I am the chaplain for my civil war re-enacting battery. I am a licensed minister, but am Protestant. We attend MANY re-enactments throughout the eastern states. At some of these re-enactments there are as many as seven thousand re-enactors. Believe it or not, their is no church service! I have taken on the responsability of providing re-enactors with a church service. Because of vast denominational backgrounds, I hold a non-denominational church service. I even have at least two or three catholics that attend services no atter where I go. My question is, what religious flag can I put in front of my Chaplain's Tent? I know that the "Christian Flag" came about in around 1890. Which flag can I use that will not make me a representative of a certain denomination? The flag must be from between the years of 1860 and 1864. I am a Christian, so it must be a christian flag.

-- S. Gisewhite (sharvin@acsworld.net), January 08, 2004

Answers

-- (top@top.top), January 08, 2004.

Your question should be directed to other Protestants.

Catholics should not be attending your "services." Attendance at them not only fails to fulfill their Sunday obligation, it constitutes a grave sin against the First and Third Commandments of God, not to mention the laws of the Church. If there is no opportunity for the Catholics involved in this hobby to assist at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, or if it interferes with their Sunday obligation in some other way, they should not be attending the Civil War re-enactment at all.

-- jake (j@k.e), January 08, 2004.

There's no sin in attending a Protestant service, a far as I know (although it does not replace the obligation to attend Mass).

-- AVC (littleflower1976@yahoo.com), January 08, 2004.

From the Baltimore Catechism:

Q. 1146. How may the first Commandment be broken?

A. The first Commandment make be broken by giving to a creature the honor which belongs to God alone; by false worship; and by attributing to a creature a perfection which belongs to God alone.

Q. 1148. How do we offer God false worship?

A. We offer God false worship by rejecting the religion He has instituted and following one pleasing to ourselves, with a form of worship He has never authorized, approved or sanctioned.

Q. 1149. Why must we serve God in the form of religion He has instituted and in no other?

A. We must serve God in the form of religion He has instituted and in no other, because heaven is not a right, but a promised reward, a free gift of God, which we must merit in the manner He directs and pleases.

-- jake (j@k.e), January 08, 2004.

S.G. I think you heart is in the right place. I for one can appreciate your thoughtful attept to offer your help in filling this void. While only a Catholic mass will fulfill a Catholic's sunday obligation, I'm sure many appreciate your efforts. (Catholics included)

-- Jim Furst (furst@flash.net), January 08, 2004.

I echo Jim's thoughts here. If you have people who are not attending Sunday obligations, they need to hop into their cars and do so. Hobbies should never get in the way of Sunday obligations.

There is not a sin in attending a non-denominational service, only in deliberately missing mass, so they can do both. Let's face it, they really aren't in a battle field where they can't get to transportation to get them to mass.

As for a flag, other than the US or Confederate flag, I wouldn't know of one for you to use.

Have you seen this page? http://www.angelfire.com/pa5/civilwarchaplain/

In Christ,
Bill

-- Bill nelson (bnelson45@hotmail.com), January 08, 2004.

AVC, you are correct. Your opposition is incorrect.

I read S. Gisewhite's post carefully. It says nothing about "Sunday." It says nothing about the Catholics in attendance not also attending Mass.

The Catholic Church does not "flat-out" prohibit our being present at all non-Catholic services. The services mentioned by S. Gisewhite may be so generically Christian as to involve no denial of any Catholic truth -- in which case a Catholic could participate fully (though not as a substitute for Sunday Mass) without even sinning venially, much less mortally. It would be an occasion for the Catholic to pray for Christian unity -- the primary intention that our Church recommends for ecumenical services.

The Baltimore Catechism has to be read and interpreted carefully -- and anything in it that is of a disciplinary nature must be ignored if the Church has changed its discipline in the many years since the BC was published.

I believe that the Catholic Church would not go so far as to make this blunt statement either:
"If there is no opportunity for the Catholics involved in this hobby to assist at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, or if it interferes with their Sunday obligation in some other way, they should not be attending the Civil War re-enactment at all."

In rare cases, a Catholic may be involved in a legitimate activity (e.g., vacationing, necessary work, etc.) that makes attendance at Sunday Mass very burdensome or impossible. In such cases, a dispensation from the obligation may be granted by the Church. Whenever possible, the specific situation should be discussed with the person's pastor, who can make an objective judgment.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@Hotmail.com), January 08, 2004.

Thanks guys for your defenses. To the individual who had the NERVE to say that a Catholic is committing a mortal sin by attending a non- denominational church service. If I were you, I would contemplate on my moral standards. The way I see it, you are VERY anti- protestant. You say that because it's a non-denoinational church service that a Catholic is too rightious to attend. You talk about Catholics being spiritually harmed by associating themselves with those "who do not teach the truth." Let us not forget that Jesus Christ himself healed the centurian's man servant. Jesus Christ himself accepted the invitation to come into the tax collector's house hold. Jesus Christ himself associated with the Romans, who were pagans. If Jesus wasn't committing a mortal sin for doing so, I'm possative that you are not committing a mortal sin by attending a CHRISTIAN church service. As far as mass, I don't know if they are attending or not and it is not my job to find out. My job is to provide Christians with the Word of God through the Holy Scriptures and to offer prayers for those in need. I have always accepted both Catholic and Protestant doctrines and traditions and I try to incorporate those things in my service and I am constantly studying both Catholicism and Protestantism. Never, though, have I found Catholic doctrine so narrow minded as you.

As for the flag question. No one so far has answered it. I am a Union re-enactor. I know which is the propper Union flag, but I want a religious flag to fly. Something to let others know that this is a Chaplain's tent. Their are flags for artillery, calvary, infantry, the medical corps and the band, but which flag is right for me?

-- S. Gisewhite (sharvin@acsworld.net), January 08, 2004.

In rare cases, a Catholic may be involved in a legitimate activity (e.g., vacationing, necessary work, etc.) that makes attendance at Sunday Mass very burdensome or impossible.

I hardly think being onvacation or engaging in a hobby are sufficient reasons to miss Mass on Sunday. Catholics should exercise prudence in choosing their leisure activities and keep in mind that they are bound, under mortal sin, to assist at Mass on Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation, unless a real legitimate reason, like sickness, prevents them from doing so.

-- jake (j@k.e), January 08, 2004.

Further, the passages I quoted from the Baltimore Catechism refer to the First Commandment, and how to keep it. "Ignore" it at your own peril, since it reflects the eternal teaching of Mother Church in these matters.

-- jake (j@k.e), January 08, 2004.

The way I see it, you are VERY anti- protestant.

No argument here, although I prefer to think of myself as "Pro- Catholic."

You say that because it's a non-denoinational church service that a Catholic is too rightious to attend.

Not too righteous, just forbidden. Pope Pius XI said:

..."this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics: for the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it...

Here's the source for that.

You talk about Catholics being spiritually harmed by associating themselves with those "who do not teach the truth."

Actually, those are your words, not mine. Not that I don't agree with them. What spiritual good can come of associating with those teaching falsehood?

Let us not forget that Jesus Christ himself healed the centurian's man servant. Jesus Christ himself accepted the invitation to come into the tax collector's house hold. Jesus Christ himself associated with the Romans, who were pagans.

The key difference is that Our Blessed Lord did not say to any of them: "Remain in your sin and make it to Heaven anyway." He desired their Conversion. He still does.

I'm possative that you are not committing a mortal sin by attending a CHRISTIAN church service.

You're not qualified to make that judgement. We Catholics leave that to the teaching of Holy Mother Church.

-- jake (j@k.e), January 08, 2004.

S. Gisewhite,
I think you need a Vexillographer. Someone who is an expert in flags. See this website:
http://www.regiments.org/special/ref/flags.htm

In Christ,
Bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45@hotmail.com), January 08, 2004.

S. Gisewhite- I think that what you're doing is wonderful. Although I don't attend services myself, I fully respect the people who do. I know how big those reenactments can get, and I'm amazed that you can handle something as huge as that.

Might I suggest simply not putting a religious flag at all? Maybe you could try an American flag, or even a Confederate one, depending on which side you're working on.And then you could put up a small sign to separate you from the other tents in the area. I don't know what the rules are for your specific events, so I am sorry to say that I really can only suggest things according to my own experiences. Good luck.

-- Abbey (AbbeyRoad122@hotmailc.om), January 08, 2004.

Jmj

"I hardly think being on vacation or engaging in a hobby are sufficient reasons to miss Mass on Sunday. Catholics should exercise prudence in choosing their leisure activities and keep in mind that they are bound, under mortal sin, to assist at Mass on Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation, unless a real legitimate reason, like sickness, prevents them from doing so."

The above is a "more-Catholic-than-the-pope" personal opinion that is partially contradicted by the Catholic Church. Worse than that, it is self-righteously and hypocritically dumped here by an ex-Catholic who NEVER attends a licitly celebrated Mass on Sunday. (Oh, the chutzpah of it!)

Finally, the above words were preceded by dishonest, selective quoting from a paragraph of mine. Only the first sentence I wrote was quoted, when the second and third are crucial to understand the full meaning. (I stated: "In such cases, a dispensation from the obligation may be granted by the Church. Whenever possible, the specific situation should be discussed with the person's pastor, who can make an objective judgment.") Wise Catholics will go to a priest to discuss the matter and seek a dispensation. The last thing that they will do is to go to a poorly informed ex-Catholic for his shoddy opinions.

"... the passages I quoted from the Baltimore Catechism refer to the First Commandment, and how to keep it. 'Ignore' it at your own peril, since it reflects the eternal teaching of Mother Church in these matters."

Nobody said to "ignore" those Q&As. Rather, it was stated that they must be studied and properly interpreted. Too bad that he who quoted them had first misinterpreted them! The Q&As have no place on this page, for they are irrelevant to the subject being discussed. But one only realizes that if he has a sufficient Catholic background and the good will to interpret the words correctly. He who quoted the Q&As has only sketchy knowledge of Catholicism and, no longer even being a practicing Catholic, he lacks the qualifications to be teaching any Catholic anything at all on this forum. Because he pretends to be a practicing Catholic, he is more dangerous, and more deserving of banning, that even Jeanie and David Ortiz were.

"... just forbidden. Pope Pius XI said: 'this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics' ..."
The ex-Catholic again proves to be incredibly foolish or guilty of abysmal ignorance! What Pope Pius XI stated in his disciplinary ruling is irrelevant to the present conversation, as was explained above when I stated: "... anything in [a Church document] that is of a disciplinary nature must be ignored if the Church has changed its discipline ...".
Either the objector rejects the Church's new discipline (thus proving that he is schismatic) or he doesn't even know about the new discipline (thus proving that he lacks the education needed for expounding on matters Catholic).

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@Hotmail.com), January 08, 2004.

No one is suggesting that Catholics should attend a non- denomiational service in place of Mass. As Educated Catholics we should be capable of associating with, and attend services with anyone we please. I've done this for years,... even when I was in one of my bouts of agnosticism. (Which certainly was not the fault of any Protestant I met,...it was my own doing)

If we are truely Catholic, we have nothing to fear about being lead down a wrong path by anyone else, unless we don't really have our faith straight anyway. Do we have the God given gift of thinking for ourselves? At some level this relates to "free will" which the last time I checked was still part of our Catholic theology. If you don't want to attend a service, then don't. How does it advance anyones position to criticize those who choose differently. You certainly won't save anyones soul by doing so.

The above sounds sort of angry. I don't mean it to... you just can't hear my vocal inflection or see my hand gestures. (quite benign...)

-- Jim Furst (furst@flash.net), January 08, 2004.

Either the objector rejects the Church's new discipline (thus proving that he is schismatic) or he doesn't even know about the new discipline

What new discipline? I'm all ears. You lay it out, and I'll let you know if I reject it or not.

Evangelize away.

-- jake (j@k.e), January 08, 2004.

Jake,

I've been reading your posts for some time, I'm sure you're a better Catholic than me, really, I'm not that good at it. Still trying to get there. I would not want to see you banned. Its just that, to me your initial post and your position relating to the original question sounds kind of mean. The schizmatic business is beyond me. I just don't think your answer was that helpful. That being said I respect the fact that you are true to your convictions.

-- Jim Furst (furst@flash.net), January 08, 2004.

What about a plain cross on a plain background for your flag?

As to the other, if interfaith services are so bad, then why do Catholic priests participate in them? Somehow I doubt that anything said at these gatherings is going to damage someone truly faithful to their beliefs.

Whatever happened to "where two or three are gathered together in my Name, there am I in their midst"? And no, if one is Catholic it doesn't take the place of Sunday Mass, but you're not worshipping some other creature, you're worshipping the same God, but not in the same way. Pray silently if you like.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), January 08, 2004.

>>>>you're worshipping the same God, but not in the same way.

Would this apply to a mosque as well? Alah is supposedly the same God.

Is this the same God who protests against the Church founded by him. would you come to one of my "services" if I ordained myself? This is a slippery slope

As I said earlier: go to an ecumential / protestant service and pray the rosary and tell us how accommodating every one is.

-- Hugh (hugh@inspired.com), January 09, 2004.

"Excuse my French, but John you are talking b_______!"

Hugh, three things: (1) we don't use that kind of language at this forum ... (2) few Americans are familiar with that vulgar British slang word ... (3) what I said was correct, not "b________"!

"Traditionalists may reject much of the teachings of Vatican 2; however their theology SHOULD be much more aligned to ours than any Protestant ministers!"

No, Hugh. I am a traditionalist -- a traditional Catholic. A true "traditionalist" rejects nothing of the "teachings of Vatican II." Those who reject any such teachings, but pretend to be Catholics, are "pseudo-traditionalists." [Pseudo is Greek for "false."]

"How dare you be so unkind to someone for quoting documents of the Church and not choosing falsehood over truth."

Hugh, you are "brand new" here at the forum. You are not aware of the two-year history of conflict between orthodox Catholics and pseudo-traditionalists. You just witnessed the latest skirmish. You wouldn't call my words "unkind," if you had seen the hundreds of previous knock-down, drag-out fights. Unfortunately, due to improper forum moderation (in my opinion), the pseudo-trads have still not been banned. By the way, what I stated above was less "unkind" than your use of the word "b________" about my comments.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), January 09, 2004.

John

My concern is that in this instance, you are arguing with the teachings of the Church.

Jake attends mass with a validly ordained minster irrespective of your point of view.

I'll take something post Vat 2 for you:

Can. 214 Christ's faithful have the right to worship God according to the provisions of their own rite approved by the lawful Pastors of the Church; they also have the right to follow their own form of spiritual life, provided it is in accord with Church teaching.

Are protestant ministers "lawful Pastors"?

I rest my case.

Hugh

PS I don't think the word bollocks is any less offensive than your teaching falsehoods.

-- hugh (hugh@inspired.com), January 09, 2004.

I've been reading your posts for some time, I'm sure you're a better Catholic than me, really, I'm not that good at it. Still trying to get there.

I'm not a better anything than anybody. "Still trying to get there" is, I'm sure, how many of the Saints would have described themselves during their life on earth. You're on the right track, Jim.

I would not want to see you banned. Its just that, to me your initial post and your position relating to the original question sounds kind of mean.

Well, I didn't mean it to be mean, just to state what the Church teaches, namely that Catholics are obliged to assist at Mass on Sundays & Holy Days, and that enjoying leisure activities does not provide a sufficient reason for missing Mass. Also, Catholics cannot fulfill their Sunday obligation by attending a Protestant serveice, and I provided a source from the Baltimore Catechism for that.

The schizmatic business is beyond me.

Me, too.

I just don't think your answer was that helpful. That being said I respect the fact that you are true to your convictions.

Please say a prayer for me, as I will for you, that God will increase our faith in Him.

-- jake (j@k.e), January 09, 2004.

Hugh, most ecumenical services are overwhelmingly Christian, so you are worshipping the same God.

Even the very few I've attended that have had non-Christians never have prayers that are offensive to Christians. In most of them, you can substitute Jesus or God and have a prayer that could be said at Mass.

As to saying the Rosary, I remember when people would say it quietly during Mass-- and you could do that at any ecumenical service as well.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), January 09, 2004.

Jmj

Hi again, Hugh. You grow more wrong with each succeeding post.

H: "My concern is that in this instance, you are arguing with the teachings of the Church."
J: Oh, definitely not. I never do that. I assent to all the Church's teachings. Do you?

H: "Jake attends mass with a validly ordained minster irrespective of your point of view."

J: My "point of view" has nothing to do with it. What the Catholic Church requires has everything to do with it. If we go against her disciplinary rules, we sin. Plain and simple.

There are many "validly ordained priests" who are not authorized by the Catholic Church to celebrate Mass. When someone attends a Mass celebrated by one who lacks permission, he is committing a sin of disobedience (at the very least). [I won't go into additional possibilities.]

Hugh, someone's attendance at a Mass that is celebrated by a "validly ordained minister" is not good enough for a Catholic. Every celebration of the Mass that we attend must also have the expressed approval of the local bishop (except that a legitimate visiting priest from another diocese may now celebrate Mass without the local bishops's knowledge).

Keep in mind that every Eastern Orthodox priest is a "validly ordained minister" (your words), but Catholics are not permitted routinely to substitute attendance at Orthodox liturgies for attendance at Catholic Mass. Even less (!) is it permissible for any Catholic to attend Masses celebrated by Catholic priests who lack their Catholic bishop's permission. Only an emergency (as defined by the Church, not by a layman) could permit such attendance.

H: "I'll take something post Vat 2 for you: 'Can. 214 Christ's faithful have the right to worship God according to the provisions of their own rite approved by the lawful Pastors of the Church; they also have the right to follow their own form of spiritual life, provided it is in accord with Church teaching.' Are protestant ministers 'lawful Pastors?'"

J: Protestant ministers are not "lawful pastors." Catholic bishops are. Nothing I have advocated is contrary to canon 214. I have not advocated substituting a protestant service for a Catholic Mass. Pseudo-traditionalists, however, violate the Church's disciplines by substituting forbidden celebrations of Mass for permitted ones.

Hugh, I want to let you know "up front" and early that you cannot make any headway by trying to argue any of these things with orthodox Catholics like me. We have heard it all! We have refuted all of it, time and again, at this forum and elsewhere. (Actually, the Church has refuted it, and we just pass along what she says.) I'm letting you know that you are wasting your time (and that of others, including me) by going into all this stuff yet again. I suggest that you go to the forum's archives and see what has been written in the past (scores of times).

H, repeating his vulgar language: "I don't think the word b_______ is any less offensive than your teaching falsehoods."

J: I never "teach falsehoods." But even if someone did teach a falsehood at this forum, that would not give you the right to use foul or obscene language. The fact that you are trying to defend your action and even repeat it -- rather than apologize for it -- indicates that you are a man of very low character indeed.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), January 09, 2004.

But even if someone did teach a falsehood at this forum, that would not give you the right to use foul or obscene language.

John, you have used vulgar language in this forum.

-- jake (j@k.e), January 09, 2004.

eek NO!!!

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), January 12, 2004.

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45@hotmail.com), January 12, 2004.