A rant in defense of the Novus Ordo

[catharina]

.
If only you were as accurate as you are agitating. I said" He **should have been **excommunicated along with Father Charles Curran…"
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=239157&page=16

That is exactly the group the gorup I was referring to.
"FRI, DEC 8 (Immaculate Conception) – Vatican confirms excommunication for US dissident group – Dec. 7, 2006 (CWNews.com) - The Vatican has confirmed an American bishop’s decision to excommunicate members of the dissident group** Call to Action**.

.
And what story did I invent???

Maria, in both instances it might have helped if you’d been much more specifc. E.g., re Charles Curran: If you’d said or even implied, “He **should have been **excommunicated along with Father Charles Curran who should have been excommunicated too, IMO.” Your intital statement seems to say that Charles Curran WAS (already) excommunicated." (Not a fact.)

Re Call to Action: the group as it exists in the Diocese of Lincoln Nebraska has indeed been excommunicated by the Bishop, with the permission of the Vatican. ALSO excommunicated under the same action by the same bishop (regarding other groups local to his Diocese) were/are SSPX, Catholics for a Free Choice, Planned Parenthood, the Hemlock Society and the Freemasons. Your initial post seemed to say that ALL members of Call to Action were excommunicated. No - only in the dicoese of Lincoln.

I see you corrected that mis-information and you’ve made that clear in LATER posts.

No agitating from me; just like to see the FACTS presented as facts.

 

[JReducation]

Getting back to the original thread on the OF (Novus Ordo), whichever we want to call it. I had a wonderful experiece tonight. I went to church for confession. That was wonderful too, but that’s not my point.

While I was waiting the two music ministers were getting ready for the 5:00 mass. Being that it’s the Solemnity of Corpus Christi in this diocese, there is a long preface before the readings.

One of the music directors suggested that instead of the preface in the missal that we use a certain song. I can’t remember which one he suggested and it’s not important. The second guy responded, “I already asked and the Friars have said there will be no substituting what’s in the missal, unless it’s overruled by the Franciscan missal.”

The other guy said, “But it’s too long.”

The second one says, “The Friars are adamant about this. They almost bit my head off.”

They sounded a little upset that the friars would not allow a deviation from the Roman missal unless it was overruled by the Franciscan missal.

I remembered these discussions that we have here. I thought to myself, “This is a perfect example of the OF being properly celebrated.”

I just thought I’d share that with everyone. There are parishes that do celebrate the OF properly.

JR

 

[Dies_Irae]

…We need to worry about what our children are being taught. Apparently you are not.
Charles Curran
hli.org/features_millstone_award_curran.html
"Shortly after Pope John Paul II was elected, the Holy Father launched a detailed investigation of Father Curran’s teaching, and found that he consistently ignored and denounced Church teachings on every aspect of sexuality, including marriage, abortion, in-vitro fertilization, euthanasia, masturbation, contraception, fornication, and homosexual acts.

Father Curran has done incalculable damage to souls and to the Faith. He is always a willing voice for the Catholic-baiting and Catholic-hating mainline media.
He speaks at nearly every Call to Action national conference, and in fact received the organization’s 2005 Leadership Award. He is also deeply involved in the homosexual dissenting organization New Ways Ministry, and received its first Bridge Building Award in 1992."

Thank you stmaria for pointing out that lay folk have to be vigilant in defending the faith. The Lord Himself said wolves would rise amongst the sheep - why it comes as a surprise to some people when it actually happens I’ll never know .

Dies Irae

 

[Dies_Irae]

…I hope these examples help to clarify what I mean about overstepping boundaries and clericalization of the laity.

Well that was one example of a guy from your parish, which to be honest here, sounds more like what happens at the average OF parish - too many lay folk acting like clerics, to the point where a runaway “pastoral council” starts trying to run the show, and and the pastor !

But I thought you and Jeanette were referring to this forum and the folks here discussing things…Jeanette’s words:

*“It seems to me that an awful lot of people around these parts are taking on roles that don’t belong to them.”
*
Maybe you guys are talking about two different things.

God Bless

Dies Irae

 

[JReducation]

Well that was one example of a guy from your parish, which to be honest here, sounds more like what happens at the average OF parish - too many lay folk acting like clerics, to the point where a runaway “pastoral council” starts trying to run the show, and and the pastor !

But I thought you and Jeanette were referring to this forum and the folks here discussing things…Jeanette’s words:

*“It seems to me that an awful lot of people around these parts are taking on roles that don’t belong to them.”
*
Maybe you guys are talking about two different things.

God Bless

Dies Irae

Dies Irae

Unfortunately, among those whith legitimate concerns on CAF, there are many like this guy in my parish also on CAF.

We have to be careful not to confuse legitimate concerns with a desire to have things our way or a desire to tell others what to do.

I also believe that you have to pick your battles. If you raise every point that is wrong or that you believe is wrong, at some point pastors, bishops and religious superiors are going to stop listening.

A long time ago I was in a parish run by a religious congregation. The congregation had certain rules about baptism. Actually, they were very good rules. They did not baptize children whose parents were not evanglized first.

People complained and complained, because people wanted to have their children baptized. They kept insisting that other parishes did not make these demands. Which was true. But the Constitution of theis congregation specifically said that their primary mission was to evangelize. So they came to the parish with this mission. Those were the terms under which they accepted the contract with the Bishop.

Eventually, they were asked to take over three more parishes.

After dealing with lay people who wanted them to drop this demand and their explaining that they could not, because this was in their religious constiution, they gave up and they gave the four parishes back to the bishop.

The bishop had to consolidate them into two parishes, because he did not have secular priests and after the experience of the previous religious congregation, other religious congregations and religious orders said that they would not take over these parishes because they would not minister to people who told them how to apply the charism of their community in their parish ministry.

This complaining ended up hurting the parishes instead of helping. I no longer live in that diocese. But to this day, no religious community has moved into that diocese. Those who were there from long ago are still there. But new ones who have been invited are gun shy.

I hope this makes sense. We have to be careful, pick our battles and treat people with respect, use appropriate means of communication or we win the battle and lose the war.

JR

 

[Jeanette_L]

Well that was one example of a guy from your parish, which to be honest here, sounds more like what happens at the average OF parish - too many lay folk acting like clerics, to the point where a runaway “pastoral council” starts trying to run the show, and and the pastor !

But I thought you and Jeanette were referring to this forum and the folks here discussing things…Jeanette’s words:

*“It seems to me that an awful lot of people around these parts are taking on roles that don’t belong to them.”
*
Maybe you guys are talking about two different things.

God Bless

Dies Irae

JR and I often talk about two different things! lol

No, it comes down to this, he is much more articulate or detailed in his expressions, and more charitable I might add, to my shame, but I’m a bit more general in the way I see things and express my thoughts on them.

What I see overall in many of these threads is a general lack of respect and a general sense of ingratitude and lack of appreciation for the sacrifice that most of those who minister make for our sakes.

Too much eagerness to find fault and too much glee in wanting to hang someone by their thumbs. A general lack of charity. This is heartbreaking. I wouldn’t want to be a priest for anything in the world if I had to deal with half of what I see here.

It’s just my feeling on the matter.

Do I think there are legitimate concerns and troubles at times? Yes, they are there. Do I think that people’s responses are often appropriate? No, I don’t. Not if they truly respond in the way they portray on these threads.

JR put it succinctly - overkill.

 

[Jeanette_L]

Getting back to the original thread on the OF (Novus Ordo), whichever we want to call it. I had a wonderful experiece tonight. I went to church for confession. That was wonderful too, but that’s not my point.

While I was waiting the two music ministers were getting ready for the 5:00 mass. Being that it’s the Solemnity of Corpus Christi in this diocese, there is a long preface before the readings.

One of the music directors suggested that instead of the preface in the missal that we use a certain song. I can’t remember which one he suggested and it’s not important. The second guy responded, “I already asked and the Friars have said there will be no substituting what’s in the missal, unless it’s overruled by the Franciscan missal.”

The other guy said, “But it’s too long.”

The second one says, “The Friars are adamant about this. They almost bit my head off.”

They sounded a little upset that the friars would not allow a deviation from the Roman missal unless it was overruled by the Franciscan missal.

I remembered these discussions that we have here. I thought to myself, “This is a perfect example of the OF being properly celebrated.”

I just thought I’d share that with everyone. There are parishes that do celebrate the OF properly.

JR

Here’s a case in point. A post about what went right. But then there’s no one to hang out to dry.

Narry a response, it doesn’t get the old juices flowing like a good scandalous Mass.

Just something wrong with the overall picture when complaining is all people really seem to want to do. The glass is always half empty and someone needs to pay dearly for it.

 

[Dies_Irae]

Unfortunately, among those whith legitimate concerns on CAF, there are many like this guy in my parish also on CAF.

That’s what I meant when I was asking for examples - from the forums.

We have to be careful not to confuse legitimate concerns with a desire to have things our way or a desire to tell others what to do.

Of course. That goes for all of us.

I also believe that you have to pick your battles. If you raise every point that is wrong or that you believe is wrong, at some point pastors, bishops and religious superiors are going to stop listening.

Of course. Goes without saying.

A long time ago I was in a parish run by a religious congregation. The congregation had certain rules about baptism. Actually, they were very good rules. They did not baptize children whose parents were not evanglized first. People complained and complained, because people wanted to have their children baptized. They kept insisting that other parishes did not make these demands.

Again, this does not sound like a “traditional” issue or concern…but rather the opposite. Traditional folks (myself included) lament so many real life stories in the non-traditional of nominal catholics who pop up in a parish to have their kids baptized. Then they disappear for five or six years and pop up until First Communion time. Disappear again until it’s time for Confirmation, then g’bye again. Too many treat the Sacraments as a social event to be “done” rather than really understanding what is happening.

Requiring catachesis - and for infant baptism, parents who actually live the faith - is not something you’ll hear complaints about on these forums anywhere…especially from traditional people. It is quite Catholic…at least it used to be .

God Bless,

Dies Irae

 

[Dies_Irae]

Here’s a case in point. A post about what went right. But then there’s no one to hang out to dry.

Narry a response, it doesn’t get the old juices flowing like a good scandalous Mass.

Just something wrong with the overall picture when complaining is all people really seem to want to do. The glass is always half empty and someone needs to pay dearly for it.

But look at yourself, and see if perhaps you are looking at the traditional sub-forums as always “half empty.”

This thread certainly didn’t get “narry a response” - forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=238851 as just one example. You even posted in it .

Now I’ve been lurking and reading here for a while before joining - alot of what I’ve seen (no names mentioned of course) seems to be a number of people have made traditional catholics and this traditional catholic forum their own personal mission. Challenging, critiquing, rebuking, almost every traditional concern mentioned at every turn - and promoting things guaranteed to get traditional people’s dander up…kind of like just looking for a squabble.

But I’m new here, so I’ll let it go at that before someone starts to “work on me”

“The glass is half full…SAY IT…the glass is half full…SAY IT!”



God Bless,

Dies Irae

 

[Jeanette_L]

“The glass is half full…SAY IT…the glass is half full…SAY IT!”



God Bless,

Dies Irae

Actually, I’ll see you’re half full and raise you a half full, because frankly, I think the glass is overflowing!!!

But then, I love the Catholic Church. Maybe because I see her with fresh eyes. I hope I always see her with fresh eyes, I really don’t like the way people with tired eyes tend to view her.

God Bless!

 

[JReducation]

But look at yourself, and see if perhaps you are looking at the traditional sub-forums as always “half empty.”

This thread certainly didn’t get “narry a response” - forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=238851 as just one example. You even posted in it .

Now I’ve been lurking and reading here for a while before joining - alot of what I’ve seen (no names mentioned of course) seems to be a number of people have made traditional catholics and this traditional catholic forum their own personal mission. Challenging, critiquing, rebuking, almost every traditional concern mentioned at every turn - and promoting things guaranteed to get traditional people’s dander up…kind of like just looking for a squabble.

But I’m new here, so I’ll let it go at that before someone starts to “work on me”

“The glass is half full…SAY IT…the glass is half full…SAY IT!”



God Bless,

Dies Irae

If I can put in my two cents, I think I get what Jeanette is saying.

The thread is about the Novus Ordo.

I posted something good that happened in a Novus Ordo parish (there is really no such a thing, but let’s use the term for the sake of clarity).

If anyone noticed it, no one commented on it. In other words, no one said, “Gee, it’s good to hear that there are parishes that keep the OF and preserve the rubrics and the reverence as well.”

Instead, the conversation continued on this abuse of that abuse and no one focussed on one good thing.

It’s almost like the child who brings home his report card and the parent screams and hollars because he has five Cs but fails to acknoledge the one A.

What message does that send?

Does this make things clearer?

I hope.

JR

 

[consumedconvert]

If I can put in my two cents, I think I get what Jeanette is saying.

The thread is about the Novus Ordo.

I posted something good that happened in a Novus Ordo parish (there is really no such a thing, but let’s use the term for the sake of clarity).

If anyone noticed it, no one commented on it. In other words, no one said, “Gee, it’s good to hear that there are parishes that keep the OF and preserve the rubrics and the reverence as well.”

Instead, the conversation continued on this abuse of that abuse and no one focussed on one good thing.

It’s almost like the child who brings home his report card and the parent screams and hollars because he has five Cs but fails to acknoledge the one A.

What message does that send?

Does this make things clearer?

I hope.

JR

Gotcha.

It must be said and should be said much more often than we say it: the Church Militant has a whole lot of As.

 

[JReducation]

Gotcha.

It must be said and should be said much more often than we say it: the Church Militant has a whole lot of As.

It’s funny (not amusing) that you use the term “church militant”, becasue it is a term tha frequently gets abused on CAF.

The original term comes from the Romance Languages and it had nothing to do with waging war.

There was the Church Triumphant which defined the saints in Heaven.

Then there was the Church Militant which defined those of us who are still working out our salvation by overcoming our shortcomings and replacing them with the practice of virtue.

If we look at St. Benedict he defines it very well in his rule. I’ll paraphrase it. He told his followers to focus on becoming saints, but to focus on the practice of virtue. Then he gave them a set of virtues to work on: prayer, work, hospitality, silence, listening, obedience, and charity towards all.

Then we have the other great founder, St. Francis. He defines it in his rule and his lessons to his friars as: the struggle to live Christ literally.

St. Teresa of Avila defines it as the effort to reach the union of the soul with the Divine King, regardless of what’s happening around you. It was an effort to become completely detached from the world around you so that only Christ was the focus of your love and your search.

Mother Teresa of Calcutta explains it as seeing Christ in every person, even those who are not of your faith or of your social condition.

Pope John Paul II defined it as learning to live with suffering, struggling to identify your sufferings with those of Christ on the cross.

None of the great saints have ever defined Church militant as a state of war between the individual and the world. Rather as a state of war against one’s own sinfulness.

Put this way, it’s a beautiful concept, because it promises relief from suffering that comes from my sinfulness and detaches us from all unnecessary preocupations and attachments.

JR

 

[Dies_Irae]

Actually, I’ll see you’re half full and raise you a half full, because frankly, I think the glass is overflowing!!!

But then, I love the Catholic Church. …

Woh Nellie…be careful the words you choose. You’re not trying to say that all those who disagree with you somehow lack love for the Church?

I know your not saying that?!?!



God bless,

Dies Irae

 

[Dies_Irae]

… posted something good that happened in a Novus Ordo parish (there is really no such a thing, but let’s use the term for the sake of clarity).

If anyone noticed it, no one commented on it. In other words, no one said, “Gee, it’s good to hear that there are parishes that keep the OF and preserve the rubrics and the reverence as well.”

Well, not commenting on a post *you thought *they should have commented on isn’t exactly the same as trying to take on the role of clerics. Come on now guys - think about it!

God Bless,

Dies Irae

 

[consumedconvert]

It’s funny (not amusing) that you use the term “church militant”, becasue it is a term tha frequently gets abused on CAF.

The original term comes from the Romance Languages and it had nothing to do with waging war.

There was the Church Triumphant which defined the saints in Heaven.

Then there was the Church Militant which defined those of us who are still working out our salvation by overcoming our shortcomings and replacing them with the practice of virtue.

If we look at St. Benedict he defines it very well in his rule. I’ll paraphrase it. He told his followers to focus on becoming saints, but to focus on the practice of virtue. Then he gave them a set of virtues to work on: prayer, work, hospitality, silence, listening, obedience, and charity towards all.

Then we have the other great founder, St. Francis. He defines it in his rule and his lessons to his friars as: the struggle to live Christ literally.

St. Teresa of Avila defines it as the effort to reach the union of the soul with the Divine King, regardless of what’s happening around you. It was an effort to become completely detached from the world around you so that only Christ was the focus of your love and your search.

Mother Teresa of Calcutta explains it as seeing Christ in every person, even those who are not of your faith or of your social condition.

Pope John Paul II defined it as learning to live with suffering, struggling to identify your sufferings with those of Christ on the cross.

None of the great saints have ever defined Church militant as a state of war between the individual and the world. Rather as a state of war against one’s own sinfulness.

Put this way, it’s a beautiful concept, because it promises relief from suffering that comes from my sinfulness and detaches us from all unnecessary preocupations and attachments.

JR

Indeed, one of the Three Parts of the Church: Triumphant, Suffering, and Militant. I would tend to think that the term militant implies an inward struggle against personal sin and for holiness and, through this struggle and perserverance in God’s grace, the attainment of eternal life?

 

[Dies_Irae]

It’s funny (not amusing) that you use the term “church militant”, becasue it is a term tha frequently gets abused on CAF.

The original term comes from the Romance Languages and it had nothing to do with waging war.

Huh?

It harkens back to Ephesisans 6 doesn’t it?

“Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we are not contending against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world rulers of this present darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. Therefore take the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.” (verses 12-13).
It also was described in the Roman Catechism that came from the Council of Trent -
** The Parts of the Church**

These things having been explained, it will be necessary to enumerate the several component parts of the Church, and to point out their difference, in order that the faithful may the better comprehend the nature, properties, gifts, and graces of God’s beloved Church, and by reason of them unceasingly praise the most holy name of God.

The Church consists principally of two parts, the one called the Church triumphant; the other, the Church militant. The Church triumphant is that most glorious and happy assemblage of blessed spirits, and of those who have triumphed over the world, the flesh, and the iniquity of Satan, and are now exempt and safe from the troubles of this life and enjoy everlasting bliss. The Church militant is the society of all the faithful still dwelling on earth. It is called militant, because it wages eternal war with those implacable enemies, the world, the flesh and the devil.

We are not, however, to infer that there are two Churches. The Church triumphant and the Church militant are two constituent parts of one Church; one part going before, and now in the possession of its heavenly country; the other, following every day, until at length, united with our Saviour, it shall repose in endless felicity.

---

The Members of the Church Militant
****The Church militant is composed of two classes of persons, the good and the bad, both professing the same faith and partaking of the same Sacraments, yet differing in their manner of life and morality.

The good are those who are linked together not only by the profession of the same faith, and the participation of the same Sacraments, but also by the spirit of grace and the bond of charity. Of these St. Paul says: The Lord knoweth who are his. Who they are that compose this class we also may remotely conjecture, but we can by no means pronounce with certainty. Hence Christ the Saviour does not speak of this portion of His Church when He refers us to the Church and commands us to hear and to obey her. As this part of the Church is unknown, how could we ascertain with certainty whose decision to recur to, whose authority to obey?

The Church, therefore, as the Scriptures and the writings of the Saints testify, includes within her fold the good and the bad; and it was in this sense that St. Paul spoke of one body and one spirit. Thus understood, the Church is known and is compared to a city built on a mountain, and visible from every side. As all must yield obedience to her authority, it is necessary that she may*be known by all.

That the Church is composed of the good and the bad we learn from many parables contained in the Gospel. Thus, the kingdom of heaven, that is, the Church militant, is compared to a net cast into the sea, to a field in which tares were sown with the good grain, to a threshing floor on which the grain is mixed up with the chaff, and also to ten virgins, some of whom were wise, and some foolish. And long before, we trace a figure and resemblance of this Church in the ark of Noah, which contained not only clean, but also unclean animals.

But although the Catholic faith uniformly and truly teaches that the good and the bad belong to the Church, yet the same faith declares that the condition of both is very different. The wicked are contained in the Church, as the chaff is mingled with the grain on the threshing floor, or as dead members sometimes remain attached to a living body."

IThen there was the Church Militant which defined those of us who are still working out our salvation by overcoming our shortcomings and replacing them with the practice of virtue.

In otherwords…overcoming sin.

Since temptation to sin comes from three sources, the world, the flesh and the devil, then we are at war with all three whenever the temptations arise from these sources.

I don’t think the saints you mentioned would have disagreed at all with this.

The things the saints and folks you mention described are different methods of fighting this war - different aspects of what it means to be in the Church Militant, and various weapons and shields the Church gives us for the battle. Doesn’t sound like they are trying to “define” the concept of Church Militant though…such would have been too narrow given what you posted.

God bless,

Dies Irae

 

[JReducation]

Huh?

It harkens back to Ephesisans 6 doesn’t it?

“Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we are not contending against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world rulers of this present darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. Therefore take the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.” (verses 12-13).
It also was described in the Roman Catechism that came from the Council of Trent -
** The Parts of the Church**

These things having been explained, it will be necessary to enumerate the several component parts of the Church, and to point out their difference, in order that the faithful may the better comprehend the nature, properties, gifts, and graces of God’s beloved Church, and by reason of them unceasingly praise the most holy name of God.

The Church consists principally of two parts, the one called the Church triumphant; the other, the Church militant. The Church triumphant is that most glorious and happy assemblage of blessed spirits, and of those who have triumphed over the world, the flesh, and the iniquity of Satan, and are now exempt and safe from the troubles of this life and enjoy everlasting bliss. The Church militant is the society of all the faithful still dwelling on earth. It is called militant, because it wages eternal war with those implacable enemies, the world, the flesh and the devil.

We are not, however, to infer that there are two Churches. The Church triumphant and the Church militant are two constituent parts of one Church; one part going before, and now in the possession of its heavenly country; the other, following every day, until at length, united with our Saviour, it shall repose in endless felicity.

---

The Members of the Church Militant
****The Church militant is composed of two classes of persons, the good and the bad, both professing the same faith and partaking of the same Sacraments, yet differing in their manner of life and morality.

The good are those who are linked together not only by the profession of the same faith, and the participation of the same Sacraments, but also by the spirit of grace and the bond of charity. Of these St. Paul says: The Lord knoweth who are his. Who they are that compose this class we also may remotely conjecture, but we can by no means pronounce with certainty. Hence Christ the Saviour does not speak of this portion of His Church when He refers us to the Church and commands us to hear and to obey her. As this part of the Church is unknown, how could we ascertain with certainty whose decision to recur to, whose authority to obey?

The Church, therefore, as the Scriptures and the writings of the Saints testify, includes within her fold the good and the bad; and it was in this sense that St. Paul spoke of one body and one spirit. Thus understood, the Church is known and is compared to a city built on a mountain, and visible from every side. As all must yield obedience to her authority, it is necessary that she may*be known by all.

That the Church is composed of the good and the bad we learn from many parables contained in the Gospel. Thus, the kingdom of heaven, that is, the Church militant, is compared to a net cast into the sea, to a field in which tares were sown with the good grain, to a threshing floor on which the grain is mixed up with the chaff, and also to ten virgins, some of whom were wise, and some foolish. And long before, we trace a figure and resemblance of this Church in the ark of Noah, which contained not only clean, but also unclean animals.

But although the Catholic faith uniformly and truly teaches that the good and the bad belong to the Church, yet the same faith declares that the condition of both is very different. The wicked are contained in the Church, as the chaff is mingled with the grain on the threshing floor, or as dead members sometimes remain attached to a living body."

In otherwords…overcoming sin.

Since temptation to sin comes from three sources, the world, the flesh and the devil, then we are at war with all three whenever the temptations arise from these sources.

I don’t think the saints you mentioned would have disagreed at all with this.

The things the saints and folks you mention described are different methods of fighting this war - different aspects of what it means to be in the Church Militant, and various weapons and shields the Church gives us for the battle. Doesn’t sound like they are trying to “define” the concept of Church Militant though…such would have been too narrow given what you posted.

God bless,

Dies Irae

What these saints tried to do was to simplify this theology into shorter language that people can remember and use. The concept is not different. It’s that struggle for inner holiness that all of us have to deal with day to day. Each of these saints found a different way to deal with it. They placed it out there for the benefit of others. That’s all. No big changes here.

JR

 

[stmaria]

What these saints tried to do was to simplify this theology into shorter language that people can remember and use.

The concept is not different. It’s that struggle for inner holiness that all of us have to deal with day to day.

JR your concept of Church Militant and the concept from the Council of Trent are completely different.
From the Council of Trent

The Church militant is the society of all the faithful still dwelling on earth. It is called militant, because it wages eternal war with those implacable enemies, the world, the flesh and the devil.

Your definition

The original term comes from the Romance Languages and it had nothing to do with waging war.
Then there was the Church Militant which defined those of us who are still working out our salvation by overcoming our shortcomings and replacing them with the practice of virtue.

I know you say you are a theologian but I will stay with the definition of Church Militant from the Council of Trent.

 

[stmaria]

=JReducation;3723484]
A long time ago I was in a parish run by a religious congregation

.
JR, I thought that you were still in the Jewish faith up until about 18 months ago? When did you become Catholic and when did you receive your theology degree. Just curious?