Diocese of Orange - Bishop Brown-Kneeling after Agnus Dei is MORTAL SIN!!


#1

I just received this email regarding some pretty unbelievable stuff going on at St. Mary’s by the Sea in Huntington Beach - Canon lawyers getting involved - parishioners being told that kneeling after the Angus Dei is a mortal sin by the administrator (not yet pastor) in the weekly bulletins, administrator (not yet pastor) telling them to leave the parish and the diocese, all with the alleged approval of Bishop Tod Brown -

It’s getting truly weird!!!

Bishop Brown welcomes homosexual activists (priests even distributed communion to them at St. John the Baptist - “In The News” forum, Jan, 2005) and allows public recognition of Loretta Sanchez (she’s the adamantly pro abortion congresswomen from Anaheim, CA) at Servite (Boys) Catholic High School- all teachers and students applauded her during the mass - 2003) But you’d better not KNEEL!!! or you’ll get kicked out!!

email -

"Please read the blogs posted by John Seiler and Steve Greenhut of the OC Register regarding St. Mary’s Parish and the actions regarding over 65 parishioners being told to leave the parish and the Diocese of Orange thru a letter sent out by the current administrator, Fr. Martin Tran, with the alleged approval of Bishop Brown…we ask you to post comments on the blog page by clicking on the appropriate spots to enable the site’s URL. We need your comments to provide strength in numbers and urge you forward this to as many people you can to encourage their voices too…please note we have forwarded to the “O’Reilly Factor” to solicit his awareness and reaction.
There will be prayer vigil at St. Columban’s (Orange County Cathedral Church) 10am to 11:30 am. Tomorrow, Saturday,
March 4.

Please, by the grace of God, let your voice be heard!

God Bless!"

Liberal ‘tolerance’ at Diocese of Orange:****[size=1][/size]
[size=1][/size]
**[size=1]http://blogs.ocregister.com/orangepunch/2006/03/liberal_tolerance_at_diocese_o.html[/size]
**

Is kneeling before Jesus a mortal sin in the Diocese of Orange?:

**[size=1]http://blogs.ocregister.com/orangepunch/2006/03/is_kneeling_before_jesus_a_mor_1.html#more[/size]
**

Too, TOO strange - what a cross we bear here in the Diocese of Orange.

God, help us, -
Angel.


#2

Sorry, anyone who could believe one’s posture at Mass could be a mortal sin, simply doesn’t know what has to be in place for a mortal sin to be present. The priest/administrator and anyone who believes him need to go to the Catechism and Canon Law.

C’mon now!

John


#3

Sorry, St. Columban’s is not the OC Cathedral Church (it’s just used when there are large crowds expected)

The vigil IS at St. Columban’s in Garden Grove.

Angel


#4

adoremus.org/1102TheologyKneel.html

The Theology of Kneeling
From Cardinal Ratzinger’s The Spirit of the Liturgy

Again, there is a story that comes from the sayings of the Desert Fathers, according to which **the devil was compelled by God to show himself to a certain Abba Apollo. He looked black and ugly, with frighteningly thin limbs, but most strikingly, he had no knees. The inability to kneel is seen as the very essence of the diabolical.
**
But I do not want to go into more detail. I should like to make just one more remark. The expression used by Saint Luke to describe the kneeling of Christians (theis ta gonata) is unknown in classical Greek. We are dealing here with a specifically Christian word. With that remark, our reflections turn full circle to where they began. It may well be that kneeling is alien to modern culture – insofar as it is a culture, for this culture has turned away from the faith and no longer knows the one before whom kneeling is the right, indeed the intrinsically necessary gesture. The man who learns to believe learns also to kneel, and a faith or a liturgy no longer familiar with kneeling would be sick at the core. Where it has been lost, kneeling must be rediscovered, so that, in our prayer, we remain in fellowship with the apostles and martyrs, in fellowship with the whole cosmos, indeed in union with Jesus Christ Himself.


#5

" AT THE SOUND OF HIS NAME EVERY HEAD SHALL BOW AND EVERY KNEE SHALL BEND,ON EARTH AND IN HEAVEN "
That pretty much answers any questions.
Catholics have a responsibility to defend he Faith even against priests and bishops when their wrong ! Don’t just complain, act !


#6

This is fascinating… I cannot believe anybody would do this!

Laura :bigyikes:


#7

Saint Mary’s sits on some very valuable property a few blocks from the shore. It is a rather small parish. One might suspect that the diocese would not be sorry to see it closed and sold.


#8

The first link posted took me to a couple German speakers talking back and forth about how to get the right code to read a file. Just so you know.

The second article, though, used the responsum of H.E. Cardinal Arinze out of context. The dubium asks specifically about the period after communion, and this is what the responsum addresses. Concerning kneeling after the Agnus Dei, the GIRM clearly states (with its US adaptions) that the faithful kneel unless directed not to by the bishop. If the bishop has directed them not do, they have a duty to obey him. If this sort of liturgical disobedience, though, is a mortal sin as the priest claims, then the vast majority of priests I have assisted at Mass have been in dire need of confession afterwards.

The bottom line is that supporters of traditional worship seem to be using the inflated claims of the administrator to cover up the fact that the parishoners who insist on kneeling are out of line.


#9

Dear Andreas,
I have heard that argument before. On the surface, it appears valid - But think about this for a minute.

You are a youngster and you ask your mom, “Mom, is it ok if I eat in the livingroom?” and Mom responds, “Sure, honey, you can eat wherever you want to.”.

Cd. Arinze is a smart guy, if he meant only after communion he would have said “only after communion”. - not "to ensure within broad limits a certain uniformity of posture within the congregation for the various parts of the celebration of the Holy Mass, and on the other, to not regulate posture rigidly in such a way that those who wish to kneel or sit would no longer be free."

He SPECIFICALLY SAID - “for the various parts…of the… mass”


So, now that he’s talking about the various parts of the mass, how many parishioners would “feel free” to kneel when threatened with excommunication?

Aren’t there more important sins to be discussing in the Diocese of Orange week after week? This administrator has been spending every word of his weekly columns bashing “kneelers” in 25% of the bulletins during the past 8 months - 25% of his weekly time is spent hollering at those who wish to kneel -
WIERD!!!

Re: the “disobedience” card
The bishop creates “Norms” for the diocese. These are not “laws” or “mandates” - they are “Norms”. and the GIRM states he may “regulate” the celebration of the mass (the priests and those in the sanctuary), NOT THE LAITY, and he may NOT LEGISLATE! He can request, recommend, convince but not legislate.

He has no more authority to 'demand ’ that you stand than he does to “demand”, under sin of disobedience that you shake hands with the person next to you at the sign of peace or than he has to tell you to wear a blue shirt to mass. So, the term “disobedient” does not even apply in these situations -** but people are threatened and intimidated by it, so priests, pastors, administrators and bishops use it… - **

God help us here in OC,
Angel


#10

I checked out the first link on the first post. It ***should ***be

blogs.ocregister.com/orangepunch/2006/03/liberal_tolerance_at_diocese_o.html

(It is also able to be linked from the second link)
Angel


#11

This is no joke folks. Here’s the story:

cwnews.com/offtherecord/offtherecord.cfm?task=singledisplay&recnum=3466

I feel a bit guilty. I just wrote a nasty message to the bishop’s assistant and also to the chancellor of their diocese. But, I just can’t take it anymore.


#12

[quote=DreadVandal]This is no joke folks. Here’s the story:

cwnews.com/offtherecord/offtherecord.cfm?task=singledisplay&recnum=3466

I feel a bit guilty. I just wrote a nasty message to the bishop’s assistant and also to the chancellor of their diocese. But, I just can’t take it anymore.
[/quote]

I can’t believe it.


#13

He has no authority to bind that on the Faithful.


#14

:eek: Wow… I would be very upset if I were a parishioner there.

Warmest regards,
-Ben


#15

OMG! I can’t believe it.That’s just crazy… :banghead:


#16

[quote=Wildgraywolf]OMG! I can’t believe it.That’s just crazy… :banghead:
[/quote]

Has anyone written to the Pope and to Cardinal Arinze?

If you have, or if you know of people who have, please post the letters here.

Meanwhile, might I suggest that this be sent to EWTN?

In all communications, please be polite, esp. if you are chosing to correct the Bishop of Orange.

In Christ, Michael


#17

Brothers and Sisters:

Please send the following to Bishop Tod Brown of Orange and present this to Fr. Tran of St. Mary’s by the Sea:

**Kneeling in the Mass **

*In some dioceses the faithful are still being told that they must stand at various times during the Mass when they are accustomed to kneeling by the liturgical tradition of the Roman Rite, by universal law, or are moved by devotion. They are told to do this for the sake of unity, and it is sometimes stated, or strongly implied, that they are disobedient if they do not. These occasions include: when an entire parish or diocese unlawfully institutes an adaptation at some point in the Mass, such as standing at the Consecration, or, when a bishop lawfully establishes a particular norm for his diocese to stand after the Agnus Dei (as permitted by GIRM 43), or, when a parish or diocese insists that everyone must stand after their Communion until all have received, and similar instances. See Authority in the Liturgy for some general legal principles.
The below letter from the Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments clarifies the obligation of the faithful in such circumstances. *

Francis Cardinal George, O.M.I., Chairman of the Bishops Committee on the Liturgy, received the following clarification concerning the right interpretation of the “General Instruction of the Roman Missal” on the posture of the faithful from their own reception of Communion until the period of sacred silence after all Communions have been received (at which time they may sit or kneel as they prefer).

*Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments

5 June 2003

Prot. n. 855/03/L

Dubium: In many places, the faithful are accustomed to kneeling or sitting in personal prayer upon returning to their places after having individually received Holy Communion during Mass. Is it the intention of the Missale Romanum , editio typica tertia, to forbid this practice?

Responsum: Negative, et ad mentem. The mens is that the prescription of the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani, no. 43, is intended, on one hand, to ensure within broad limits a certain uniformity of posture within the congregation for the various parts of the celebration of the Holy Mass, and on the other, to not regulate posture rigidly in such a way that those who wish to kneel or sit would no longer be free.

Francis Cardinal Arinze
Prefect*

ewtn.com/expert/answers/kneeling.htm

GIRM 42-44 on Postures

*…as circumstances allow, they may sit or kneel while the period of sacred silence after Communion is observed.

In the dioceses of the United States of America, they should kneel beginning after the singing or recitation of the Sanctus until after the Amen of the Eucharistic Prayer, except when prevented on occasion by reasons of health, lack of space, the large number of people present, or some other good reason. Those who do not kneel ought to make a profound bow when the priest genuflects after the consecration. The faithful kneel after the Agnus Dei unless the Diocesan Bishop determines otherwise.* (The last sentence moderated by Cardinal Arinze’s reply above)

ewtn.com/expert/answers/GIRM42-44.htm

Authority in the Liturgy
Long Article
ewtn.com/expert/answers/authority.htm

It is completely inconsistent with Christian charity and with their role as Shepherds of the Faithful to say that the Faithful are being proud and vainglorious and are placing their souls in peril for doing that which is specificially allowed by the Vatican and by Cardinal Arinze of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.

These people are the ones who are being vainglorious for trying to bully the faithful and telling them they may not do that which the Church has stated they may do.

This is one of the few times this forum is in a position to correct a real wrong being committed by the Bishop and Priests of the Southern California. Now do it, but just be charitable.

These people are chasing faithful people out of the Church and right into the arms of Satan. I’ve made the trip, and I’m horrified that ANY Catholic priest or Bishop would even consider the possibility of forcing any faithful Catholic to make it. We should do everything we can to make sure the Faithful these Hirelings are trying to bully out of the Church don’t.

Please post your e-mails and the replies from these two Hirelings here.

In Christ, Michael


#18

People,

isn’t it a grave sin to act contrary to the decrees of the bishop?

If the bishop is in error, I’m sure our Lord will have a word in his ear.

It’s not a sin to obey a bishop if he’s in error but it is a sin to disobey
him.

Am I wrong?

God bless,
Noel.


#19

[quote=DreadVandal]This is no joke folks. Here’s the story:

cwnews.com/offtherecord/offtherecord.cfm?task=singledisplay&recnum=3466

I feel a bit guilty. I just wrote a nasty message to the bishop’s assistant and also to the chancellor of their diocese. But, I just can’t take it anymore.
[/quote]

Dread Vandal:

Please, don’t be nasty. The Bishop and his minions appear to be doing that so they can get nasty responses to point to.

If those of us who understand and have Cardinal Arinze’s clarification can email (or snail mail) him the Dubium/Responsum with a statement that we believe he hasn’t considered this, and that his actions are needlesslay chasing the faithful away from the Church, I believe we will have much better results.

Arinze’s Clarification with Dubium/Responsum is here:

Kneeling in the Mass
ewtn.com/expert/answers/kneeling.htm

To those who feel this has been taken out of context, I remind them that this is the entire letter, and that Cardinal Arinze has not caused anything to be published which contradicts this direction.

The Bishop is not at liberty to order the faithful to stand at his whim under penalty of holy obedience. This is esp. true when a Bishop has a history of defying the authority of the Vatican or the teachings of the Church.

I beg those who write Bishop Brown and Fr. Tran to be polite and to remember that, until these two walk away from their positions, they stand in Persona Christi at the Alter.

I beg anyone with the knowledge to post or PM the contact information to the appropriate officials in the Vatican, and I ask any who write any other above to post their emails and any replies they might receive.

May God bless you all.

In Christ, Michael


#20

Actually I go to St.Mary’s by the Sea in Huntington Beach.I am a conservative Catholic. Here is a sliver
of all the facts that I have seen which may not be 100% truth, but an accurate assessment all the same.

The ‘protesting group’ has been passing out flyers
telling about abuses and such that the Bishop is responsible for in his diocese. The flyer is not very well written
in many cases supplies sophist arguments
to support their contentions. In other cases it is right on. Our Bishop is very liberal and tolerates openly gay priests and other lesser offenses.

Let me start about 6 months ago…
Initially, the group had rebelled because the communion rail was essentially shut down,and a small crucifix was removed from the Altar. I’m not sure about the Canon code about the small crucifix,
however the front of the Alter contains the P cross
ingrained in the wood and behind the Altar and above is a life
sized Crucifix with a pink skinned loin clothed Jesus on it. but they were still allowed to kneel for receiving communion at the front of the communion line.

At this point, various protest flyers came out defending their right to kneel while receiving communion and decrying that their right was taken away. Conversely, the Church bulletin written by the pastor was decrying the situation that the flyers were stating they couldnt kneel for communion, but the Pastor from the pulpit and in the bulletin was decrying that this was not the case.
I should state, it was never taken away but you
wouldnt know that by reading their ‘protest flyers’.
Their protests include distributing flyers after church, defining their own kneeling and standing postures during Mass, and imagine turning around
during the ‘Sign of Peace’ and all of these grumps
are immobile and tight jawed while the rest of us are standing up giving acknowledgements and hand shakes. This is their protest.

In the intervening months, the protesters have continued distributing flyers, each with new alllegations, information and arguments, of which a significant proportion is either poorly supported allegations or might range to being propaganda material from a sophisticated read. Plus these flyers started out with not being honest with their 'not being able to kneel for communion ’ propaganda from the get go.

This whole things seems to be, from my perspective, a case of the the Bishop and Fr. Tran
the interim pastor, of confronting and pushing the ‘nuts’ and creating this situation. If change was not
instituted then these parishioners would have remained happy and content with thier own Church.

The Bishop and Fr Tran are guilty , and so are the
protestors who are not your normal garden variety
flexible and obedient Catholics. One side is pushing
for their agenda which they have the right as imposing discipliine by a Bishop , the other side is
inflexible and is being led by your garden variety
’holier than thou nuts’ in the name of ‘tradition’.

I definetly feel that if these protester were acceded to earlier than they would be very happy and would
no longer concern themselves with our liberal Bishop and his lax oversight of others. I cant’ help but feel
most of this is selfishly motivated on the part of the protesters and that they dont’ really have a great concern over the bigger issue of the Bishop. Aside from what I have observed, the only fact I have to support this is that I have been waiting for this story to break on a website or local news media for quite a while and its only now seems to have made it.
Either a choice of the protestors or its only now gotten big enough.

According to reports church attendance has dropped by about 40-50%, lots of people dont want
protest flyers, some just read it for the ‘bizzare’, and this is not a local church in solidarity.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.