Are we losing our focus?

[HenryV]

Let me try one more time.

My goal is for each of us to examine our hearts to see if we are doing those things. I have accused nobody of anything, but am trying to bring each of us to try to take the next step toward a stronger focus on God by searching the dark places in our soul to see the times when we don’t. We cannot bring anyone but ourselves back into focus, but if we are individually in focus we will be less likely to distract someone else’s focus.

Maybe I’m just not up to the task of conveying what I’m trying to do. If I see more confusion, perhaps I’ll just ask that the thread be closed rather than have my inadequacy bring on a counterproductive result.

Peace,

Who could possibly distract your focus from Christ?

Only sin can do that, and sin is also personal.

And you’re right we all need to examine our concience, and repent and receive His mercy in confession.

 

[laudamus_te]

Dear John,

Above is the original quote you posted.

Who are you blaming then…the Catholic Religion? The only true religion…the only true Church…the Church outside of which there is no salvation?

I find your post offensive to Catholic ears…Our Faith is expressed in the Creed! Our worship is determined by these disciplines!

You are quoting a liberal non-Catholic here…and he is wrong. He does not make any distinction between true and false religions…do you make those distinctions?

Yes, we’ve lost our focus…we’re focused on false ideas and this obsession with false ecumenism.

Gorman

Excellent post, Gorman. The sentiments of the text quoted in the OP is exactly why the Church is in such disarray today. Ecumenism is wrong! It was denounced by several modern popes. Look at the fruits of VII and it is obvious how wrong it is.

It is important that Catholics be more selective of what and who they read. Some texts may sound lovely, but the little drop of poison that is hidden within can be deadly.

 

[Walking_Home]

Let me try one more time.

My goal is for each of us to examine our hearts to see if we are doing those things. I have accused nobody of anything, but am trying to bring each of us to try to take the next step toward a stronger focus on God by searching the dark places in our soul to see the times when we don’t. We cannot bring anyone but ourselves back into focus, but if we are individually in focus we will be less likely to distract someone else’s focus.

Maybe I’m just not up to the task of conveying what I’m trying to do. If I see more confusion, perhaps I’ll just ask that the thread be closed rather than have my inadequacy bring on a counterproductive result.

Peace,

---

Who is it that is really distracting. Who is it that does not accuse anyone—and in the next breath says —people need to search supposedly “dark places in the soul”.

I will agree with you—it may be better to shut this thread down–since it does seem to be counterproductive.

 

[Cat]

I think that other things besides sin can take our focus off Jesus

People become devoted to their families, to their jobs, to their pets, to the pursuit of health, and even to their “church” (all the meetings, committees, socials, rehearsals, luncheons, etc.).

There is nothing sinful about any of these things. Family, job, pets, health, church–these are good things.

I would venture to say, though, that many of us let these good things crowd out the Lord, and we have a very hard time recognizing it because these things are good!

These good things don’t even have to become idolatrous, just time-consuming, especially if there is a crisis such as a wedding, a new baby, a promotion, surgery, or a new and exciting ministry in the church.

But at all times, we need to keep our eyes focused on Jesus. It’s really hard when we are distracted by the “good things” in this life. We have to learn to do two things at once, I guess, like the Gospel reading of today said–Love God and love our neighbor. It’s not easy for humans!

 

[BobP123]

The OP implication is that we are not on focus.

Does this mean we cannot multitask?

Or does it mean that our focus should be the same as his?

Either way, I can’t say I really have an opinion on this. Maybe I wasn’t trained properly by those strict pre-Vatican II British teachers and American nuns.

 

[ncjohn]

---

Who is it that is really distracting. Who is it that does not accuse anyone—and in the next breath says —people need to search supposedly “dark places in the soul”.

When the Church teaches that all are prone to sin, I made the assumption that we must then all have dark places in our soul.

Aside from Mary, do you know of someone who does not need to do so?

 

[gorman64]

ncjohn:

The point of the ariticle, which is what I’m trying to get at, is that when faith becomes a matter of rote response and adherence to the words of creeds, etc, without true worship of the Author, it becomes pointless.

The article contains erroneous ideas…it contains false notions.

When it becomes legalistically and Pharisaically about the rules, and forgets the reason for the rules–to bring us to love of God–then it is worse than useless and becomes a tool of oppression.

Well, those rules are the Rule of Faith for those who are still Catholic…they are not rules of oppression.

1. But the Church has a further office. The heirs of Rule the Apostles have the right and duty to prescribe, promulgate, and maintain at all times and in behalf of the whole Church the teaching of the Apostles and of the Church in former ages; to impose and to enforce it as a doctrinal law binding upon all; and to give authoritative decisions on points obscure, controverted, or denied. In this capacity the Church acts as regulator of the Faith, and these doctrinal laws, together with the act of imposing them, are called the Rule of Faith. All the members of the Church are bound to submit their judgment in matters of Faith to this rule, and thus by practising the “obedience of Faith” to prove themselves living members of the one kingdom of Divine truth. - A Manual Of Catholic Theology, Based On Scheeben’s “Dogmatik”, Joseph Wilhelm, D.D., PHD. And Thomas B. Scannell, D.D. With A Preface By Cardinal Manning

This has nothing whatsoever to do with “true religion” and “false religion”. It has to do with religion that loses its focus on God and instead focuses on the fingers pointing to God, with a result of using a God made in our image to beat others into submission to our personal vision rather than helping them to join in the journey.

Well, John…Some of us need those fingers pointing to God…those fingers are provided to us by Our Lord Himself by establishing His Church. They are the rule of Faith that you seem to discount so nonchalantly.

I specifically asked that this thread be kept in this forum because I see it so aptly highlighting the discord that is the result of the very things the passage articulates. I don’t confine that to either “side”, but put it here because the battle rages more fiercely here than in other areas on the forum.

Well, I think it’s inappropriate and non-Catholic.

My goal was to hopefully bring each of us to look at whether we have individually been guilty of losing our focus and using God for our own purposes rather than seeking to join together to do His purpose.

That’s fine…but this is a discussion forum and it does not encompass all areas of the Faith…that fact seems to be lost on some here.

I only used this passage because the author stated it more eloquently than I could (and in fewer words ). Who wrote it really isn’t relevant to the discussion. How we react to what was written is.

The passage contains error. Just a few drops of poison in the cup is all it takes…does it not?

My goal, always, is to try to bring peace to the Body of Christ and to unite us in trying to bring about the Kingdom, even where we might differ in preference. If one wishes to attack me for that, though I’m not saying you are, I will bear that.

What peace do you intend to bring to us? The peace of the world…or a true peace as indicated below?

“Every one therefore that shall confess me before men, I will also confess him before my Father who is in heaven. But he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven. Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword. For I came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And as a man’s enemies shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than me, is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not up his cross, and followeth me, is not worthy of me.”

But much as Jesus said that “those who are not against us are with us” when the disciiples wanted to rain down fire on some that were doing work in his name but not part of their band, I would seek peace between all who are trying to do work in his name, that we might all find our way to the full Truth, breaking ourselves for the salvation of the world.

And that is the role of His Church…to lead those who follow Him to salvation with the supernatural help of the Sacraments and the Catholic rule of Faith.

Gorman

 

[ncjohn]

The OP implication is that we are not on focus.

Does this mean we cannot multitask?

Or does it mean that our focus should be the same as his?

Either way, I can’t say I really have an opinion on this. Maybe I wasn’t trained properly by those strict pre-Vatican II British teachers and American nuns.

I think the OP and the followup posts explain pretty clearly that that is not what the thread is about, and that it has nothing to do with agreeing with HOW I focus.

I would hope though that we would all agree that our focus should be on God, so to that extent I guess I would hope that it would be the same as I attempt mine to be, even if expressed differently than I might express it.

 

[ncjohn]

Well, those rules are the Rule of Faith for those who are still Catholic…they are not rules of oppression.

The rules are not of themselves, yet are used every day by men for their own purposes and under their own misinterpretations. To that extent they can become oppressive, which is the point of this whole thread.

Well, John…Some of us need those fingers pointing to God…those fingers are provided to us by Our Lord Himself by establishing His Church. They are the rule of Faith that you seem to discount so nonchalantly.

And again, there is nothing wrong with the signs, as long as the signs are not taken to be God, as they very often are. That is why the first commandment deals with worshipping idols and having other things before God.

And again, I am not discounting any of the rules of Faith–nonchalantly or otherwise. I am only commenting on the tendency to misuse and misinterpret those rules. History is littered with examples of this, and these forums are littered with examples of it. I’m not saying that people do so intentionally, but it happens regularly, across the spectrum of belief.

At this point I think the point of the thread has been shown. Jean, could you please just close the thread.

 

[Walking_Home]

When the Church teaches that all are prone to sin, I made the assumption that we must then all have dark places in our soul.

Aside from Mary, do you know of someone who does not need to do so?

---

I know what the Church teaches—and I know what I need to do to be right with God.

Like a said before----for someone who “claims” to have the goal of bringing peace to the Body of Christ ----- you have a “peculiar” way of doing it. This whole thread—seems to say—that anyone who does not follow your train of thought —has a lot baggage to contend with—down to “dark places”.

 

[gorman64]

ncjohn:

The rules are not of themselves, yet are used every day by men for their own purposes and under their own misinterpretations. To that extent they can become oppressive, which is the point of this whole thread.

No, John…the rules are to be followed…that fact that no one follows them is the problem.

And again, there is nothing wrong with the signs, as long as the signs are not taken to be God, as they very often are. That is why the first commandment deals with worshipping idols and having other things before God.

You are somehow equating the Catholic rule of Faith with false worship and worship of idols! Unbelievable!

And again, I am not discounting any of the rules of Faith–nonchalantly or otherwise. I am only commenting on the tendency to misuse and misinterpret those rules.

The Church makes the rules and they are good…they need to be followed!

History is littered with examples of this, and these forums are littered with examples of it. I’m not saying that people do so intentionally, but it happens regularly, across the spectrum of belief.

Well, give us some examples of this. And please explain what you mean by the “spectrum of belief”.

At this point I think the point of the thread has been shown. Jean, could you please just close the thread.

The thread has been shown to be presenting some quite unorthodox ideas…they need to be corrected.

Gorman

 

[mchium]

Who is Abraham Heschel?:

His theological works argued that the religious experience was fundamentally human impulse, not just a Jewish one, and that no religious community could claim a monopoly on religious truth.

The bolded part of the above is heretical. Do you agree with this?

Gorman: I think there’s a difference between a monopoly on the truth and the fullness of truth. Do you agree?

Having said that, I don’t really know what the author of that quote meant or what was in his mind - but I’ll take the word he uses - ‘monopoly’ - at face value and maintain that the fullness of truth is not the same thing. A “monopoly on the truth” is a meaningless term to me.

 

[gorman64]

mchium:

His theological works argued that the religious experience was fundamentally human impulse, not just a Jewish one, and that no religious community could claim a monopoly on religious truth.

The bolded part of the above is heretical. Do you agree with this?

Gorman: I think there’s a difference between a monopoly on the truth and the fullness of truth. Do you agree?

Having said that, I don’t really know what the author of that quote meant or what was in his mind - but I’ll take the word he uses - ‘monopoly’ - at face value and maintain that the fullness of truth is not the same thing. A “monopoly on the truth” is a meaningless term to me.

Dear mchium,

You misunderstand…I am referring to the below as heretical:

“His theological works argued that the religious experience was fundamentally human impulse”

Now, from the encyclical Pascendi, Pope St. Pius X:

Yet the Vatican Council has defined, “If anyone says that the one true God, our Creator and Lord, cannot be known with certainty by the natural light of human reason by means of the things that are made, let him be anathema”;[4] and also, "If anyone says that it is not possible or not expedient that man be taught, through the medium of divine revelation, about God and the worship to be paid Him, let him be anathema’’;[5] and finally, “If anyone says that divine revelation cannot be made credible by external signs, and that therefore men should be drawn to the faith only by their personal internal experience or by private inspiration, let him be anathema.”[6] It may be asked, in what way do the Modernists contrive to make the transition from Agnosticism, which is a state of pure nescience, to scientific and historic Atheism, which is a doctrine of positive denial; and consequently, by what legitimate process of reasoning, they proceed from the fact of ignorance as to whether God has in fact intervened in the history of the human race or not, to explain this history, leaving God out altogether, as if He really had not intervened. Let him answer who can. Yet it is a fixed and established principle among them that both science and history must be atheistic: and within their boundaries there is room for nothing but phenomena; God and all that is divine are utterly excluded. We shall soon see clearly what, as a consequence of this most absurd teaching, must be held touching the most sacred Person of Christ, and the mysteries of His life and death, and of His Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven.

1. However, this Agnosticism is only the negative part of the system of the Modernists: the positive part consists in what they call vital immanence. Thus they advance from one to the other. Religion, whether natural or supernatural, must, like every other fact, admit of some explanation. But when natural theology has been destroyed, and the road to revelation closed by the rejection of the arguments of credibility, and all external revelation absolutely denied, it is clear that this explanation will be sought in vain outside of man himself. It must, therefore, be looked for in man; and since religion is a form of life, the explanation must certainly be found in the life of man. In this way is formulated the principle of religious immanence. Moreover, the first actuation, so to speak, of every vital phenomenon – and religion, as noted above, belongs to this category – is due to a certain need or impulsion; but speaking more particularly of life, it has its origin in a movement of the heart, which movement is called a sense. Therefore, as God is the object of religion, we must conclude that faith, which is the basis and foundation of all religion, must consist in a certain interior sense, originating in a need of the divine. This need of the divine, which is experienced only in special and favorable circumstances. cannot of itself appertain to the domain of consciousness, but is first latent beneath consciousness, or, to borrow a term from modern philosophy, in the subconsciousness, where also its root lies hidden and undetected.

Gorman

 

[gospel_life]

Quite frankly Gorman, I can’t figure out if you truly don’t understand what I’m saying or if you are intentionally misinterpreting it.

No, John…the rules are to be followed…that fact that no one follows them is the problem.

This is exactly my point. When people stop obeying them and make up their own interpretations of them, we have a serious problem.

You are somehow equating the Catholic rule of Faith with false worship and worship of idols! Unbelievable!

I have done no such thing. I have no idea what you are talking about here or how you come to that conclusion.

The Church makes the rules and they are good…they need to be followed!

Agreed, as I said above. But the fact that we don’t–especially the one that says “Thou shalt love the Lord your God with your whole heart…and your neighbor as yourself”–the one that Jesus said sums up the whole of the Faith–creates problems because then people start using religion for things that don’t have to do with worshipping God.

Well, give us some examples of this. And please explain what you mean by the “spectrum of belief”.

All of history is filled with people, from Popes on down, using religious rules to fulfill their own ambitions. I know you know enough Church history that I don’t have to go through a litany here.

As to the spectrum of belief, I’m referring to the fact that there are those on both the “conservative” and “liberal” side of religion–as much as I detest those terms–who distort the meaning of the gospels and the teachings of the Church, and then claim them to be the teachings of the Church. And again, that has been true all through history.

The thread has been shown to be presenting some quite unorthodox ideas…they need to be corrected.

Gorman

If searching for a peaceful coexistence between legitimate and faithful members of the Body of Christ is unorthodox, then by all means let it be corrected.

Peace,

 

[Ann_Nonymous]

John,
As I was reading your OP I wasn’t quite sure what your question was. Then I read the passage you quoted. I have to say as I read it, I felt myself becoming agitated because I think it makes some pretty sweeping generalizations. How can one “blame religion” for it’s failure? For some have failed it and others have not. I wouldn’t say that the Catholic religion has failed anyone but rather some have failed at practicing it or simply stopped trying. Was it G.K. Chesterton who said something along the lines of Christianity hasn’t been tried and found wanting but has been found difficult and left untried? If your point is that posters on this forum become contentious and sometimes less than charitable, I would assert that it’s due to our human nature. These forum debates can feel daunting to me when someone “steps on my toes” and I think sometimes much meaning is lost or left to interpretation of the reader that the poster may or may not have intended. Clearly, there are a multitude of opinions. My personal opinion is that the Catholic faith is the one true faith. I don’t like some of the changes that have been made since Vatican II. That’s mostly because I feel that our Church, especially our Mass was beautiful as it was and didn’t need to change. I have to bear in mind that many on this and other forums did not experience our Church prior to that time due to their ages. I do appreciate these forums for the opportunity to read others’ opinions and share my own annonymously.

As for whether or not we’ve lost our focus, I think collectively we have gotten off track but, individually, many would say they are completely focused on our Lord. We don’t necessarily share the same focus. My faith in the Lord is what gets me through each and every day. My faith in the Lord is what causes me to step back and reflect on whether or not my actions have been charitable. My faith in the Lord is what makes me thankful that everyday that I awake I will have more opportunities to try to live up to his example. Most days I fall woefully short of my goal but, I haven’t completely lost my focus.

 

[ncjohn]

Quite frankly Gorman, I can’t figure out if you truly don’t understand what I’m saying or if you are intentionally misinterpreting it.

gorman64:

No, John…the rules are to be followed…that fact that no one follows them is the problem.

This is exactly my point. When people stop obeying them and make up their own interpretations of them, we have a serious problem.

You are somehow equating the Catholic rule of Faith with false worship and worship of idols! Unbelievable!

I have done no such thing. I have no idea what you are talking about here or how you come to that conclusion.

The Church makes the rules and they are good…they need to be followed!

Agreed, as I said above. But the fact that we don’t–especially the one that says “Thou shalt love the Lord your God with your whole heart…and your neighbor as yourself”–the one that Jesus said sums up the whole of the Faith–creates problems because then people start using religion for things that don’t have to do with worshipping God.

Well, give us some examples of this. And please explain what you mean by the “spectrum of belief”.

All of history is filled with people, from Popes on down, using religious rules to fulfill their own ambitions. I know you know enough Church history that I don’t have to go through a litany here.

As to the spectrum of belief, I’m referring to the fact that there are those on both the “conservative” and “liberal” side of religion–as much as I detest those terms–who distort the meaning of the gospels and the teachings of the Church, and then claim them to be the teachings of the Church. And again, that has been true all through history.

The thread has been shown to be presenting some quite unorthodox ideas…they need to be corrected.

Gorman

If searching for a peaceful coexistence between legitimate and faithful members of the Body of Christ is unorthodox, then by all means let it be corrected.

Peace,

 

[THurifer2]

John…could you please answer a very black and white question…

Q: Do you beleive that the Catholic Faith is the one and only true religion…(please respond with a YES…OR NO…

Thank You

Peace