My Photo

Insight Scoop

Catholic World News Top Headlines (

The Curt Jester


Poor Box

Render Unto Us

Tip Jar
Blog powered by Typepad

« Catholics Come Home | Main | Thy Brother's Blood Crieth »

Tuesday, July 15, 2008



Freakish! Why should this be displayed during the visit of the Holy Father? What spiritual growth could possibly come from viewing this? It seems in many areas, nothing but an entertainment show, and it probably could be said that if the WYD continued every year hereafter, it would become more and more unholy. I wish it were not true.


As long as this was at an "opening ceremony" and not a Mass then I'm fine with it. Really, what's the big deal? Part of WYD is about finding the joy and celebration that we can share with our fellow Catholics. If this helps spread the joy- more of it. What does trouble me is when I see puppets and dancers showing up at Mass...

Dan Hunter

This crap has been condemned, repeatedly by Pontiff after Pontiff in encyclical after encyclical.
"Pascendi Dominici Gregis"
"Mediator Dei"
"Lamentabili Sane"
As well as in many of the writings of Jozeph Cardinal Ratzinger and many other bishops.


The problem is that this type of entertainment or concert atmosphere at World Youth Day may be the only exposure that some young people have to Catholicism.

It's a good thing for Catholics to be able to celebrate together and to share the richness of the many cultures in which the Catholic faith lives and is expressed. But this is not an appropriate preparation for participating in the Mass. If this sort of feel good, exciting experience is allowed to become the central focus, then how will these young people persevere under persecution? There has to be something deeper, and young people need to experience reverence. I fear that's not happening.


You can read this article and see that the Pope is a better sport than some of the fuddy-duddies here:

Good heavens, lighten up a little.


It looks like the Pope is less of a fuddy-duddy than some of the folks who are making much ado about very little. Read here:

Good grief, lighten up a little.


Uhh...Maybe it's just that my eyesight is going, but just what am I looking at here?


My question, as well, JMC, but you admitted to it first! My eyesight IS going and I do not know what we're looking at. A few guys in native costume tossing leafy Frisbees was my guess. What does whatever it has have to do with World Youth Day, even in the sense of entertainment?


It's simple. Abrogate the Novus Ordo.



Well, one thing is certain; it does co-incide with many many novus ordo masses, "Beach masses, teddy bear masses, clown masses, magic masses, bingo masses, halloween masses, puppet masses,gymnastic masses, animal masses...yep, so what's the big deal, their only going along with many a theme for the novus ordo modern masses. Huh, maybe, we just need to "get with it?"

Greg Mont

Sure! All this has NO Meaning what so ever! The EWTN commentator mentioned it was some kind of "purifacation of the land" rite. Why are the last two Popes constantly having Pagans performing in their mists? Are we being taught something? Why do our Bishops and laity restrict Latin Tradition and then are so welcoming to Pagan Tradition? Wasn't Latin Tradition OUR tradition? We've slowly given up our faith to blend in with the new global world religion claiming that that old stuff is irrelevant and bias. To whom? Why not greet the Pope with a Marian Procession? It’s too Catholic maybe? Even though we don’t stop being Catholic as a group, a subconscious understanding of respect is formed that leads the ignorant to believe that pagans don’t worship devils, but the same God. Why is Rome going this direction? Paganism mixed with Catholic belief occurs in our face and we are made to feel ridiculous and judgmental if we cringe that something heretical is occurring to the True Catholic Faith. What's the True Catholic Faith anyway? they say.... look at the new one! Most WYD youth are painted a bias version of the True Faith and just get the new one that caters to emotion and understanding each other. I disagree with your suggestion that the Pope has to tolerate this: His planners approved of this. And if Rome constantly walks into these abominations that create the impression that the Pope endorses their gods, then our humble Popes never seem to learn their lesson because that’s the message. Face it - the new Catholic Faith is a new religion that would make any new-ager feel confident that a generation or two more of this and the Catholic faith WILL be the convergence of all world religions. You might read about this from Pope Benedict himself, unfortunately as a form of endorsement, in his Theological Highlights of Vatican II Council, 1966 pg 61, 68.



I think you are over-reacting on this. Catholic tradition going back to Roman times is full of examples of the Church co-opting what are ostensibly "pagan" things. Christmas was chosen to co-incide with the Roman Saturnalia. The term "Easter" has pagan roots. If you take this aversion to its logical extreme, you would have to ban bunnies and eggs from Easter, the Leprechaun from Notre Dame and the Norse Kris Kringle from Christmas.

As Colonel Henry Blake used to say to Major Frank Burns on the TV version of M*A*S*H, "Lighten up, Frank."

Greg Mont


There is a difference between the examples you site, adaptations separated from the pagan use and into Catholic use, and what I remarked about. The last three decades have shown both in Papal writing and often showing up at Papal events, an acceptance of pagan religions as they are, not to be converted, but converged into a Catholic event. Perhaps you’re not aware of this. This new understanding is mentioned in Cardinal Ratzinger’s book (see my prior post): “A basic unity of Churches that remain Churches, yet become one church – must replace the idea of conversion.” If you’ve only experienced the faith since the 1960’s, like myself, then we assume it is Catholic teaching. But it is a radical departure from Catholic Teaching and it gets harder to defend because so few have the ability to correct it anymore, especially within the medium that these arguments come up. This “new” understanding has decades of acceptance that makes anything prior to it look harsh and uncharitable. It’s become easier to blow people off nowadays and promote the “emotional experience” of faith, with Jesus being the global social worker, then really looking at what being Catholic is. The faith is being contaminated with globalist ideals, especially at WYD, and who does that serve? What disturbs me is the indifference people, empowered with ministries, have towards this. It’s as if you don’t bite that hand that gives you ministries! When Popes allow pagans to bless them (JP2 and the Shiva Priestess,) kiss Korans, gather strange religions at Assisi, and appoint St. Michael the Archangel to protect Islam, for example, then something is wrong. I ask what is the Spiritual consequence for those who see no problem? People would never have accepted Hindus worshipping their god at the main alter in Fatima 30 years ago. But today it is a reality and people who have no idea as to the seriousness of their opinions often dismiss it. It’s as if Jesus exists exclusively for there own edification.

I can only ask you to consider that serious changes are occurring in the faith that requires people to investigate what the church has Traditionally taught. If we have “New” teaching then what was wrong with the original Catholic teaching and what is the consequences on our salvation?

The book “No Crisis in the Church? (A rigorous comparison of Catholic Church teachings before and since the Second Vatican Council)” by Simon Galloway might be of use to you in understanding this position and the gravity of our times.



I Googled Simon Galloway. Here is what I found at his website:

Writer Galloway chooses several rather brief documents to support the allegations. Appendix I is “Jewish Freemasonry on the Subversion of the Catholic Church and State.” From secret Jewish meetings in Paris, statements were smuggled out and published in The London Catholic Gazette, February 1936, confirmed later in Paris, Le Reveil du Peuple. Behind it was B’nai B’rith, “the secret directors of international Freemasonry.” One line reads, “We have induced some of our children to join the Christian Body with the explicit intimation that they should work .... for the disintegration of the Christian Church, by creating scandals within her.” Shortly after, “We are the Fathers of all Revolutions .... We were the creators of the Protestant Reformation .... Martin Luther was our dupe ....” And so goes this candid tale of hate-filled conspiracy.

Sorry Greg. You just revealed yourself. Anybody that beleives in this goofy anti-semitic crap is certifiable. This is more than just being a Vatican II rejectionist. This is from way out in La-La land. About as believable as believing in the Space Alien stories on the cover of the supermarket tabloids.

Greg Mont

I notice that you take cheap shots at people and don't offer much defense regarding what I talked about. So you come across as cocky and arrogant. Google is a terrible source for Catholic information. It takes discipline to understand the errors of today’s churchmen and if you react every time someone pushes your buttons, you’ll never hear the other side. If your ignorant to Catholic doctrine, then it’s easy for teaching that is horrible, to pass over without notice. People who question respectfully the philosophy of today are easily characterized as being freemasonry nuts and anti-Semites. And this is very effective because no one hangs around to hear the other side of the issue. You could be caught up in the confusion that is out there? It is a possibility because it looks for reactionary people who have little real Catholic knowledge. If you can suspect that I fell into some craziness, then you could have fallen too. Unless you’re invisible. If you’re caught up in it, the first response is to react and attempt to humiliate the person you disagree with. You are probably unaware of your rudeness. Vatican Two promised a surge in interest for the Catholic faith - rather it emptied the church and seminaries and sacked our Traditions, replacing them with novel ideas that suit a specific group. We're paying that price today. God is not blessing its philosophies and I guess I'll just have to be this nut case and wait it out. In the meantime, you need to work on your attitude. It doesn't win anyone over to your side because you don't explain anything, it just insult. I guess that's what you’re revealing about yourself too. Try reading the encyclicals of St. Pius X like Pascendi. A lot of what he talks about is playing out in the faith today.

In reference to Galloway, his book is a reference to the writings of pre and post VC2. It's a handy book to read what popes have said in the past and what the VC2 popes have said. It's their words, not his. There are many other books with long footnotes that have opened our rich Catholic past to me that I've read along with 25 years in diocese ministries as experience. I didn’t roll out of bed yesterday. In my years I've noticed that a small group of people patiently research issues using Catholic material that is outside the era of influence and as a result, are isolated, a small group that reads terrible scholastic material, and often are aggressive and slow to respect others because they hide their ignorance in power groups, and the larger group that “goes along to get along.” What group do you belong too? I hope you'll ask God to open the door to good scholastic books, to open your eyes that we are not in Good Catholic times, but rather mediocre times. It is a very hard task to begin and it comes with consequences. As Jesus said “Let no one despise your youth.”


Sorry Greg, but the crap that Galloway cites for his argument are only slightly varying in degree from Mein Kampf or Protocol of the Elders of Zion.

I consider myself a good orthodox Roman Catholic. There is a reason why the Lefevre adherents, the Shuckhardt adherents and the Sedevacantist crazies who think some guy in Nebraska is the true pope have been classified as schismatics. Guys like Galloway who cite some centuries-long international Jewish conspiracy to destroy Catholicism are heretical as well.

Sorry that I have not sugar-coated it, but sometimes you have to call BS what it is, and not try to argue with it. It is sort of like the old saying about not arguing with a crazy person, since it will get you nowhere.



I do not wish to question your Catholicism, but I pray that you will continue to deepen your knowledge of the truth, as you have already done, since I believe you to be sincere.

Pope John Paul II beatified a Polish priest, St. Josef S. Pelczar, who spoke of attacks against the Church perpetrated during the French revolution, and other times, by groups similar to the ones you cite. Would you like to censor him as well simply because he mentioned thse groups which are uncomfortable to you? A pious south American Cardinal wrote about the same topic, as did Fr. Fahey. Pope Leo XIII, as did other popes, wanted the plans of secret anti-Catholic organizations to be published for the same purpose. These are not lunatics, but Catholics, and the latter a Pope, who wish to expose the truth. By the way, in many of these cases, the gist of the book/article probably does not depend on these details, but, like Greg said, concerns and quotes mainly from Papal documents and Catholic spirituality. Remember Plato's allegory of the Cave: people will KILL those who try to persuade them with the truth, rather than listen to it.

Also, Greg's valid points have not been answered, but they are very relevant. I will only speak of the topic at hand: pagan rituals may have been adopted, but hundreds of years ago. God in His Providence foresaw these events, and has showed that Christianity, the Catholic Church, overrides them by its triumph over idolatry. It does not adapt what is not good. Hence, as our Pope wrote when he was Cardinal, during the Roman times, inculturation occured this way, as an example: Latin was imposed so that all cultures would have a uniform way of worship.

However, when was the last time this has happened before the 1960s? Since Catholicism has its own long tradition by now, IT must be spread: there is no need to assimilate pagan elements. Otherwise, what you will get, is Hindu gods worshipped in Cathedrals. Why criticize that if a similar spirit breathes at Assissi and at Papal masses? Why cannot we have, like Greg said, a Marian PRocession? Why must we abandon Catholic stations of the Cross for ecumenican, non-Catholic stations? And yes, perhaps we should ban the easter bunny, the eggs, and the Leprechaun, since if you look around you, that is what the world, and many Catholics worship, instead of our Good Lord. Or at least work strongly to de-emphasize these deviations. Compare another era of Christianity in the second millenium to the current one, and you will observe the dearth of Catholic traditions today. This is the reality. And we must work to restore them

May Our Lady of Mount Carmel continue to intercede on your behalf so that you are showered with further divine graces. God bless.


I thought the procession with the magnificent book of the gospels where it was accorded the respect reserved to a chieftain entering the racetrack on a throne was immensely expressive and rich in symbolic value. I do not agree with some who thought this procession constituted "an occasion of sin". My answer to them is adopting the fir tree in 8th century Germany as a symbol of Thor and now the Christ child was undoubtedly seen with the same shocked response.
Had this rite not been indigenous to the peoples of the Pacific or sub-Saharan Africa, then I think there might have been some reason to object. Just as we use holy water and incense, the dancers used rattles and other devices to symbolically drive away evil spirits.
Note also how this rite ended very abruptly with the Roman rite deacon in dalmatic accompanied by torch bearers immediately taking the book of the gospels from the dancer. That too was significant in many ways. One mode of liturgical expression or liturgical theater ended and began with another. The deacon gave another type of honor to the gospels in more familiar terms to most western catholics, but it was not symbolically superior to what the dancers were doing entering the racetrack.
While Pope Benedict looked a little surprised or even puzzled, I didn't think he looked disapproving in any way. Other bloggers on other sites seem to think he was "shocked" and "angry". I didn't see that.


Does the devil not exist? Does he not try to work through willing humans to destroy the Catholic Church?
You may call your fellow Catholics lunatics until you're blue in the face, but if you don't believe there are diabolical forces at work trying to destroy the Church, and have been trying since it was created, then I am afraid that you are the one who is confused. Have you not read about the apparitions at Fatima? Do you not believe them?


Dear Greg, Alvares and Jeff,

1.) I believe you are sincere. But I also believe you are nuts, as are most sedevacantists and Vatican II rejectionists.

2.) Vatican II was almost 50 years ago. All your issues were debated up and down for about 3 or 4 years. "Rome has spoken and the matter is closed." I think we have to have some faith that the Holy Spirit would not have misguided John XXIII, Paul VI, JP I, and JP II as well as the Church Council. It is a bit funny to take serious your claim that John Paul II was some wild-eyed liberal. If he was, then why did the Blessed Mother intervene to save his life on the anniversary of the Apparition of Fatima? To me, that is proof positive of God's approval of the path that "John Paul the Great" was leading the Church correctly.

3.) Take away the Leprechaun as the symbol of Notre Dame? Now you are treading on serious trouble. Fat chance that will ever happen.


Good luck and God bless. It seems fruitful discussion is not possible when you resort to name calling.


Dear Jeff,

God bless you too. I am sorry I can't be a diplomat on this discussion. But I can't in good conscience dignify some of the schismatic sedevacantist nonsense spouted here. That would only give it an air of intellectual legitimacy.


I'm not asking you to dignify schismatic or sedevacantist nonsense. I'm asking you to not assume you know me because you've read two things I've written.
Use reason in your arguments. Use logic. Name calling does nothing and is not the way a Catholic should act, although we all do at some time or another.
I am loyal to my priest on up through the bishop to the Vicar of Christ, Benedict XVI. I've heard my parish priest back home (also loyal to his archbishop, on up to Rome) discuss many horrendous abuses he saw and heard in seminary. My college experience was at a Benedictine Monastery that saw many monks and priests who were sexual criminals-I knew one or two personally!
Trying to find out the reasons for this should be done respectfully, but honestly.
Well, more later. Gotta run.


I don't see the problem. Would you be so offended if the Japanese invited him to a formal tea ceremony, or performed a classic Japanese dance for him? What does it matter what cultural performances people put on for his visit.

I don't know if it was a "purifacation of the land" rite, as suggested (though I'm skeptical), but even if it were, what's the harm? It doesn't do anything. It doesn't 'purify' anything, but nor does it un-"purify" anything. What harm is tribal dancing?


I'd have no problem attending a tea ceremony or seeing a classical dance in any country if it was a modest dance.
I would not pray to a Japanese person's ancestors with them at a Shinto shrine.
The difference is that the first is a legitimate cultural activity, the other is pagan worship.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Pope Benedict XVI Homilies & Statements

Codex of Catholic Blogs

Orthodox Blogs

Blogs From People We Wish Were Catholic