Vatican III Anathemas


#1

I just had an idea. Lets make possible canons that could clearify the confusion in the Church. Please this isn’ta game
Please no joking or weird stuff. Just a list of canons with anathemas in all seriousness to the problems of confusion in the Church.
example:

If anyone says that life does not begin at the moment of conception, Let him be anathema


#2

Well, that excludes me. I’ll have to start my own Thread, I guess, as split off from this one.


#3

Will the title be “Joking and Weird Stuff?” :stuck_out_tongue:


#4

If anyone says that marriage is anything other than the life-long union between a man and a woman, let him be anathema.


#5

If anyone says that vows of marriage are not holy and binding, let them be anathema
If anyone says that a human body is the property of any person, including whose body it is, let him be anathema
If anyone says he is without sin, and goes a year and a day without receiving the crown of martyrdom, let him be anathema
If anyone says that the Church does not have the power to forgive sins, let him be anathema
If anyone says that it is not a worthy thing to be holy, let him be anathema


#6

If anyone says that Vatican II reversed any doctrine, any Council which preceded it, or any infallible declaration made by the Supreme Pontiff, let him be anathema.

If anyone says that women should and/or can be ordained into the priesthood, let him be anathema.

If any priest or bishop performs a general absolution when it is not allowed by Canon Law, let him be anathema.

If anyone derides any liturgy used by the Church past or present, let him be anathema.

If anyone abuses the liturgy, let him be anathema.

If anyone says that contraception is not always immoral, let him be anathema.

If anyone says that he is personally in favor of Church doctrine but publicly and/or politically opposes it, let Nancy Pelosi be anathema.


#7

Double AMEN here - I’m all for having the TLM much more widely available for those who enjoy it and find it a spiritual aid and comfort. Personally, from what I’ve seen of it, I don’t.

Neither have I ever, in my 30 years of mass attendance, been privy to a ‘baguette mass’, a ‘clown mass’ or any other such abomination, nor do I know anyone who has. So don’t trash us for actually liking things like the fact that the NO is in our native language!

If anyone abuses the liturgy, let him be anathema.

Define ‘abuse’ - someone who absentmindedly adds or subtracts a few words a handful of times (not at the Consecration of course) is not in the same league as someone who attempts to consecrate choc-chip cookies or turns up in a Barney costume.

If anyone says that he is personally in favor of Church doctrine but publicly and/or politically opposes it, let Nancy Pelosi be anathema.

And John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, about ten percent of the Australian parliament … :smiley:


#8

If anyone deliberately and knowingly abuses the liturgy, let him be anathema.

And John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, about ten percent of the Australian parliament … :smiley:

:smiley:


#9

Anyone who picks and chooses which Church teachings to follow and which to ignore, change or alter to their liking,

Let them be who they are, ANATHAMA!


#10

I’ve always thought if I get a dog I should call it Anathema, just so I can enjoy taking it to obedience classes … ‘Anathema, sit!’

I still disagree that a priest who makes minor and inconsequential changes to the wording of the Mass should be anathematised, even if they do it knowingly. But that’s just my :twocents:


#11

If anyone says he is without sin, and goes a year and a day without receiving the crown of martyrdom, let him be anathema

I don’t understand this one. :confused:


#12

:thumbsup:


#13

:rotfl:


#14

If any church should use the “Sign of Peace” (greeting one’s neighbors), let it be Anathema. (I’ve seen this in both Lutheran and Catholic churches, and even the Lutheran church I go to didn’t start this until a few years ago).

[quote=http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:uwbJ90AnMWoJ:www.rpinet.com/ml/2508bi1.html+%22sign+of+peace%22+liturgy&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us]When
[/quote]

extending the sign of peace, attentive worshipers resist turning it into a break. This is not the time to congratulate someone on their anniversary, to set up an appointment, or to exchange messages with the servers. It is the time to express peace and love.

This always seems to happen. :frowning:

If anyone dares download one of those "Priest Certificate"s (it says you’re a “priest” so you can conduct weddings, start a church, etc.), let them be anathema.


#15

What if those changes in wording invalidate the consecration?


#16

Hence the use of the words ‘minor’ and ‘inconsequential’ :yup: - obviously anything that invalidated the consecration would be both major and extremely consequential!!!


#17

I wonder what breed of dog would be most appropriate for such a title…

Certainly not a German one. :wink:


#18

And yet, with something so important and so great as the Liturgy, are there really such things as “minor and inconsequential” abuses? I think the Liturgy is one of those things that just cannot be played around with because any tinkering of the Liturgy by priests or anybody else calls into question Tradition and the authority of the Church. It is as if the abuser is saying “I know better than the Church” or “I have the authority to change the Liturgy as I see fit.”


#19

Or a Rottweiler , for that matter. :stuck_out_tongue:


#20

I wonder what breed of dog would be most appropriate for such a title…

Either a chihuahua or a pomperanian (sp?) because:

If any household pet is small and annoying, sniping at the heels of welcomed houseguests, let it be anathema.

But I think we’ve got OT…:o


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.