The cross will be removed and the background where it once hung will be painted with kikochumenary pictures. The cross will be set aside and the kikochumenary cross will be used and placed on the side.
You forgot to mentioned that the statues on the wall at the Chapel will be taken down and the kikochumenary mural will appear. It's the sign of the time?
What a horrible cheap image on the Ambo. Whoever is doing the interior design, has no taste, no class, no style. Cheap really beyond words. They may have lots of money, but no taste it really is tragic.
How disappointing for the families that broke their backs to build this chapel. Slowly, not all at once...remove a little here and a little there. At least the Tabernacle is still there.
The banner on the left is the typical "protestant cross": a cross with a sheet hanging around it to show their belief that Christ is no longer on the cross. Catholics believe otherwise which is why we use the crucifix, not just the cross.
Rebuttal here..we do an early morning of the stations of the cross on Good Friday at the Immaculate Heart of Mary Church in Toto. A large wooden cross is carried by the parishioners. In the end we erect the cross at the side of the church and place a purple clothe over it. Are you saying that Pale' Mike Crisostomo is following a Protestant belief?
Veiling in purple, the crucifix, and in fact all religious images during Lent is a Catholic custom. It used to be for the whole of Lent but now is only required for the last two week. The "protestant cross" is NOT veiled. The cross is fully visible with a white sheet (representing the burial cloth) left hanging on it. It's a nice image, and certainly a reminder of the resurrection, and maybe nice to have as as banner during the Easter season. But this is Lent. However, nothing the neocats do is by accident. Everything, everything is planned and carefully choreographed and deliberate. And the introduction of certain visuals is designed to pave the way for the theology they contain. The Church has always done this. And Kiko is wise to do it too. It works. Too bad it is the wrong theology.
Sorry wrong choice of words. We drape the ccross as shown on the banner at IHOM Toto
Draping the cross is not the problem (though Protestants would never drape it in purple). Replacing the crucifix with an empty cross where a crucifix is required (as in a Catholic Church) is the problem. So long as the Toto church has a primary crucifix in the sanctuary, and preferably at its focal point, then the requirement is fulfilled. Also, the Stations is considered a devotion not a liturgical act, thus it's practice isn't regulated other than what the the pastor may require if he is participating with a group.
Why would anyone with even a basic understanding even want to remove a crucifix from a central place in a church. Even in our catholic homes the crucifix has a central place to be daily seen by a family. A man was blessed with great wealth, a great collection of art, but towards the end of his life he looked to the wall and said, the greatest beauty, the greatest art, is the crucifix .
The Crucifix has not been removed…yet. In time it will be, as will be the altar and the pews. One has only to look at the seminary chapel to see how they wish to transform their churches. And the seminary chapel is but a minor replica of the their mother church, the Domus Galilee in Israel. Google and take a look. But as I've mentioned more than once on this blog, the Neocatechumenal Way is just the logical consequence of what the post-Vatican II church already did to itself in the so-called "spirit of Vatican II."Crucifixes were removed from many churches as early as the 70's and replaced with empty crosses or at best, the risen Jesus. Under John Paul II the crucifix was mandated in the revised GIRM. Communion in the hand, Saturday night Masses, the move away from the altar to a table, the idea of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass giving way to the "Celebration of the Eucharist", the elimination of the sanctuary and the relocation of the "table" increasingly towards the center of the church (see St. Jude's), the ever present guitars, the bongos, so-called liturgical dance, and the aforementioned disappearance of the Crucifix, all of these are standard neo practices that began as exceptions. outright abuses, or simple naiveté amongst us "regular" Catholics. Kiko has just capitalized on this post-Vatican II penchant to manufacture liturgy to our liking, and now we whine.Actually I don't whine. I've shouted about these things for 35 years. Just as vociferously as I have asked to "see the document" from the neocats, I have asked the same of our "regular" clergy for the liberties they have taken, or allowed to be taken, for decades. I would go so far as to say that Kiko and the Neocats are God's judgment on a church gone wild with abuses of every kind. Sadly the "liturgical books" became just a list of suggestions long before Kiko.
If it is abuse, blame the Pope for allowing it to happen, it seems you have no trust in them. Why is that. Why not question Rome? You state it's not only locally but nationally, so if it is, ask Rome. Ask Rome.
Actually the bishop is considered the competent authority in local liturgical matters. When Rome gives a directive or establishes a norm they expect the bishops to see to it. And as you can see I have asked the bishop many things, many times. Silence, silence, silence.
Do you think that the sanctuary in Agat church will become Neo style? I know they have a certain style of setting up their sanctuary.
Actually Kiko eschews the idea of a sanctuary as much as he does an altar. The Agat church doesn't lend itself well to the neo-square, but it doesn't matter. The parish will be broken up in to small communities where the "eucharist" will be offered in homes. The church will be used only for special occasions, that is until they tear it down like they are going to do with Santa Rita.
True what Tim is saying about all these abuses. They began in the 1970s with the removal of altar rails. It was a small thing but slowly we lost interior designs of churches which led us through beauty to the sacred. Churches were removed of art and style, the tabernacle went to a side room, the guitars began playing, the pipe organ was left to wither out, the priest bagan to wear his stole over the vestment, slowly we lost a sense of the sacred. The land was fertile for kiko to begin building his church within the structure leading to greater confusion. We need to return to the sacred tradition, to the holy sacrifice of the mass, this I find is the answer for the souls thirst for the spiritual life, it is the church, the spirituality I am now proclaiming on Guam. We are young people, we are not neo,we are not anti archbishop, but we know where we stand, the church we live and proclaim, and we follow documents, we follow teaching, we have fun, we dance, we sing, but we are loyal to tradition. We do need need neo, we do not need the archbishop, we follow the pope. We are a part of the be evangelization.
This is not about any update on the renovations but since it concerns OLMC church I decided to post it here.Father Alberto is now pastor and it seems he carries his traditions wherever he goes. Why does he not allow funerals on Saturdays? He seemed to have done the same thing in Barrigada so I was told. I think there should be a consistency in all parishes.1. If one pastor does not allow Saturday funerals, then all parishes should abolish it.2. If on pastor does not allow a eulogy to be said, then all parishes should abolish it.3. If one pastor does not allow baskets as part of the funeral services, then all parishes should abolish it.4. If one pastor says, no, follow the daily mass schedule, then all pastors should abide by it.Too many differences of rules in the parishes. You all need to be consistent.
I attended mass at Mt. Carmel Church in Agat yesterday. I saw the priest chair with two other chairs in front of the tabernacle. I thought that was very odd. What does the church law say about that? I will be awaiting your comment. Thanks
If the tabernacle is still in the center behind the altar then the seating arrangement you describe is not allowed. Chances are if the tabernacle has not yet been moved, it soon will be. Here is the relevant section from the GIRM:The Chair for the Priest Celebrant and Other Seats310. The chair of the priest celebrant must signify his office of presiding over the gathering and of directing the prayer. Thus the best place for the chair is in a position facing the people at the head of the sanctuary, unless the design of the building or other circumstances impede this: for example, if the great distance would interfere with communication between the priest and the gathered assembly, or if the tabernacle is in the center behind the altar. Any appearance of a throne, however, is to be avoided. It is appropriate that, before being put into liturgical use, the chair be blessed according to the rite described in the Roman Ritual.Several years ago the tabernacle was stationed an a side altar. It was rarely reverenced. People entered and left through the door in front of the tabernacle without so much as a bow let only a genuflection. It was later moved to the center behind the altar which is the most noble place in the church and most appropriate for the reservation of the blessed sacrament, except in cases where a church, like a cathedral, is often visited by tourists.
The tabernacle is still in the center behind the altar. The priest chair has been removed and placed in front of the tabernacle. The priest announce in his homily that he placed the chairs so that he can see the people.
He will soon move the tabernacle. The place will become a neo temple sooner or later. Unfortunately many non-neo churches for years, including Agat, as described above, placed the tabernacle in a less than noble place and where it was rarely visited or reverenced. As mentioned. Much of what the neo does is just the next step of what we have already allowed. Pastors can restore the church by restoring the sense of the sacred. It's up to them.
He is the priest -shouldn't he know that already. The three chairs appear to look like a throne. When you view it front the pew, the chair is very distracting. It just seem right at all.
Pls. look into this! This arrangement does not show reverence to our Lord. I will not be surprise if there are many concern parishioners.
I am so glad this concern came up. It is true! Penny
In my experience, I have found that many good Catholics have no clue that there are liturgical guidelines that need to be followed. They might see something that doesn't look right, but rather then question, would just assume it's okay. May I suggest that those concerned parishioners not keep quiet but instead, approach the pastor with their concerns. At the very least, this will put the pastor on notice that there are parishioners there who do know what the Church teaches and will not tolerate liturgical abuses occurring in their parish church.
To find the answer to anything relative to the liturgy just google GENERAL INSTRUCTION OF THE ROMAN MISSAL. The one at VATICAN.VA is easiest to use. Just press Control + F and type in the word you are looking for.
I will say this in a half way defense of the clergy. The mix up following the move to an anthropocentric liturgy (facing the people), has left in its wake a slew of problems, including where to put the priest and where to put the tabernacle as well as a long list of other problems. On the one hand Rome wants the priest in a place of prominence, and on the other wants the tabernacle to have the same, but does not want either to be in the same place. I'll address this more in detail later.
I agree with you that any concerns in which the General Instructions of the Roman Missal is not being followed then it should be brought up to the priest. It is quite obvious in the case of Mt. Carmel Church. This priest came from St. Vicente Church in Barrigada. Did you see the changes to that church? Very disturbing I must say.
I wouldn't be surprise at all if this issue has been brought up to the pastor by parishioners. We will have to wait and see whether concerns will make a difference.
I actually read Chapter 5 No. 310 of the General Instructions of the Roman Missal. It specifically states that in any case, no appearance of a throne IS TO BE AVOIDED. The throne is the tabernacle. The altar is the focus in mass as it is where the consecration takes place and is the table of sacrifice. Therefore, we shouldn't treat the tabernacle less important. I can imagine how distracting it would be to see the priest directly in front of the tabernacle facing the congregation and his back on the tabernacle.
They have these handmade thrones in the chapel of RMS. I think it is some kind of biblical symbolism which I have forgotten. Doubt it means seminarians sitting on thrones. Maybe one of RMS can explain. I know lots of people didn't like the sound of it. Bad enough living in a palace. But sittling on thrones?? Please explain, someone. Thank you.
Symbolic of the throne of David. That is why they dance around the altar. David danced around the Arc of the Covenant.
Thank you for explanation. Why are seminarians sitting on the throne of David.? Is it because we are a royal people?
“The real crisis of the Church is anthropocentrism, forgetting the Christocentrism.” It comes “when we place ourselves, including the priests, at the centre and when God is put in the corner and this is happening also materially.”“Our first duty as human beings is to adore God, not us, but Him. Unfortunately, the liturgical practice of the last 40 years has been very anthropocentric,” he said.Bishop Athanasius Schneider, auxiliary bishop of Astana in Kazakhstanhttp://www.lifesitenews.com/news/bishop-schneider-church-faces-great-crisis-as-shes-tempted-to-conform-to-th
GIRM not important only a casual guide like a tourist guide book.
At least according to the Kiko's
Comments like this make Junglewatch great entertainment!! "like a tourist guidebook" ROFL
NO, According to the VATICANII not Tim ROHR's, not TLM
Thanks for addressing this issue in detail. I think it should be stand alone topic. Penny
Boring in the Jungle today. Wandered over to Diana's blog. She has the NEO TOP TEN songs going on. All her favorites. Stop in the name of love! My fav. Just stop, Diana
I am surprised she hasn't posted the Archbishop's favorite song by the Beatles "Let it Be"!
Archbishop told me his favorite is 'I'm leaving on a jet plane, don't know when I'll be back again". Oh, guess I don't know him THAT well.
Today is just not my day. Diana said 'certain songs in your community cannot be sung yet, until you reach a certain step" and you might have to repeat the step : ((( I'm never gonna get to sing the top ten at the rate I'm going. Just at home playing my tambourine alone. I think I'm being bullied~that's not right.
Anon 6:43 PM. Better get permission! Tambourine and guitar playing is only allowed at a certain step too. You are defying the statues! May as well borrow someone's belambentuyan to play! No need to go through steps to play the indeginous instrument!
Well that is a disappointment. I bought the tambourine. Guess I'll just put it under my bed until I get to that step. Joy!
Thought it over. I'm not being bullied by Diana. I'm being persecuted. That's great for the step I'm on, isn't it?? Joy!
In this case, is it the spirit of the law or the letter of the law or both? Penny
Does the Archbishop have to give a directive as to where the priest sits on the sanctuary or is it up to each individual priest ? Just curious.