Cafeteria Catholicism

[AlanFromWichita]

Morning Glory:

I could only read part way through this thread because my heart became so heavy.

I do not mean to patronize or to insult anyone, but one thing came up a few times and it sort of cocked my head to the side.

Faith is believing without having proof. Quoting the Bible is not proof, since the dissenter will find thier own meaning in the quote for thier own purposes.

Right now I only see people hurting each other to prove they are the greater/more faithful Catholic.

If you have problems with “Cafeteria Catholics”, please stop insulting and start praying.

If “Cafeteria Catholics” have problems with others more strict beliefs, stop insulting and start praying.

Everyone chooses their faith. We may not have choices when we are children, but when we grow up, we choose to stay in the faith or to change it. If you feel you have not a choice in the matter, perhaps reflecting on what you want in/from the Church is a more productive use of your time.

You have really summarized a couple really good points. It may not have started that way (that is, taking your points into consideration), but I think the thread is going in that direction.

When this many people, all strong Catholics, and most of whom have run into opposition before (and often opposition who is, shall we say, not informed enough to give a good answer) and come here with certain hurts about the past, it is very frequent that we “tweak” somebody’s bad memories with practically any story.

The trick is, as you said, is to stop insulting each other. I notice you are new to the forums, so I welcome you. I can say with a great deal of confidence that although we’ve done quite a bit of “head butting” it would seem we’re starting to learn how to accept each other’s “touchy” spots a little better without having to feel the need to compete.

My guess is this is one of the few places where so many Catholics with some much cumulative knowledge and strong feelings are connected. That being the case, and each of us taking the Church seriously, but in many different ways with many different experiences, it is taking us a little time not to be wary of each other. I think in my case and in some others, a lot if not all of our hostility we show to each other is actually becoming obvious to giver as well as taker, and it’s helping.

I tend to get verbose, but my main point is to welcome you to the forums, invite you to continue to join in, and with the ideas you espoused above you can certainly help advance the cause of Catholic unity, something we all want but have “slightly” different ideas of the best strategy to go about achieving it. We are finding more and more (again at least from my perspective) how to help each other understand when we’ve offended, because honestly none of us want to but we somehow can’t help it because we’re so used to hostile environments, as I wrote, it is taking some adjustment. Also a lot of people come here with a big problem and spout off and are very angry, and we seem to be doing a better job all the time of ministering to their anger without getting angry and defensive back!

Again welcome, and please don’t get discouraged by this thread. There were several threads like this where we took some of our most hurtful divisions and have gradually been becoming a little more conversant and less combatant. It’s really kind of beautiful to behold I think. A lot of the mean things we say either without realizing or because we are angry, we now retract within an hour. I believe your observations of parts of this thread are right on target, but I also hope you’ll see we are a “work in progress” and from where I sit, it looks like we are in fact making progress! Personally I tend to think a little “too” grandiose, but I think we are making real progress toward Christian unity, even if not in agreeing on doctrine as much as we’d like yet, then at least in learning how to be more open and less defensive toward each other.

Peace,
Alan

 

[TOME]

I see my post earlier has raised a few comments, which I believe is good. About Fr. McBrien, is is only one source that I use in my studies and where I think or others like him are correct and useful I use him. There is one thing, however, I did find disturbing in some replies and that is the inaccuracies of some comments on the Church’s condemnation of Catholicism by the USCCB. That is not correct, the USCCB never “Condemned” the work. They found many difficulties with it, but if you read just the articles provided
Lux_et-Veritas there is no out right condemnation of Fr. McBrien’s work and in one link the article actuallys complains about the USCCB not condemning his work. So I think should be more careful about our terms we use especially when it comes to making statements about offical Church pronouncements.

As for the particular topic of this thread, I see Cafeteria Catholics coming in two basic groups - yes I know it’s unchristian to put people into categories. One group we all know as Liberal, the other take justifiable pride in refering to themselves as Orthodox(but not in the sense of the Orthodox Christian Church).

I would like to compare the two in their practice of “Cafeterianism” using the Mass as a focul point. But I have to leave right now so hopefully I’ll continue this later.

 

[ncjohn]

AlanFromWichita:

Personally I tend to think a little “too” grandiose, but I think we are making real progress toward Christian unity, even if not in agreeing on doctrine as much as we’d like yet, then at least in learning how to be more open and less defensive toward each other.

Peace,
Alan

Hey Alan,

Maybe it’s time for us to request a forum on Pursuing Catholic Unity where we could target ways for overcoming our inherent distrust for people with opposing views and attempting to keep our baggage in the closet.

Maybe there could even be a required entrance posting, like “Post your personal prayer for Catholic Unity here” before entering this forum." That idea comes from Morning Glory’s post.

I agree that overall the tone I’m seeing is more positive, especially in threads like this that start off kind of contentious as people come in thinking that this is their chance to make their great statement that will “fix” all of those with different views, only to discover that they are still part of the problem and might need a little adjusting themselves. (wow, how’s that for a run-on sentence!!) I also find though that I’m finding the same thing in myself, as you’ve noted with yourself, so I am also more and more able to contribute to a peaceful tone both here and in other sometimes more “technical” forums.

We have to keep removing our “planks” as they pop up while being gentle with out brother’s splinters if we’re ever to move toward peace. Just learning that continues to be an ongoing journey.

Peace,

 

[AlanFromWichita]

ncjohn:

Hey Alan,

Maybe it’s time for us to request a forum on Pursuing Catholic Unity where we could target ways for overcoming our inherent distrust for people with opposing views and attempting to keep our baggage in the closet.

Maybe there could even be a required entrance posting, like “Post your personal prayer for Catholic Unity here” before entering this forum." That idea comes from Morning Glory’s post.

That’s a good idea, and it gives me a chance for a Shameless Plug for my “Unity” thread which could use resurrecting. It was initially intended to be “public scratch paper” where I was going to observe all kinds of interesting things, but the actual interactive peacemaking we’ve seen of late was more compelling then a meta-thread on unity at least at the time.

I agree that overall the tone I’m seeing is more positive, especially in threads like this that start off kind of contentious as people come in thinking that this is their chance to make their great statement that will “fix” all of those with different views, only to discover that they are still part of the problem and might need a little adjusting themselves. (wow, how’s that for a run-on sentence!!) I also find though that I’m finding the same thing in myself, as you’ve noted with yourself, so I am also more and more able to contribute to a peaceful tone both here and in other sometimes more “technical” forums.

We have to keep removing our “planks” as they pop up while being gentle with out brother’s splinters if we’re ever to move toward peace. Just learning that continues to be an ongoing journey.

Peace,

I think it’s magic. Christ said, “the person who believes in me shall do greater works than these” about his minor miracles, which I understood he did mostly for show to demonstrate that He was God. Would Christ smile upon our use of the Internet in this fashion, to take somtimes lifelong, very heartfelt issues and help each other work them out even as we help ourselves?

I’ve heard other say the Holy Spirit is working in us through these forums. Well, if this is a sample of what the Holy Spirit can do, then I look forward to seeing a lot more of it.

Alan

 

[ncjohn]

AlanFromWichita:

That’s a good idea, and it gives me a chance for a Shameless Plug for my “Unity” thread which could use resurrecting. It was initially intended to be “public scratch paper” where I was going to observe all kinds of interesting things, but the actual interactive peacemaking we’ve seen of late was more compelling then a meta-thread on unity at least at the time.

LOL, I’d have to support resurrecting that thread just to take the notch off of my belt for being the “thread killer” on it.

Seriously though, there were some good ideas already going there although it didn’t seem to catch on for whatever reason. Could be that unity, in and of itself, isn’t an issue many people are here for, which would be sad. Or it could be that it just needed a catchier title to draw people in.

Maybe we just need to have a thread as kind of an organizational meeting or steering committee about a Unity forum to see if there’s any real interest or if it’s just part of the “dead horse” society.

Peace,

 

[Brad]

Morning Glory:

I could only read part way through this thread because my heart became so heavy.

I do not mean to patronize or to insult anyone, but one thing came up a few times and it sort of cocked my head to the side.

Faith is believing without having proof. Quoting the Bible is not proof, since the dissenter will find thier own meaning in the quote for thier own purposes.

Right now I only see people hurting each other to prove they are the greater/more faithful Catholic.

If you have problems with “Cafeteria Catholics”, please stop insulting and start praying.

If “Cafeteria Catholics” have problems with others more strict beliefs, stop insulting and start praying.

Everyone chooses their faith. We may not have choices when we are children, but when we grow up, we choose to stay in the faith or to change it. If you feel you have not a choice in the matter, perhaps reflecting on what you want in/from the Church is a more productive use of your time.

Can you identify any insults or are you suggesting that discussion or confusion regarding what the Church is and is not is unworthy discussion?

 

[AlanFromWichita]

ncjohn:

LOL, I’d have to support resurrecting that thread just to take the notch off of my belt for being the “thread killer” on it.

Seriously though, there were some good ideas already going there although it didn’t seem to catch on for whatever reason. Could be that unity, in and of itself, isn’t an issue many people are here for, which would be sad. Or it could be that it just needed a catchier title to draw people in.

Maybe we just need to have a thread as kind of an organizational meeting or steering committee about a Unity forum to see if there’s any real interest or if it’s just part of the “dead horse” society.

Peace,

I’m not sure I’m comfortable with your thread idea unless maybe we can take a poll on whether such an effort is warranted. Maybe nobody wants to discuss whether this is an issue that needs to be discussed?

The best outcome I really had imagined, all “delusional” thinking aside, was that people on both sides of contentious issues and divisions would realize that they each have a part in bringing unity other than cajoling the other side to change. That seems to have happened regardless of activity on the thread, so my dreams for the thread came through without its even participating! I figure God works His own way, and I guarantee I wasn’t the only one truly wishing unity, so hey, if it dies I’ll just say you had the last word.

Why not be delusional, though, in our dreams and hopes? Who can tell us we “aren’t supposed” to think big? I normally don’t watch TV, but I did watch EWTN a few times, and some really cool speaker (might have been Groeschel but I don’t exactly remember – or this one really old looking guy with just a bit of white hair and such a happy attitude he looked like he was going to smile at any given time) actually confirmed what I had only dared think myself after doing contemplation for a while and studying the spiritual journey.

Why not aspire to be a saint? Are we presumptuous for doing so, or, as in the opinion of that happy guy on EWTN are we not only invited, but even expected to desire to become saints?

I have a good friend at Church who simply has no desire to be a saint. He studies the saints a great deal, is very active in the Church and now works for the parish, is intelligent and everything else, but he would rather read about it than participate in it. He knows a credible story of a woman he knows whose Rosary supposedly turned gold during adoration, and he says he just finds all that too spooky and would rather just be a “small” person and do what he can. He was friends with me through my illness, and when I came up with bizarre ideas, I’d run them by him and he’d always know what some saint said about it. He was the only one I knew with enough knowledge to address my questions, who made me feel not in the least judged, but minced no words about when he thought I was astray. He also liked to tell stories about St. Alphonsus – apparently among his favorite. Most people never spoke to him of these things because he came off like the quiet guy that held the door for the school kids, fixed things humbly, and picked up scraps of paper and cigarette butts wherever he saw them. Few knew how fervent he was about discussing faith issues outside of official retreats – he said most people probably don’t want to hear what he has to say, so he doesn’t say it. He has a wonderful wife he adores, and I think a couple grown children.

He also has a little more peace now that I have found these forums.

As I write this, I began to wonder if the man has already thwarted his own wishes, and is in fact a saint.

Alan

 

[ncjohn]

AlanFromWichita:

He also has a little more peace now that I have found these forums.

As I write this, I began to wonder if the man has already thwarted his own wishes, and is in fact a saint.

Alan

Sounds to me that he’s discovered, perhaps unknowingly or perhaps knowingly, what Mother Teresa said: “We can do no great things; only small things with great love.” I guarantee that’s the only way I’ll be a saint; it sure won’t be through the big things. And of course the true saints never believe themselves to be so; they just consider themselves “little flowers” in God’s garden.

Thinking about this idea more over the weekend while I was out of town and holding grandchildren, I came to the same conclusion you did. Unity has to be a byproduct of all of this; part of each thread as we strive to become civil and learn from each other. Not many people are going to spend time on the topic just for its own sake, and there probably isn’t a good reason to as this has to be a way of life, not a topic of conversation. The ideas and conversation would come to an end very quickly. In the end, the discussion itself has to lead us to “check our guns at the door.” If I lead someone away from that I’ve failed, and if I bring my own guns in I’ve also failed. At least I’ll be in good company when I do though, with other sinners who will hopefully help pick me back up.

Peace,

 

[TOME]

I find cafateria catholics coming in two bsaic garden varities. The First and more common is the Liberal. This is the more popular of the two and we know who they are - for example, they practice birth control because Humanae Vitae rejected the majority report for, God forbid, the minority report. Miss Mass on Sunday, because in the “Spirit” of Vat II Mass isn’t an obligation rather something I should attent when I choose to because I want to and not out of fear of damnation.

The second varitey is the Orthodox varitey. These may adhere to the Law but do so out of the obligation (rejected by the liberal) and criticize at every turn Vat II, the Novus Ordo and anything else they consider not Orthodox. They best way to identify an orthodox varitey of a cafateria catholic, is their use of the Catechism and GIRM much in the same way Protestants use the Bible, namely, by using a passage or part of a section to prove their point against the Novus Ordo and its continued abuses (especially by the Bishops of our Nation).

Actually, I believe both originate, sincerely, from their starting point in Christology. This is done consciously or not and is commonly called High and Low Christology. Unfortunately, both High and Low Christologies are suppose to be starting point to move to a fuller understanding of Christ and thus the Church.

For those who are not sure what I’m talking about, a High Christology (how we study and come to a deeper understanding of Christ) begins with a theology from above. It begins its study of Christ as the Second Person of the Trinity then moves to the Incarnation - God made Man. A low CHritsology begins by asking how did the people, who knew Christ personally, who ate, sleep, drank with him, watch his mircles and listen to him preach, in other words experienced the Human Jesus, after the Resurrection come to know Jesus is God?

These two starting points are seen reflected through out Church History, in our Doctrines, Liturgies, Music everything that makes us Church.

Our task then is to bring these two Christologies into union in our lives, and reflect Christ Himself - Fully Divine, Fully Human.

 

[EquusNomVeritas]

I will agree that there are some things in that teaching that are more important than others, and certain teachings do give some leeway. That being said, I would argue that papal inerrancy is not one of those things. Think about it for a minute. The claim being made by the Church is basically that the pope will not be wrong when speaking ex cathedra. That’s a pretty profound statement. It calls for Catholics to take as true those things that are said ex cathedra by the pope. This things are a part of our faith. So speaking wrongly would lead millions of Catholics down the wrong path.
Realistically, there aren’t many explanations as to why the Church should make this claim. The most obvious explanation is tat this claim is actually true, that the Church, under the guidance of the pope, will not lead us astray. A second possible explanation is that the Church knows that this is untrue, and is continuing to make the claim anyway. Such a Church would not be following God, now, would it? It would be knowingly risking leading its follower down the wrong path. Arguably, in a statistical sense, it certainly would on one point or another be doing this. A Church that does this would have to be a corrupt Church indeed. The only conclusion from this explanation is that the Church is and has been corrupt since introducing the doctrine of Papal Inerrancy. But I’m betting that no one here is buying that explanation (you wouldn’t be a Catholic if you did).
Another possibility is that the Church does believe this to be true, even though it’s not. This is the position that I imagine those of you who diagree with this doctrine take.
SO, it becomes important to ask, how is this possible? Well, the Church may have been mislead (which you are arguing actually CAN happen, if you are arguing that the Church is wrong on some issue of morality). This would either have been accidental or deliberate, but in either case, there is no reason why at some point the Church shouldn’t have come forward and said, “Oops, we were wrong about this one. Our bad.” Certainly, if the gates of Hell can’t prevail against the Church, then it can’t mislead us by claiming that it has inerrancy when it doesn’t (actually, if the gates of Hell can’t prevail against the Church, then how can the Church be wrong on matters of morality?). Surely one of the Popes between then and now would have called a Council to discuss this with the Cardinals, and one of them would have stepped forward to apologize. But that hasn’t happened, has it? And surely God would have spoken to at least one of the popes (probably all of them since the introduction of this doctrine) to tell them that the doctrine is wrong. If they came forward and said, “We’ve been wrong on this point,” they don’t necessarily lose credibility with the faithful (not long-term, anyway). Besides which, to not do so would be dishonest, and what kind of person would allow this dishonesty when the moral well-being of millions is at stake?
In any case, the other possible explanation as to how all of the Popes and Cardinals have believed this doctrine (assuming it’s wrong) is that they’re all crazy. But come on, who here believes that every Pope since then has been insane? They certainly don’t show any other signs of it, so I think we can safely assume that this isn’t so. Another possibility is that the original council deliberately mislead us with this doctrine, and all of the Cardinals and Popes since then have been fooled into believing this council. But again, this doesn’t explain the lack of willingness by any of the popes to come forward and make a statement to the contrary. It also make thes assumption that the entire council was either mad or evil (how else would this be able to be established as doctrine), but this is a pretty wieghty claim to make agains that entire council of cardinals. I would say that the correct conclusion then is that the doctrine of Papal Inerrancy is correct along with all of its implications.

PS: I hope all of this hasn’t come off as seeming harsh. It’s not meant to be.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

TOME:

Miss Mass on Sunday, because in the “Spirit” of Vat II Mass isn’t an obligation rather something I should attent when I choose to because I want to and not out of fear of damnation.

If we honestly have no desire to attend the Mass, then we have a problem. It should never be a “duty” to go Praise our Creator and share in His lifegiving sacraments, honor his Son and his Son’s Mother. If this is a “duty” then we may just as well be robots instead of humans and we’d get the same result.

If that is the spirit of Vatican II, then so be it, and I’m all for it. I’m not going to bring someone along kicking and screaming so they can have grudgingly followed the letter of the Church’s clear teachings. My “common sense” says that unless I am their legal guardians I am as likely to lead them astray as to feed them anything they are willing to swallow.

Alan

 

[TOME]

Alan, I agree with you, I unfortunately left out something to the effect that they cover laziness with that rationalization (I’m speaking from personal experience now, the Cafateria Catholic I sometimes tend to be).

Again, you are right and you expressed yourself the way I had hoped to.

Thanks!

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

AlanFromWichita:

If we honestly have no desire to attend the Mass, then we have a problem. It should never be a “duty” to go Praise our Creator and share in His lifegiving sacraments, honor his Son and his Son’s Mother. If this is a “duty” then we may just as well be robots instead of humans and we’d get the same result.

Does this mean worship is conditional? That is, conditional on how it makes me feel, as opposed to how that time makes God “feel”?

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Lux_et_veritas:

Does this mean worship is conditional? That is, conditional on how it makes me feel, as opposed to how that time makes God “feel”?

Yes, worship is conditional.

Your attitude toward it determines whether it is valuable or just a farce, as you walk lemming-like through the same motions you have for years. That’s fine if that’s the depth of your faith.

Frankly I don’t think God needs me or you in that pew on any given Sunday. I don’t go because I offend God if I don’t. I go because I want to. Like He can’t get along with all the others that do show up without me.

We get together to celebrate a feast with Holy Communion together. I say if you’re just going there with the idea to get it over so you can go home for another week, then you mightn’t as well not bother. What kind of celebration is that? Does coming to Mass in that state of mind actually even count as going to Mass in terms of not being a mortal sin?

Alan

 

[ncjohn]

AlanFromWichita:

We get together to celebrate a feast with Holy Communion together. I say if you’re just going there with the idea to get it over so you can go home for another week, then you mightn’t as well not bother. What kind of celebration is that? Does coming to Mass in that state of mind actually even count as going to Mass in terms of not being a mortal sin?

Alan

Unfortunately Alan, my experience is that the bulk of the congregation in any given church are “pew potatoes” who believe exactly that–that showing up on Sunday is all that is required of us. The sadder part is that there seems to be little effort on the part of most priests I have encountered in my life to correct that notion, which I believe to be the reason why there seem to be so few Catholics who are excited about their faith or on any kind of journey. I also think it is the biggest reason why so many of our young people bolt as soon as they get the opportunity, or end up switching over to some friend’s church where there is excitement.

Finally, I think that it is also a large part of the reason why we have such a category as Cafeteria Catholic. Since Sunday Mass is all that is required in most minds, the level of catechesis is minimal and most people don’t know what the church teaches, much less give much thought as to whether that affects their life or gives cause for believing or not believing. There just is no ownership of the faith.

Of course I recognize that the label also exists for many “thinking” Catholics who struggle with, or disagree with, a few or many teachings of the Church. The biggest difference to me is that those (including me at times ) who are actively struggling and questioning are doing so because they are on a journey to discover the Truth. I truly believe that God recognizes and rewards that effort and that the more we seek the Truth the more of it God will reveal to us. It’s a slow process, but that’s why we get a whole lifetime and don’t get to know the whole truth when we’re twenty, as much as we might like to think we do.

Peace,

 

[AlanFromWichita]

ncjohn:

Unfortunately Alan, my experience is that the bulk of the congregation in any given church are “pew potatoes” who believe exactly that–that showing up on Sunday is all that is required of us. The sadder part is that there seems to be little effort on the part of most priests I have encountered in my life to correct that notion, which I believe to be the reason why there seem to be so few Catholics who are excited about their faith or on any kind of journey.

Of course, when we say we are going to “celebrate” Holy Communion, then get all stiff about it and comport ourselves as if we’re at a funeral of something, it may be difficult for some to see how that is “celebrating.”

Then again I never could understand why my dad liked to listen to Ravel’s Bolero. I didn’t mind it, but if I just sat and listened to it instead of using as backgound music, to me it has an interesting theme but was insanely boring and repetitious. I’d not “celebrate” hearing that song again, any more than I think a lot of Catholics “celebrate” Holy Communion.

Our new bishop, bishop Jackels who we finally got to replace Thomas Olmstead, gave a very moving homily at the Mass for our parish Confirmation candidates. He also was very funny and kept the kids’ (and adults’) attention. He asked them to admit why they’re all here. Was it because their dads told them they had to be confirmed and they were afraid of his size 10 1/2’s ending up their “bohinkus” if I recall? The kids loosened up as the bishop talked about how incredible this sacrament is. In effect, we’re having spiritual “whoopie” (my word not his) and we are all going to be on fire with faith. He flailed his arms just a bit even when talking about how incredible an event that was happening here tonight. He was obviously so completely thrilled about the whole idea of bringing these kids this sacrament, that I think a lot of them caught part of his enthusiasm. I know I did, and I was just watching. So far, everyone I talked to who has seen him, has found him to have a great sense of humor, an engaging speaker, and truly seems on fire with the faith.

He also told the kids that the real test of their faith is what they do when they no longer have to answer to their parents. He admitted that as soon as he got away from his parents, he himself ran away from the Church for two years (went toward Buddhism I guess) but then “came to his senses and returned to the Church – in a big way.” All laughed at that. He was obviously right at home in this Church and didn’t mind showing it. This kind of behavior, where a priest is so happy and excited to be there he doesn’t try to hide it, I think really spoke to a lot of those children, and to some of the adults in attendance I’ve talked to.

I liked Olmsted, but I certainly am excited about the new Bishop, for whom I will give a shameless plug:

Home

The Catholic Diocese of Wichita located in Central and Southeastern Kansas consists of 90 beautiful midwestern parishes that Go forth faithfully and preach the Gospel to all God's children evangelizing today's culture.

catholicdioceseofwichita.org

Bishop Michael O. Jackels

Appointed the 10th Bishop of the Catholic Diocese of Wichita on January 28, 2005 by Pope John Paul II, Bishop Jackels (pronounced JAKE-uhls) was ordained at the Church of the Magdalen on Monday, April 4, 2005.

Prior to leading the Diocese of Wichita, Bishop Jackels worked for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in Rome for eight years under Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI.

Funny thing, our last bishop Olmsted also came here directly after working in Rome, having been JPII’s secretary at the time he was shot, I think. Maybe many bishops work in Rome just before their appointments?

reference: Wichita Diocese web site

Alan

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

AlanFromWichita:

Yes, worship is conditional

I understand a little more clearly now. However, a root of disagreement has surfaced with this answer, unless you misunderstood my context.

In my mind, worship is something that should be totally unconditional. Worship is for God because he is good, gave me life, sent his Son to take on the burden of our sins in sacrifice, and promises us everlasting life. We worship God because His love for us is unconditional, and therefore, so should our worship of Him. Not only should I be at the Mass each Sunday, but there are things I have found I need to do in order to be ready to give God his due Worship (because the Mass has more to do about what I give God - namely myself for the hour - than what He gives me. This means, sometimes it is a sacrifice to go to Mass.

For the last 20 years, I was one of those irreverent pew potatoes who only went to Mass because I knew it was a requirement…guilty!

Something happened a few months back, and everything changed. The Mass now is the central point of my Faith and everything radiates outward from there. The Mass is where I get strength through the Eucharist, instruction through the Word, and time to purely focus on God, and God alone. To ready myself, I try to get to Mass at least 15 minutes early and just sit quietly with my eyes closed. Even if I cannot focus fully, I owe it to God to sit there and pay attention, to receive His Word, and to receive Him.

When I made Mass conditional all those years, it made my entire spiritual life one of conditions. This is backwards. How did I make it conditional?

• I was picky about music and the band
• I was picky about where I sat.
• I wanted to be comfortable climate-wise
• I wanted to hear “Fr. Keep-me-Awake” and avoided Masses with “Fr. Put-Me-To-Sleep”.
• I was late because something else was always placed before Worship of God.
• I always left early because something else was always placed before Worship of God (often getting to the local diner or to the opening kick-off).
• I used the baby in the front pew as entertainment to help me pass the hour.

The list goes on.

That is not true worship, it was conditional worship. It was conditional that a priest kept me awake rather than making myself be receptive. It was conditional to look for entertainment out of a baby, making goo-goo faces all the while I was there.

Unconditional worship means that I will come to Mass regular, get there early enough to predispose myself (after all, God only gave me life, the roof on my head, the car I drive, and every morsel that I eat). It means I worship him whether I must be dripping in sweat or freezing during the Mass. It also means that I must focus on God, and not entertain myself with the baby in front of me.

From the Mass all else spawns so there is plenty of time outside of the Mass for contact.

Your attitude toward it determines whether it is valuable or just a farce, as you walk lemming-like through the same motions you have for years. That’s fine if that’s the depth of your faith.

Frankly I don’t think God needs me or you in that pew on any given Sunday. I don’t go because I offend God if I don’t. I go because I want to. Like He can’t get along with all the others that do show up without me.

When you say, “Your attitude toward it determines whether it is valuable or just a farce…”, you miss a really big point. Sweetness and consolation in prayer is often a grace, given by God and has little to do with our efforts. This is what grace is all about. He controls the switch not us. Often times God will withdraw those wonderful feelings that make us feel our prayer is valuable in order to see if we will remain with him. It is a test.

We get together to celebrate a feast with Holy Communion together. I say if you’re just going there with the idea to get it over so you can go home for another week, then you mightn’t as well not bother. What kind of celebration is that? Does coming to Mass in that state of mind actually even count as going to Mass in terms of not being a mortal sin?

Alan

I get the impression you may think that when people walk out of Church they are suppose to go out and do something huge and significant. However, it is more about continous improvement. Tweaking and refining each week so that gradually we become more Christlike. We go from the Mass to confession where we grow more.

There’s more I’d like to say on this, but I have to go - dinner calls and someone mentioned an old Jewish deli with the best cornbeef sandwiches.

Later!

 

[ncjohn]

Lux_et_veritas:

In my mind, worship is something that should be totally unconditional. Worship is for God because he is good, gave me life, sent his Son to take on the burden of our sins in sacrifice, and promises us everlasting life. We worship God because His love for us is unconditional, and therefore, so should our worship of Him. Not only should I be at the Mass each Sunday, but there are things I have found I need to do in order to be ready to give God his due Worship (because the Mass has more to do about what I give God - namely myself for the hour - than what He gives me. This means, sometimes it is a sacrifice to go to Mass.

Wow Lux, you really express this in a clear way and you’re absolutely right. The only thing I would add is that we still make that “sacrifice” out of our overall joy and love. Just as there are days I don’t feel like babysitting my grandchildren, I still do it because I love them unconditionally and know that it’s what I’m called to do. That would be maybe the only place where I might quibble a little, and it would be splitting hairs–doing what you’re called to do and doing what you feel coerced to do aren’t necessarily the same thing as the motivation is still different. There are Sundays when I wake up not as “remembering” as I should be how much God has blessed me, but I’ll still be in church that morning because I know He’s calling me, not because the Church tells me it’s a mortal sin if I stay home.

It also means that I must focus on God, and not entertain myself with the baby in front of me.

Ouch! I have to admit that at time my focus does wander from God to whichever of the grandchildren I happen to be holding. But to be fair, it’s as often or not because I’m seeing Jesus in that little wonder. Of course if the “man” in me gets distracted by the girl in the short skirt and the crop top, that’s a different issue, so please pray for me (and all the other red-blooded men!) for deliverance on that one.

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

Great analogy with the grandchildren, John. That’s kind of what I’m saying. And, you are right about the love and joy - that is very true.

What I have noticed within myself these past few months is that it is at times when I’ve got something buried deep that may need to “come out” into the light, that I get fidgety about Mass.

I noticed once recently, how all the air seemed to go out of my tire when I fell into the state of mortal sin after having been free (at least visibly to me) for a couple months. My first reaction was that I skipped my daily Mass. Keep in mind I rearranged my work schedule so I could attend this Mass. I also go for morning Lauds which precedes the Mass, at 7:00 and skipped that too. I was scheduled for adoration and didn’t want to go, but I did. I lost interest in spiritual readings and everything. I then went to confession and enthusiasm returned. I talked about this with my confessor, with whom I meet face to face about every two weeks. I told him I was not proud of my response because it was another example of how I had made my worship conditional. That is, conditional that I’m not in the state of mortal sin. It wasn’t God’s fault I fell, so I had to ponder why I was punishing God by not worshiping Him and not praying. I was throwing a type of spiritual temper tantrum because I was weak and fell. However, this then becomes an opportunity to realize that without the graces of God, I am nothing. With a snap of his fingers, he can give me the strength to endure and do things that I ordinarily cannot handle.

 

[ncjohn]

Lux_et_veritas:

Great analogy with the grandchildren, John. That’s kind of what I’m saying. And, you are right about the love and joy - that is very true.

What I have noticed within myself these past few months is that it is at times when I’ve got something buried deep that may need to “come out” into the light, that I get fidgety about Mass.

I noticed once recently, how all the air seemed to go out of my tire when I fell into the state of mortal sin after having been free (at least visibly to me) for a couple months. My first reaction was that I skipped my daily Mass. Keep in mind I rearranged my work schedule so I could attend this Mass. I also go for morning Lauds which precedes the Mass, at 7:00 and skipped that too. I was scheduled for adoration and didn’t want to go, but I did. I lost interest in spiritual readings and everything. I then went to confession and enthusiasm returned. I talked about this with my confessor, with whom I meet face to face about every two weeks. I told him I was not proud of my response because it was another example of how I had made my worship conditional. That is, conditional that I’m not in the state of mortal sin. It wasn’t God’s fault I fell, so I had to ponder why I was punishing God by not worshiping Him and not praying. I was throwing a type of spiritual temper tantrum because I was weak and fell. However, this then becomes an opportunity to realize that without the graces of God, I am nothing. With a snap of his fingers, he can give me the strength to endure and do things that I ordinarily cannot handle.

Yup, and I almost always find that the times I don’t feel like going to church, or a Franciscan meeting, or whatever, turn out to be the times that I need them most, and I can’t think of an instance where I didn’t end up doubly blessed for making the effort.

I remember when I did my Cursillo weekend, many of the people noted that they felt great pressure building up as it got closer to not go. It seems the deceiver uses these weaknesses to great advantage to keep us from places of spiritual benefit, especially if we’re feeling a little “unworthy” at the time.

I think that’s the point we’ve all kind of been working up to in our different ways of saying it–that it’s not about doing things out of fear; it’s about doing things because they’re the right things to do, even when it’s not particularly what we feel like at the moment.

Of course we’ve gotten way off thread but in a worthy discussion. Please forgive me if I’ve displeased anyone in doing so.

Peace,