to offend John in any way, and ask forgiveness If I ever did…but know that I have prayed for him, in all honesty, to the Lord! I want every Christian to come to the Holy Faith that we all, who are united to the Holy Pope Benedict XVI know! I pray that John will realize some day all the virtues, holiness, joy and graces found in our current Church and Catholic Faith…even if there are elements that aren’t pleasing to him.
It should be easy to understand that, I think, most of us here are eager for much reforn in the Church. However, the reforms are more on the lines of devotional…exterior reforms. The heart of the Church and faith has always been the same!!
So to fight over the exterior stuff, whether the MAss is long or Short, whether the Vestments are one color or other for a particular feast, whether tonsures are more holy than a sclap without a tonsure, etc…are all ‘secondary to the doctrine and practice of the Faithh. These things can come and go…they are ornamental..to help in the devotion of the Catholic Faith.
To fight over such items is unbecoming of a Christian!Just as it would be to fight and say..”only Icons are holy, all Western art is pagan”. This is clearly wrong, and very judgemental. So its best if we distiguish the necessary and essential things of teh faith from the merely beneficial!
And this way, maybe we can have more agreement..even between John, and many on this blog? There are so many things that even N.O. Catholics and Traditional Catholics have in common, that we should try to concentrate and discuss, now and again, some of these unifying elements.
And hopefully we can all find something of the Lord in the other!
So, Esau, it’s probably good to control the name calling. And I also ask pardon if I have ever personally offended John in any way. I would like to refute errors that I find, but not insult, belittle or condemn….as these are highly Un Christian and against Divine Charity.
May the Sacred Heart of Jesus Live in all of us, and forever!!
Following the Shepherd: What don’t we get?
NOTE:There is a Translation of this comment for the Sede Vacantist in the audience(skip the article and go to p.s.)
What does it mean to follow the pope? Well, a big clue to this “perplexing??” question is found in the definition of the word “follow”:
1. to come after in sequence, order of time, etc.: The speech follows the dinner.
2. to go or come after; move behind in the same direction: Drive ahead, and I’ll follow you.
3. to accept as a guide or leader; accept the authority of or give allegiance to: Many Germans followed Hitler.
4. to conform to, comply with, or act in accordance with; obey: to follow orders; to follow advice.
5. to imitate or copy; use as an exemplar: They follow the latest fads.
Notice how none of the definitions indicate that follow means “to lead”, “to explore”, “to meander” “to advise”,”to carefully consider”,”to alter”,”to disagree”,”to reserve judgment”. Even if you are going in the same direction you are not a follower until you get all your directional cues from the leader. Even if you think you know exactly where the leader is going you are not a follower if you are ahead of his cue. The leader if he has authority to lead also has all the responsibility for those who follow(Pope=Christ mouthpiece=authority). If we jump ahead or veer away we exit his area of protection and assume upon ourselves the responsibility, for which we will always be moronically under-qualified–our salvation.
Basically what I am saying (a little sarcasm mixed in, sorry)is that the only balanced Catholics I know are those who trust the lead of the Pope without hesitation. They don’t pine for the Church of THEIR dreams, they accept it as it comes from the Holy Father’s hands. The liberals want to eat only dessert and the traditionalists are whining for watermelon in winter. Balanced Catholics just eat what is put before them. If it’s not what we ordered or seems bland we don’t have to pretend that we’re ecstatic(our ignorance usually dominates our value-response) …but as long as we want to stay under Papa’s roof we heartily thank Mama for the meal.”wow Mom, thanks, that was great!!!”
Do we think that just because Catherine of Siena got the pope out of Avignon and there is such thing as a sensus fidei that we have a Duty to input and a right to influence the Holy See? To distrust the Pope’s lead is to commit a sin against the Holy Spirit who was given to the Church so that the gates of hell should not prevail. Only the Church can set Heaven as your default option. Penance is over the counter all we want but absolution is prescription only.
Maybe some will accuse such undoubting obedience as a weakness–an intellectual laziness. I answer; God damned Eve’s lack of laziness. She could have eaten of any tree, she didn’t have to get up and dialog and ponder. She didn’t have to use her nuggin. Thanks a lot Adam and Eve, stroke of genius, now tell me, do you feel just a little foolish?
Here’s a quiz: Are you a conscientious, catholic, who deliberates before giving the Church your opinion, who weighs carefully before advising Her, and makes no rash judgments when faced with the “encrusted” dogmas of yesteryear or the “adolescent” vigour of Vatican II? If so, can I put you on hold? I have a Mormon on the other line.
As for me and my house we will follow Peter… because He has the groceries. “Feed My sheep”Jn 21
By the way, I am honored to be a balanced Catholic (entirely God’s welcome intrusion upon my innate stupidity). How do I know? Because my landmark is a white skullcap.
Manuel
P.S. Bla…Bla…Bla…Ex Ecclesiam Nulla Salus…Bla…bla…Bla
For all the beauty and eloquence of the prayers found in the TLM, how many of these prayers would actually be heard AND understood by the congregation? Indeed, the translations of the prayers from Latin into English reveal such profound statements of our faith in God and the entire mystery of our salvation. But what good is all this beauty if no one can understand what’s being said in the first place? The missals produced do provide translations, but the Spirit of the liturgy intends for all to most importantly be able to “fully and actively participate” in the liturgy. I know the traditionalists out there feel that this “understanding” is superficial is the and unimportant, but I feel this fundamentally important. And this can be accomplished without losing the reverence, beauty and grandeur of the Holy Mass. Although I do admit that sadly many priests have taken it upon themselves to change the liturgy of the Church to suite themselves.
John, where are you getting this 45 minute Mass???
I don’t think I have ever been to a Mass that was a minute more or less than 45 minutes. It’s something I laugh about because Mass always seems to last 45 minutes. Maybe it’s just where I live.
*BTW, just to make clear, I’m not saying that’s a bad thing. 45 minutes seems about right to me for a daily mass. If there’s music and everything it will last longer, obviously.
I totally agree Veritas! I have attended about 150 Spanish language masses in the last 3 years and ‘still’ I don’t find them to be nearly as edifying as the Liturgy in English. Now, I’m pretty much giving up on them and ‘relishing’ the English Mass, and also the company of English speaking Christians. So, no matter how inspirational the Latim MAss is on the ‘outside’, I think I will always prefer the N.O. Mass.
And even if the Mass is NOT perfect, we can all try to be perfect examples to show others HOW to attend the Mass. This can include ACTIVE participation and singing (that is if the songs aren’t too bad), attention, genuflections, true love and true prayer. With these things, even with a crowd of pagans, it’s hard to go wrong..and maybe the good influence might rub off on some of them??
You make some excellent points, above, Manuel!
Once again, I ask, why not a TLM in the vernacular.
Everybody wins!
I LIKE THAT IDEA! If it can really work!
But one thing that I think many people forget is that the Faith needs to really be taught ‘out there’. I think NO liturgy, alone, will highly affect the Growth of the Faith. The Saints themselves often say the same.
It’s probably just as important to teach the faithful to make a habit of holy reading, of educating themselves in the Faith, continually. Many saints encouraged this, and it’s the reason many saints were such prolific writers!
But we need to read them! And then get others to read them also! The Catholic faith is FILLED with Spiritual Treasures, the problem is no one wants to give these treasures to others, share them!
Every devout Catholic should, at least, give some holy or spiritual literature, books, pamphlets, etc.., away to others every year..if not every month!!
Then, those attending any liturgy the Church decides on, will be well informed to make the best of it!
Read holy literature, write holy literature, distribute holy literature!..it’s an apostolate that ANYONE can do!
“The missals produced do provide translations, but the Spirit of the liturgy intends for all to most importantly be able to “fully and actively participate” in the liturgy.”
What is this “Spirit of the liturgy” that Veritas refers to? It sounds like more of that spirit of Vatican II stuff that is used to justify all kinds of error. There is a new sheriff in town, and hopefully the Mass will be primarily in Latin as prescribed by the Vatican II documents in writing, and maybe some provision for readings and propers in the venacular. Let us pray for more reverence in the Liturgy and the return of the Latin Mass. Go Benedict 16!! Now that is the truth.
I’ve seen 45 minutes Masses on Sunday in both the Novus Ordo and in low Tridentine Masses. High Masses are little longer than a typical NO Mass, usually clocking in at 1:15, a little longer on Palm Sunday. So, John’s argument is, as usual, not on point.
As for understanding prayers said in Latin – that’s what Missals are for. Granted, not everyone will have the bulky missal that translates the weekly prayers, so saying them in the vernacular may not be a bad idea. But following the Latin Mass is not so hard is it sometimes is made to be.
Tim posted as I illustrated that clearly the New Mass gutted the Traditional Mass by deleting 35 Prayers after Esau was trying to assert that the new mass was not shorter and that the Traditional mass was shorter because of Latin and that nothing had been deleted:
“”Esau-the blank space is hard for even you to debate!!!!!”
Yes, John, one thing you have demonstrated again and again is that it is hard to debate a blank space.
”
Sarcasm that actually makes no sense Tim, I dont think that any of my posts contain blank spaces, just pure facts
Then Manual somehow relates to what is best for our children and the new mass with obedience to the Pope. Sorry-no relationship there. I have proven earlier, if the liturgy is infallible then Paul VI was not allowed to altar it, if it is not infallible, then one must not worship God in a way that one feels does not worship him in the most reverent way, and as Catholics had done so for centuries before the Catholic “Reformation” of 1962-1970 took place
And Esau, for someone who is so quick to throw slander at anyone who disagrees with you (Rad Trad) and even damn them to Hell (Imagine that), as you have done both to me-But you have posted time and time again that you forgive Cardinal Law and all of the pedophile priests who have harmed and deflowered our little children and have caused harm that will be felt for centuries (not one of my cousins or family who attend the NO mass will let their boys be Altar boys for fear of pedophiles) and that is just one aspect
Your holier than thou attitude of forgiveness for pedophile clergy invoking the name of Our Lord, then blasting so many others here on this board is just so hypocritical, as is JPII worshipping with Moslems, Protestants, Hindu’s, Vodoo, etc-But then excommunicating Archbishop Lefebvre for wanting to “hold fast” to Tradition
Hypocrites just like the Pharises
Could we just ignore John? Think of what this is doing to people who want to read Jimmy’s blog for insights on the actual topics brought up. In this case, we’ve had a whole thread of how children can be brought up to understand and participate in the Mass hijacked by “HOW LONG IS THE NOVUS ORDO MASS VERSUS THE TRIDENTINE” with a side helping of “REPENT! THOU SINNER!” on both sides.
I think it would be much better when John tries to hijack a thread for someone to point out where John’s coming from, ie. he’s a regular thread hijacker, and then leave him alone. Unless, of course, the thread topic really is one of his hobbyhorses.
Eileen R,
I think that’s a great idea.
Although there are, as usual, many lies in John’s most recent post that I would like to respond to, I think what you say here is best and should be heeded.
God bless you.
Now THAT’s doing some real penance!! :0
A. Williams:
You might want to refer to:
Matthew 16:23
23 Who turning, said to Peter: Go behind me, Satan, thou art a scandal unto me: because thou savourest not the things that are of God, but the things that are of men.
Also, about having the TLM in English, there is no way you can do this!
As mentioned, you’d have a mutant!
The rite is specifically for Latin and the prayers are precisely configured accordingly (as they are historically a result of the early western church).
For example, in terms of achieving proper English translations, even with our Novus Ordo, several are suspect.
Did you even watch the EWTN coverage of the Bishop’s meeting where they were actually discussing the poor English renditions in the Novus Ordo?
(Mind you, I’m not saying there is something wrong with the Novus Ordo itself, but specifically certain English renderings.)
For example, “And also with you” should have been rendered (as in the TLM) “And also with your spirit”.
There are also the poor English rendition of the Creed, but let’s not get into that.
MANUEL:
Some good points there!
If we jump ahead or veer away we exit his area of protection and assume upon ourselves the responsibility, for which we will always be moronically under-qualified–our salvation.
Do we think that just because Catherine of Siena got the pope out of Avignon and there is such thing as a sensus fidei that we have a Duty to input and a right to influence the Holy See? To distrust the Pope’s lead is to commit a sin against the Holy Spirit who was given to the Church so that the gates of hell should not prevail.
As some would have us believe: vox populi, vox Dei!
Okay, enough of that.
Back to the ‘show’, as they say.
The Topic here is:
“Bringing Children to Mass”.
John – Every single Mass I’ve ever been to since converting to Catholicism in 2003 has lasted at minimum 60 minutes. The daily masses I’ve been to have been a bit shorter, but not by much. Also, I am eagerly awaiting the 3-hour-long Easter Vigil Mass we plan to attend at the Basilica of St. Mary in Minneapolis, MN this year!
Everyone else –
I have a two-year-old daughter and it is difficult to get her to sit still during Mass. Inevitably one of us has to take her out because she wants to get out of th pew and run around. We try to get her “involved” in the Mass as much as possible but after a certain point she just won’t sit still. I’ve tried bringing quiet toys and coloring books to keep her occupied, but even those don’t work after a while. Any tips??
“with a side helping of “REPENT! THOU SINNER!” on both sides. ”
Eileen,
That was a joke.
Put her on your shoulders..it should work for about 10 mins.?
Also, hold her up high when you’re standing, so she can see over the heads of those in front of you. It’s the same principle, they like to look around, and even be seen by others. I think it kind of makes them feel like a part of the community! Moreover, they can learn that the focus of attention is in the Sanctuary.
And just think…you won’t need to go to the gym afterwards!! :>
Jimmy,
John has hijacked your entire blog! He posts incessantly about V II, JP II, Paul VI, John XXIII, the Novus Ordo, etc.
I truly enjoy Your post, and your commentary about events in the world… However, John apparently thinks that your blog is just an excuse for him to attack you, Catholic Answers, the Church, the Pope, et al. I say ENOUGH!!! Ban him! Depose the tyrant! (of course, this is your blog, Jimmy. If you want to let John rant, that’s your call)
David B!
Are you really John SuperNova???
Talk about ‘secret identities’!
Sounds like some sort of super-hero of JA.O!
CRACKED me up!
Okay, enough of that.
Back to our ‘show’…
Esau,
() ()
(^)
>(____)<
Dang!
Esau posted:
“Okay, enough of that.
Back to the ‘show’, as they say.
The Topic here is:
“Bringing Children to Mass”.”
With due respect to Jimmy, I dont think that a topic limited to whether or not a 2, 3, 4, etc on up should go to mass is something that could be talked about and discussed with about 10 posts. Canon law and ones is one answer and then it is left to ones onw subjective desire to have ones child versed in the faith at as early an age as possible.
If you dont think that discussing whether a child is exposed to a reverent or irreverent mass is not at all important and considered “hijacking”, then again that is a parents cross to bear at a later time when their child strays from the faith, which by all accounts only 25% of Catholics today attending mass, down from 75% pre Vatican II, then so be it
And those who dont have the guts to post under your own name (Esau Mr Pedophila supporter), then you are a coward as well
God bless
Above 1st paragraph should have read:
With due respect to Jimmy, I dont think that a topic limited to whether or not a 2, 3, 4, etc on up should go to mass is something that could NOT be talked about and discussed with about 10 posts, AND ANY MORE IS JUST BANTER BACK AND FORTH. Canon law and ones is one answer and then it is left to ones onw subjective desire to have ones child versed in the faith at as early an age as possible.
I’m raising my children to pause and reflect for a minute before they start to think they know better than the Pope, and can sit in judgement of him.
If the “faith” they grow up with is one in which they place themselves at the center of the ecclesial universe, look down on others, where they alone are the arbiter of what it means to be a Real Catholic(TM), and where obedience is only required on those points with which they agree, then the sooner they stray, the better.
Those on the extreme fringes – left and right – all have this in common;
“I believe everything the Church teaches, EXCEPT …(insert favorite obsession here)”
” If you dont think that discussing whether a child is exposed to a reverent or irreverent mass is not at all important and considered “hijacking”, ”
John,
You weren’t giving advice on where to find a priest who offers the Mass in a dignified manner. You were saying that you think the the novus Ordo is, in itself irreverent. Once again, you were attacking the Novus Ordo and blaming a Liturgy for the sins of the last forty years. So yes, I call that hijacking the thread.
There are more lies in John’s latest post than I actually care to respond to in detail.
Let’s just say I never thought I would actually encounter the Catholic equivalent of James White!
At any rate, going back to the main topic, JoAnna’s dilemma is a real one that many parents with similarly young children at Mass have; although, I more than appreciate the efforts of such responsible parents (as her) who try to control their children as best they can, even if those efforts might sometimes be in vain because of the inherent difficulty in doing so over children so young.
Good habits are formed early in the socialization processes of children. Many of you would probably agree that even the youngest begin to pick up on those subtle and not so subtle cues from their parents. If as role models, parents teach their children the importance of maintaining a prayerful and reverent mindset at Mass, then they will more than likely grow to appreciate its significance. As compendium states (572) “We pray as we live, because we live as we pray.” By engaging in such prayerful postures as folding hands, genuflection, kneeling and bowing, we reflect on the exterior the faith and joy, and the Holy Spirit that dwells inside of us. Not to say that our individual manifestaions of piety are intended to gain admiration from others, rather to orient ourselves using posture not normally seen in secular life, but is reserved for the worship of the Lord. I like to think if many more people take the Mass seriously, you would have less people showing up late in the middle of the homily, and engaging in “eat & run”-making a bee-line for the door after communion. let us not judge these individuals, but pray to God to grant us patience and bless those who sincerely follow in the way of God.
“When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, who love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on street corners so that others may see them. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward.
But when you pray, go to your inner room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you.
In praying, do not babble like the pagans, who think that they will be heard because of their many words.
Do not be like them. Your Father knows what you need before you ask him.” Matthew 6:1-18
Christus Exinanivit Semetipsum
St. Robert Cardinal Bellarmine, Ora Pro Nobis
In a Eastern Catholic parish, a child is expected to be there as they are given Baptism, Chrismation (Confirmation) and Holy Communion at the 40th day after birth (usually.) So children are expected to be there and participate. A traditional Eastern parish has no pews so there’s no chance of a kid falling out of one or hitting their heads on one. They are allowed to roam about freely in their Father’s house, to go visit one of the “grandmas” or venerate an Icon or two and come back to mom and dad.
My “traditionalist” priest friend agrees that maybe we should turn back to this ancient practice in the Latin Church as it will stop the “debutante ball” Confirmation Masses in which the preteen girls wear their prom dresses to the Mass.
Sad but true in my area.
In a Eastern Catholic parish, a child is expected to be there as they are given Baptism, Chrismation (Confirmation) and Holy Communion at the 40th day after birth (usually.)
I had always understood Confirmation as (at least partially) intended to provide the recipient the chance to confirm their Baptism once they’ve passed the age of reason and attained some nominal level of maturity.
With that mindset, confirming a 40 day old baby makes no sense to me. What’s the thinking behind it?
Well like Esau said, back to the topic of children. Well if our children are supposed to grow up with reverence and awe of our Lord especially the eucharist, what do you think is going through their minds when the go and see everyone line up and receive our Lord dressed in their latest shorts, tank tops, and flip flops in their hands from a “Eucharistic Minister” (note the protestant word minister)?
The New Mass itself is damned
Scripture is clear where in St Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 2:6-11, we are told that, “at the name of Jesus every knee should bend, of those in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father”.
So every knee shall bend in the name of Jesus, but no one even knows where the tabernacle is anymore, or kneels to receive our Lord at communion! is this good for the children?
Kneeling is a fundamental act of faith, a strong expression about Who stands at the center of one’s life and Who stands at the center of all creation.
Being unwilling to bend the knee at the name of Jesus is the essence of evil. (Cf. Is 45:23, Rom 14:11) But when we kneel at Jesus’ name, when we bow down in service of others, and when we bend the knee in adoration, we are following in the footsteps of all the saints and angels in heaven.
Curious, I wonder if there are any Maronites reading the blog.
Smoky,
The same thing could be said about Baptism, wait until the child can make a conscious decision to be Baptized.
The 40 days are traditionally observed as a period of resting in the home. Then the child is brought out the first time to the Church and presented as Our Lord was Presented in the Temple on his 40th day after birth.
Smoky, that perception is encouraged by the current way we go about confirmation in North America, but confirmation isn’t actually meant to be that at all. This confusion is why the bishops at the latest US bishops conference discussed the idea of some day moving confirmation to follow baptism, as in the Eastern Rites.
When a Horse poops in the road, you step over it, and move on.
At Confirmation, the bishop or his representative lays hands on us, and we receive the Holy Spirit.
Given that St. John the Baptist received the Holy Spirit and started prophesying _in his mother’s womb_, I think that a baby’s Baptism day isn’t too soon for him to be Confirmed! 🙂
This is not to say that I think _everybody_ should get Confirmed that early; but there’s nothing against it, either.
Oh, and btw — 45 minutes for a Sunday Mass, 20-30 for a daily one, usually.
wow. I am really disappointed with the contempt people here have for each other. I also am shocked at some of the comments. Not what I expect from my children or Catholic Christians who are to be setting the example by the way they conduct themselves.
A little bit late to the conversation, but here’s my two cents:
Our son is 3 weeks old. He’s gone to Mass since he was 8 days old, missing only the first Sunday after he was born (on a Saturday night). Barring illness, we plan on taking him every week (save one where we’ll be out of town and he’s staying with my parents). I believe it’s important – although not required – to raise him as regularly attending church.
Why?
When I was little, I went to church every week (true, I was Lutheran then, but…) so I was used to it growing up.
My brother rarely went as a child, because he didn’t want to, and with two little children, my parents weren’t going to fight him.
Today, I am a faithful, practicing Catholic who goes to Mass regularly. My brother believes in God, but puts no stock in any organized religion and hasn’t been to Church in nearly a decade (save my wedding, and the upcoming baptism of his nephew). I truly believe my parents taking me in my youth and setting aside that time, and the discipline of regular church attendance, made the difference.
“..the discipline of regular church attendance, made the difference.”
I think you are very right, Amy. Sometimes, what many people consider to be useless, or meaningless, turns out to actually be extrememly important or even essential! Your example of your brother, although not absolutely conclusive, is fairly persuasive in promoting the benefits of Church attendence at every age level.
And should we forget about St. John the Baptist, who was sanctified in the womb, just by the physical proximity of Christ when Mary merely approached and greeted Elizabeth??
So too, the Holy Eucharist is the very same person and presence of Christ. Might the Lord not also communicate to, and sanctify the soul of the child in the same way…as happened at “the Magnificat”??
I think it’s assuredly so.. to one degree or another!
“wow. I am really disappointed with the contempt people here have for each other. I also am shocked at some of the comments. Not what I expect from my children or Catholic Christians who are to be setting the example by the way they conduct themselves.”
Hey, nobody here claims thay are perfect, except maybe E….:-) Just kidding, of course.
So true!!!
Esau the perfect One!!!
Lets see, he is an Apologist, a Theologian, Apostle…know it all!!
Esau, do you have a job or do you sit by your computer all day with nothing to do but comb Jimmys blog for someone to blast!!!
Now how did BobCatholic put it — it’s that MIRROR thing again… although this time, the case, it seems, concerns ‘projectionism‘.
SNORE
When you already start looking for what is obligated, you are going down the wrong path.
St. Peter Julian said we should recieve Communion 10 times a day if we were able to.
So, if children cannot recieve, they should at least be around Our Lord, because even like that they can recieve graces.
This is an example of how the commandment most broken is the first.
Commodity wins over what gives God more glory, because children are annoying.
Sure we are difficult when young(it gets worst in other ways as we get older anyhow ;)) but you should see some of the “tradox” families.
Sure they push it sometimes, but it is interesting when you see a long line of children neatly following their parents and behaving better than the adults in most churches.
Love of God will bring dicipline.
Thank you, David B., I think that appropriately describes the hobby horse.
Ass-au-
I mean Esau
Your Protestant agenda is clear
Question Assau-How many children do you have to contribute to this Thread?
Ohh I forgot, you are not even Married-Wonder why???
John,
Not matter what Esau has said to you, personal attacks aren’t a good idea.
David B.,
Where exactly have I said anything as viscious as John?
John has not only slandered our Popes, John Paul II and Benedict XVI, as Apostates, but also spread calumny concerning them as well as Mother Teresa and other such good and holy folks.
He has done the same with others here on this blog in the past, including me in many of his recent posts above.
However, if John is to be presented as such the blameless holy man, then so be it.
David B posted:
“John,
Not matter what Esau has said to you, personal attacks aren’t a good idea.”
Such hypocracy! I have been called “Rad Trad”, damned to Hell by Assau, called a jackass by him, schismatic, and he continues to post my home e-mail address in clear violation of the FCC whom I have family who are government police starting to investigate if my personal freedoms have been violated
And you say the above! shameful!
John,
Knock off the ridiculousness about supposed FCC violations.
The FCC is pure, unadulterated idiocy since John himself posted his email address about 5000 times on various blogs over the past year. Can Jimmy please ban this lunatic and get it over with?
I meant the FCC stuff is idiocy, although some may say the same about the FCC itself. 🙂
Esquire posted:
“John,
Knock off the ridiculousness about supposed FCC violations. ”
Really Esquire, the FCC has clear anti spam laws and solicitation, and the promotion of advertising ones E-mail address agains one’s written consent. Ass-au has not only published my e-mail address on a public blog, but has pretended to be me falsely by using traspositions of my names. Both my brother and sister in law are Harvard lawyers and deal with security fraud and other areas of the law, and Esau is in clear violation of such. A complaint is a simple as placing one through the web, and then having the ability to document such, which I have done so with Esau now three times, thanks to his latest tirade
Take a look for yourself and educate yourself
“In 2003, Congress enacted the Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing (CAN-SPAM) Act to curb spam. As required by the Act, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted rules that prohibit sending unwanted commercial e-mail messages to wireless devices without prior permission. This ban took effect in March 2005. In addition, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) adopted detailed rules that restrict sending unwanted commercial e-mail messages to computers. To find out more about the FTC’s rules, visit http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/edcams/spam/business. ”
http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/canspam.html
John, the only reason Easau has your email address is because you have published it on this blog hundreds, if not thousands, of times.
You should give your brother and sister all of the facts when you consult with them next time. They should be smart enough to figure out what you obviously cannot.
Thanks, but I am quite familiar with the FCC regulations.
Esquire posted:
“John, the only reason Easau has your email address is because you have published it on this blog hundreds, if not thousands, of times.”
Ahh…but you clearly miss the point, it was not published, it was present only as part of my posting personal info, and not published on the blog itself
After Esau published it on the blog and I had realized that some as devious as Esau could get a hold of it, I asked him not to do so. I then removed it from my postings as I realized then one could post without having an e-mail address as part of the post as other blogs require, and then Esau CONTINUED to publish it on this blog at least twice, possibly more, and if I recall you or others did so as well
This being done without my written consent is a clear violation of FCC rules and I have saved all. All that needs to be done is for the lawyers to subpeona Jimmy A Blog records and it is there for all to see really
John,
John, I would be laughing but for the fact that you don’t seem to recognize how inane your statement is. Posting and publishing are pretty much the same thing in this context. Whatever you call it, it was only because you — not Esau or anyone else — posted personal information for everyone and their brother to see.
It is people like you (or at least people who do things like you’re suggesting) that bog down our judicial system with frivolous claims and make it needlessly inefficient and expense.
If you were really familiar with what the Catechism of Trent had to say about the Eighth Commandment you’d refrain from making idle threats to use our judicial system for such trivial matters.
“Such hypocracy!”
I must have missed the boat. how am I being Hypocritical?
John, I would add that Esau has said several times that your email address was a way of being clear that he was referring to your posts and not posts made by anyone else named John.
And there’s no way you can get around the fact that you posted your email address yourself.
Esau,
“Where exactly have I said anything as viscious as John?
However, if John is to be presented as such the blameless holy man, then so be it.”
I have condemned John’s hateful rantings before. I don’t know how you could possibly think that I’m taking his side. You think that one post of mine is defending John and you are offended. It would have been best to ask for a clarifaction. I’m sorry if my post was unclear and seemed to you to be taking John’s side (once again, I don’t know how anyone could think that), but try to not jump to conclusions.
sigh . I shall refrain from posting, if it causes such anger (From John) and offense (From Esau).
God Bless, ya’ll.
Sorry, David B.
Stress from work and other factors regarding such produced that outcome.
Sometimes, multi-tasking is not such a good thing.
My apologies again.
Thanks, Easu. In my opinion, you have acted, on the whole, more like a Catholic than John has.
Esau , not easu.
In my view, very young babies should not be brought to church, except to be baptized. As Jimmy points out, they certainly are not “obligated” to be there, and at that age, they do not get anything out of being there. They are likely to be tired, hungry, and irritable. In fairness, those who are there to worship God and to profit from the homily should not be subjected to a wailing infant.
Of course, I recognize that some parents may have no practical alternative, but in that case, churches should endeavor to place the parents with young infants in a separate area where their needs can be attended to and where they will not disturb the other parishioners’ ability to obtain spiritual benefit from the liturgy.
As for the priest, mentioned in another comment, who thinks that the presence of babies will encourage married couples to have more, he needs to mind his own business. The decision to have a child is an important and life-changing event that requires years of emotional and financial sacrifice. It should not be made lightly or in response to a quip, especially one coming from a celibate priest who has no conception of married and family life or the sacrifices that must be made for it to have a chance of being successful.
If the Roman Rite abandoned its artifical and scripturally-unnecessary prohibition on ordaining married men to the clergy, it might have priests with a more realistic view of life in general and marriage in particular.
Eastern Catholic churches ordain married men to the clergy, and they are in full communion with Rome. Their priests, in general, have a far more normal outlook on life.
In my experience, the typical Roman Catholic Mass (Novus Ordo) takes about 45 to 60 minutes, depending on the length of the homily and the announcements. In June 1971, I attended a Roman Catholic Mass on Sunday that took only 37 minutes. The only thing I can conclude is that the priest had some other engagement that caused him to hurry.
Daily Mass can be done in about 15 minutes. Remember that it omits the Gloria and the Creed, and there is no Homily, and only two readings, not three. With those omissions, and a fast reader, it can be done quickly.
I attended a Roman Catholic parish that had a daily mass at 9:00 a.m. every morning. One Sunday, the priest announced that there would be a weekday meeting at the church for some purpose. He announced the time as 9:15 a.m. “right after the Daily Mass.”
“In fairness, those who are there to worship God and to profit from the homily should not be subjected to a wailing infant.”
Which is why my wife and I always took a crying infant out until they could be quieted. On the other hand, I would hope that a room full of loving Christians would be able to spare a little charity for a baby. Offer it up, for goodness sake. Babies are a blessing from the Lord. Blessed is he who has his quiver full, and all that. We ought to welcome babies to the Mass.
“As for the priest, mentioned in another comment, who thinks that the presence of babies will encourage married couples to have more, he needs to mind his own business. The decision to have a child is an important and life-changing event”
Yes, FAR be it for the pastor of the parish to be handing out spiritual advice! Much better to get that from lay people via the internet – much more reliable. (toungue out of cheek, now).
Some comments in response to earlier comments:
(1) The Eastern church confirms babies so that they will have the gifts of the Holy Spirit that are imparted by the reception of the sacrament as soon as possible. We never know when the child will need the gifts, so, from the Eastern perspective, it is better to do it as soon as possible. In the Eastern church, the parish priest is the ordinary minister of confirmation.
(2) The Roman church adhering to its own practices, generally confirms at the age of 9 years to 13 years. It will do so earlier, however, if the child is in danger of death. So, the West and the East are not really in disagreement, but their approach and practice is different.
(3) There is no need for a person to reaffirm the promises that were made for him at baptism, whether by confirmation or otherwise. It is the duty of the parents to have the child baptized and confirmed at the appropriate time and to raise him in the faith to the best of their ability.
(4) To tell a married couple whether and when to have a child is not “spiritual advice.” It is meddling in a very personal and private matter, and it is particularly annoying to me when such “advice” comes from a celibate who does not have any personal experience in the dynamics of making a marriage work or in rearing and providing for the upbringing of a child. If Roman priests were married and had families, I would be more inclined to listen to “spiritual advice” of this sort. The Eastern churches have married clergy, and those clergy have children, and they are in full communion with Rome. There is nothing in Scripture that forbids a married clergy. The Roman church has never contended that celibacy is a matter of faith or morals. It is merely a matter of discipline.
(5) As a practical matter, sitting next to a wailing, hungry, irritable infant screaming his head off in church would only serve to DISCOURAGE me from bringing a child into the world!
Once a child is old enough to understand what is going on, say starting about 3 years old, or so, he or she should be brought to church regularly. I do not favor special liturgies for children. Once they are old enough to understand, they should participate in the same liturgy the parents do. If they need explanation, and they will, that is the job of the parents and the teachers, to be fulfilled at home or in religious education classes.
“To tell a married couple whether and when to have a child is not “spiritual advice…”
All advice is spiritual advice.
“It is meddling in a very personal and private matter,”
I don’t believe the priest in question tried to tell any couple “whether and when” to have a child, did he (unless you know something I don’t)? He was just encouraging married couples to have kids. Sounds pretty dang Catholic, to me.
Was the above post by John made tongue-in-cheek?
Very young babies shouldn’t be brought to Mass? And so someone stays at home with them? Even with a non-Catholic husband who would be fine staying home with the baby, I’ve never cared for mass-going as a partial family. And as someone else mentioned, if they start to fuss, you just take them out.
I did attend for a few years a mostly Vietnamese & Filipino parish; there weren’t many babies crying from hunger or boredom, because the entire back pew was taken over by nursing mothers, and the men knew to sit further forward. A very quiet church, even with pretty long Masses.
I personally know two women who left their Protestant churches for Catholicism in part because their congregations shared the view that “churches should endeavor to place the parents with young infants in a separate area where their needs can be attended to and where they will not disturb the other parishioners’ ability to obtain spiritual benefit.” Children in their churches belonged in cry rooms, in Sunday school, anywhere except where worship was going on. Catholicism and its welcoming of the whole family were a tremendous relief to these women (and their children).
I hardly know what to say to “The decision to have a child is an important and life-changing event that requires years of emotional and financial sacrifice. It should not be made lightly…” except that the plain fact is that the decision to have a child is often enough made as a result of a free evening, a bottle of champagne, and a new negligee. I thank God that not one of our children was either “planned” or “unplanned,” impossible as such a thing is in the current wisdom of the world. If we’d waited for emotional and financial readiness to have the first, we never would have gotten started. Next one due in July!
John said:
Yet, John had stated in the past:
AND
AND
John has repeated this theme time and again — the Novus Ordo Missae being a damned Mass and, furthermore, nothing more than a Protestant service.
John has also DECLARED the Second Vatican Council and the Teachings of the Pope apostasy!
He has clearly demonstrated the EXTENT to which he would go just to bring down the Catholic Church — that is, to the treacherous extent of SPREADING LIES regarding her:
AND
John would go so far as to DESTROY HOLY PEOPLE LIKE MOTHER TERESA WITH OUTRIGHT CALUMNY JUST TO ADVANCE HIS SINISTER AGENDA:
John hilariously states in his most recent post:
I take it, then, that these posts from him aren’t personal:
AND
AND
But, I guess since John is unable to defend his REBELLION against the Catholic Church (disguising it as TRADITIONAL CATHOLIC TEACHING), he cannot win an argument other than to personally attack those who argue for the Catholic Church, the Pope and the Modern Roman Rite!
As I had asked him numerous times:
In fact, John has NEVER provided answers to these questions — he is UNABLE to provide a satisfactory one since the OBVIOUS ANSWER would no doubt REVEAL his actual DISDAIN for the PAPACY & Christ’s Catholic Church itself as well as the FACT that IT IS HE whose agenda is AGAINST TRADITIONAL CATHOLIC CHURCH TEACHINGS!
This is why when ROSEMARIE & her husband submitted their arguments against John’s High Church Protestant ideas, because he could not, in fact, refute them, John took potshots as usual:
Yet, not only does John sink so low as to ATTACK people whose arguments he is UNABLE to REFUTE, but he also goes to the extent of MIS-REPRESENTING WHAT THEY ACTUALLY SAID!
For example, as Innocencio had caught him:
John has also been CAUGHT PLAGERIZING other people’s opinions and DISGUISED THEM AS HIS OWN:
AND
AND
Of course, Anon with No Name said it best:
In addition, JOHN many times just OUTRIGHT LIES:
AND
YET, this is what I have actually said about those Pedophile priests:
AND
Even after Easter, John has not REPENTED of his sin of lying, deception and two-faced-ness!
Jn:8:44:
44 You are of your father the devil: and the desires of your father you will do. He was a murderer from the beginning: and he stood not in the truth, because truth is not in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father thereof. (DRV)
CLARIFICATION:
Because there are other “JOHN”s on the blog, the ‘John’ I speak of above is:
jtnova@optonline.net
Unless children can behave….WITHOUT TOYS, A PICNIC BASKET, VIDEO GAMES, BOOKS, WIND SPRINTS DOWN THE ISLES, there is no reason to be in church, NONE. NONE. NONE. If your main concern during mass is to placate your offspring…..
LEAVE EM HOME. My church has become a day care center.