Author Topic: Traditional Catholic American Indians (Native Americans) (Read 6562 times)

BTNYC · « **Reply #15 on:** August 14, 2015, 01:02:43 PM »

BTW, the Dreamcatchers on the walls of the chapel reminded me of nothing so much as banned former CI poster Bruce Ferguson aka "Trickster."

Remember him, circa summer '14? His pet cause was a synthesis of the Catholic Faith (more accurately, the NO) and "Native American Spirituality."

One of my exchanges with him on the subject went thus:

Quote from: trickster

Quote from: BTNYC
Quote from: trickster

When I talk about aboriginal theology I am only talking about incorporating indigenous symbols, etc into the mass.

Like what?

Feathers on the vestments?

Responding to "Pax Domini sit semper vobiscuм" by lighting up a peace pipe?

Dream Catcher over the Tabernacle?

Totem pole in the Sanctuary (or "communal table space" or whatever you modernists are wont to call it)?

Peddle the snake oil elsewhere. We're not buying.

...Dream catchers are a new artsy phenomenom. I don't remember them growing up, they developed in the 80s or 90s and are more art than anything else...

...So dreamcatchers have a different purpose than what the mass would be about, so they wouldn't be included.

Bruce

http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=33222&min=25

So, as we can see, even Trickster Bruce - flaming Modernist pagan inculturator that he was - knew better than to include Dreamcatchers in his panreligious fantasy. Would that those in charge of the St. Kateri Shrine had at least as much sense as he.

PerEvangelicaDicta · « **Reply #16 on:** August 14, 2015, 01:15:08 PM »

BTNYC said:

Quote

he <Card. Dolan> wants the emptying, failed, financially insolvent den of Modernism that Robbins is currently turning it into, which would provide him with the excuse he's looking for to shut the parish down and sell that valuable Park Avenue real estate to the highest bidder.

Ah, that explains it! The modernist argument on it's face didn't make sense to me as to the destruction of a thriving parish, and to the church itself. But this explanation fulfills the "if it doesn't make sense, there's an agenda" piece. This is the agenda. How utterly tragic.

PerEvangelicaDicta · « **Reply #17 on:** August 14, 2015, 01:21:44 PM »

I remember Bruce "Trickster" well and his affinity for native American spirituality. It may be my naivete, but he seemed oddly genuine, if way off base Catholicism-wise and with his pagan preoccupation, not to mention trying to merge it somehow with the Faith. I pray he is well and finds the Truth he was seeking. Come, Holy Ghost.

ClarkSmith · « **Reply #18 on:** August 14, 2015, 02:16:57 PM »

Marxists use white colonialism as a reason for natives to return back to their roots/paganism. Marxists say Christianity is an oppressive colonial religion. This mindset has damned many souls.

Vactican II Popes don't challenge the Marxists. The Popes apologize for the past and become indifferent to paganism . What are Native Americans to think? They must think the Marxists are telling the truth.

poche · « **Reply #19 on:** August 14, 2015, 10:45:30 PM »

Quote from: ClarkSmith

Marxists use white colonialism as a reason for natives to return back to their roots/paganism. Marxists say Christianity is an oppressive colonial religion. This mindset has damned many souls.

Vactican II Popes don't challenge the Marxists. The Popes apologize for the past and become indifferent to paganism . What are Native Americans to think? They must think the Marxists are telling the truth.

What about the danzas to the Blessed Virgin of Guadalupe that have been going on for hundreds of years?

poche · « **Reply #20 on:** August 14, 2015, 10:50:23 PM »

Quote from: BTNYC

Quote from: poche
Is the Traditional Latin Mass offered at the shrine's chapel, Poche? The website says nothing about it.

According to Summorum Pontificem if a group of atholics requests the celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass then it has to be provided to them. If a request is made in an appropriate manner I don't see why not.

http://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/letters/2007/docuмents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20070707_lettera-vescovi.html

You can always depend upon Poche to toe the party line, eve when - especially when - reality is at odds with it.

I've seen - and, in my more naïve days, taken part in - several group attempts to have the TLM provided at NO parishes - including my mother's parish (where I received all my first Sacraments). Each time these were answered with polite form letters telling us, in essence, to bugger off.

I was also a witness to what occurred at the Church of Our Saviour in NYC, where Fr. Rutler had perhaps the best-attended TLM in the city. Then, when Cardinal Dolan ousted him, and appointed a successor more amenable to the current Bergoglian atmosphere, one of the first orders of business was to put an end to the TLM at Our Saviour, despite (or more accurately, because of) the fact that there was a very large, very stable group there attending the Mass.

So, please, Poche... Save the "According to Summorum Pontificuм" BS for someone who hasn't seen the wheels of the Conciliar Machine in action.

You have to work with a view to the long term. I remember 35 years ago when there was an efort to get perpetual adoration in the area. Today we have perpetual adoration at teh cathedral, in my parish and in many other areas. You have to be patient, yet persistent. And remember, "no" doesn't mean "no." It just means "not yet."

BTNYC · « **Reply #21 on:** August 15, 2015, 09:10:03 AM »

Quote from: poche

You have to be patient, yet persistent. And remember, "no" doesn't mean "no." It just means "not yet."

Well, you're right about that. That's how we got Altar Girls, Lay "Ministers" of Holy Communion, Communion in the hand, and, in just a few more weeks, divorced and "remarried" "Catholics" officially permitted to receive Holy Communion.

What next? Open Sodomites officially permitted to receive Holy Communion? Woman Cadinals?

No (not yet).

Pardon me if I don't have "patience" to wait for the Modernist method of wearing down Church infrastructure until I finally get my way. That's how a spoiled child or a nagging wife operates - not a faithful Catholic who desires what Immemororial Tradition and St. Pius V's Quo Primum established in perpetuity as the One and Only Mass of the Latin Rite of the Roman Catholic Church.

poche · « **Reply #22 on:** August 18, 2015, 12:01:54 AM »

Quote from: BTNYC

Quote from: poche
You have to be patient, yet persistent. And remember, "no" doesn't mean "no." It just means "not yet."

Well, you're right about that. That's how we got Altar Girls, Lay "Ministers" of Holy Communion, Communion in the hand, and, in just a few more weeks, divorced and "remarried" "Catholics" officially permitted to receive Holy Communion.

What next? Open Sodomites officially permitted to receive Holy Communion? Woman Cadinals?

No (not yet).

Pardon me if I don't have "patience" to wait for the Modernist method of wearing down Church infrastructure until I finally get my way. That's how a spoiled child or a nagging wife operates - not a faithful Catholic who desires what Immemororial Tradition and St. Pius V's Quo Primum established in perpetuity as the One and Only Mass of the Latin Rite of the Roman Catholic Church.

Henry VIII wanted the Church to allow him to divorce his first wife so that he could marry a younger and supposedly more beautiful woman and the Church refused to give him an annulment he started his own church, which incidently doesn't have a valid celebration of the Holy Mass.

poche · « **Reply #23 on:** August 18, 2015, 12:19:24 AM »

What next? Open Sodomites officially permitted to receive Holy Communion?

Nobody is officially permited to receive Holy Communion unless they are free of mortal sin. If the "open sodomite" will make a good confession and renounce his sin then he should be able to receive Holy Communion.

BTNYC · « **Reply #24 on:** August 18, 2015, 08:04:28 AM »

Quote from: poche

What next? Open Sodomites officially permitted to receive Holy Communion?

Nobody is officially permited to receive Holy Communion unless they are free of mortal sin. If the "open sodomite" will make a good confession and renounce his sin then he should be able to receive Holy Communion.

Is a person who is divorced and remarried in a state of mortal sin?

If the Synod permits them to receive Holy Communion, what will you say, Poche?

BTNYC · « **Reply #25 on:** August 18, 2015, 08:12:00 AM »

Quote from: poche

Quote from: BTNYC
Quote from: poche
You have to be patient, yet persistent. And remember, "no" doesn't mean "no." It just means "not yet."

Well, you're right about that. That's how we got Altar Girls, Lay "Ministers" of Holy Communion, Communion in the hand, and, in just a few more weeks, divorced and "remarried" "Catholics" officially permitted to receive Holy Communion.

What next? Open Sodomites officially permitted to receive Holy Communion? Woman Cadinals?

No (not yet).

Pardon me if I don't have "patience" to wait for the Modernist method of wearing down Church infrastructure until I finally get my way. That's how a spoiled child or a nagging wife operates - not a faithful Catholic who desires what Immemororial Tradition and St. Pius V's Quo Primum established in perpetuity as the One and Only Mass of the Latin Rite of the Roman Catholic Church.

Henry VIII wanted the Church to allow him to divorce his first wife so that he could marry a younger and supposedly more beautiful woman and the Church refused to give him an annulment he started his own church, which incidently doesn't have a valid celebration of the Holy Mass.

So what's your point? That he should have had the patience to wait a few centuries for the Synod against the Family 2015 to come along and grant him his wish?

You're the one saying "no" means "not yet," Poche. In my household "no" means "no." Our Lord told us to let our "no" be "no" and our "yes" "yes."

The Church is held to no less a standard. She already said "Yes" definitively to the TLM and "No" to any attempts to replace it. It is to that "Yes" and "No" that I will hold.

Graham · « **Reply #26 on:** August 18, 2015, 11:28:28 AM »

Kateri Tekakwitha's shrine is in the Kahnawake reservation, about 20 minutes' drive from me. There is certainly no TLM or traditionalist community there, very far from it.

BTNYC · « **Reply #27 on:** August 18, 2015, 03:23:53 PM »

Quote from: Graham

Kateri Tekakwitha's shrine is in the Kahnawake reservation, about 20 minutes' drive from me. There is certainly no TLM or traditionalist community there, very far from it.

So the inferences one might reasonably draw based on the décor of the place (and which Poche, being a constitutionally unreasonable person, would not) would seem to be correct.

Thank you for confirming that, Graham.