F
FiveLinden
Guest
I did not know the comments of a non-believer could be disheartening! I can understand how someone who accepts the so-called ‘natural law’ position most recently advocated by the Pope emeritus could feel about those seeking a more ‘situation ethics’ approach to sexuality. But I see in CM a desire to exaggerate and promote division in the form of a specific attack on Church leadership. This seems to me to be unprecedented from within the Church. The similar language used in the reformation led to schism.I’m not trying to personally attack you or belittle your beliefs, but your comment was disheartening. It’s this same indifference and impartiality that allows such liturgical abuses to continue. I’m not implying that your dispassion for such is to say that you’re advocating for its implementation, but there are many who unfortunately share a similar attitude.
They view all masses as equal and to quote a common response on these forums “a mass is a mass”. So some actually see no difference in its celebration, other than the obvious, but they don’t view these misconstrued acts of piety as anything but a perfectly acceptable form of worship.
So long as they receive their host, it doesn’t matter if it comes from the priest at the Tridentine mass or the the one riding in on a hover board, wearing clown makeup and being flanked by liturgical dancers.
Which I think gives me better insight into why you seem “so perplexed” at the sudden spike in faithful Catholics condemning church leadership in such an alarming way.
After all, if you have no views as to the issue of homosexuality, especially from a Catholic perspective, how can you see the errors of it by those who advocate for its place in the Church.