God would tell the LGBT folks, including the clergy, to go and sin no more. Rome has a sick fascination with them just like the Dem’s transgender fascination. You’d look good in them though, they go with your hair color
The second comment perhaps fell victim to TJM's suggestion regarding temporal matters. Vestiture should not be an add board. What is the RC's problem that everything has to look abstract and childish? Christ was crucified on a cross beam - the state sanctioned method of execution. They weren't bent unless that is supposed to look like a boat with a mast and anchor. Regardless, let's put on our big-boy pants, shoes and vestments. My opinion, of course - I wouldn't wear this - I can't see real men seeking this out.
Byz - For the record, I would not choose to buy/wear this vestment.
First, it seems to be cheaply made - the colors and words are most likely printed on the fabric. Quality costs money, but it is money well spent.
Second, I am not a fan of adding symbols to symbols to symbols on any vestments. The chasuble itself is a symbol. The color of the chasuble is a second symbol. That's enough!
Adding intricate embroidery, even of saints or other symbols such as the Chi Rho or the IHS, is, in my estimation, unnecessary clutter. Who can read what's written on a chasuble from more than a few feet away?
FRMJK, do you realize how outdated your chasuble ideology is? It’s right out of the 1970’s chasuble ideology playbook especially the chasuble is the symbol, not anything on it. My what and old fogy you are! Or is old old koger?
Don’t think so John Nolan pretty much decimated your liturgist pretensions long ago. Of course, you can always go to work for your first love, the DNC!
Fr. MJK, agree on quality and symbols for events. Not quite there on Christian/Catholic symbols. I suppose this is a matter of taste and preference as opposed to rubrics.
You likely won't agree, but, I feel some in the Roman Church emphasize lighting, sound systems, keyboards while de-emphasizing the liturgy, liturgical embellishments etc. (NOT cheap-looking banners). The "Worship Space" is paramount to that parish at the expense of theology of the building. In the East, we would celebrate Divine Liturgy exclusively by candle light before skimping on vestiture (be it for the presbyter or holy table) and other appurtenances. I suppose it's perspective, negotiables vs non-negotiables.
16 comments:
Looks like LGBT colors - these folks are nuts.
Gee, LGBT colors. Just like God made in the rainbow. Imagine that! (Now TJM's telling us that God must be nuts...)
Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple.
God would tell the LGBT folks, including the clergy, to go and sin no more. Rome has a sick fascination with them just like the Dem’s transgender fascination. You’d look good in them though, they go with your hair color
Just when you think it can't get any worse....
The second comment perhaps fell victim to TJM's suggestion regarding temporal matters. Vestiture should not be an add board. What is the RC's problem that everything has to look abstract and childish? Christ was crucified on a cross beam - the state sanctioned method of execution. They weren't bent unless that is supposed to look like a boat with a mast and anchor. Regardless, let's put on our big-boy pants, shoes and vestments. My opinion, of course - I wouldn't wear this - I can't see real men seeking this out.
*ad board, not add board.
ByzRus, unfortunately many of our priests adore this type of vestiture a la the clown chasubles featured at the re- opening of Notre Dame
Byz - For the record, I would not choose to buy/wear this vestment.
First, it seems to be cheaply made - the colors and words are most likely printed on the fabric. Quality costs money, but it is money well spent.
Second, I am not a fan of adding symbols to symbols to symbols on any vestments. The chasuble itself is a symbol. The color of the chasuble is a second symbol. That's enough!
Adding intricate embroidery, even of saints or other symbols such as the Chi Rho or the IHS, is, in my estimation, unnecessary clutter. Who can read what's written on a chasuble from more than a few feet away?
FRMJK, do you realize how outdated your chasuble ideology is? It’s right out of the 1970’s chasuble ideology playbook especially the chasuble is the symbol, not anything on it. My what and old fogy you are! Or is old old koger?
The words you are seeking are fogey and codger.
And, no, my theology is not "right out of the 1970s." Symbols have always communicated best when they are clear and unobscured.
Sorry about the spelling but your second comment reconfirms my original observation!
The jealous one has returned. Based on your comments and understanding of the Liturgy, I would posit this chasuble fits you to a tee!
TJM - Your assumption is wrong.
Don’t think so John Nolan pretty much decimated your liturgist pretensions long ago. Of course, you can always go to work for your first love, the DNC!
Fr. MJK, agree on quality and symbols for events. Not quite there on Christian/Catholic symbols. I suppose this is a matter of taste and preference as opposed to rubrics.
You likely won't agree, but, I feel some in the Roman Church emphasize lighting, sound systems, keyboards while de-emphasizing the liturgy, liturgical embellishments etc. (NOT cheap-looking banners). The "Worship Space" is paramount to that parish at the expense of theology of the building. In the East, we would celebrate Divine Liturgy exclusively by candle light before skimping on vestiture (be it for the presbyter or holy table) and other appurtenances. I suppose it's perspective, negotiables vs non-negotiables.
Post a Comment