Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: JacobRCharpentier on December 27, 2012, 11:27:32 PM
-
This past Sunday (4th Sunday of Advent) we were treated to a lesson on genuflecting. Rules were, (1) down on the right knee (2) return to standing as soon as your knee touches down, (3) do it only once. The ONCE part was in reference to entering or leaving church. We were treated to more specific examples of what to or not to do. For example, when leaving after mass, exit your pew, genuflect and leave. Do not turn around and genuflect one more time when you make the Sign of the Cross. Another example. If you need to come to the sacristy after mass, genuflect once and the end of your pew and proceed to the sacristy. My note, you have to cut across the corner of the sanctuary to get to the sacristy. Most people will genuflect before they exit the sanctuary, regardless how brief the "sanctuary exposure" time may be. Could this be preparing us for the NO?
Now, to put this into a better perspective, I recall a sermon (never to be forgotten) by our former pastor (SSPX) who told the story of a protestant minister who did not believe in the True Presence, would joke about the Catholic belief in the True Presence and said if Catholics really believed Jesus Christ was really present in Holy Communion, we should all be crawling on our stomachs to receive Him. This should make us look at genuflecting as something more than a knee "touch down."
Thanks for indulging me and my paranoia.
Jake
-
They are extremely manipulative people.
As Bowler says, people should adhere to custom.
Genuflect only once - we'll take care of the modesty issue.
It's enough to make you wonder who is giving these instructions? Who are they connected to?
-
Extremely sad news, Jake.
When devout exercises of authentic veneration become "aerobicized", it's time
to look for the exits.
Quick question, are you by any chance a descendant of the great Baroque composer, Marc-Antoine Charpentier? ( I'll bet folks genuflected deeply and for awhile in his day! )
Here's a sample from his sacred works:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hu_5p400SeQ
-
I was taught as a child by Catholic Sisters pre-Vatican II that when you genuflect, you should devoutly say an aspiration with your head bowed while down on your knee before you enter the pew or turn around to leave after Mass. It is done to honor God and help remind yourself of Whose presence you are in. Since you are in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament, this should be done with all solemnity and humility and NOT rushed. We got severely reprimanded for rushing. This would be pretty difficult to do if you are genuflecting like a yo-yo. Since most people did this, no one minded waiting a few seconds longer to exit the pew while those ahead of them genuflected. You also made the Sign of the Cross while genuflecting and that was done with solemnity as well.
As for modesty, we were taught that a woman may turn her body from the waist down a little towards the pew if she is concerned about being properly covered when in this position, but the head and torso should be facing God in the Tabernacle. If you have to turn more than "a little" towards the pew, your skirt is too short and/or too tight.
We were taught that EVERYTHING one does in Church should be done with dignity and solemnity because we are in the presence of God.
Note: For anyone who doesn't know, an aspiration is a short prayer of adoration or petition, etc. Example: My Lord and my God!
-
Beautiful music, Anthony Benedict. Thank you for sharing!
-
One pope, I do not remember which one but I think it may have been Pope St. Pius X, condemned the Modernist practice of certain priests and theologians who would discourage the pious practices of the simple faithful unless those practices were actually sinful or damaging to the faith. I wish I could provide the reference, but I simply must rely on memory here so the reader will have to take it for what it's worth.
It does make sense, however, that if the pious practices of the faithful do not lead to a loss of true faith then, even if they are not actively encouraged, they should not be actively discouraged.
I wonder why a priest would ever think it necessary to discourage multiple genuflections to the Blessed Sacrament even if he thinks it not necessary. Frankly, it does not make any sense.
-
...Quick question, are you by any chance a descendant of the great Baroque composer, Marc-Antoine Charpentier? ( I'll bet folks genuflected deeply and for awhile in his day! )...
I would like to think so, but there is no evidence to support that position. John Charpentier came to the USA by an unusual path. He was on a prison ship, probably because he was a Huguenot. The ship was in England and there was a US naval vessel close by, in port. He jumped over board, swam to the US Navy ship and was transported back to the USA. That part of the family was not catholic until my grandfather wanted to marry a nice catholic girl. For what it's worth, my other grandfather's wife, my grandmother became a catholic. Both of them supported the faith without question.
Jake
-
...I wonder why a priest would ever think it necessary to discourage multiple genuflections to the Blessed Sacrament even if he thinks it not necessary. Frankly, it does not make any sense.
If you are old enough, you can think back to the pre-NO days. If not old enough, there is enough history. Anyhow, recall how the changes were gradual, seemingly innocent enough to the casual observer. This whole genuflecting thing is no different. It does not have to make sense, it just has to work. Like I said, paving the way. So, the priest is not really and actively discouraging the practice, he is just being a good little foot soldier, probalby not even understanding the ramifications of his actions. Then again, maybe he is sinister enough to understand in a clandestine way of course. We may never know.
We need to barrage Our Lord with our prayers that He send arrows of grace into the hearts of these little foot soldiers that the errors of their ways be illuminated before them, maybe the same way St. Hubertus was enlightened, figuratively speaking, of course.
Jake
-
This past Sunday (4th Sunday of Advent) we were treated to a lesson on genuflecting. Rules were, (1) down on the right knee (2) return to standing as soon as your knee touches down, (3) do it only once. The ONCE part was in reference to entering or leaving church.
I genuflect and bow my head, and place my right fist on my heart, as I am in the presence of the King of Kings. Genuflecting quickly like a flinch, is disrespectful, and not noble.
We were treated to more specific examples of what to or not to do. For example, when leaving after mass, exit your pew, genuflect and leave. Do not turn around and genuflect one more time when you make the Sign of the Cross.
If I were near the last row, sure, maybe that is the way I may do it. But for the rest of the seats, I will genuflect upon exiting my row, AND again when I take the Holy Water, turn and genuflect while doing the sign of the cross
Another example. If you need to come to the sacristy after mass, genuflect once and the end of your pew and proceed to the sacristy
No way. That priest has no fear of God, the root cause of the Novus Ordo mindset!
"The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is prudence." Proverbs (9:10)
You have to genuflect in the sanctuary every time you go (in and out of the sacristy and) by the tabernacle, even via the side of the tabernacle. Someone like myself is lucky if God does not strike me down for even being so presumptuous as to think I can enter the sanctuary, let alone not genuflecting in the sanctuary. Moreover, before I enter the sanctuary, I always ask God to forgive me for even entering.
Bottom Line:
"All change, except from evil, is the most dangerous of all things" (Plato)
Am I doing anything evil? No. Is the new direction more respectful? No.
It is now your duty to consciously genuflect on all occasions, because the priest (and the laity following his example) are no longer good examples.
-
...I wonder why a priest would ever think it necessary to discourage multiple genuflections to the Blessed Sacrament even if he thinks it not necessary. Frankly, it does not make any sense.
If you are old enough, you can think back to the pre-NO days. If not old enough, there is enough history. Anyhow, recall how the changes were gradual, seemingly innocent enough to the casual observer. This whole genuflecting thing is no different. It does not have to make sense, it just has to work. Like I said, paving the way. So, the priest is not really and actively discouraging the practice, he is just being a good little foot soldier, probalby not even understanding the ramifications of his actions. Then again, maybe he is sinister enough to understand in a clandestine way of course. We may never know.
We need to barrage Our Lord with our prayers that He send arrows of grace into the hearts of these little foot soldiers that the errors of their ways be illuminated before them, maybe the same way St. Hubertus was enlightened, figuratively speaking, of course.
Jake
AGREE 100% regarding how the changes came about and prayers needed. I fear SLOW BOILING IN PROCESS!!!
If not slow boiling, then I must wonder why these instructions NOW???? And more importantly, why discourage ANY acts of adoration of God done when they don't interfere with the Mass???? This is NOT how it used to be.
-
That is a GREAT story, Jake. Merci!
...Quick question, are you by any chance a descendant of the great Baroque composer, Marc-Antoine Charpentier? ( I'll bet folks genuflected deeply and for awhile in his day! )...
I would like to think so, but there is no evidence to support that position. John Charpentier came to the USA by an unusual path. He was on a prison ship, probably because he was a Huguenot. The ship was in England and there was a US naval vessel close by, in port. He jumped over board, swam to the US Navy ship and was transported back to the USA. That part of the family was not catholic until my grandfather wanted to marry a nice catholic girl. For what it's worth, my other grandfather's wife, my grandmother became a catholic. Both of them supported the faith without question.
Jake
-
As far as I know, a proper genuflection, as has always been taught to seminarians, for example, is made in a dignified way, i.e. not rushed, but not staying down on one knee, and with a straight back and head erect, looking at the tabernacle, and without making a sign of the cross.
But why are they getting didactic about it? People can add their own devotions if they like. One good custom I know, if it doesn't get in the way of anyone else, is, after genuflecting, to stay facing the tabernacle and say a short mental prayer, such as: "My Jesus, I believe Thou art truly here present in the most Holy Sacrament of Thy Love."
I always think it's better to genuflect immediately after entering the church, to acknowledge Our Lord first, rather than just before entering a pew, but that's just my idea!
-
Ok- you guys lost me somewhere. Granted I am rather new to Tradition, but I thought it was proper to genuflect every time you passed in front of the tabernacle, and before entering or leaving the pew. That would mean upon entering and using the holywater, again when entering the pew, and anytime leaving and re-entering thereafter, as well as if you crossed directly in front of the altar in order to light candles or do anything else. Am I doing this wrong? No one has ever corrected me, so far. What about the side altars?
-
Why in the world would any Catholic, let alone a priest, with anything resembling sense want to chastise other Catholics for genuflecting TOO MUCH?
-
Ok- you guys lost me somewhere. Granted I am rather new to Tradition, but I thought it was proper to genuflect every time you passed in front of the tabernacle, and before entering or leaving the pew. That would mean upon entering and using the holywater, again when entering the pew, and anytime leaving and re-entering thereafter, as well as if you crossed directly in front of the altar in order to light candles or do anything else. Am I doing this wrong? No one has ever corrected me, so far. What about the side altars?
I remember what I wrote above. I do not recall being taught to genuflect when using Holy Water on entering or leaving the church. I may well have forgotten this part, but the Sisters marched us into church and out of church, two across, and we dipped our fingers in the Holy Water on entering and leaving the church and kept going without turning around. Turning around to genuflect again would have meant kid piling up upon kid, which I can picture happening now if many people were exiting or entering the church at one time -- people would be bumping into people and perhaps not see those down on their knee.
I was also taught like you said to genuflect when passing before the Blessed Sacrament and when in near proximity to It, as in approaching It from the side, etc. It is God present there Whom we bow down before. Whenever you are near God, you genuflect as a sign of humility and honor to Him.
The essence of what I remember is that you genuflect anytime you pass before the Blessed Sacrament or near It and especially before you turn your back on It and to genuflect after exiting the pew is sufficient because you then turn your back on It to leave the church.
As for side altars, I would assume the same rule applies: Where the Blessed Sacrament IS, you observe the rules for genuflection. If the Blessed Sacrament is on a side altar, THAT is where your genuflection should be directed
I was taught your genuflection is intended to honor the God's Presence in the Tabernacle which, at that time, was the center of the altar. We did not genuflect in honor of the altar but in honor of God Who was present on the main altar, as I don't ever recall the Blessed Sacrament being anywhere else. We saw side altars for Masses to be said there but we never witnessed one done there. They too had small Tabernacles but without the Blessed Sacrament within.
Perhaps the rules changed. This is all I remember. If the church is empty and/or I would not be in anyone's way, I would genuflect upon entering and exiting the doors too. I don't believe there is such a thing as honoring God too much!
-
When I originally posted this message, my intent was to bring to the attention of all of you the use of rubrics in a manner which somehow serves to diminish our adoration to Our Lord. I think everyone clearly understands that, and this has become most evident in the additional postings, particularly when passing before the tabernacle. A common response I have seen is we can not adore Our Lord too much. I ask you to offer a prayer for this particular priest who appears to be headed somewhere other than a direction we believe to be proper.
Thanks again,
Jake
-
Rubrics are for the clergy and ministers at the altar, not laypeople; priests do not have the authority to impose rubrics on them! Laypeople follow custom.
-
Why in the world would any Catholic, let alone a priest, with anything resembling sense want to chastise other Catholics for genuflecting TOO MUCH?
Meanwhile, I've never known an SSPX priest that taught the women that tight tops are inappropiate to wear at ANY time. And it seems like practically all the women wear them no matter what age. No?
(http://data.touchpuppet.com/wp-content/uploads/Marilyn-Monroe9.jpg)
-
Rubrics are for the clergy and ministers at the altar, not laypeople; priests do not have the authority to impose rubrics on them! Laypeople follow custom.
Very sensible advice. In the Byzantine rite we don't genuflect. We make a profound bow while crossing ourselves and touching the floor (or as close as we can get to it). When I am in a Latin rite church I genuflect when entering or leaving my pew if the Sacrament is present and whenever passing in front of It. If it is a side chapel with no tabernacle I bow. That is what I was taught to do as a kid.
-
Why in the world would any Catholic, let alone a priest, with anything resembling sense want to chastise other Catholics for genuflecting TOO MUCH?
Meanwhile, I've never known an SSPX priest that taught the women that tight tops are inappropiate to wear at ANY time. And it seems like practically all the women wear them no matter what age. No?
(http://data.touchpuppet.com/wp-content/uploads/Marilyn-Monroe9.jpg)
No. Not all women do. And if you think this picture illustrates an inappropriately tight blouse, why in the world would you post it here?
-
No. Not all women do. And if you think this picture illustrates an inappropriately tight blouse, why in the world would you post it here?
This is the same response that I received before when I posted a girl in tight jeans. It is an irrelevent comment.
I posted that picture because by todays standards, that top is loose, and so thought more appropiate than a tighter top. I posted it because I doubt many trad women would consider it obviously inappropiate, like some other tighter tops samples I could have posted.
Moreover, why would you say "if you think this picture illustrates an inappropriately tight blouse"? It appears that you think it is not. This is not a matter of "my thinking", it is a matter of what all Catholics were taught by priests prior to the 1960's, going back to the beginning of the Church. Are we not traditionalists?
And yet, I have NEVER once seen or heard an SSPX priests tell the women that this is inappropiate. By the way, it has also always been inappropiate for women to cross their legs during mass. Did you know that? How many women cross their legs, and again never a word from the SSPX priests.
The title of "traditionalist" is a very loose term, it really can mean nothing, since people today pick and choose what they like (in courting practices, clothes, birth control, family unity, work, entertainments, etc.).
-
I don't see any problem with that blouse.
I said "If" because was not completely sure whether you were posting that as a positive or negative example.
-
I don't see any problem with that blouse.
I said "If" because was not completely sure whether you were posting that as a positive or negative example.
That's because you have been slow boiled all these years. That top has never been appropiate in the history of the Church, till the late 1960's.
I started a thread of its own for this subject in the Catholic Living in the Modern World section.
-
"A dress cannot be called decent which is cut deeper than two fingers breadth under the pit of the throat; which does not cover the arms at least to the elbows; and scarcely reaches a bit beyond the knees. Furthermore, dresses of transparent materials are improper."
------THE CARDINAL VICAR OF POPE PIUS XI
1. Marylike is modest without compromise, "like Mary," Christ's Mother.
2. Marylike dresses have sleeves extending at least to the elbows; and skirts reaching below the knees. [Note: Because of market conditions, quarter-length sleeves are temporarily tolerated with Ecclesiastical Approval, until Christian womanhood again turns to Mary as the model of modesty in dressing.]
3. Marylike dresses require full coverage for the bodice, chest, shoulders, and back; except for a cut-out about the neck not exceeding two inches below the neckline in front and back, and a corresponding two inches on the shoulders.
4. Marylike dresses do not admit as modest coverage transparent fabrics, laces, nets, organdy, nylons, etc.---unless sufficient backing is added. However, their moderate use as trimmings is acceptable.
5. Marylike dresses avoid the improper use of flesh-colored fabrics.
6. Marylike dresses conceal rather than reveal the figure of the wearer; they do not emphasize, unduly, parts of the body.
7. Marylike dresses provide full coverage, even after jacket, cape or stole are removed.
Marylike" fashions are designed to conceal as much of the body as possible. [Tan Book Editor's note: This automatically eliminates such fashions as tight slacks, jeans, sweaters; shorts which do not reach down to the knees; sheer blouses and sleeveless dresses, etc. Especially scandalous is the wearing by both sexes of shorts in church---the house of God! One can't help but wonder if Catholics who come to church immodestly, or inappropriately, dressed haven't lost belief in the presence of Christ in our churches. If Our Lord were to come back to earth now, in His Physical Body, to sit on a throne on the altar, would we go to the altar in shorts---or other immodest, or improper, attire---to fall down in adoration before His Divine Presence? Think about it!]
The Marylike standards are a guide to instill a "sense of modesty." A girl who follows these, and looks up to Mary as her ideal and model, will have no problem with modesty in dress. She will not be an occasion of sin or source of embarrassment or shame to others.
Source: http://www.catholictradition.org/Children/immodest-dress.htm (http://www.catholictradition.org/Children/immodest-dress.htm)
-
We have beem getting lessons on genuflecting, as well. We were told not to genuflect and make the sign of the cross at the same time and that we also should not genflect when blessed with holy water during the Asperges. Is there anything wrong with doing either of those?
-
This past Sunday (4th Sunday of Advent) we were treated to a lesson on genuflecting. Rules were, (1) down on the right knee (2) return to standing as soon as your knee touches down, (3) do it only once. The ONCE part was in reference to entering or leaving church. We were treated to more specific examples of what to or not to do. For example, when leaving after mass, exit your pew, genuflect and leave. Do not turn around and genuflect one more time when you make the Sign of the Cross. Another example. If you need to come to the sacristy after mass, genuflect once and the end of your pew and proceed to the sacristy. My note, you have to cut across the corner of the sanctuary to get to the sacristy. Most people will genuflect before they exit the sanctuary, regardless how brief the "sanctuary exposure" time may be. Could this be preparing us for the NO?
Now, to put this into a better perspective, I recall a sermon (never to be forgotten) by our former pastor (SSPX) who told the story of a protestant minister who did not believe in the True Presence, would joke about the Catholic belief in the True Presence and said if Catholics really believed Jesus Christ was really present in Holy Communion, we should all be crawling on our stomachs to receive Him. This should make us look at genuflecting as something more than a knee "touch down."
Thanks for indulging me and my paranoia.
Jake
I think there is a lot of value in these questions.
When I originally posted this message, my intent was to bring to the attention of all of you the use of rubrics in a manner which somehow serves to diminish our adoration to Our Lord. I think everyone clearly understands that, and this has become most evident in the additional postings, particularly when passing before the tabernacle. A common response I have seen is we can not adore Our Lord too much. I ask you to offer a prayer for this particular priest who appears to be headed somewhere other than a direction we believe to be proper.
Thanks again,
Jake
Rubrics are for the priest, and traditional customs are for the faithful.. However,
the priest is able to encourage the Faithful to practice customs, or, he is also able
to encourage the Faithful to abandon customs. A lot of the latter has been going
on post Vatican II.
Why in the world would any Catholic, let alone a priest, with anything resembling sense want to chastise other Catholics for genuflecting TOO MUCH?
I think I have an answer to this question.
It seems to me that this priest may have been approached by a Protestant or a
Freemason, who convinced him that it would be a good idea for his Catholics to
not behave in a way that is offensive to Protestants. This priest then, may have
taken that to heart, and he may have asked Fr. Rostand or his district superior,
whoever that is, if it would be a good idea to discourage excessive genuflections.
This seems to be a likely scenario.
Then, the D.S. could have taken this question as an opportunity to develop a
new method of unpacking the old habits of the SSPX in preparation for the 'deal'
which is 'off the table.'
It would make sense then, that the D.S. would say to the priest, "Yeah, sure. Go
ahead and tell them any way you like that they are genuflecting "TOO MUCH,"
and try to be cautious about it, because we don't want to overdo this. Let's see
if we can tone it down a bit, and eventually we can just phase it out. But take a
few baby steps for now."
That makes perfect sense to me. Because then the priest would come away from
that conversation thinking he has the 'authority' to preach a departure from
Tradition to his Faithful,..
..and therefore, that is why "a priest with anything
resembling sense would want to chastise other Catholics
for genuflecting TOO MUCH."
It would make even MORE sense to me that this is going on if it were to appear in
any other SSPX chapels................
We have been getting lessons on genuflecting, as well. We were told not to genuflect and make the sign of the cross at the same time and that we also should not genuflect when blessed with holy water during the Asperges. Is there anything wrong with doing either of those?
Well, fancy that!
Ask and you shall receive.
Knock and the door shall be opened to you.
Dear friends,
I am here to tell you, that soon
you will be told that we only
genuflect for the words,
"ET HOMO FACTUS EST" on
Christmas day in the reading
of the Credo, for that is what
the Modernists did to the
Novus Ordo lemmings in 1968,
the year Padre Pio died.
I doubt they could have pulled that off during his lifetime.
As for the words, "Et verbo caro factum est: et habitabit in nobis,"
the wreckovationists didn't have to deal with genuflections there because they
eliminated cap. i of St. John entirely by dumping the Last Gospel FIRST before
they made the switcharoo on the Credo.
Beware. Once bitten twice shy -- or so it OUGHT to be!
And then, after the change to only genuflecting once a year in the Credo on
Christmas Day, within about two years, nobody did it any more at all.
First they dilute -- then they let it extinguish itself. That is the pattern with all
of the Revolution. And in this it is no different.
Beware the leaven of the Pharisees.
In case you think I'm shooting from the hip and making this all up, let me assure
you that is not the case. I have seen it happening.
Years ago, about 1993 when I was an active member of the local Novus Ordo
parish, I had two experiences, which I will relate here FYI.
First, I was in a choir of about 50 singers in a medium sized parish in my area.
Our conductor was a promoter of interreligious dialogue and community spirit,
to the point of organizing a collective sing-along kind of event whereby several
area Protestant congregations would send their choirs in to meet in our church
for this event on an appointed day. So about 4 Prot choirs were seated in the
pews of our church, and our choir was seated in the left-rear area of the pews.
There were about 300 people in the church and it was less than 1/4 full. The
capacity of the church is about 1500 persons.
I was one of the last members to arrive, and I came in from the right front side,
and crossed the center aisle up in front. This was before they had torn out
the $50,000 communion rail. (It had not cost that much to install originally, but
since the black/gold vein marble in its pilasters is all mined out and rare, it would
cost about twice as much to build the rail today.)
As I passed the center aisle, with 250 Protestants seated behind me, I paused
in the middle of the aisle and genuflected toward the altar, where the tabernacle
had recently been removed and placed in a side niche to the right of the
sanctuary. That is, I had walked past the tabernacle without pausing to genuflect,
on the way to the center aisle where I did pause to genuflect. I heard the whole
assembly gasp audibly when I did so. As I turned to the left and proceeded to
the left side aisle, I noticed in my peripheral vision a number of people turning
right and left to murmur to each other while turning to look at me. I got the
feeling they were talking about me and what I had just done.
When I got to my seat, one of the more pompous and ill-informed corroborators
with innovation attempted to "inform me" that, "We don't do that any more. I
thought you may like to know that we have made a change now." He was more
concerned with how the Protestants present would be "offended" or whatever,
than he was for keeping a customary practice in use.
At the next rehearsal after the event, the conductor took a minute or two to
inform the whole group that she had received comments from the Protestant
choirs that they had been disappointed that they saw someone genuflect when
they had been told that Catholics had ceased to do that these days. A number of
the choir members turned to look at me with an expression of pity or derision,
that I was "holding back progress," or so I got the impression. Let me tell you,
that not one of them had the courage to come and speak to me in person about
it because they all knew, or, at least, they would all find out in about a second
and a half, that I HAD ABSOLUTELY ZERO PATIENCE FOR THEIR COMPLICITY
WITH ERROR AND I WAS MORE THAN READY TO PUT IT RIGHT BACK IN THEIR
FACE IF THEY WERE TO ATTEMPT TO TRY IT. IYKWIM.
So I never was blessed with any personal confrontation. I was a little
disappointed, actually, because I was LOOKING FORWARD TO IT. Oh, well....
A few months later, when leaving the church after mass (Newmass), I passed a
group of adults who had specifically gathered in front of the tabernacle on the
right side of the sanctuary, outside the now-demolished communion rail. They
were talking loudly with each other, as if to make a display of their collective
contempt for the red sanctuary lamp lit next to the tabernacle and the customs
of the Church to respect the Real Presence of Our Lord. I did not hesitate to
step into their circle and address them all, focusing my attention on the one
man who gave the appearance of being the "ring leader." I told him to his
face, very firmly but respectfully, that we do not do this in our church, that we
believe in the Real Presence of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, present
Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity in the Belessed Sacrament reserved right there
in the tabernacle..." At that point, I put my hand on his back and ushered him
out of the building, and he did not resist me. If he had, I can assure you, I
was prepared for a confrontation with all my will, and I think he had the ability
to perceive that fact. I continued to speak to him all the way out the door,
saying that "You know, Jesus Christ is our king, and we would never stand
about in front of the throne of the King and carry on loud conversations like
that while ignoring the real presence of our King, would we? No, we would not
even THINK of doing such a thing, for we would know that the palace guard
would be right on our case and we would perhaps be thrown into prison for
having offended the ruling majesty. So we do not do this here, either."
By that time we were outside, and I had made sure that the whole group of
offenders had followed us. Other parishioners stood about mulling and watching
the progress, while most were apparently passers-by that were not paying much
attention. The man stopped mid-traffic and faced me to give his reaction to
the whole affiar, saying "Well congratulations, you got what you wanted this time.
You get a GOLD STAR!" he exclaimed with raised eyebrows, at which time I
immediately thought, this man is a Freemason. There is a local lodge nearby,
and I wanted to go up there to see if he was among them, but it's not easy to
sneak in unnoticed to collect information. They keep their attendance well-
regulated and observed, a lot like a certain hot spot SSPX chapel in Florida does.
Later, I went to Confession to the pastor, and told him that I had thought that
perhaps I had been a bit overzealous with that stranger, but I was actually
looking to see whether the pastor was willing to support my zeal under the
seal of Confession. And he did. So that was a good thing. But before too long,
that pastor was moved to the new Kateri Tekakwitha parish in Canyon Country,
where the nave of the church is built on a hill, such that there is literally no room
for kneelers even if they wanted them. He was forced to start having the
Faithful either stand or sit for the Consecration. I got the feeling it was Roger
Cardinal Mahony's way of punishing his traditionalism.
So these things (and there is a lot more) combine to teach me that the word is
something that gets around, and that when Liberalism is something that the
leadership wants to promote, it often times only has to wait for opportunities to
present themselves, wherein they can use the liberal-leaning suggestions or
ideas of the Faithful or even of Protestants or Freemasons in the community,
to act as a force to advance the Liberalism that is already an accepted principle.
Doing so makes the advance of the Liberal agenda something easier, and rather
seamless, like power steering and power brakes on a car.