100 days. A silly wishlist.
#31
I don't know how the Pope would enforce this but no Holy Communion distributed in any Church until everyone goes to confession. Because in most NO Churches...either there are a lot of Saints that never commit any mortal sins or there are a lot of people that are not properly disposed to receive Holy Communion.

Reply
#32
(03-06-2013, 01:52 PM)Petertherock Wrote: I don't know how the Pope would enforce this but no Holy Communion distributed in any Church until everyone goes to confession. Because in most NO Churches...either there are a lot of Saints that never commit any mortal sins or there are a lot of people that are not properly disposed to receive Holy Communion.

How would it be determined that everyone has gone to confession? 

ETA:  Oh, sorry.  I did not properly read your post.  I now see where you said you are unsure of how it would be implemented. 
Reply
#33
Quote:That sounds like a very doable and good solution. Fr. Gruner are you reading this ?

It does sound awfully reasonable.  It may be time to start talking this up as a real suggestion.  I personally do not have a long history of involvement in this issue, so I consider myself something of an outsider on it, and this strikes me as a very good thing that should offend no one, and if handled properly, could be a nice event that would appear as a mere outpouring of global concern. 
Reply
#34
(03-06-2013, 01:52 PM)Petertherock Wrote: I don't know how the Pope would enforce this but no Holy Communion distributed in any Church until everyone goes to confession. Because in most NO Churches...either there are a lot of Saints that never commit any mortal sins or there are a lot of people that are not properly disposed to receive Holy Communion.
While in theory I totally understand and am quite sympathetic to this, it would require a wholesale uprooting of how the West has dealt with publicly administrating the Sacrament of Holy Communion. For a loonnngg time (i.e. way before VII), Canon Law and the established practice of the Church only provided for the refusal of Communion to a specific class of persons: those who obstinately persevere in manifest grave sin.

Thus, four conditions:

1. obstinate
2. persevere
3. manifest
4. grave

To put into plain English, a person must be aware that they are sinning and choose to continue to do so, it must be a situation which is publicly known (canonists differ on how many persons must be aware, but six is common), and it must be grave matter. Thus, I think this ought to apply to many more persons than it has been applied to, but it is still not the same thing as the practice in many Eastern Churches (and some trad chapels, I hear) of the priest requiring that he know the communicant/their situation.
Reply
#35
Well if you think they don't understand, I'd teach them. No communion until I preach a refresher course on sins, especially the ones no one mentions like the pill. After a month or two the Church would be half empty, but we could build from there with serious minded Catholics.

tim
Reply
#36
Here are some things I would love to see.

1. His Holiness will assume the regnal name of Gregory XVII.
2. The 1962 Calendar is updated with new feast days without all the moving about of traditional feasts, and imposed on the Ordinary Form, thus getting rid of this "Ordinary Time" nonsense, and the implementation of the '65 missal as the Ordinary Form.
3.This bit's the most complicated.  The establishment of a new sui iuris Church in the west.  This would go one of two ways.  The Latin Church will have the Extraordinary Form as its Ordinary Form and the '65 Missal will be known as the Pauline Rite and the '62 Missal will be either the Roman or Gregorian Rite as one's taste dictates.  A new sui iuris Church called the Occidental Church will have the Pauline Missal of '65 as its Rite of the Mass and I suspect that the vast majority of Western Catholics would elect to come under this particular Church.  Thus leaving the original Latin Church for those that are attached to the traditional liturgy, etc.  This means that Latin will appropriately remain firmly entrenched in the Latin Church with a wide vernacular usage available in the Occidental Church.  Or perhaps it would work the other way.  A new sui iuris Church is erected for traditionalists.  Western Catholics are given the opportunity whether they wish to elect to join in it and leave the Latin Church.  We would have our own canon law, etc.  In effect we wouldn't be entirely different from our western brothers and sisters.  We would just be free from the interference of them.
4. If #3 would be impossible then I would see established the personal ordinariate of Saint Gregory the Great for traditionalist Catholics, granting anyone the right to elect themselves into belonging to it, and the Extraordinary Form will be its ordinary form, etc.  The '65 Missal is still the Ordinary Form for the wider Latin Church.  However the Calendars are still aligned as per #2 and the Liturgy of the Hours are suppressed.  The Roman Breviary of 1962 is imposed on the clergy.  An authorised translation of the 1962 breviary is given strictly for use by the laity to participate in the public prayer of the Church at home when they are saying it alone.  But the Latin will be strongly encouraged.  All public or communical recitation of the Divine Office must without exception be in Latin.  And henceforth all priests are commanded on Sundays and major Feasts to publicly recite Vespers in their Churches.  Cathedrals will be required to have all of the Hours sang publicly.  Priests may, if they have good reason such as a very poor Latin, be dispensed from the obligation to recite the breviary in Latin whilst on their own and may substitute it for the approved vernacular translation.  However this dispensation is not perpetual.  If it is a very poor Latin comprehension then they must learn Latin, etc.
5. The Use of Sarum is restored to ordinary usage throughout the British Isles.
6. The Minor Orders are restored and not solely to the seminaries but throughout the Latin Church.
7. Clarifying documents on Vatican II in light of tradition.
8. Saint Louis de Montfort elevated as a Doctor of the Church.
9. Our Lady as Mediatrix of All Graces and Co-Redemptrix dogmatically defined.
10. Complete and detailed report on the sexual abuse scandal, names, punishments, etc.  Secular law officials given full cooperation and access where possible.
11. Visitation to each and every community of Religious and review of their standing and whether they need suppressed, etc.
12. Reform of Catholic education establishments to make sure that they are in line with the Catholic Church's teachings.
13. Same as #12 except with Hospitals.
14. Disestablishment of the national Bishop Conferences.

I'll think of some more later..
Reply
#37
(03-06-2013, 01:02 AM)mikemac Wrote:
(03-06-2013, 12:48 AM)DoktorDespot Wrote:
(03-06-2013, 12:42 AM)MRose Wrote:
(03-06-2013, 12:25 AM)DoktorDespot Wrote: Thus Russia would be consecrated by name, but while remaining sensitive to political considerations etc.

Maybe, but -

dontcha think that is the heart of the bloody problem, being "sensitive to political considerations" more than being "sensitive" to the command of the Mother of God?

I certainly agree - I ways just wondering whether that would fulfill her command - if it would make the consecration more likely then wouldn't that be a good thing.

You would think that would work.  But they should just do it anyways, without beating around the bush.

I think the bigger problem would be gathering the support of all the bishops.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)