10 reasons why liberal Catholicism is doomed

[archangel04]

ah…but again…other styles are welcomed…but must be prayerfully and reverently expressed…who gets to decide? There are many on these boards that have suddenly become music critics…and mini theologist on songs…which seems…kind of protestant to me:shrug:

Did I say the Mass was a dance club??? But there is a big difference between a “dance club” and Greagorian chant. Lots of grey area in there that the Church herself does not lay out…so…who gets to decide???

Yes, they are welcomed, but they do not hold the highest place of honor, the Church has asked that if possible, we should have Gregorian at Mass, this means if funding and resources are available, but this is not always the case, and so other styles of music are welcomed including those that are part of the culture if shown to be reverent and spiritual, but as we see, culture always changes and so styles of music do as well, when we bring in “modern” music to the mass, within 5 years or less that type of music will be out of “style” and hence once again we are left with music that was only brought about because of our emotions at that time. The problem I see is that many Churches have the resources for Gregorian but deny it to their parishioners, and instead of having both Gregorian and other styles of worship music, they only accept one and refuse the other, going against the request of the church. The Church leaves it up to us to use common sense as to what is appropriate, when you have music that distracts and takes AWAY on the purpose of the mass, then you know that type of music is not appropriate for mass. An example, I like hard rock music, especially for working out, but in no way do I find this type of music appropriate for mass, even if the song was about Jesus, why is that? Because this music is loud and even obnoxious, it’s not meant to encourage worship, but to get the emotions up and even the blood flowing, and it’s only meant for “me”.

I never said that you said the mass what a dance club, but used it as an example. Why is it that at clubs you hear loud beat rhythms? Because this type of music is meant to get the body moving to a specific rhythm and once again never meant to be a style of worship.

In the end what I can say is that everything, inlcuding music, has it’s place and time. But you do bring up good questions.

 

[ProVobis]

Change does not = Liberal. Change is merely change…

Maybe more along the lines of being progressive?

 

[FAB]

Just like those who wanted to change the identity of the Church with the Spirit of V2 right? Talk about blowing up in your face lol

.

Actually they have had great success. If not would they be those like you who don’t seem to be able to see any good in the Church.

 

[JChapel]

While I have nothing against those who enjoy EF, nor do I believe that The Church should ever remove it, maybe it’s just the CAF effect taking over again, but I haven’t exactly seen “sweeping” changes towards EF in my area. I think just one church in our area even offers masses in EF and that’s only one day a week.

Of course, I definitely do not want to see OF removed any time soon, either. It makes Catholicism much more… accessible… for the average churchgoer. Here’s where I stand on a few common issues regarding OF.

The Music: Yes, I’ll agree, it’s largely pretty bad. That said, it makes the atmosphere of the church a lot warmer and more welcoming than Gregorian chant. Baroque music largely seems to distance me from God.

The Latin: I want to be able to understand what the priest is saying, at all times. While I know the meaning of a few Latin phrases, I certainly don’t know enough to get anything meaningful out of an EF Mass, nor do I really have the time to learn Latin. In the end, it just chalks up to another thing that further distances me from God.

The Altar-facing: Personally, it doesn’t make that much of a difference to me, and in some ways it makes more sense because we’re there to worship God, not the priest. That said, it does compliment the intended warm and welcoming atmosphere of OF quite nicely.

Again, I have nothing against people who choose to go to EF Masses. I just believe that EF isn’t for everyone, and in either case, we’re still participating in the same sacrament, with the same presence.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

the Church has asked that if possible, we should have Gregorian at Mass, this means if funding and resources are available, but this is not always the case, and so other styles of music are welcomed including those that are part of the culture if shown to be reverent and spiritual, but as we see, culture always changes and so styles of music do as well, when we bring in “modern” music to the mass, within 5 years or less that type of music will be out of “style” and hence once again we are left with music that was only brought about because of our emotions at that time. The problem I see is that many Churches have the resources for Gregorian but deny it to their parishioners, and instead of having both Gregorian and other styles of worship music, they only accept one and refuse the other, going against the request of the church. The Church leaves it up to us to use common sense as to what is appropriate, when you have music that distracts and takes AWAY on the purpose of the mass, then you know that type of music is not appropriate for mass. An example, I like hard rock music, especially for working out, but in no way do I find this type of music appropriate for mass, even if the song was about Jesus, why is that? Because this music is loud and even obnoxious, it’s not meant to encourage worship, but to get the emotions up and even the blood flowing, and it’s only meant for “me”.

I never said that you said the mass what a dance club, but used it as an example. Why is it that at clubs you hear loud beat rhythms? Because this type of music is meant to get the body moving to a specific rhythm and once again never meant to be a style of worship.

In the end what I can say is that everything, inlcuding music, has it’s place and time. But you do bring up good questions.

Ah…I think we can agree here. My parish does not have the resources or space for the Gregorian chant. But nor do we use loud “beat” type music…although I’m sure there are those that may dislike some of the songs.

I TOTALLY agree on the rock music. Sometimes I listen to mainstream Christian music channels when our Catholic radio is broadcasting spanish. And when a song comes on that it TOO hard rock style…I have to flip to another channel. I, personally, don’t even find it appropriate in my car.

 

[archangel04]

.

Actually they have had great success. If not would they be those like you who don’t seem to be able to see any good in the Church.

And what makes you think I don’t see good changes? All you are is attacking me, and no real argument. I like what Vatican II implemented believe it or not, it’s those who used it to make the Church into their own experimental arena that I dislike! What success? If they did have success the Church wouldn’t have to do a new translation for the English, she wouldn’t have sent document after document of how to serve the mass and telling people that we have our place in the Church and not to take up roles we have not been called to. What did I hit a nerve with you? All those orders and societies are really loosing vocations, yet those that seem more traditional and faithful to the magisterium, or so filled that they need to construct new housing building or turn people away. So please spare the attacks.

 

[Dymphna82]

Keeps hearing about liberal vs. rightwing. As if rightwing is a bad thing. All I know is, and I’m not all that knowledgeable, is that the Revelations warns about this. Churches falling asleep, churches of lukewarm faith, and most of all, churches that need to repent. I don’t need any church trying to lead my soul into things God does not want for me.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Keeps hearing about liberal vs. rightwing. As if rightwing is a bad thing. All I know is, and I’m not all that knowledgeable, is that the Revelations warns about this. Churches falling asleep, churches of lukewarm faith, and most of all, churches that need to repent. I don’t need any church trying to lead my soul into things God does not want for me.

Just an aside:

It probably isn’t helpful for us to employ words like “liberal” and “conservative” to the Church. The meanings for both are far too broad and far too dependent on context for their meanings. “Liberal” can mean “radically progressive” or “open-handed.” Liberalism is actually condemned by the Church, IIRC Pope St. Pius X, but what the Church defines as that particular error is often confused with what other people think “libralism” means.

Far better terminology would be “orthodox” and “heterodox.” To be a Catholic is to be orthodox (small “O,” not to be confused with the big “O,” as in Russian Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, etc). To depart in any way from the Truth of the Church, ie., to fail in orthodoxy, is to cease to be a Catholic. One can question matters of discipline and have an opinion on matters of discipline (for example, Communion in the hand) and still be a loyal and faithful Catholic. If, however, one disagrees with the Church on matters of faith and morals, that doesn’t make one a “liberal” Catholic. It makes one NOT Catholic at all.

 

[JChapel]

Liberalism is actually condemned by the Church, IIRC Pope St. Pius X,

Care to elaborate?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Care to elaborate?

I do apologize, it was Blessed Pope Pius IX, in his Syllabus of Errors:

papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9syll.htm

 

[JChapel]

I do apologize, it was Blessed Pope Pius IX, in his Syllabus of Errors:

papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9syll.htm

Thanks for the link.

 

[ProVobis]

While I have nothing against those who enjoy EF, nor do I believe that The Church should ever remove it, maybe it’s just the CAF effect taking over again, but I haven’t exactly seen “sweeping” changes towards EF in my area. I think just one church in our area even offers masses in EF and that’s only one day a week.

That’s partly because of the “liberal” paradigm shift towards dropping classics (and de-emphasizing math and science in favor of political and computer science and others) in our school system inter alia. Despite all the efforts by the Vatican to preserve its use, Latin just hasn’t been studied by the priests and, of course, the perceived 40-yr suppression of the rite has taken its toll on most of those who once had faithfully attended the TLM, the only Mass available at that time. Today, despite the fact that it is still an obligation to attend Mass on every Sunday, around 75% of Catholics don’t go to any Mass. There are other forces at play here. Drop the English Mass in its 1970 form for 40 years, just have communion services, and see at the end how many still go to that Mass if they brought it back after that time. Would you have tears flowing down every face of those in Church? Would anyone be there at all?

 

[JChapel]

Drop the English Mass in its 1970 form for 40 years, just have communion services, and see at the end how many still go to that Mass if they brought it back after that time. Would you have tears flowing down every face of those in Church? Would anyone be there at all?

That sure would be a quick way to purge 50%+ of the practicing Catholic population.

 

[At_Trent]

While I have nothing against those who enjoy EF, nor do I believe that The Church should ever remove it, maybe it’s just the CAF effect taking over again, but I haven’t exactly seen “sweeping” changes towards EF in my area. I think just one church in our area even offers masses in EF and that’s only one day a week. …

Hi James, the sweeping changes you don’t see are understandable. If you were to stand outside your parish after Mass and ask each parishioner as they leave “what do you think of the Summorum Pontificum ?” , you’d get some puzzling looks.

The CA effect you speak of is correct, in that the internet allows ignorance on many matters to be overcome. If a parish pastor does not mention the SP, for whatever reason, chances are, not many in the parish will know of it. I’m not sure what % of average Catholics go to Catholic forums, but I’d guess very few.

I posted a poll on L&S forum here asking if a EF Mass were available in the area, would you attend. Ran for a few weeks before the thread was locked, but during the entire time, the “yes I’d attend” figures ran over 70%. So, though not a very scientific or controlled study, the poll indicated the power of the internet to inform, and also indicated a strong interest, at least here on CA. And, as the thread was locked, we saw evidence of some very passionate fear and disdain for the EF. Of those voting “no”, a very high percentage of them saw a need to tell us why. And most of those, saw fit to repeat themselves. It’s obvious by looking through the thread, that a very small percentage of those voting 'Yes" offered a reply on the thread. Voting was enough.

Again, though not scientific or worthy of citation, the thread was very revealing. We saw an effort to suppress the EF. We saw labels being hurled. Now, that isn’t suprising. It’s the internet after all. But considering reports of continued suppression of the EF by certain Bishops, it’s easy to understand why “sweeping changes” aren’t being seen.

I have no ill will against this Cardinal, but he said this, and it is hurtful to many who waited so long for the EF to be freed of indult.

“The Tridentine Mass was meant for those who could not make the transition from Latin to English [or other languages] after the Council. But there is no participation by the people, and I don’t believe that instills the spirit of Christ among us.”
ncregister.com/blog/cardinal_mahony_vs._latin_mass/

The statement contains false information. Imagine someone who doesn’t know better reading that.

That’s why traditionalists see all these “if one prefers the EF, fine” sort of statements empty and meaningless. One who says such may very well be sincere, but in general, the stigma hanging over traditionalists, even those who kept their mouths shut and rolled with the flow since 1970, remains.

It’s a persecution of sorts. And that brings us to your last statement.

Again, I have nothing against people who choose to go to EF Masses. I just believe that EF isn’t for everyone, and in either case, we’re still participating in the same sacrament, with the same presence.

That is a true Catholic attitude and expresses a desire for unity. But the fact is, those like yourself are in a minority, at least on these forums. For everyone who feels as you do, there are 10 who hate us with all their might.

God Bless

 

[MarkThompson]

Again, though not scientific or worthy of citation, the thread was very revealing. We saw an effort to suppress the EF. We saw labels being hurled. Now, that isn’t suprising. It’s the internet after all. But considering reports of continued suppression of the EF by certain Bishops, it’s easy to understand why “sweeping changes” aren’t being seen.

I have no ill will against this Cardinal, but he said this, and it is hurtful to many who waited so long for the EF to be freed of indult.

“The Tridentine Mass was meant for those who could not make the transition from Latin to English [or other languages] after the Council. But there is no participation by the people, and I don’t believe that instills the spirit of Christ among us.”
ncregister.com/blog/cardi…s._latin_mass/

Not to get off topic, but is there a simple explanation for the cardinalatial zuchettos those girls are wearing in that photo (“Girls sing at a Tridentine Mass celebrated last year by Bishop William Murphy of Rockville Centre, N.Y.”)? Is the red zuchetto a traditional headcovering of some sort for women? When I saw the picture at NCR I thought for a second that it was some liberal girlcardinal thing that Mahoney was responsible for, then I read the caption.

 

[At_Trent]

Not to get off topic, but is there a simple explanation for the cardinalatial zuchettos those girls are wearing in that photo (“Girls sing at a Tridentine Mass celebrated last year by Bishop William Murphy of Rockville Centre, N.Y.”)? Is the red zuchetto a traditional headcovering of some sort for women? When I saw the picture at NCR I thought for a second that it was some liberal girlcardinal thing that Mahoney was responsible for, then I read the caption.

Mark, I’m sorry, but I don’t have a clue what or why. Secular liturgical garb isn’t my forte

 

[MarkThompson]

Mark, I’m sorry, but I don’t have a clue what or why. Secular liturgical garb isn’t my forte

Okay. I’ve just never seen a woman, under any circumstances, in a headcovering that looked like that, let alone for a traditional Mass. I thought maybe I was missing something obvious.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Quote:
Again, I have nothing against people who choose to go to EF Masses. I just believe that EF isn’t for everyone, and in either case, we’re still participating in the same sacrament, with the same presence.

That is a true Catholic attitude and expresses a desire for unity. But the fact is, those like yourself are in a minority, at least on these forums. For everyone who feels as you do, there are 10 who hate us with all their might.

God Bless

I feel the same way…I have nothing against people who choose EF Masses…they are our Catholic breathern are they not. I just don’t like when someone who does tries to tell me I don’t believe in the real presence because I go to the OF. I think there are a lot of us here who really do not hate traditionalist…who may just really not know enough about them. These people just may not post…or…traditionalist may have been “burned” enough that they immediately think everyone feels like that. We don’t. I for one love my entire Catholic family!

 

[Aboveallbereal]

Just an aside:

It probably isn’t helpful for us to employ words like “liberal” and “conservative” to the Church. The meanings for both are far too broad and far too dependent on context for their meanings. “Liberal” can mean “radically progressive” or “open-handed.” Liberalism is actually condemned by the Church, IIRC Pope St. Pius X, but what the Church defines as that particular error is often confused with what other people think “libralism” means.

Far better terminology would be “orthodox” and “heterodox.” To be a Catholic is to be orthodox (small “O,” not to be confused with the big “O,” as in Russian Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, etc). To depart in any way from the Truth of the Church, ie., to fail in orthodoxy, is to cease to be a Catholic. One can question matters of discipline and have an opinion on matters of discipline (for example, Communion in the hand) and still be a loyal and faithful Catholic. If, however, one disagrees with the Church on matters of faith and morals, that doesn’t make one a “liberal” Catholic. It makes one NOT Catholic at all.

May I say Jkirk that this above is an admirably clear, concise and wholly accurate comment which if understood generally would help no end in having people debate with some actual grasp of what they are debating. Definition matters.

 

[archangel04]

Hi James, the sweeping changes you don’t see are understandable. If you were to stand outside your parish after Mass and ask each parishioner as they leave “what do you think of the Summorum Pontificum ?” , you’d get some puzzling looks.

The CA effect you speak of is correct, in that the internet allows ignorance on many matters to be overcome. If a parish pastor does not mention the SP, for whatever reason, chances are, not many in the parish will know of it. I’m not sure what % of average Catholics go to Catholic forums, but I’d guess very few.

I posted a poll on L&S forum here asking if a EF Mass were available in the area, would you attend. Ran for a few weeks before the thread was locked, but during the entire time, the “yes I’d attend” figures ran over 70%. So, though not a very scientific or controlled study, the poll indicated the power of the internet to inform, and also indicated a strong interest, at least here on CA. And, as the thread was locked, we saw evidence of some very passionate fear and disdain for the EF. Of those voting “no”, a very high percentage of them saw a need to tell us why. And most of those, saw fit to repeat themselves. It’s obvious by looking through the thread, that a very small percentage of those voting 'Yes" offered a reply on the thread. Voting was enough.

Again, though not scientific or worthy of citation, the thread was very revealing. We saw an effort to suppress the EF. We saw labels being hurled. Now, that isn’t suprising. It’s the internet after all. But considering reports of continued suppression of the EF by certain Bishops, it’s easy to understand why “sweeping changes” aren’t being seen.

I have no ill will against this Cardinal, but he said this, and it is hurtful to many who waited so long for the EF to be freed of indult.

The statement contains false information. Imagine someone who doesn’t know better reading that.

That’s why traditionalists see all these “if one prefers the EF, fine” sort of statements empty and meaningless. One who says such may very well be sincere, but in general, the stigma hanging over traditionalists, even those who kept their mouths shut and rolled with the flow since 1970, remains.

It’s a persecution of sorts. And that brings us to your last statement.

That is a true Catholic attitude and expresses a desire for unity. But the fact is, those like yourself are in a minority, at least on these forums. For everyone who feels as you do, there are 10 who hate us with all their might.

God Bless

Very good