Are we too self-absorbed?

[JReducation]

PS. The concern that many of us who do this line of apostolic work have been communicating to our superiors is that many people do not look past this time and space.

For example, people condemn abortion as murder and they are right to do so. But they don’t explain to the general population why human life is sacred. The Church has been harping on human dignity since Vatican II and we’re still not explaining it correctly. The destruction of an innocent human life, in the womb or outside the womb has been condemned by God since the time of Cain and Abel. This biblical message is not taught by many pro-life ministries.

On homosexuality, many Catholics, Protestants and Muslims have it all wrong. The issue is not homosexuality. The issue is sexual intercourse between people of the same sex. Because sexual intercourse between people of the same sex is incompatible with what has been revealed to us about human sexuality. Again, we need to go the scriptures and to the Fathers of the Church. Instead of teaching the scriptures and Fathers, we beat up homosexuality and by extension, we beat up homosexual people and make them feel rejected, dirty and judged by us. We need to preach what has been revealed about human sexuality. This then puts all since against chastity in a clearer Evangelical context. This will include promiscuity (gay or straight), same-sex marriage, contraception, adultery (including divorce and remarriage).

This what we mean when we say that you can’t just throw out there a bunch of disconnect doctrines. You can’t just sit around and say “Don’t do this and don’t do that.”

Even in the OT, God gives us the Commandments in a context. There is a relationship between Israel and Him, a relationship that goes back to the covenants with Noah and Abraham. So too, we Catholics must engage in a relationship with those whom we are trying to bring to the Christian life and whom we are trying to steer away from sin.

If you remember that one teacher in school who pointed fingers at you, you’re probably not to fond of that person. I had one of those and I’m not too fond of those memories. The woman flew in to school and parked her broomstick right next to the friars’ car.

 

[KathleenGee]

God bless you, JR!

Yes, we are too self-absorbed as a culture. I would say in part is that America has not been a Catholic culture, but our loved ones before us lived as if in a Catholic ghetto.

I remember reading European obversations of American soldiers in there during WWII, and they were looked upon as over-sexed. After my uncle died, who was a lieutenant in the Air Force, a bombadier, and also went incognito behind Nazi and Communist lines, made a great witness before his companions, by going on his knees and praying before he would lay down to sleep. I praise my Irish Catholic grandmother for that who was most devout.

Then we had the growing affluent life style and television. My early childhood was spent up on Capitol Hill in Seattle, in what they called then, ‘Catholic Hill’, Irish Catholic. I remember very well all the people sitting out on the porches visiting, all the children playing outside, I remember recalling so many voices of animation and interaction.

My mother got sick so we moved to inner city Tacoma and into an Italian immigrant neighborhood, and went to their mission church. We got a TV, and it was in the summer, and I remember the day very well, and then how my dad had us watch such wholesome television in TV’s Golden Years.

But what the good programming did, and I remember ‘I Love Lucy’, going on vacations with her neighbors, something you don’t see these days, people not even talking to their nextx door neighbor, that what television did was bring people inside and not interact. The TV took the place of their neighbor.

Just recall how much the internet has effected people where they would prefer emails or texts rather than talk directly with another human being.

People stopped writing letters may be 25 years ago, letters of endearment.

Then we had all the growing materialism, the dissension and sexual revolution, and people being put down if they were not for abortion and free sex and taking drugs to find one’s self. I was in college during all of that.

And we would see contrary candidates in public having their character flaws and vices being exposed in public. People having to put up with others’ values being imposed on them, while their opinions ignored or invalidated.

Then, in the 1980 to 2000, so many devout in Christian ministry, be it Catholic or Protestant, and even this happening in Jewish denominations, this dissenting spirit and character malignment, people divided between liberal and conservative labels, people fighting and splitting up over differences to the Liturgy or to its abuses, all this caused people to withdraw into their own little groups.

Also when I came home overseas, I noted how lively my parish was inside, during liturgy, but then when Mass was over, people would put up the veil, protect themselves, and go out closed up.

So the Holy Father is telling us we are in a time of grace and to step out.

What is working for me is to unite with people of good will as so many here are atheist or agnostic. I am working with a Lutheran family right now and they are complaining likewise of the lack of Christian spirit and vitality in their congregations.

We need renewal in Christ through the Holy Spirit.

I am hoping to start a beginning yet simple evangelizing component in my parish. Our bishop is waiting for results from the Synod.

P Francis is saying we begin serving the elderly and unborn.

 

[KyrieEleison17]

Have you read Evangelium Vitae? If not, read it first and then we’ll talk. It give you the talking points that you need so you can speak on CNN or in a law firm as Christian, without sounding like a preacher. Once you read it, I will teach you how to use it, just as I teach my novices and our secular brothers.

That is deeply impractical and poses all sorts of problems, Brother. An encyclical is not meant to be a ‘live’ document: It cannot be constantly ‘updated’ and, even if it were, would require specification for certain regions (or other groupings) depending on what is of moment in any given context/society.

You can’t expect 1.2 billion Catholics to be specially trained for appearing on CNN or entering political life - maybe the Church should select certain vocations -like getting active in social issues or entering political life- for special programs; however, that would be a delicate affair, as the broader society might in some places see that with suspicion.

It makes sense that you specially instruct your novices and secular brothers. But can you do this for the entire Church? Is not the pulpit, if anything, where such ‘training’ should be coming from, even granting it is actually necessary?

First of all, the Church is not opposed to homosecuality or to homosexuals, lesbians or transgender people.

First of all, I never said the Church was opposed to homosexuals.

Moreover, I did not even bring up the separate issue of transgender issues.

Now the fact that you link them is alarming and unfortunately, Brother, in my mind raises the question of your competence or authority on this subject.

The Church does not take positions against people anymore than God does. The Church is opposed to actions that are contrary to revelation.

Since it is clear we are not actually having a dialogue/conversation at this point, I will leave off here.

Sorry for taking up your time, Brother.

 

[Avila123]

Pope Francis has hit the nail on the head.

Although I can’t comment on the Church in the USA, I do feel that overall our parish is self-absorbed. There is still a tendency to focus on the four walls of the church attended and in a parish with more than one church, passions fly over which special celebration happens at which building etc. We also have a tendency to pick up on one or two aspects of the faith or Church’s teachings, which is probably okay as we are limited beings, but it can go wobbly if we forget to keep it in the context of the overall faith and teachings.

Pope Francis said that parishes should be “environments of living communion and participation”. Sadly many are not for many reasons.

Pope Francis said “The bishop must always foster this missionary communion in his diocesan Church, following the ideal of the first Christian communities”. Our Bishop has been self absorbed at the Diocesan level this year and the fruits of this will be the formation of the Re-Evangelisation teams next year, across a very large diocese (okay, large by UK standards). The teams will look at and engage in all aspects of our faith with a view to having better informed and more open and active parishes and ministries. I don’t know what the response rate is, but sadly I do know that many people prefer to talk rather than act. All I can do is pray for its success and that God puts me in the team where I can serve Him the best (and releases me from cleaning the church).

Being self-absorbed during our daily examination of conscience and sometimes when reading the Bible seems to be a good (and uncomfortable) thing, but I can’t work out how to live the faith and be self-absorbed. The word “self” seems to keep getting in the way.

 

[JReducation]

That is deeply impractical and poses all sorts of problems, Brother. An encyclical is not meant to be a ‘live’ document: It cannot be constantly ‘updated’ and, even if it were, would require specification for certain regions (or other groupings) depending on what is of moment in any given context/society.

You can’t expect 1.2 billion Catholics to be specially trained for appearing on CNN or entering political life - maybe the Church should select certain vocations -like getting active in social issues or entering political life- for special programs; however, that would be a delicate affair, as the broader society might in some places see that with suspicion.

It makes sense that you specially instruct your novices and secular brothers. But can you do this for the entire Church? Is not the pulpit, if anything, where such ‘training’ should be coming from, even granting it is actually necessary?

I’m talking about people involved in pro-life ministry, such as volunteers. They don’t sit down to read the document. They don’t attend classes, workshops, courses or lectures on it. One of the beauties of Evangelium Vitae is that it is one of those documents that cannot be updated, because everything in it is infallible dogma. There is nothing to update. The best that can be done is restate what it already says, if the need should arise in 50 or 100 years with the evolution of language.

First of all, I never said the Church was opposed to homosexuals.

Moreover, I did not even bring up the separate issue of transgender issues.

Now the fact that you link them is alarming and unfortunately, Brother, in my mind raises the question of your competence or authority on this subject.

I’m not referring to you. I’m speaking about an issue and how many people view the Church’s position, including Catholics. There are people viewing this as the Church against LBGT people. That’s not the case at all.

My competence and authority come from my bishop from whom I have written license to speak on this issue.

Since it is clear we are not actually having a dialogue/conversation at this point, I will leave off here.

Sorry for taking up your time, Brother.

I’m find it sad that you feel this way, but I can’t help you any further either.

 

[KyrieEleison17]

I’m talking about people involved in pro-life ministry, such as volunteers. They don’t sit down to read the document. They don’t attend classes, workshops, courses or lectures on it. One of the beauties of Evangelium Vitae is that it is one of those documents that cannot be updated, because everything in it is infallible dogma. There is nothing to update.

That is truly wonderful But yes I would agree that even so things like workshops, lectures and classes are still needful. The application of general principles to particular circumstances is notoriously difficult.

The best that can be done is restate what it already says, if the need should arise in 50 or 100 years with the evolution of language.

Lol - presumably you mean micro-evolution or adaptation Although perhaps things like texting are indeed introducing a language shift of evolutionary scale.

I’m not referring to you. I’m speaking about an issue and how many people view the Church’s position, including Catholics. There are people viewing this as the Church against LBGT people. That’s not the case at all.

I know. My very next post following the one you are replying to was as follows:

Homosexuals are welcome to and in the Church. Being gay is not a sin; fornication is…

My competence and authority come from my bishop from whom I have written license to speak on this issue.

Sorry if I have offended you. But you brought up multiple issues. Issues that for some people are going to be deeply personal because these issues are not philosophical musings but a part of life.

I’m find it sad that you feel this way, but I can’t help you any further either.

It’s not what I feel that is at issue. It is what I think.

One of the things that is of concern to me was an encounter not long ago where a man tried to ‘covert me’ to homosexuality. I think you can appreciate the problems that raises: the man was not interested in my instincts or sexual inclinations, he was trying to ‘sell’ the gay lifestyle to me as an ideological ideal. It was irrelevant whether or not I was ‘born that way’. This is part of what I mean about the scope of this issue. I had to work with this man all day in very close proximity. Of course I had to be able to ‘get on’ with him and so developed, as best I could, a civil and friendly discourse. So long as he was being reasonable -and he was exceptionally intelligent- we could “get on”. But that didn’t change the fact that it was alarming to see a man trying to “sell me” the homosexual lifestyle as an ideal. I openly wonder whether or not this man - who was gay - was not himself a ‘philosophical’ convert, so to speak, to homosexuality.

So when people try to simplify this issue and produce what from my experience is a grotesque caricature of all the complexities involved with homosexuality or the gay community, I get ‘off-bent’ so to speak. I have one friend who is a (closet) bi-sexual. He is married with a family. But he knows he can trust me and I can trust him - but he also knows I wont let myself be a near occasion (let alone an actual) sin for him. I have a near relative who is gay (lesbian). I get along better with her on the issue of homosexuality than I do her (heterosexual) brother. Again I think that is testimony to the complexity of the issue.

I am sorry if I was short with you, Brother.

 

[JReducation]

That is truly wonderful But yes I would agree that even so things like workshops, lectures and classes are still needful. The application of general principles to particular circumstances is notoriously difficult.

Lol - presumably you mean micro-evolution or adaptation Although perhaps things like texting are indeed introducing a language shift of evolutionary scale.

I know. My very next post following the one you are replying to was as follows:

Sorry if I have offended you. But you brought up multiple issues. Issues that for some people are going to be deeply personal because these issues are not philosophical musings but a part of life.

It’s not what I feel that is at issue. It is what I think.

One of the things that is of concern to me was an encounter not long ago where a man tried to ‘covert me’ to homosexuality. I think you can appreciate the problems that raises: the man was not interested in my instincts or sexual inclinations, he was trying to ‘sell’ the gay lifestyle to me as an ideological ideal. It was irrelevant whether or not I was ‘born that way’. This is part of what I mean about the scope of this issue. I had to work with this man all day in very close proximity. Of course I had to be able to ‘get on’ with him and so developed, as best I could, a civil and friendly discourse. So long as he was being reasonable -and he was exceptionally intelligent- we could “get on”. But that didn’t change the fact that it was alarming to see a man trying to “sell me” the homosexual lifestyle as an ideal. I openly wonder whether or not this man - who was gay - was not himself a ‘philosophical’ convert, so to speak, to homosexuality.

So when people try to simplify this issue and produce what from my experience is a grotesque caricature of all the complexities involved with homosexuality or the gay community, I get ‘off-bent’ so to speak. I have one friend who is a (closet) bi-sexual. He is married with a family. But he knows he can trust me and I can trust him - but he also knows I wont let myself be a near occasion (let alone an actual) sin for him. I have a near relative who is gay (lesbian). I get along better with her on the issue of homosexuality than I do her (heterosexual) brother. Again I think that is testimony to the complexity of the issue.

I am sorry if I was short with you, Brother.

Thank you for sharing. The issue is very complex. But then again, human beings are very complex. When I was a young brother, many moons ago, one of my psychology professors was also my confere, Benedict Groeschel. At that time, both of were Capuchin friars. This was before the whole renewal began.

Anyway, one of the many great things that I learned from him was that the human mind and human behavior is too complex for simple one line doctrines or moral codes. The moral codes are good for objective teaching. But when you have to deal with the individual, then you must become subjective. It is at that point that you must seek to harmonize the objective moral code with the subjective situation of the person before you. This is no easy task for those of us are in pastoral care.

Any volunteer in the pro-life area is in pastoral care. He or she must be open to learning more about the Church and the Church’s understanding of an issue, not run out there with a machine gun mouth shooting off charges that only alienate people, rather than save souls.

I head a very big pro-life ministry in a large archdiocese. I need more volunteers, but I do not accept any volunteer who is not willing to learn while on the job. This means working one hour a week with pro-life and taking classes for two hours per week for 40 weeks per year for two years. He must study moral theology, Evangelium Vitae, Franciscan Theology, Franciscan methods in pastoral care, the Rule of St. Francis, the Life of St. Francis,the life and work of St. Maximilian Kolbe, Humanae Vitea and Sacred Scripture.

 

[AndyP2010]

There is a British physicist who has argued that TIME doesn’t exist. He says that time is a mental construct that our brains use to organize reality into something we can understand.
popsci.com/science/article/2012-09/book-excerpt-there-no-such-thing-time

 

[KyrieEleison17]

And some physicists have claimed that the universe is really a hologram… I just don’t see why that is relevant here - important issues but probably more suitable for the philosophy section.

 

[KyrieEleison17]

Thank you for sharing. The issue is very complex. But then again, human beings are very complex. When I was a young brother, many moons ago, one of my psychology professors was also my confere, Benedict Groeschel. At that time, both of were Capuchin friars. This was before the whole renewal began.

Anyway, one of the many great things that I learned from him was that the human mind and human behavior is too complex for simple one line doctrines or moral codes. The moral codes are good for objective teaching. But when you have to deal with the individual, then you must become subjective. It is at that point that you must seek to harmonize the objective moral code with the subjective situation of the person before you. This is no easy task for those of us are in pastoral care.

Any volunteer in the pro-life area is in pastoral care. He or she must be open to learning more about the Church and the Church’s understanding of an issue, not run out there with a machine gun mouth shooting off charges that only alienate people, rather than save souls.

I head a very big pro-life ministry in a large archdiocese. I need more volunteers, but I do not accept any volunteer who is not willing to learn while on the job. This means working one hour a week with pro-life and taking classes for two hours per week for 40 weeks per year for two years. He must study moral theology, Evangelium Vitae, Franciscan Theology, Franciscan methods in pastoral care, the Rule of St. Francis, the Life of St. Francis,the life and work of St. Maximilian Kolbe, Humanae Vitea and Sacred Scripture.

Thank you for this Brother. I have to agree completely with what you wrote, The moral codes are good for objective teaching. But when you have to deal with the individual, then you must become subjective. I would also agree that especially in practice we need to take exceptional care, especially perhaps with homosexuals, because the issue is obviously quite personal for them, not and never to give the impression that God in any way rejects them: all people are warmly encouraged and invited to be in Communion with him. It may even be good to personally ask them if they have ever attended Mass, for example, and if they would like to. God does love them and we are all sinners. But exactly because we must become subjective in personal encounters, I think we need to distinguish between someone who is seriously wrestling or dealing with strong homosexual inclinations on one hand, which certainly calls forth our sympathy, and the libertine on the other, which is a different issue and has its own medicines. Someone proposing homosexuality as an ideal lifestyle for men, for example, raises different issue and problems then the question raised by how we should cope with homosexual inclinations or those who have them, especially those who have very strong and deep-seated homosexual inclinations.

 

[TEPO]

There is a British physicist who has argued that TIME doesn’t exist. He says that time is a mental construct that our brains use to organize reality into something we can understand.
popsci.com/science/article/2012-09/book-excerpt-there-no-such-thing-time

Very interesting for those of us whose paradigm is set up from a top-down approach. It’s hard to focus on one thing without taking the relationships to everything else into consideration.

 

[Dorothy]

Brother JR,

Thank you for all of your insightful posts! I have trusted our new Pope Francis, and now I comprehend much better what he has been saying. I appreciate your gift of clarity.

Peace,

Dorothy

 

[polki]

The priest who said mass today gave an excellent homily. He said that the Kingdom of God is mentioned many more times in the Bible than the Church is, and that we need to focus on the Kingdom of God throughout the whole world, not just the Church.

 

[TEPO]

What’s the difference between the Kingdom of God and the Church?

 

[polki]

What’s the difference between the Kingdom of God and the Church?

He was saying that the whole world is God’s kingdom, not just those in the Church. I think the gist of the message was spreading Christ’s love to all, not just to Catholics or to the people who agree with us. I think I’m explaining this poorly though.

 

[graciew]

What’s the difference between the Kingdom of God and the Church?

Looking for an answer I found these two links helpful.

catholicnewsagency.com/news/pope-francis-kingdom-of-god-comes-by-wisdom/

Newadvent.org Kingdom of God

 

[JReducation]

What’s the difference between the Kingdom of God and the Church?

Systematic theology, particularly Christology, shows us that “the Kingdom of God” has a double meaning in the NT. It refers to a state of being and to the person of Christ. When Jesus says, “The Kingdom of God is among you,” he’s referring to himself. When he says ïn the Kingdom of God . . . " he’s referring to a state of being. The two are inseparable. That’s why the number of times that the term “Kingdom of God” appears in the Gospels is so great. It’s a continuum between the person of Christ and that state of existence where all things are gathered together in Christ for all eternity.

 

[TEPO]

Systematic theology, particularly Christology, shows us that “the Kingdom of God” has a double meaning in the NT. It refers to a state of being and to the person of Christ. When Jesus says, “The Kingdom of God is among you,” he’s referring to himself. When he says ïn the Kingdom of God . . . " he’s referring to a state of being. The two are inseparable. That’s why the number of times that the term “Kingdom of God” appears in the Gospels is so great. It’s a continuum between the person of Christ and that state of existence where all things are gathered together in Christ for all eternity.

Good point. I would have assumed that referencing the Kingdom of God in the bible would have been a reference to salvation including the forgiveness of sin through Jesus, and His church being that vessel - but that point does involve a “state of being” just as much as anything else.

 

[AndyP2010]

Getting back to the OP.

In “Evangelii Gaudium” Pope Francis writes in Paragraph 94.
Evangelii Gaudium 94:

1. This worldliness can be fuelled in two deeply interrelated ways. One is the attraction of gnosticism, a purely subjective faith whose only interest is a certain experience or a set of ideas and bits of information which are meant to console and enlighten, but which ultimately keep one imprisoned in his or her own thoughts and feelings. *The other is the **self-absorbed promethean neopelagianism ***of those who ultimately trust only in their own powers and feel superior to others because they observe certain rules or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style from the past. A supposed soundness of doctrine or discipline leads instead to a narcissistic and authoritarian elitism, whereby instead of evangelizing, one analyzes and classifies others, and instead of opening the door to grace, one exhausts his or her energies in inspecting and verifying. In neither case is one really concerned about Jesus Christ or others. These are manifestations of an anthropocentric immanentism. It is impossible to think that a genuine evangelizing thrust could emerge from these adulterated forms of Christianity.

Emphasis Mine

I remember being shocked when someone on this forum or a comment in a catholic blog stated that the EF objectively conferred more grace than the OF. Now I can see how a person felt more open to God’s grace at one form of the Mass or the other but, how one form was objectively more efficacious. Could such an attitude be an example of self-absorbed promethean neopelagianism?

 

[Cojuanco]

Getting back to the OP.

In “Evangelii Gaudium” Pope Francis writes in Paragraph 94.

Emphasis Mine

I remember being shocked when someone on this forum or a comment in a catholic blog stated that the EF objectively conferred more grace than the OF. Now I can see how a person felt more open to God’s grace at one form of the Mass or the other but, how one form was objectively more efficacious. Could such an attitude be an example of self-absorbed promethean neopelagianism?

Yes. I mean, don’t get me wrong, for some people the EF and its spirituality is beneficial to their spiritual life, and we should encourage that. But to assert that one form is gives more grace than the other would to me make the error of denigrating one form of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, as if the two were two different sacrifices instead of one.