Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: bowler on April 04, 2013, 01:06:22 PM
-
I once had the impression that the SSPX was about survival, humble small wood chapels with a few people trying to just survive the current war against the faith, and that the SSPX priests existed only because of the supplied jurisdiction provided by the faithful.
Through the years I saw things change, as more and more new parishioners with a "oddball traditionalists" complex, started filling the pews and building fancy marble chapels to "attract" new people who would never have gone to an SSPX "humble small wood chapel with a few people trying to just survive the current war against the faith".
Have things changed from like 15+ years ago, are the traditionalists supposed to build marble monuments to look like the mainstream?
In my opinion, building beautiful marble churches to attract new people is not our job. Our job is keeping the faith, preaching the truth, keeping our families isolated from precisely the type of people who are repulsed by the "humble small wood chapel with a few people trying to just survive the current war against the faith".
Comments?
-
Or maybe the original intent of the marble was to give Glory to God. A woman doesn't have to dress like a mennonite to be modest. Why are we picking on our own?
-
Have things changed from like 15+ years ago, are the traditionalists supposed to build marble monuments to look like the mainstream?
Building beautiful traditional buildings isn't about being mainstream. It's about being Catholic, like our ancestors.
That being said, the SSPX is not anyone's parish.
One of the things Vatican II has done is that it has removed the stability of the local parish.
The SSPX seems to have no qualms about abandoning very nice, well-located churches.
If Traditional Catholics wish to build beautiful churches, I suggest they twice before letting a group like the SSPX take over it.
-
Hi Bowler, you asked for comments, so here is mine:
From the bottom of my heart I believe there cannot be enough beauty to honor Our Lord and His Blessed Mother.
If the very best one can possibly do is humble and poor, may God bless the honst effort. But whenever there is an opportunity or the talent to create something beautiful for the glory of God, it should be done.
Our Catholic tradition is full of stories about saints and holy people finding beautiful sacred objects, hiding statures during wars and persecutions, miraculous images happening and so forth.
One reason some of us are *nervous* about Pope Francis is his Humble thing. Plain and non-descript is masonic, Jєωιѕн and Protestant.
-
Hi Bowler, you asked for comments, so here is mine:
From the bottom of my heart I believe there cannot be enough beauty to honor Our Lord and His Blessed Mother.
If the very best one can possibly do is humble and poor, may God bless the honst effort. But whenever there is an opportunity or the talent to create something beautiful for the glory of God, it should be done.
Our Catholic tradition is full of stories about saints and holy people finding beautiful sacred objects, hiding statures during wars and persecutions, miraculous images happening and so forth.
One reason some of us are *nervous* about Pope Francis is his Humble thing. Plain and non-descript is masonic, Jєωιѕн and Protestant.
What is better for the faithful, to build?:
One St. Isidore like this:
(http://www.saintisidore.org/pics/Outside%20St%20Isidore_3.jpg)
or 20 small chapels like this spread over the World?:
(http://www.pbpindiantribe.com/sub/snow/olschurch002.jpg)
-
What is better for the faithful, to build?:
There are not enough priests to turn the large parishes into 20 smaller ones.
-
(please pardon my poor grammar in earlier post)
I have to admit you've got a point, Bowler. BUT how about painting faux marble and gorgeous interiors? Instead of plain old wood? If there are artists available?
And making lovely gardens with free or easily propagated plants and flowers?
-
What is better for the faithful, to build?:
There are not enough priests to turn the large parishes into 20 smaller ones.
Oops, I posted before I saw your very good point--I forgot about that !
-
Or maybe the original intent of the marble was to give Glory to God.
Yes, maybe, however, it may also be misdirected "giving". Maybe God prefers us to spread the faith and the wherewithall to other areas that don't have the money to even have a chapel?
A woman doesn't have to dress like a mennonite to be modest.
A small chapel is not like a woman "dressed like Mennonite". It is just as beautiful as any jeweled princess.
-
What is better for the faithful, to build?:
There are not enough priests to turn the large parishes into 20 smaller ones.
Not having enough priests is not a reason to build one big church. You have to think of the future. If there are 5 new priests every year, you build/buy five small churches every year for 4 years.
I don't buy the "there are not enough priests" excuse either. I'm sure there are also many Novus Ordo priests that would come to the SSPX (and re-ordained conditionally), if there were chapels that needed them.
If there are not enough priests for the future, then why is the SSPX building a brand new $100,000,000 seminary?
-
I once had the impression that the SSPX was about survival, humble small wood chapels with a few people trying to just survive the current war against the faith, and that the SSPX priests existed only because of the supplied jurisdiction provided by the faithful.
Through the years I saw things change, as more and more new parishioners with a "oddball traditionalists" complex, started filling the pews and building fancy marble chapels to "attract" new people who would never have gone to an SSPX "humble small wood chapel with a few people trying to just survive the current war against the faith".
Have things changed from like 15+ years ago, are the traditionalists supposed to build marble monuments to look like the mainstream?
In my opinion, building beautiful marble churches to attract new people is not our job. Our job is keeping the faith, preaching the truth, keeping our families isolated from precisely the type of people who are repulsed by the "humble small wood chapel with a few people trying to just survive the current war against the faith".
Comments?
I am sorry this has six dislikes. I think we are going back to a scenario of Mass in humble places. A few priests here and there.
-
Hi Bowler, you asked for comments, so here is mine:
From the bottom of my heart I believe there cannot be enough beauty to honor Our Lord and His Blessed Mother.
If the very best one can possibly do is humble and poor, may God bless the honst effort. But whenever there is an opportunity or the talent to create something beautiful for the glory of God, it should be done.
Our Catholic tradition is full of stories about saints and holy people finding beautiful sacred objects, hiding statures during wars and persecutions, miraculous images happening and so forth.
One reason some of us are *nervous* about Pope Francis is his Humble thing. Plain and non-descript is masonic, Jєωιѕн and Protestant.
What is better for the faithful, to build?:
One St. Isidore like this:
(http://www.saintisidore.org/pics/Outside%20St%20Isidore_3.jpg)
or 20 small chapels like this spread over the World?:
(http://www.pbpindiantribe.com/sub/snow/olschurch002.jpg)
I would prefer the 20 small chapels.
-
What about This?
This Church was built in 1692, abandoned since the 1850's.
-
Hi Bowler, you asked for comments, so here is mine:
From the bottom of my heart I believe there cannot be enough beauty to honor Our Lord and His Blessed Mother.
If the very best one can possibly do is humble and poor, may God bless the honst effort. But whenever there is an opportunity or the talent to create something beautiful for the glory of God, it should be done.
Our Catholic tradition is full of stories about saints and holy people finding beautiful sacred objects, hiding statures during wars and persecutions, miraculous images happening and so forth.
One reason some of us are *nervous* about Pope Francis is his Humble thing. Plain and non-descript is masonic, Jєωιѕн and Protestant.
What is better for the faithful, to build?:
One St. Isidore like this:
(http://www.saintisidore.org/pics/Outside%20St%20Isidore_3.jpg)
or 20 small chapels like this spread over the World?:
(http://www.pbpindiantribe.com/sub/snow/olschurch002.jpg)
That is a false dichotomy. What would be better is twenty St. Isadore's.
-
That is a false dichotomy. What would be better is twenty St. Isadore's.
Even better would be 1000 St. Isidores, and every member of Cathinfo a billionaire. However, we have to deal with reality.
-
Bowler,
I think I get your point.
Expensive, marble laden churches can give the image of religion without the substance.
Here are two different examples:
1. In the 1990s, a Chinese friend and I went to see St. Joseph's Cathedral in San Jose, CA. It had just undergone a $20mil restoration and the interior and artwork were exquisite, despite the fact it was a new mass design.
My Chinese friend was so overwhelmed by the restoration job, he stated he wanted to start going there for Sunday Mass.
I think he was impressed with the material grandeur and wanted to take his girlfriend to a classy church. However, religious doctirine and worship of God were not of his interest. This could be one example of your point.
2. In Covington, KY, there is a most beautiful Cathedral named St. Mary's of the Assumption Basilica built in 1895 and elevated to a Basilica by St. Pope Pius X.
St. Mary's Covington KY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-f8Nl1BU10)
If you walk through the surrounding neighborhood of this parish, you'll see mostly modest and humble homes.
It's obvious the faithful there funded this church, with a large portion of their hard earned dollars, for the honor and glory of God.
-
Bowler,
I think I get your point.
Expensive, marble laden churches can give the image of religion without the substance.
Here are two different examples:
1. In the 1990s, a Chinese friend and I went to see St. Joseph's Cathedral in San Jose, CA. It had just undergone a $20mil restoration and the interior and artwork were exquisite, despite the fact it was a new mass design.
My Chinese friend was so overwhelmed by the restoration job, he stated he wanted to start going there for Sunday Mass.
I think he was impressed with the material grandeur and wanted to take his girlfriend to a classy church. However, religious doctirine and worship of God were not of his interest. This could be one example of your point.
Yes that is exactly an example of what I was refering to when I said that:
building fancy marble chapels to "attract" new people who would never have gone to an SSPX "humble small wood chapel with a few people trying to just survive the current war against the faith".
Bowler,
I think I get your point.
2. In Covington, KY, there is a most beautiful Cathedral named St. Mary's of the Assumption Basilica built in 1895 and elevated to a Basilica by St. Pope Pius X.
St. Mary's Covington KY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-f8Nl1BU10)
If you walk through the surrounding neighborhood of this parish, you'll see mostly modest and humble homes.
It's obvious the faithful there funded this church, with a large portion of their hard earned dollars, for the honor and glory of God.
The local neighborhood Novus Ordo church that I would be going to if it was still Catholic, is also large, and was built in 1926. When I was young they had like 6 masses per day with like 5000+ people in total on Sundays. Obviously, the parishioner base (the money) was there to support such a church.
From what I've seen, the SSPX chapels do not have the parishioner base to cover their chapels. The few parishioners are overburdened with paying for something they can't afford. Hence the constant appeals for more money. A good example is the new $1,000,000 seminary. It would be much easier for them if the people who seek to build monuments would ease up with their personal aspirations, and live in the reality that we are living "in the deserts". Don't you think?
If the SSPX was composed of little chapels all over, it would not be very attractive for takeover. I believe the takeover of the SSPX is a sign from God that he does not want us building monuments. That we should rely on preaching the truth to attract parishioners, rather than marble monuments.
Who would want to steal that little chapel in the picture that I posted? Now St. Isidore, every priests would want to have that church!
-
If the SSPX was composed of little chapels all over, it would not be very attractive for takeover. I believe the takeover of the SSPX is a sign from God that he does not want us building monuments. That we should rely on preaching the truth to attract parishioners, rather than marble monuments.
Who would want to steal that little chapel in the picture that I posted? Now St. Isidore, every priests would want to have that church!
Another thought is that these fancy churches also attract priests looking for comforts, rather than a priest like the Cure de Ars that was looking to save souls. If the SSPX was a bunch of small chapels like the one in the picture, I can guaranty everyone that the Fr. Pflugers, Schimbergers, Bp. Fellays would have no interest in them. They likely would have never even entered the SSPX. AND how many of the current seminarians are more of the same "comforts" priests? You won't see any of those running to Fr. Pfeiffer's seminary to serve "shanty" chapels.
-
Just for human interest: In Germany, I saw chapels in the castles. Marble was too expensive and to haul/ship. So, wood columns were painted to look like marble and boy does it!! Until you touch it, it looks like the real thing!
-
It was Rev Fr Joseph Pfeiffer who built the church of St Isidore (yes, our very own Fr Pfeiffer) and I do not see anything wrong with that.
In fact I hope he can build many more beautiful churches like it.
-
If the SSPX was composed of little chapels all over, it would not be very attractive for takeover. I believe the takeover of the SSPX is a sign from God that he does not want us building monuments. That we should rely on preaching the truth to attract parishioners, rather than marble monuments.
Who would want to steal that little chapel in the picture that I posted? Now St. Isidore, every priests would want to have that church!
Another thought is that these fancy churches also attract priests looking for comforts, rather than a priest like the Cure de Ars that was looking to save souls. If the SSPX was a bunch of small chapels like the one in the picture, I can guaranty everyone that the Fr. Pflugers, Schimbergers, Bp. Fellays would have no interest in them. They likely would have never even entered the SSPX. AND how many of the current seminarians are more of the same "comforts" priests? You won't see any of those running to Fr. Pfeiffer's seminary to serve "shanty" chapels.
Seeing Fr. Pfeiffer celebrate Mass on the streets, walking in flooded waters to assist souls, sleeping on pews or on the ground, and doing whatever it takes to save souls has made a huge impact on my view of the true humility a true Catholic priest should possess (just like the priests from past centuries). Fr. could care less about any bodily/worldly comforts (which certainly can't be said about some of the neo-SSPX priests....i.e "The SeaWorld Rollercoaster priests") and he just goes wherever souls are in need.
Whether Fr. Pfeiffer celebrated mass in a backyard barn or a huge Cathedral, it wouldn't have made one difference to me as I know Fr. speaks the Truth.
(I'm only using Fr. Pfeiffer as an example here as I've personally witnessed him "in action", but I'm aware that all the other resistance priests have a similar mindset and have proven themselves without doubt......they did this by just leaving the "comforts" of the neo-SSPX organization).
-
It was Rev Fr Joseph Pfeiffer who built the church of St Isidore (yes, our very own Fr Pfeiffer) and I do not see anything wrong with that.
In fact I hope he can build many more beautiful churches like it.
Likely, as soon as he was done, they took it from him. Just like they will take all of the nice ones.
I wonder what Fr. Pfieiffer thinks about that today?
-
Hi Bowler, you asked for comments, so here is mine:
From the bottom of my heart I believe there cannot be enough beauty to honor Our Lord and His Blessed Mother.
If the very best one can possibly do is humble and poor, may God bless the honst effort. But whenever there is an opportunity or the talent to create something beautiful for the glory of God, it should be done.
Our Catholic tradition is full of stories about saints and holy people finding beautiful sacred objects, hiding statures during wars and persecutions, miraculous images happening and so forth.
One reason some of us are *nervous* about Pope Francis is his Humble thing. Plain and non-descript is masonic, Jєωιѕн and Protestant.
:applause: :applause:
You couldnt be more right, Elizabeth! In the history of the Church, thousands of magnificent churches have been built to honor Our Lord and his Blessed Mother. Most of them have taken 100 years to build.
If there is money to build churches, than they should be built.
However, I might add, there are now many abandoned beautiful churches that can be reclaimed. The problem is, if the Novus Ordo finds out that traditionalists want to buy a church, they refuse to sell. They have no problem selling to protestants.
-
I like beautiful Churches. My chapel is still in a Hotel room and we do not draw many people though the city it is located in is very large. I wonder sometimes if more people would come if we had a beautiful Church.
But then, I wonder if the people who are attracted because of the beauty of the Church would be the best Catholics.
-
But then, I wonder if the people who are attracted because of the beauty of the Church would be the best Catholics.
Its not for us to decide, but for us to allow the Holy Ghost to inspire in whatever way He sees fit (and than to pray that those entering our Church are open to his inspiration). The entire premise of the OP is ridiculous; Bowler is trying, but failing, to be a holier than thou person. The nitpicking offered by some here remove credibility from the resistance. I sometimes wonder if people actually think about the things they come up with. Evidently not.
-
I think it is a valid issue to discuss. If a parish can truly afford to build something grand then it is their decision, however, there should be some sort of "fund" to which the faithful can contribute to build the small chapels in places were none exists. I don't think it has to be an either/or question.
Marsha
-
The SSPX seems to have no qualms about abandoning very nice, well-located churches.
Where did this happen? I had not heard of them leaving any locations.
Marsha
-
But then, I wonder if the people who are attracted because of the beauty of the Church would be the best Catholics.
Its not for us to decide, but for us to allow the Holy Ghost to inspire in whatever way He sees fit (and than to pray that those entering our Church are open to his inspiration). The entire premise of the OP is ridiculous; Bowler is trying, but failing, to be a holier than thou person. The nitpicking offered by some here remove credibility from the resistance. I sometimes wonder if people actually think about the things they come up with. Evidently not.
Is that all that you have to contribute sir, ad-hominem attacks? I don't see anything else.
-
Just for human interest: In Germany, I saw chapels in the castles. Marble was too expensive and to haul/ship. So, wood columns were painted to look like marble and boy does it!! Until you touch it, it looks like the real thing!
You were reading my mind! The first thing I thought of was painting faux-marble. It's not even very hard to do. It can even me made seriously beautiful and durable on cardboard.
-
Hi Bowler, you asked for comments, so here is mine:
From the bottom of my heart I believe there cannot be enough beauty to honor Our Lord and His Blessed Mother.
If the very best one can possibly do is humble and poor, may God bless the honst effort. But whenever there is an opportunity or the talent to create something beautiful for the glory of God, it should be done.
Our Catholic tradition is full of stories about saints and holy people finding beautiful sacred objects, hiding statures during wars and persecutions, miraculous images happening and so forth.
One reason some of us are *nervous* about Pope Francis is his Humble thing. Plain and non-descript is masonic, Jєωιѕн and Protestant.
What is better for the faithful, to build?:
One St. Isidore like this:
(http://www.saintisidore.org/pics/Outside%20St%20Isidore_3.jpg)
or 20 small chapels like this spread over the World?:
(http://www.pbpindiantribe.com/sub/snow/olschurch002.jpg)
(please pardon my poor grammar in earlier post)
I have to admit you've got a point, Bowler. BUT how about painting faux marble and gorgeous interiors? Instead of plain old wood? If there are artists available?
And making lovely gardens with free or easily propagated plants and flowers?
I never said anything about "plain old wood", AND I only used the word "humble" to describe 20 smaller churches that could be built for the price of one big one. Everyone can scratch out the word "humble" and "wood" if they want, if it bothers them. Build it out of cement block, build it out of wood painted like marble, guild it with gold, whatever, I'm strictly talking about 20 small churches spread all over the world versus one church like St. Isidore.
-
It is real easy to want a chuch like St. Isidore, but it's another thing to actually put up ones own money to pay for it.
Of those people who put thumbs down to my idea, how many of you have paid with your own money for a millions of dollar church like a St. Isidore?
-
I never said anything about "plain old wood", AND I only used the word "humble" to describe 20 smaller churches that could be built for the price of one big one. Everyone can scratch out the word "humble" and "wood" if they want, if it bothers them. Build it out of cement block, build it out of wood painted like marble, guild it with gold, whatever, I'm strictly talking about 20 small churches spread all over the world versus one church like St. Isidore.
You're, as has been pointed out to you by others, leading into a false dichotomy. People should not build Churches with the idea of being humble; this in no way takes away from a person or people's humility. They should build the most beautiful Churches they can with the idea of giving Glory to God. If the parishioners at St. Isidore wanted a place signifying their belief that they wanted a home which they saw more befitting the King of Kings, and the newly built St. Isidores was what they could afford, so be it.
You're starting to sound like a Protestant (Look at how much money the Church spent on building extravagant t buildings when there was the poor who could have used it more!). This is what I was speaking of in the other thread on dress- your attitude is Jansenistic (aka Protestant).
Take note: Criticizing the SSPX for the sake of criticizing (which I find you and others doing more often than not) is in no way supportive of the resistance; actually it undermines it as you make us look like foolish imbeciles. You need to stop.
-
Indeed bowler, you sound like a protestant.
I know, I used to be one.
-
Nice Churches are expensive though. I live two blocks from a pretty nice Novus Ordo Church. They are raising money to fix the roof and it is going to cost over one million dollars just to fix the roof.
-
Nice Churches are expensive though. I live two blocks from a pretty nice Novus Ordo Church. They are raising money to fix the roof and it is going to cost over one million dollars just to fix the roof.
Must be big then.
My parish is *the* historical first (non-Mission) church in the region, although rebuilt in the 1860's it is still the oldest structure we are told (nothing still standing is apparently older than 1860's construction?) And is spanish tile roof (more expensive) and is in California (ridiculously expensive labor and materials)
Our re-roof was something like 160K.
-
I never said anything about "plain old wood", AND I only used the word "humble" to describe 20 smaller churches that could be built for the price of one big one. Everyone can scratch out the word "humble" and "wood" if they want, if it bothers them. [/b] Build it out of cement block, build it out of wood painted like marble, guild it with gold, whatever, I'm strictly talking about 20 small churches spread all over the world versus one church like St. Isidore.
You're, as has been pointed out to you by others, leading into a false dichotomy. People should not build Churches with the idea of being humble; this in no way takes away from a person or people's humility. ...
You're starting to sound like a Protestant (Look at how much money the Church spent on building extravagant t buildings when there was the poor who could have used it more!). This is what I was speaking of in the other thread on dress- your attitude is Jansenistic (aka Protestant).
Total Strawman.
-
Indeed bowler, you sound like a protestant.
I know, I used to be one.
No quote from you showing where I sounded like a Protestant.
-
posted in wrong place
-
I never said anything about "plain old wood", AND I only used the word "humble" to describe 20 smaller churches that could be built for the price of one big one. Everyone can scratch out the word "humble" and "wood" if they want, if it bothers them. [/b] Build it out of cement block, build it out of wood painted like marble, guild it with gold, whatever, I'm strictly talking about 20 small churches spread all over the world versus one church like St. Isidore.
You're, as has been pointed out to you by others, leading into a false dichotomy. People should not build Churches with the idea of being humble; this in no way takes away from a person or people's humility. ...
You're starting to sound like a Protestant (Look at how much money the Church spent on building extravagant t buildings when there was the poor who could have used it more!). This is what I was speaking of in the other thread on dress- your attitude is Jansenistic (aka Protestant).
Total Strawman.
Matthew and I are pretty much the same thing (except that Matthew is talking about building two $10,000 chapels instead of one $20,000. While i was talking about building 20 small chapels versus one giant chapel), and yet I don't see you writing the same way to him that you did to me. Is that because he owns Cathinfo?
You detracted twice against my character based on a strawman of your creation, in other words, you created a strawman that you made out to be me, then you detracted twice against that "strawman Bowler", that you invented.
Bowler is trying, but failing, to be a holier than thou person. The nitpicking offered by some here remove credibility from the resistance. I sometimes wonder if people actually think about the things they come up with. Evidently not.
What do you have to say for yourself?
-
Matthew and I are tlaking the same thing, and yet I don't see you writing the same way to him that you did to me. Is that because he owns Cathinfo?
If you knew anything about my history with Matthew, you'd know I have no problem disagreeing with him, and letting him know; I've even been known, I'm ashamed to admit, to be uncharitable with my typing 'tone'. His owning of the forum has no bearing on my opinions.
You detracted twice against my character based on a strawman, in other words you created a strawman that you made out to be me, then you detracted against that strawman me invented false me twice.
What do you have to say for yourself?
Are you always so dramatic about things bowler? For such a rough and tough sounding fellow, you sure seem to get your feelings hurt easily. Reminds me of another emoting man who posts here frequently; you two must share the same temperament... Anyways, if you can't handle it, press the "Hide" button on one of my posts.
I would normally take more time to point out to you your error in this post; but I think you can see the downvotes / upvotes on the OP as evidence that most here disagree with you. I will leave you with this, but I feel it will have no effect in helping you because you are too feminine in your thinking and may be of bad will: contrary to what you may believe in your warped illogical mind, your post in this thread was not the same as what was in Matthews thread ('catacombs').
-
I once had the impression that the SSPX was about survival, humble small wood chapels with a few people trying to just survive the current war against the faith, and that the SSPX priests existed only because of the supplied jurisdiction provided by the faithful. [....] building beautiful marble churches to attract new people is not our job. Our job is keeping the faith, preaching the truth, keeping our families isolated from precisely the type of people who are repulsed by the "humble small wood chapel with a few people trying to just survive the current war against the faith".
I've read all of this thread to date, and I'm amazed at the hostility that's been directed toward 'bowler'.
What is better for the faithful, to build? One St. Isidore like this: [largish basilica style] or 20 small chapels like this spread over the World?
No one has addressed an issue of recurring high cost: Isn't it quite expensive to operate a single huge church having a grand interior featuring vaulted ceilings? Nowadays, visitors and transplants to overly warm places like Florida insist on being pampered by air conditioning. Maintaining comfortable air-conditioned temperatures at the level of its huge floor would guzzle energy--thus money. Never mind that churches were filled in Florida for decades with fan-waving faithful adapted to life without a.c. (even into the Space Age).
This issue occurred to me because the recurring cost of cooling a decommissioned high-ceilinged industrial building (rearranged for offices and rehearsal space) was the primary factor that forced into bankruptcy an opera company in central Florida that'd been established for many decades. They originally thought they'd been very clever & frugal to've obtained, repurposed, and occupied that building.
By contrast, ceilings of ordinary secular-office height would not be out-of-place in a sensible "humble small [...] chapel". That does not mean that its ecclesiastical furnishings should be grimly Protestant, altho' it'd be very prudent in Florida to spend money on insulation that won't visually inspire the faithful. Seems to me that genuine antique Catholic furnishings would be readily available nowadays, as a consequence of the wreckovations and wrecking balls of Novus Ordo bishops whose deeds have earned notoriety for their hostility to the traditional faith.
-
I believe that the people who wrote against my initial posts misunderstood my idea. As the thread developed I hope I answered all of the questions which were:
1) "We prefer a gloriously built large churches like St. Isidore. We should give the best to God".
My answer was that I agree 100%, afterall, who would not? HOWEVER, we do not have the resources, that is the premise of the whole thread. "We" means ALL traditionalists, therefore, if one group has the resources, they still should not build for themselves, a big church, when others around the world can use their assitance to have their own chapels. I think this was simply answered here:
That is a false dichotomy. What would be better is twenty St. Isadore's.
Even better would be 1000 St. Isidores, and every member of Cathinfo a billionaire. However, we have to deal with reality.
2) Someone mentioned that there are not enough priests for all of those smaller churches.
My simple answer was that that was not a reason to build a big church.
3) Someone made a good point in that the fact that big glorious churches attract people who are there for the beauty rather than the faith, is not a reason not to build them. That it is not not our concern what brings a person to our church, but that they are brought, and given a chance to become real Catholics.
My answer is that I can't deny that this is true, however, again, we do not have the resources, that is the premise of the whole thread. "We" means ALL traditionalists, therefore, if one group has the resources, they still should not build for themselves, a big church, when others around the world can use their assitance to have their own chapels. EXAMPLE- I read of one trad Franciscan priest in Florida that by being frugal with the money, was able to loan money from his chapel to three other chapels in Florida, which later became SSPX chapels today. Had he built one oppulent church for himself, there would be no money to loan to help the other chapels be built.
-
There seems to be one factor that has been omitted from this discussion, unless I've missed it: People need the sacraments, especially if they are in mortal sin.
These are not the good old days when there was a parish church nearby for almost everyone and you could certainly contribute all you wanted to yours. Yes, God SHOULD have the most beautiful things imaginable for His dwelling. But His favorite dwelling, as the saints write, is in souls who are in the state of grace. He does not dwell in those who are not--those in mortal sin--and He wants everyone to be in the state of grace so that we can attain eternal salvation and enjoy Heaven with Him. If someone is in mortal sin they are in danger of not only losing God dwelling within but their eternal salvation as well. Our primary purpose on this earth is to give glory to God. The main way to do so is to be in the state of grace; i.e., no mortal sin. Confession is needed for the remission of sin and Communion is needed wherever possible for the graces to remain without mortal sin and fight temptations.
My personal opinion is that this is where true love of neighbor comes in. If we truly care about our neighbor it means we care primarily about their souls, whether we personally know these people or not. The more chapels or at least a place to receive the sacraments that there are, the more places people have to go to confess and make their souls a beautiful dwelling for Almighty God again and receive Him in Communion and be given more grace to remain in the state of grace. Our answer cannot be "It's not my problem" (stating an often-used answer in today's society at large). It IS my problem if we truly want to follow the commandment to love our neighbor -- we must care about their souls and want for them what we want for ourselves, and the needs of the soul take precedence over those of the body, as Christ tells us in the Gospels. We say the Rosary every day for sinners and we ourselves are some of those sinners. Well, we all need places to confess, especially if we are in mortal sin and in danger of losing our souls. (I realize I am repeating myself but THIS is the most important factor of all as I see it.) Many, many people are simply unable to drive a long distance to hear Mass! It has been this way and the situation may become even more grave as time goes on.
It is true that there is a shortage of priests, but perhaps if we had more places to have Mass (even homes, etc.) the people could form a group and pay for a priest to come even once a month, perhaps coordinate one Mass center with another to provide drivers for him and he could go to a few places before returning to KY or wherever, and perhaps the more affluent places could help those more financially strained with having their needs met. The group I belong to has been assisted greatly by an established chapel. No, I will not reveal where I am. But the point is, we have the sacraments whereas without the other group's help, we might not.
We ALL need the sacraments and we ALL need a place to receive them. I feel sure God WILL provide even if we must wait as is the situation in Texas.
We are currently in a time of necessity in the Church. There is a contagious disease (Modernism) that is eating souls alive. We Traditional Catholics have been given the medicine to stay healthy (the Traditional Faith and the sacraments). Let's help one another in this time of need--FOR THE LOVE OF GOD AND NEIGHBOR.
The altar of an unsoiled soul is the most magnificent altar imaginable to God. Our sacrifice is love and adoration. This is above and beyond anything that any human being is capable of producing, buying, building. It is something supernatural. If the place where we have Mass is less than what we desire to have, so be it. We do what we can. God well knows our limitations in this regard. But let us at least be sinless before Him and let us have as many places as are needed to remain so.
-
This topic now seems to be a much better match to the "Catholic Bunker" (or "Resistance Movement" or "Crisis in the Church") category, but I've just gone with the flow, and kept it in "SSPX-Rome Agreement", where 'bowler' originated it.
-------
What is better for the faithful, to build? One [largish basilica style like] St. Isidore [...] or 20 small chapels[....] spread over the World?
I previously expressed my concerns, in this same topic, on an issue of recurring cost (Apr 10, 2013, 1:32 am, above).
Lately, someone else (who, like me, is a relative newcomer here) raised the issue of continued availability of the sacraments:
People need the sacraments, especially if they are in mortal sin. These are not the good old days when there was a parish church nearby for almost everyone [....] The more chapels or at least a place to receive the sacraments that there are, the more places people have [available] to go to confess and make their souls a beautiful dwelling for Almighty God again and receive Him in Communion and be given more grace to remain in the state of grace.
Both sensibly point to solutions in the same direction as for another important issue--a strategic issue--not previously addressed:
I write this with trepidation, because I'm unsure whether a majority of CathInfo members believe that their lives will be at risk for practicing traditional Catholicism in the not-too-distant future. But for those who do believe that, it seems logical to me that in a time of renewed persecution, large attention-getting churches ought to be avoided as sites of increased risk, not only because they are highly conspicuous, but also because reliance by the faithful on a single site simplifies the task of persecution.
Far better to have more and less conspicuous refuges, to maximize the opportunities to receive the sacraments, while striving to survive as traditional Catholics in such a future.
In the U.S.A., it's becoming increasingly difficult to avoid the conclusion that the U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security and its Transportation Security Administration are being trained & equipped to serve as federal agents of a kind of repression that was nearly unanimously dismissed at the end of the 20th Century: "it could never happen here". Alas, news of highway check-point road-blocks set up by TSA far from our international borders, makes it worth considering whether travel to a traditional Mass in the future, even across county lines, might become an ordeal without government authorization.
A U.S. citizen no longer needs to be especially cynical to imagine that enforcement of government-imposed restrictions on personal travel, especially in a tourism-intensive state like Florida, would be highly unlikely to have anything legitimate to do with "national security", except as a flimsy pretext for violating the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Hostility or repression that might be focused on future refuges for the Faith might make it extremely desirable to furnish them with nonsacramental objects that are easily set up (ponere|facere), are stout during use, are resilient during transportation, and are easily broken down (movere) for evacuation (as for a M.A.S.H. or traveling circus).
The currently depressed market in U.S. commercial real estate, apparent from the abundance of empty storefronts--from sole-proprietor strip-mall niches to major retail-chain stores--seems to present opportunities for arranging to multiply the refuges now available to the Faith. I'll have to leave details as an exercise for someone who has demonstrable financial expertise, something I demonstrably do not possess.
The physical beauty that distinguishes the Catholic faith from the Protestant could still be in evidence, albeit limited, for practical reasons, to those physical objects that are easily portable--or natural objects reasonably expendable.
-
This topic now seems to be a much better match to the "Catholic Bunker" (or "Resistance Movement" or "Crisis in the Church") category, but I've just gone with the flow, and kept it in "SSPX-Rome Agreement", where 'bowler' originated it.
-------
What is better for the faithful, to build? One [largish basilica style like] St. Isidore [...] or 20 small chapels[....] spread over the World?
I previously expressed my concerns, in this same topic, on an issue of recurring cost (Apr 10, 2013, 1:32 am, above).
Lately, someone else (who, like me, is a relative newcomer here) raised the issue of continued availability of the sacraments:
People need the sacraments, especially if they are in mortal sin. These are not the good old days when there was a parish church nearby for almost everyone [....] The more chapels or at least a place to receive the sacraments that there are, the more places people have [available] to go to confess and make their souls a beautiful dwelling for Almighty God again and receive Him in Communion and be given more grace to remain in the state of grace.
Both sensibly point to solutions in the same direction as for another important issue--a strategic issue--not previously addressed:
I write this with trepidation, because I'm unsure whether a majority of CathInfo members believe that their lives will be at risk for practicing traditional Catholicism in the not-too-distant future. But for those who do believe that, it seems logical to me that in a time of renewed persecution, large attention-getting churches ought to be avoided as sites of increased risk, not only because they are highly conspicuous, but also because reliance by the faithful on a single site simplifies the task of persecution.
Far better to have more and less conspicuous refuges, to maximize the opportunities to receive the sacraments, while striving to survive as traditional Catholics in such a future.
In the U.S.A., it's becoming increasingly difficult to avoid the conclusion that the U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security and its Transportation Security Administration are being trained & equipped to serve as federal agents of a kind of repression that was nearly unanimously dismissed at the end of the 20th Century: "it could never happen here". Alas, news of highway check-point road-blocks set up by TSA far from our international borders, makes it worth considering whether travel to a traditional Mass in the future, even across county lines, might become an ordeal without government authorization.
A U.S. citizen no longer needs to be especially cynical to imagine that enforcement of government-imposed restrictions on personal travel, especially in a tourism-intensive state like Florida, would be highly unlikely to have anything legitimate to do with "national security", except as a flimsy pretext for violating the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Hostility or repression that might be focused on future refuges for the Faith might make it extremely desirable to furnish them with nonsacramental objects that are easily set up (ponere|facere), are stout during use, are resilient during transportation, and are easily broken down (movere) for evacuation (as for a M.A.S.H. or traveling circus).
The currently depressed market in U.S. commercial real estate, apparent from the abundance of empty storefronts--from sole-proprietor strip-mall niches to major retail-chain stores--seems to present opportunities for arranging to multiply the refuges now available to the Faith. I'll have to leave details as an exercise for someone who has demonstrable financial expertise, something I demonstrably do not possess.
The physical beauty that distinguishes the Catholic faith from the Protestant could still be in evidence, albeit limited, for practical reasons, to those physical objects that are easily portable--or natural objects reasonably expendable.
-
[Duplicate posting on disconcertingly sluggish server deleted by author on own initiative.]
-
Nice Churches are expensive though. I live two blocks from a pretty nice Novus Ordo Church. They are raising money to fix the roof and it is going to cost over one million dollars just to fix the roof.
I have to correct this. I found out that the amount over one million dollars is not just for the roof to be fixed, but also for some other improvements as well. Sorry.
-
Nice Churches are expensive though. I live two blocks from a pretty nice Novus Ordo Church. They are raising money to fix the roof [....]
I found out that the amount over one million dollars is not just for the roof to be fixed, but also for some other improvements as well.
Only "one million dollars"? They obviously just weren't thinking big enough.
My region's Novus Ordo cathedral, a largish basilica-style church in some combination of concrete & stucco, is only 61 years old, having been completed on Jan. 20, 1952. Its bishop: Thomas "Stained Glass" Wenski, was able to leverage persistent 21st-century leaks in its tile roof, into a ten million dollar renovation. He brazenly began the fund-raising campaign as the Florida real-estate market, on which Florida's economy is heavily dependent, and in which many short-sighted people eagerly "invested" (it's Florida!--how could you possibly lose?), began to show convincing signs of screeching to a halt--that being a prelude to its later crumbling.
"This renovation wasn't undertaken because God needed it, but because God's people needed it", Wenski claimed during its rededication on (Sat.) Nov. 20, 2010. Never mind that what many of "God's people" in Florida really needed financially, especially many senior citizens, is restoration of the money they lost from their failed "risk-free" real-estate "investments" (quite a few of them having been victimized by outright fraud).