Arbitrary rigorism, a recurring theme on this board

[Philothea53]

How can we avoid placing unnecessary burdens on people while still encouraging their piety?

Betsy

I’m not even going to read the other posts before answering this. As someone who was baptized as a teenager, never very well catechized, left the Church and came back again - I can tell you that it is darn hard to want so badly to do what is right. It is so hard in this slippery slope society we live in to know if what we are doing is in keeping with the teachings of the Church or if what we are being told is someone’s ultra-liberal personal interpretation made to confuse those who don’t know any better.

There are some of you on this forum who are so very knowledgeable. I have learned so much by reading, and re-reading, your discussions. In many ways this forum has taken the place of Catechism class - oh, wait, there isn’t one for someone in my position. Sure, there’e a Bible study class at Church but they are so far advanced that they bounce around back and forth through the Bible, quoting form this Pope, from that Church Father - it makes my head spin.

What you might see as rigorism is probably just a desire to do the right thing. Take it easy with us. Some of us are still learning to walk.

 

[Digitonomy]

This is an actual sign…“Communion in the hand is a sacrilege!”

If someone chooses to believe this for his or her own personal use and acts accordingly, no problem whatsoever. If someone uses this belief to accuse millions of fellow Catholics of committing sacrilege each Sunday because they’re not receiving on the tongue, well, then there’s (IMO) a problem.

If that is their belief, I don’t see what’s wrong with trying to warn others about it. In fact, I see no difference between that and a bumper sticker that says “Abortion is murder,” except for the gravity of the sin in question.

 

[SeekerJen]

If that is their belief, I don’t see what’s wrong with trying to warn others about it. In fact, I see no difference between that and a bumper sticker that says “Abortion is murder,” except for the severity of the offense under question.

See, though, that argument doesn’t hold water for me. Abortion IS murder, and the Catholic Church has deemed it so. Thus, it is not arbitrary to insist that it is, in fact, murder. I could be mistaken, but I don’t believe that the Church has deemed communion in the hand to be sacrilegious (whether it should deem it so is for another thread). Thus, insisting that those who receive in the hand are committing sacrilege is IMO no better than those who claim that if we don’t hold our neighbors’ hands during the Our Father, we must be holding them in contempt, or that those who only fast for an hour before Mass are less holy than those who fast for three hours.

 

[Digitonomy]

See, though, that argument doesn’t hold water for me. Abortion IS murder, and the Catholic Church has deemed it so. Thus, it is not arbitrary to insist that it is, in fact, murder. I could be mistaken, but I don’t believe that the Church has deemed communion in the hand to be sacrilegious (whether it should deem it so is for another thread). Thus, insisting that those who receive in the hand are committing sacrilege is IMO no better than those who claim that if we don’t hold our neighbors’ hands during the Our Father, we must be holding them in contempt, or that those who only fast for an hour before Mass are less holy than those who fast for three hours.

I’m afraid I have to disagree. Sacrilege is a grave sin. If you truly believe communion in the hand is sacrilege, you have a duty to warn people and try to prevent it. If you truly believe that, you’ve probably also concluded the Church is in error on this practice, or perhaps that the Church is not the True Church. So you probably won’t care much that the Church has ruled communion in the hand permissible.

On the other hand, in the examples you give above, the number of hours one fasts or failing to hold hands during the Our Father are issues where it may be meritorious to provide advice or fraternal correction given a suitable opportunity, but are not serious matters that require such action.

 

[scylla]

What does arbitrary rigorism really mean anyways? This can twisted to several different meanings. Does it mean not allowing liturgical abuse, or leeway? Does it mean judging others? Does it mean encouraging piety? What does it really mean?

To be judgemental to others actions and expect them to conform to a sense of holiness that they might not understand would be wrong as you would be pushing them away from a proper sense of piety.

This is wrong and I believe is the proper sense of improperly stressing a relationship with God. This is kinda like the pharissees binding people to things that mean little without a relationship or sense of faithfulness.

Now to use that to justify doing the least amount allowed and feel good about it is wrong. We should be either hot or cold, not luke-warm with our faith. Piety should be extreme, our faithfulness should be extreme, our devotion extreme. This we should individually foster. If we can kneel, kneel. If we can pray, pray. If we can adore Jesus, adore Him.

Who cares what the latest gay liturgist has said about acting like a bunch of hippies in Church. Our first focus should be God.

It is amusing to me that the most intolerant people are the people who wig out when they hear that a guy says that nuns should put their habits on, or that we should have as many kids as possible.

Isn’t being rigid part of Catholicism. Either we try and do what is right or we seek to do our own thing. What is wrong is seeking the easiest way or pushing people away because we don’t know the faith well enough to kindly explain why we do things.

There is a reason why it is better to have boy altar servers, there is a reason why it is better to have statues, incense, candles. There is nothing wrong with not having them, but we should seek the harder, more devoted path for God.

Any objections feel free to PM me, if I am wrong correct me, I will be happy to conform if I am wrong on any point.

In Christ
Scylla

 

[cameron_lansing]

What does arbitrary rigorism really mean anyways? This can twisted to several different meanings. . . . Scylla

As I originally used the term, I intended it to mean the imposition of burdens, duties, or obligations on others on the subjective basis of personal preference rather than on the objective basis of the law and norms of the Church.

 

[JimG]

If that is their belief, I don’t see what’s wrong with trying to warn others about it. In fact, I see no difference between that and a bumper sticker that says “Abortion is murder,” except for the gravity of the sin in question.

The difference is that receiving communion in the hand is no sin. Accusing people of sacrilege where none exists constitutes a false accusation.

 

[dixieagle]

I don’t care if people of either gender wear flip-flops, decently-fitting jeans that don’t expose too much of their bodies, bermuda shorts, capri pants, burquas, chadors, yarmulkes, kepahs, big fancy hats out of a millinery, small hats out of the 50s and 60s, beanies, hat clips, chapel caps, veils, mantillas, shawls or hats made of fruit ala Carmen Miranda. Just don’t make comment on my four outfits that I rotate for Sunday wear, by the fact that you can tell which Sunday it is by my clothes. And until there is a definite discipline back in force that says we women must- don’t expect to see anything on my head but hair and maybe a few dried fleck of hairspray. ( Can hairspray count as a head covering the way Kleenex used to count? )

I prefer to receive the Sacrament of Reconcilation face-to-face, but have known times where I have wanted “the box”. Let’s keep both!

Receive the Eucharist on the tongue. And it will not be my hand that holds the chalice bearing the Sacred Blood to your lips to force you to drink it. Give me a heads up if I am behind you in the Eucharistic procession if you intend to kneel, so I don’t fly over the top of you and into Father or the EMHC. But don’t deny me what is now my opportunity to receive my Lord in my hands, or to drink from the chalice. I know I am not worthy of Him, and I also know not one part of my physical body is, even my mouth. I don’t have to say it in Latin to bring that fact to my heart. But if it helps you- by all means, do so.

And if my now granddaughters want to serve Mass, they may.

I remember in the 1960s and 1970s people who would make pronouncements, even priests who would make pronouncements, that simply were not true. They kept people out of church and way from the sacraments. Instead of improving things, we are still at it. From this point out, I will do my best not to cause that to happen any more.

These quotes, and the rest of your post, just made me giggle out loud! (Esp. the Carmen Miranda bit…) You sound like someone with your head (hatless, but with a bit of hairspray) on straight and your heart in exactly the right place

Peace!

 

[Digitonomy]

The difference is that receiving communion in the hand is no sin.

These people obviously disagree.

Digitonomy:

If you truly believe communion in the hand is sacrilege, you have a duty to warn people and try to prevent it. If you truly believe that, you’ve probably also concluded the Church is in error on this practice, or perhaps that the Church is not the True Church. So you probably won’t care much that the Church has ruled communion in the hand permissible.

 

[dixieagle]

As I originally used the term, I intended it to mean the imposition of burdens, duties, or obligations on others on the subjective basis of personal preference rather than on the objective basis of the law and norms of the Church.

In other words, “more Catholic than the Pope”
Peace!

 

[Philothea53]

In other words, “more Catholic than the Pope”
Peace!

You know, that’s really unfair. If you read my post, it is #61 in this thread, that I wrote after reading just post #1, you’ll maybe see just how unfair you are being. More Catholic than the Pope? Not hardly. Striving to be the BEST WE CAN BE? That’s more like it. Concerned because of the confusion caused by the likes of the Sr. Chittesters and the National Catholic Reporter and others ad nauseum who want to lead us astray?

Humble thyself holier than me.

 

[dixieagle]

You know, that’s really unfair. If you read my post, it is #61 in this thread, that I wrote after reading just post #1, you’ll maybe see just how unfair you are being. More Catholic than the Pope? Not hardly. Striving to be the BEST WE CAN BE? That’s more like it. Concerned because of the confusion caused by the likes of the Sr. Chittesters and the National Catholic Reporter and others ad nauseum who want to lead us astray?

Humble thyself holier than me.

Whoa…I wasn’t even replying to your post #61, which makes sense and a good point. You don’t sound as if you’re trying to go to extremes, but to figure out the right way to do things. That isn’t arbitrary (“individual choice or preference, sometimes at whim”)
rigorism - that’s just trying to be a good Catholic! But I’ve known plenty of folks who take positions that are more rigorous than required by the Pope or Church and hold themselves up as arbiters of correct Catholic behavior; that is what I refer to, and it is pretty easy to find.

I’m just a cradle-Catholic wife and mom of two great young adult daughters, fortunate enough to have been educated in Catholic schools/colleges but nowhere near as theologically sophisticated as some folks here. I have seen plenty of extremism in both camps (traditional and modernist) and try to keep to the middle of the path, or wherever the Church says I should be (not always easy.)

Peace!

 

[Philothea53]

Whoa…I wasn’t even replying to your post #61, which makes sense and a good point. You don’t sound as if you’re trying to go to extremes, but to figure out the right way to do things. That isn’t arbitrary (“individual choice or preference, sometimes at whim”)
rigorism - that’s just trying to be a good Catholic! But I’ve known plenty of folks who take positions that are more rigorous than required by the Pope or Church and hold themselves up as arbiters of correct Catholic behavior; that is what I refer to, and it is pretty easy to find.

I’m just a cradle-Catholic wife and mom of two great young adult daughters, fortunate enough to have been educated in Catholic schools/colleges but nowhere near as theologically sophisticated as some folks here. I have seen plenty of extremism in both camps (traditional and modernist) and try to keep to the middle of the path, or wherever the Church says I should be (not always easy.)

Peace!

I’m sorry. I am feeling a bit thin-skinned today. Please forgive me.

 

[dixieagle]

I’m sorry. I am feeling a bit thin-skinned today. Please forgive me.

Nothing to forgive at all! I understand completely, and can tend to feel a little put-upon myself, at times - only natural, as much as we all have to contend with these days, particularly as we attempt to live a Christ-like life

Peace!