Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit!
You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language.
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
The Tablet
Topic Started: Saturday, 6. October 2007, 01:42 (1,090 Views)
Gerard

Clare,

With that I certainly do agree.

I thought about posting something similar (0050s) but preferred my light hearted smart alec remark. If we are being serious then I go with the spirit of your remark.
However, 0050s would hit the mark better - post the Resurrection and what it all meant.

Gerry

PS

No vestments (to link to another thread)
and no Latin either ;)
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Gerard
Oct 24 2007, 07:30 AM
Clare,

With that I certainly do agree.

I thought about posting something similar (0050s) but preferred my light hearted smart alec remark. If we are being serious then I go with the spirit of your remark.
However, 0050s would hit the mark better - post the Resurrection and what it all meant.

Gerry

PS

No vestments (to link to another thread)
and no Latin either ;)

0030s was when Our Lord Himself was preaching!

How do you know there weren't vestments?

And chances are there was a non-vernacular liturgical language.

The concepts of vestments and non-vernacular worship would not have been alien to Jewish converts.

:)


S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

Quote:
 
How do you know there weren't vestments?


Says so in "The catholic Encyclopedia" - so it must be true.

Quote:
 
And chances are there was a non-vernacular liturgical language
.

Possible but most unlikely. Certainly Hebrew was the Jewish sacral language but I doubt Jesus spoke anything other than Aramaic at the last Supper. I also very much doubt that those gentile converts of Paul spoke anything other than Greek or the vernacular during their Agape meal.

Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Gerard
Oct 24 2007, 01:46 PM
Quote:
 
How do you know there weren't vestments?


Says so in "The catholic Encyclopedia" - so it must be true.

Where?

Quote:
 
Quote:
 
And chances are there was a non-vernacular liturgical language
.

Possible but most unlikely. Certainly Hebrew was the Jewish sacral language but I doubt Jesus spoke anything other than Aramaic at the last Supper. I also very much doubt that those gentile converts of Paul spoke anything other than Greek or the vernacular during their Agape meal.

I think it's almost certain that the Last Supper was in Hebrew. And that Our Lord wore vestments wouldn't surprise me either.

And what has the Agape meal got to do with it?

Clare.
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
It is understandable that threads digress a little.

There is obviously interest in vestments, so I have copied and pasted the comments about vestments from two new topics, onto the Vestment thread, so we have them all together under one umbrella, for discussion.

Vestment postings on Vestment thread please. It would be best to keep this for discussions about The Tablet in general, and Tablet content.

Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Brilliant article by Sir Stephen Wall in today's Tablet. This ex Prime Ministerial advisor and advisor to Carinal O'Connor-Murphy spells out so clearly what we shoud be thinking as modern Catholics . In doing so he criticises the language used by the Church in recent statements, the remoteness of the Vatican from everyday life and indeed the fripperies and vanities surrounding the official Church. However, all this is framed in the context of a loyal Catholic with a life-long devotion to Catholicism but with a wish to see an end to our obsession with "form" and a return to basics.

All the above is my own, inadequate, summary, and tomorrow I shall get a proper link for those interested. Suffice to say for the moment that my heart soared when I read this counter-blast to the narrow "catholic" puritanism that so often overshadows the Catholic message today.

John
Quote Post Goto Top
 
pete

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/ukcorresponde...tephen-wall.htm

Is this what you are talking about John?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
pete

Quote:
 
According to Wall – formerly Tony Blair’s chief adviser on Europe – the Vatican is wrong to oppose gay adoption and IVF; it is “using, or abusing, its own moral absolutism to deny to people whose way of life it stigmatises the civil rights that a more generous state recognises as basic to their status as citizens”.


What gay people do with their own lives is their business. Where other people are concerned, that's a different matter. Gay adoption I find this abhorrent, if only for the child's sake. Children should be bought up in a good stable heterosexual relationship with a mother and a father. The first thing that springs to mind is the ridicule that child will receive when he/she starts school. Secondly, it's a fact same sex relationships are know to be more dysfunctional. Thirdly and most importantly of all, where do we draw the line?. Do we start legalising murder and paedophilia?, it's only a few years ago that to have same sex was a criminal offence, now it's legal, I feel it's being pushed on us so much it will soon become compulsory. Watch any soap opera and you will see what I mean, men and men, women and women, when will they bring in the animals?
God bless
Pete
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
James
James
John,

Here I am not quite on your wavelength.

I am not up for separation between Vatican and modern thinking or concepts.

I do agree some ways of putting things across should be modernised - without taking away from the core message - if you know what I mean.

So after that, John, what are you saying , but then I have just had a few glasses of the old vino and my judgement may be clouded.

Spelling OK - so I am not too bad :(

As always.

James (hic.)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
James
Dec 1 2007, 03:34 PM
John,

Here I am not quite on your wavelength.

I am not up for separation between Vatican and modern thinking or concepts.

Not all modern thinking and concepts are of God, so we need to exercise caution and judgement.

Quote:
 
Spelling OK - so I am not too bad
James, there is nothing wrong with your spelling. Have a GCSE certificate.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quicunque vult

What is so brilliant about this article that is attacking Catholic teaching? Just to pick up one point, the suggestion that Catholics who loyally adhere to the teaching on birth control bring unloved children into the world is absolutely disgraceful. How can any Christian support the planned parentage by artificial means of children without fathers? Even in wholly secular terms, this is crazy, given the social breakdown attendant on the collapse of family life and in particular the absence of father figures.

It is absolutely deplorable that the Tablet, allegedly a Catholic paper, should continually attack the Church and its teaching. The Editor should consider her position.

QV
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Quicunque vult
Dec 1 2007, 05:09 PM


It is absolutely deplorable that the Tablet, allegedly a Catholic paper, should continually attack the Church and its teaching. The Editor should consider her position.

QV

The problem is, any person can own a newspaper and call it Catholic. The hierarchy have no control over The Tablet because it is privately owned. For all I know, the editor could be be part owner.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Hopefully, this should be a direct link to the article
http://www.thetablet.co.uk/articles/10689/

Damian Thompson's blog,per Pete's link above, makes a much more interesting read. I was somewhat disconcerted to read
Quote:
 
Sir Stephen Wall, the senior diplomat who served as the Cardinal’s right-hand man from 2004-5, has written a blistering attack on recent Catholic moral teaching in the Tablet, a stridently Left-wing magazine regarded as the unofficial voice of the Bishops’ Conference.


Is the Pill regarded as the unofficial voice of the Bishops' Conference? I do hope not.

KatyA
Quote Post Goto Top
 
PJD

Having gone into the blog provided by Pete.......

Sir Stephen Wall’s comments are a very good example of the lack of intellectualism Duffy once referred to.

I don’t need to say anymore.

PJD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

The Tablet "stridently left wing"!!. As if. If only. Make syou wonder how far out ouf sight of genghis Khan old Damian must be if he regards the immaculately middle-class, middle road old Tablet as such

John
Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Catholic Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply