And yet another issue divides us

[tonild]

As I read through the forums, It seems we catholics are divided on so many issues. the music in church, the form of the mass we prefer, what language the mass should be said in. What people should or shouldn’t ware to mass. Holding hands in church, Now it is John Coropi. I this not how Satin wins by dividing us?

If I ware jeans to mass or shorts, will it make my worship less holy? I am not saying we should dress like we would to the beach. If I prefer contemporary music to chant, does it make my prayers less heard then than one who prefers more classical music? And if I hold hands with my brothers and sisters, durring the Our Father, will Jesus not hear my prayer, as I show love to my church family? How one worships is between God and the person, and should not be judged. Maybe we need to stop looking for what people are doing wrong, and be more loving to them.

 

[Bohm_Bawerk]

As I read through the forums, It seems we catholics are divided on so many issues. the music in church, the form of the mass we prefer, what language the mass should be said in. What people should or shouldn’t ware to mass. Holding hands in church, Now it is John Coropi. I this not how Satin wins by dividing us?

Not all Catholics are like that. I’m not, and the Catholics I know personally are not .

It’s just the self-styled “Traditionalists” on the internet who make a big fuss about the all things you’ve mentioned. I wouldn’t take them too seriously or pay them much attention if I were you .

 

[JoArtist]

I find that most Catholics are like this. I have a hard time being friends with Catholics due to this issue. I have been put down because of my religious tattoos (my Priest actually loves these… He says they are “really cool”) , but the same people are cool with mortification. But I guess I find most Christians in general judgmental… I came from a fundamentalist background and people were the same way, just with different issues.When will the body of Christ start showing the love of Christ? To quote Relient K “The enemy is much ignored while we fight this Christian Civil War.” “We are cannibals, we watch our brothers fall, we eat our own the bones and all.”

 

[EasterJoy]

As I read through the forums, It seems we catholics are divided on so many issues. the music in church, the form of the mass we prefer, what language the mass should be said in. What people should or shouldn’t ware to mass. Holding hands in church, Now it is John Coropi. I this not how Satin wins by dividing us?

If I ware jeans to mass or shorts, will it make my worship less holy? I am not saying we should dress like we would to the beach. If I prefer contemporary music to chant, does it make my prayers less heard then than one who prefers more classical music? And if I hold hands with my brothers and sisters, durring the Our Father, will Jesus not hear my prayer, as I show love to my church family? How one worships is between God and the person, and should not be judged. Maybe we need to stop looking for what people are doing wrong, and be more loving to them.

Is it a tactic of the devil to first tempt to carelessness, and then if that doesn’t work, to tempt to pride? That’s what CS Lewis surmised:
“Through this girl and her disgusting family the patient is now getting to know more Christians every day,and very intelligent Christians too. For a long time it will be quite impossible to remove spirituality from his life. Very well then; we must corrupt it. No doubt you have often practiced transforming yourself into an angel of light as a parade-ground exercise. Now is the time to do it in the face of the Enemy. The World and the Flesh have failed us; a third Power remains. And success of this third kind is the most glorious of all. A spoiled saint, a Pharisee, an inquisitor, or a magician, makes better sport in Hell than a mere common tyrant or debauchee.” Screwtape Letters, Letter 23

 

[Cyclophile]

Is it a tactic of the devil to first tempt to carelessness, and then if that doesn’t work, to tempt to pride? That’s what CS Lewis surmised:
“Through this girl and her disgusting family the patient is now getting to know more Christians every day,and very intelligent Christians too. For a long time it will be quite impossible to remove spirituality from his life. Very well then; we must corrupt it. No doubt you have often practiced transforming yourself into an angel of light as a parade-ground exercise. Now is the time to do it in the face of the Enemy. The World and the Flesh have failed us; a third Power remains. And success of this third kind is the most glorious of all. A spoiled saint, a Pharisee, an inquisitor, or a magician, makes better sport in Hell than a mere common tyrant or debauchee.” Screwtape Letters, Letter 23

hey, that’s right! I just finished reading the letters myself.

I think it is pride… the entire “Holier than thou” thing… its a poison in protestant circles as well… especially the more fundamentalist individuals (that tend to forget to judge not…)

Oops, there I go, easy trap.

 

[manualman]

Actually there are equal and opposite hazards at play here.

I absolutely agree that nitpicking one’s neighbors and community detracts from holiness rather than inclines us towards it.

But apathy and carelessness are at least as much a risk. If we feel that there is ‘no need to bother’ cleaning up a tad before going to mass, we are sending God a message, conscious or not. When you grab at a reluctant parishioner’s hand at the Our Father, you are pushing him to YOUR preference as much as CAF curmudgeons are pushing you to theirs. If we reduce our taste in liturgical music to “that’s a catchy tune and I like the beat”, are we engaging in what Augustine referred to when he said “He who sings well prays twice?”

Food for thought, anyways. There are ditches on BOTH sides of the straight and narrow.

 

[Trebor135]

hey, that’s right! I just finished reading the letters myself.

I think it is pride… the entire “Holier than thou” thing… its a poison in protestant circles as well… especially the more fundamentalist individuals (that tend to forget to judge not…)

Oops, there I go, easy trap.

I totally agree that it can definitely become excessive, but having standards isn’t a bad thing. Probably what gets a lot of the “traditionalist” folks is just how mediocre things have gotten in the past few decades.

I’ve often been guilty of being dressed not all that appropriately for church, and I know I have to change that. I don’t like holding hands during the Our Father–it seems so hippy-like–but get stuck doing it because the rest of my family insists. I don’t mind incense, and prefer the more old-fashioned music (the use of guitars grates on me), but I haven’t acquired the taste for Gregorian chant.

At my family’s parish we never hear a homily that would cause a stir–it’s usually rather fluff-filled and never looks at a “controversial” issue like war, abortion, or contraception. (If they ever preach on the last one, I’ll probably have a heart attack.)

It’s almost as if there’s a symbiotic relationship between the laiety and the clergy: “As long as the priests and deacon don’t antagonize the parishioners with an uncomfortable message about dress or ethics, the priests and deacon will still have a decent number of parishioners to shepherd.”

 

[tonild]

Actually there are equal and opposite hazards at play here.

I absolutely agree that nitpicking one’s neighbors and community detracts from holiness rather than inclines us towards it.

But apathy and carelessness are at least as much a risk. If we feel that there is ‘no need to bother’ cleaning up a tad before going to mass, we are sending God a message, conscious or not. When you grab at a reluctant parishioner’s hand at the Our Father, you are pushing him to YOUR preference as much as CAF curmudgeons are pushing you to theirs. If we reduce our taste in liturgical music to “that’s a catchy tune and I like the beat”, are we engaging in what Augustine referred to when he said “He who sings well prays twice?”

Food for thought, anyways. There are ditches on BOTH sides of the straight and narrow.

I would never grab any ones hand, but I do offer it to them.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Exactly.

My pastor often speaks of the challenge of constantly remembering that Christ was both God and man. He says if even the tiniest overemphasis is placed on Christ being God MORE than man, one falls into heresy; likewise even the tiniest overemphasis placed on Christ being MAN more than GOD will lead to heresy.

Most of the things such as dress, gesture, etc. are the same; too much emphasis on the “God loves me so I don’t need to do anything but 'go as I am” is putting too much emphasis on Christ as MAN. . .buddy, friend, somebody who’s ‘just a slob like one of us.’

And too much emphasis on "God is to be worshipped and adored and we need to be extremely ornate in our dress and servile and even cringing in our actions’ is putting too much emphasis on Christ as GOD . . .so far above us that we need to propitiate Him by all sorts of arcane rituals and uptight narrow rules.

Rather, right in the middle is “Christ is God and man. As God I adore Him; as man He is my brother and friend. As both, I do not dress ‘down’ to ignore His Godhood nor do I stifle myself in rigid prideful ‘splendor’ to ignore His Humanity.”

Body and soul should strive to make the balance between both inward AND outward signs of respect and awe of God. . .yet also inward and outward signs of love and fellowship of our firstborn Brother.

 

[EasterJoy]

Actually there are equal and opposite hazards at play here.

I absolutely agree that nitpicking one’s neighbors and community detracts from holiness rather than inclines us towards it.

But apathy and carelessness are at least as much a risk. If we feel that there is ‘no need to bother’ cleaning up a tad before going to mass, we are sending God a message, conscious or not. When you grab at a reluctant parishioner’s hand at the Our Father, you are pushing him to YOUR preference as much as CAF curmudgeons are pushing you to theirs. If we reduce our taste in liturgical music to “that’s a catchy tune and I like the beat”, are we engaging in what Augustine referred to when he said “He who sings well prays twice?”

Food for thought, anyways. There are ditches on BOTH sides of the straight and narrow.

Would anyone fail to be charmed if they went to a church dressed in a way they almost feared to be seen in public, got there to find everyone impeccably dressed, and was overwhelmed only by the warm and honest hospitality extended to them? Would that hospitality not be even more remarkable than the same behavior coming from people who seemed to care nothing for their own grooming?

Transfer to housekeeping. There is a whole range from keeping (or failing to keep so that you get) a home that is a true health hazard through keeping a place to a white-glove clean. Very few people will defend a dangerously dirty home. Few will argue that a clean home or business does not feel more gracious than a dirty one…but always provided that the hosts are not so concerned about housekeeping that they cease to be gracious. There is a kind of housekeeping that makes you hope you survive the hospitality without humiliating yourself or upsetting your hosts.

Just as the ideal is to keep a beautiful home and yet to not turn a hair when your guests come in the house with dirty shoes, so it ought to be with dressing up for church. Likewise, the gracious person is pleased with whatever hospitality is honestly extended, even if it does not meet some prevailing ideal. This person might arrive to dinner impeccably dressed, find that the hosts, though trying, were handicapped with regards to the most basic housekeeping and food preparation, and would be thankful to eat everything put before them, converse naturallly, and act as if nothing were amiss.

The keeping of the church and the selection of our dress for Mass ought to be something we do in order to be gracious to one another, and to give us all a shared a sense that we are doing something special…kind of like the special things we do to mark a holiday (holy day). Just as we would not impoverish ourselves to impress with the food we serve, but would do our best within what we could afford, so we would be more honest to wear what is within our means.

I think it is easy to extend the analogy on and on. The minute we let the clothing (or whatever it is) become an end in itself, then we lose the very thing that the clothing was meant for in the first place. That doesn’t mean that it doesn’t matter whether we dress up or not! After all, being lax is not the same as being big-hearted and accepting!

As Steven Covey put it, the trick is to take care to “keep the main thing the main thing.”

 

[TheRealJuliane]

As I read through the forums, It seems we catholics are divided on so many issues. the music in church, the form of the mass we prefer, what language the mass should be said in. What people should or shouldn’t ware to mass. Holding hands in church, Now it is John Coropi. I this not how Satin wins by dividing us?

If I ware jeans to mass or shorts, will it make my worship less holy? I am not saying we should dress like we would to the beach. If I prefer contemporary music to chant, does it make my prayers less heard then than one who prefers more classical music? And if I hold hands with my brothers and sisters, durring the Our Father, will Jesus not hear my prayer, as I show love to my church family? How one worships is between God and the person, and should not be judged. Maybe we need to stop looking for what people are doing wrong, and be more loving to them.

Don’t fret about Corapi, most Catholics have no idea who he is. He’s got his fan base, and a lot of them aren’t even Catholic, or they don’t appear to act like Catholics. Pray for him and his supporters.

These things are not divisions, they are merely distractions. Pray for everyone involved!

 

[JackQ]

As I read through the forums, It seems we catholics are divided on so many issues. the music in church, the form of the mass we prefer, what language the mass should be said in. What people should or shouldn’t ware to mass. Holding hands in church, Now it is John Coropi. I this not how Satin wins by dividing us?

If I ware jeans to mass or shorts, will it make my worship less holy? I am not saying we should dress like we would to the beach. If I prefer contemporary music to chant, does it make my prayers less heard then than one who prefers more classical music? And if I hold hands with my brothers and sisters, durring the Our Father, will Jesus not hear my prayer, as I show love to my church family? How one worships is between God and the person, and should not be judged. Maybe we need to stop looking for what people are doing wrong, and be more loving to them.

Well, we shouldn’t be divided on what matters, but what matters is always the question. I don’t think jeans will make you less holy, unless they’re designed to make others look at your hindquarters. Shorts? It doesn’t affect my holiness to wear them, unless looking ridiculous impacts holiness. You? I don’t know. It also depends on the cut of shorts. Baggy shorts are probably okay for the most part; hot pants, probably not so much. What I’m saying is that it seems to me common sense that clothes that are designed to incite lust are going to have an impact on the holiness of the wearer. I don’t mean that those who gape aren’t to blame for their own actions, but someone who deliberately invites gaping shares some responsibility too.

John Corapi wasn’t that interesting to me before, and if I see one more article about him I’m going to go out in public with hot pants on.

 

[JoArtist]

Exactly.

My pastor often speaks of the challenge of constantly remembering that Christ was both God and man. He says if even the tiniest overemphasis is placed on Christ being God MORE than man, one falls into heresy; likewise even the tiniest overemphasis placed on Christ being MAN more than GOD will lead to heresy.

Most of the things such as dress, gesture, etc. are the same; too much emphasis on the “God loves me so I don’t need to do anything but 'go as I am” is putting too much emphasis on Christ as MAN. . .buddy, friend, somebody who’s ‘just a slob like one of us.’

And too much emphasis on "God is to be worshipped and adored and we need to be extremely ornate in our dress and servile and even cringing in our actions’ is putting too much emphasis on Christ as GOD . . .so far above us that we need to propitiate Him by all sorts of arcane rituals and uptight narrow rules.

Rather, right in the middle is “Christ is God and man. As God I adore Him; as man He is my brother and friend. As both, I do not dress ‘down’ to ignore His Godhood nor do I stifle myself in rigid prideful ‘splendor’ to ignore His Humanity.”

Body and soul should strive to make the balance between both inward AND outward signs of respect and awe of God. . .yet also inward and outward signs of love and fellowship of our firstborn Brother.

Well also a thing we must remember is not everyone has the means to dress nice, or come into mass clean even. Many people are poor and homeless without nice clothing or the means to shower or brush their hair. I have seen people like this escorted out of mass, that is just wrong.

 

[merne9]

At my family’s parish we never hear a homily that would cause a stir–it’s usually rather fluff-filled and never looks at a “controversial” issue like war, abortion, or contraception. (If they ever preach on the last one, I’ll probably have a heart attack.)

It’s almost as if there’s a symbiotic relationship between the laiety and the clergy: “As long as the priests and deacon don’t antagonize the parishioners with an uncomfortable message about dress or ethics, the priests and deacon will still have a decent number of parishioners to shepherd.”

sometimes priest are not allowed to talk about certain topics even if they want to. i’ve heard of government officials sit during mass to hear what the priest is preaching about. of course in other countries. my parents have been involved in our parish for decades and for a while my dad would tell me the priest wasn’t allowed to talk about the wars or abortion. he could only say to pray for these.

lastly, priest have all kinds of personalities. some are more “in your face” harsh, loving and tender… but it is not because of fear of losing parishioners it’s his style.

 

[Trebor135]

sometimes priest are not allowed to talk about certain topics even if they want to. i’ve heard of government officials sit during mass to hear what the priest is preaching about. of course in other countries. my parents have been involved in our parish for decades and for a while my dad would tell me the priest wasn’t allowed to talk about the wars or abortion. he could only say to pray for these.

I find that difficult to believe. Who would be not “allowing” a priest to talk about war, abortion, or contraception in the U.S. or Canada? The two countries’ constitutions are still in force and, despite some egregious violations in the past ten years under Bush and Obama, what sway would the government have over what clergy say in their homilies and sermons? Apart from enforcing the legal prohibition against political endorsements from the pulpit, or taking the priest, deacon, or pastor to a human rights tribunal, the state can do little to lay restrictions on his freedom of speech. And what legitimate reason could a bishop give for interfering in a parish where the orthodox faith is being preached? That would show that he was dissenting from the beliefs he was supposed to be espousing, and the bishop could then be reprimanded, transferred, or defrocked by his superiors. Thus, whether the state or church were to become involved, a golden opportunity for setting a precedent in favour of free speech and orthodox preaching would present itself–all to the good of souls and the detriment of postmodernism.

lastly, priest have all kinds of personalities. some are more “in your face” harsh, loving and tender… but it is not because of fear of losing parishioners it’s his style.

This is true, but if all of the clergy in one parish conduct themselves in the same fashion–not rocking the boat at all costs–moral relativism appears to have won the day in the parish. It’s far more loving to discuss hard questions at Mass–and thereby ensure that the flock is aware of the faith’s teachings and its own consequent moral responsibilities–than to allow most parishioners, ill-catechized as they already are, to engage in sins of commission and omission with impunity. The salvation of Christians is at stake here. “The road to hell is lined with the skulls of bishops,” as St. John Chrysostom memorably noted. And, it is tragically likely, with those of dissenting churchgoers as well.

 

[JoArtist]

I find that difficult to believe. Who would be not “allowing” a priest to talk about war, abortion, or contraception in the U.S. or Canada? The two countries’ constitutions are still in force and, despite some egregious violations in the past ten years under Bush and Obama, what sway would the government have over what clergy say in their homilies and sermons? Apart from enforcing the legal prohibition against political endorsements from the pulpit, or taking the priest, deacon, or pastor to a human rights tribunal, the state can do little to lay restrictions on his freedom of speech. And what legitimate reason could a bishop give for interfering in a parish where the orthodox faith is being preached? That would show that he was dissenting from the beliefs he was supposed to be espousing, and the bishop could then be reprimanded, transferred, or defrocked by his superiors. Thus, whether the state or church were to become involved, a golden opportunity for setting a precedent in favour of free speech and orthodox preaching would present itself–all to the good of souls and the detriment of postmodernism.

This is true, but if all of the clergy in one parish conduct themselves in the same fashion–not rocking the boat at all costs–moral relativism appears to have won the day in the parish. It’s far more loving to discuss hard questions at Mass–and thereby ensure that the flock is aware of the faith’s teachings and its own consequent moral responsibilities–than to allow most parishioners, ill-catechized as they already are, to engage in sins of commission and omission with impunity. The salvation of Christians is at stake here. “The road to hell is lined with the skulls of bishops,” as St. John Chrysostom memorably noted. And, it is tragically likely, with those of dissenting churchgoers as well.

Actually I heard in Canada it is considered a hate crime to speak against homosexuality… now that was from a Canadian friend, so I don’t know how accurate that is. But I do know that Canada is way more liberal when it comes to it’s laws about homosexuality.

 

[PatriceA]

Actually there are equal and opposite hazards at play here.

I absolutely agree that nitpicking one’s neighbors and community detracts from holiness rather than inclines us towards it.

But apathy and carelessness are at least as much a risk. If we feel that there is ‘no need to bother’ cleaning up a tad before going to mass, we are sending God a message, conscious or not. When you grab at a reluctant parishioner’s hand at the Our Father, you are pushing him to YOUR preference as much as CAF curmudgeons are pushing you to theirs. If we reduce our taste in liturgical music to “that’s a catchy tune and I like the beat”, are we engaging in what Augustine referred to when he said “He who sings well prays twice?”

Food for thought, anyways. There are ditches on BOTH sides of the straight and narrow.

 

[Trebor135]

Actually I heard in Canada it is considered a hate crime to speak against homosexuality… now that was from a Canadian friend, so I don’t know how accurate that is. But I do know that Canada is way more liberal when it comes to it’s laws about homosexuality.

Canada is, unfortunately, a fairly liberal country. Human rights tribunals have gone after purveyors of politically incorrect ideas, but eventually (in the cases that I’m aware of) the “guilty party” was allowed to go free.

I see no possible legal grounds (i.e., pretexts) for dragging those who promote peace and life into such a tribunal, however. Even where homosexuality is concerned, the best way to get rid of hate-speech laws, or at least dilute them, is to have actual cases to fight, so that the courts will be forced to make necessary clarifications and concessions to the fundamental right to freedom of expression and conscience.

 

[manualman]

Canada is, unfortunately, a fairly liberal country. Human rights tribunals have gone after purveyors of politically incorrect ideas, but eventually (in the cases that I’m aware of) the “guilty party” was allowed to go free.

“Go Free.” Except for all those boat payments you had to make for your lawyer along the path to freedom. Scary stuff going on up nort’.

 

[Trebor135]

“Go Free.” Except for all those boat payments you had to make for your lawyer along the path to freedom. Scary stuff going on up nort’.

True. Canada is crying out for a spiritual revolution. We should all strive to do what we can to defend moral absolutism and combat moral relativism and indifferentism in our own lives. The only way the prevailing societal outlook can ever be changed is to take a from-the-ground-up approach and sow seeds everywhere, letting them fall on rocky ground and fertile soil as they will.