The recitation of the rosary was the ONLY reverent thing taking place in that church.
That’s your opinion. Doesn’t carry much weight.
Shouting the Rosary like a slogan in a political rally hardly counts as recitation and it is certainly not “reverent”.
I am reminded of an incident when living in Russia where a group of Baptist fundamentalists entered a Church and started trying to disrupt the liturgy. Understandably people were quite angry and some made threatening moves. One olde man use a far more creative solution and whispered to his friends who simply formed a cordon around these individuals and slowly backed them out of the place without physically touching them. This sort of approach to disagreement is not noble or helpful, they look like rebellious teenagers behaving in a disruptive and ill-mannered way. They should have removed themselves if asked to do so initially and quite frankly their approach to this whole matter has the taint of religious triumphalism all over it.
Was that church, at that time with that service you don’t like going on, the most reverent place in the city to pray the rosary? If you had scheduled a rosary service, and some people came running into your church, preaching things you don’t like and liturgical dancing, etc, would that have affected the reverence of your rosary?
It’s a Catholic church. A Catholic should be able to go in there at any time to pray or visit Our Lord without having to contend with heretics and dancers prancing around the sanctuary. I am just amazed at how many people are siding with this act of sacrilege and berating these brave Catholic men who were trying to make reparation to Our Lord and Our Lady in the face of it.
Really? So if I said, “I give thanks to God the Father for giving us Christ through the Quran”, that wouldn’t be a celebration of Islam? Well, you’re certainly entitled to your opinion, but I don’t believe its tenable given the structure of the video. The second half of it consists of a Protestant gushing over the wonderful fruits of Catholicism (social activism, amusingly enough), after the priest’s complimentary commentary on the fruits of the Reformation. Evidently there was an agreement to say things which would keep both sides happy.
I disagree with the act of disrupting a Catholic Church. This does not necessarily mean I agree with the service they were disrupting.
Repeated disruptions like this have not resulted in any gain for Orthodox Catholics. They are so unsuccessful for the conservative cause, so readily recorded and exploited by those who oppose orthodox doctrine and the TLM (“See what those people are like!”), I sometimes wonder if they are actually staged by the Left.
The Left likes the idea of having of having an excuse for the police. The government. in the Church. Maybe next time the police will stay, to protect the rights of the people, against the church authorities.
Please read Cardinal Muller’s declaration, I am tired of arguing over the same stuff.
The Catholic Church is not celebrating the protestant Reformation or Martin Luther or Calvin or anyone else. End of story.
Some people may have misunderstood or misapplied the wishes of the Holy See. We are all imperfect human beings, sinners. We don’t need to create more scandal and division when that happens.
It hurts me enough that some bishops allow protestant “ordinations” to occur in our cathedrals, but seeing Catholic faithful dragged out of their own Church for opposing what they perceive to be scandalous makes me nauseous. It’s distressing, even.
What or who are “The Left”? Is it a political way of saying “The Modernists”? Is it a brand-new label?
The truth is that these are the same rad-trads of Argentina, who like to make a show of their piety by shouting the rosary as a “protest”. Wannabe crusaders. Reminds me of the disgusting sights in Ireland, when Catholics would throw stones and insult Protestant children and vice-versa.
If the Church was ruled by these fellows, we’d probably still be burning towns under the motto “Kill them all and let God sort them out”. How very sad.
An admirable sentiment, and one which will hopefully be remembered in future when speaking of “radical hotheads“ and “radical fundamentalist pseudo-traditionalists” who “make a spectacle of themselves" and “spread the poison of liars”. Or does a different standard of charity apply to posters such as R_H_Benson and josh987654321?
There’s a fine line (actually, a very large and well shaded in zone) between chanting the rosary in your own church- in protest of scandal- and assault and battery. The borders are miles apart.
It actually strengthens my resolve. In so many ways I see the following being played out in society and sadly within the Church.
Benedict vs. the Dictatorship of Relativism
In his homily to the 2005 conclave that would soon choose him as the successor of Pope John Paul II, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger warned those attending, “We are moving toward a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize anything as for certain and which has as its highest goal one’s own ego and one’s own desires.”
This is a warning that Pope Benedict has not tired of repeating during his pontificate.
Relativism is a poison. It attacks our most human capacity, the capacity to seek and know the truth, including the moral truth. A dictatorship of relativism imposes by real cultural force (and even by political force) a no-standard standard, a command that all must imbibe this poison.
At first blush, it would seem contradictory to have relativism united to dictatorship. Isn’t relativism just a healthy dose of humility, a way to cool the intellectual or religious hot-head who insists, “I, only I, have the truth”?
The proof of the pudding of relativism is in the eating. How has it fared?
“In recent years I find myself noting,” Cardinal Ratzinger said in his Without Roots, “how the more relativism becomes the generally accepted way of thinking, the more it tends toward intolerance. Political correctness … seeks to establish the domain of a single way of thinking and speaking. Its relativism creates the illusion that it has reached greater heights than the loftiest philosophical achievements of the past. It presents itself as the only way to think and speak — if, that is, one wishes to stay in fashion. … I think it is vital that we oppose this imposition of a new pseudo-enlightenment, which threatens freedom of thought as well as freedom of religion.”
That last point is key. While appearing to be the very essence of neutrality and equity — “all views are equal and equally valid” — it actually undermines both the freedom of thought and the freedom of religion. As to the latter, it does so (ironically) as a new religion itself, “a new ‘denomination’ that places restrictions on religious convictions and seeks to subordinate all religions to the super-dogma of relativism.”
As Cardinal Ratzinger noted in his Truth and Tolerance, “relativism … in certain respects has become the real religion of modern man.” It has become, especially in Europe, but now increasingly in America, the religion that stands at the heart of modern secular civilization in the way that Christianity defined the heart of Christendom.
It is the religion, Pope Benedict insists, which the Church must combat in the third millennium for the sake of civilization itself. A civilization built upon dogmatic relativism is one that ensures its own destruction. It is also a civilization in which Christianity — challenging dogmatic relativism with the proclamation that Jesus Christ himself is the Way, the Truth and the Life — must be persecuted.
God Bless You
You see, those “people” I mentioned in my quote, unlike the neo-protestants in France and perchance some users here (I don’t know them personally so I can only judge their statements) were not hotheads, were not radical, were not fundamentalists, were not pseudo-traditionalists (that is, subscribing to their version of Sacred Tradition), they did not “make a spectacle of themselves”, and they did not openly lie over and over even after clarification was offered.
Sometimes you have to take the bull by the horns, and I’ve read plenty of it in this thread. One assumes people are in bona fide until they prove otherwise. Then it is time to call a spade a spade or let the thread go to shambles and the truth fall within the shadows of those who thrive in negativity and division.
You are in direct violation of the hierarchy.
Such behaviour by the laity should be punished and punished severely by the Bishops.
When radical traditionalists behave in the shameful that these protestors and disruptors behaved, they flag for Catholics the truly toxic mindset of these people and the severity of action that needs to be taken against them – including handing them over to the civil authorities to be prosecuted.
They should be treated as criminals…because that is what they are. That is…unless the civil authorities of France make a finding that these persons are actually religious radicals. In that case, they should be dealt with according to those provisions.
Good. So was Christ.
“For the sake of His sorrowful passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world.”
But they do. Pray for them.
“Criminals” for praying the rosary in a Catholic Church? Give me a break. Please, tell me that you’re joking.
“For the sake of His sorrowful passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world.”
God Bless You.