Catholic conservatism on the rise as priest refuses funeral for 'sinner'

  • Thread starter Thread starter buffalo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
buffalo:
The five senses tell us what we can know as humans. There is a supernatural existence.

How do we know it exists - Revelation.
I cannot see, hear, feel, smell, or taste fix. Therefore he does not exist.

Wait, wait, I am having a Revelation…it is telling me that fix exists.

Uh-oh, now I’m in real trouble. What do I do now? Does this mean I am internally relativistic?
 
Ani Ibi:
I cannot see, hear, feel, smell, or taste fix. Therefore he does not exist.

Wait, wait, I am having a Revelation…it is telling me that fix exists.

Uh-oh, now I’m in real trouble. What do I do now? Does this mean I am internally relativistic?
I have decided I no longer exist. What you now read you are not reading.
 
40.png
fix:
I have decided I no longer exist. What you now read you are not reading.
It is OK for you to believe you don’t exist, but I believe you do. Since you don’t exist any longer, you have no say in it. I will determine whether you exist or not.
 
40.png
AlanFromWichita:
Now to accept the last one fully, I must accept that despite the many wrongs that every human ever in the Church laity and clergy have done, that the particular part of her that involves Teachings on Faith And Morals has been kept pristine. We have committed moral atrocities, but we have sole intellect.

That means we could be like Christ, or that we could be like the pharisees. Mental assent is meaningless without love, so if we supply love than mental assent will be nurtured.

Sorry I might have drifted off topic. I was halfway listening to my wife’s phone conversation.

Alan
And to continue your drift, love is meaningless without truth.

As far as distinguishing between the Bible and the Church’s interpretation thereof in combination with Tradition and Magisterial Teaching:

The same Church that gave us the Bible and says that it is true is the Church that gives us the faith and morals teachings. Same Church full of sinful people.

Who you seem to be questioning is Jesus. You seem to question whether the gates of hell can prevail against His Church and you seem to question whether He is the Head of His Church and because He is the Head and Truth then we cannot be lead astray in doctrinal teaching.
 
40.png
AlanFromWichita:
Well, in a way that is correct. Perhaps you intended to be glib and that’s OK, because sometimes that’s where insights are formed.

When you do contemplative prayer, you completely quit communicating with the world as much as possible. It isn’t just relaxing, and it isn’t meditating in silence. it is interior silence of the mind.

In silence, we allow ourselves to be in the loving presence of our Lord with no worldly concerns at all, and this invites His Spirit to speak to us in a process called “contemplation” where the Holy Spirit speaks to us in His native language, which is entirely silent of human language. Christ spoke to us in human language so we’d understand Him. He speaks other languages, such as pure faith. When we quiet our minds we assent to His presence.

This is exemplefied by Benedict xvi recent talks about the importance of taking vacations. This is part of the whole idea of keeping at least the sabbath holy. When we are constantly busy and yakking away and listening to others yakking while thinking of ten other things we should be doing, it builds up spiritual junk.

Contemplation is dejunking by the Divine Therapist, the Holy Spirit.

That is very creepy to some people, and having been raised in constant noise their whole lives it helps to have spiritual direction in deciding on contemplative prayer forms. For example, centering prayer is praised by some and feared by others, but Lectio Divina also strives to achieve contemplation (which is a gift from God and not a “method”) and is hardly controversial.

This is very much like what happens every day in a monestary.

People with active lives boggle at the thought of people being together without verbal communications. I guess when it’s too quiet the nonverbal communications then become deafening?

Alan
I understand the value of contemplative prayer and taking rests. What I question is that it is extraodinarily difficult to understand someone’s words (written or verbal) and/or actions. In most cases, it is not exceedingly difficult. It takes effort but not as much as liberal pundits make it out to be - as if we can never understand something written 100 years ago. We should never jump to rash conclusions and generalizations. Nor should we fear making assessments after examining the facts.
 
40.png
AlanFromWichita:
Are you trying to defend absolutists by saying that whether a certain spiritual principal applies depends on a subjective measure such as “how serious” we take a particular aspect of the truth?

When Jesus told parables, He talked of mustard seeds but intended to teach on the principles of the kingdom of heaven. He talked of weeds but meant the children of the devil.

I don’t get why you object to making such abstractions.

Alan
I object because you belittle the kindhearted efforts of those that put their neck on the line to defend the Church’s teaching and help save a soul or 2 in the process.
 
40.png
AlanFromWichita:
That’s a good thing to ponder.

While you’re pondering that, I’ll ponder where it says in the Bible that if you are Full Mental Assent, it becomes your Solemn Duty to judge others and determine whether they are worthy of honor even after their death.

In Topeka there is a couple who actually attend funerals and protest against them because they deemed the dead people to be sinners and want to make sure they send the correct message to the mourners about it. As I may have mentioned (I forget which thread I say what) hey have a disadvantage against the Church because the Church can completely cancel the funeral Mass for a dead person if she thinks it be a sinner.

Alan
You’re still missing the point about the funeral mass. It is about those still living. I don’t give a hoot who honors me once I’m dead (actually I don’t even care that much who honors me now but I really won’t care once I’m dead).
 
40.png
AlanFromWichita:
Yes, judging. He objectively broke a specific forum rule.

In the world of moral absolutists, he should suffer the penalty.

In the world of loving relativists, we should let him be.

In the world of CAF, we should not discuss moderator actions.

Alan
All relativists are loving. How certain are you of that?
 
40.png
fix:
I have decided I no longer exist. What you now read you are not reading.
Did you write something? I thought I was reading something you wrote. I thought I was reading that you wrote you don’t exist any longer. I think I can possibly be certain that you wrote something, but I think I cannot be certain I read it. If you wrote something, then how can you not exist? If I cannot be certain I read that you do not exist how can I be certain that you exist? I cannot hear, see, smell, feel, or taste you. I have to conclude that you wrote something even though you don’t exist. I’m happy now.
 
40.png
buffalo:
It is OK for you to believe you don’t exist, but I believe you do. Since you don’t exist any longer, you have no say in it. I will determine whether you exist or not.
Ah! We are onto belief now, are we? Good. It is about time. I agree with you, buffalo. I believe that fix exists, even though I cannot see, hear, smell, taste, or feel him. He has, after all, written something. Therefore I am inclined to believe he exists. I like the authority angle too. I agree that fix should have absolutely no say in whether or not he exists, since I have no evidence of his existence.

(I don’t consider his writing to be evidence of his existence. Albert Camu wrote something. But he’s dead. That means he does not exist.) Since fix does not have any say in whether or not he exists, it follows logically that any say in the matter is up for grabs. You grabbed first. Therefore you have the say. You can be the authority. Nice move. I’m a bit envious, but you were the first off the blocks.

Now there is the disturbing possibility that fix, at one time, did exist. Sort of like Camu. If fix, at one time, did exist, then where is he now? Where does a person go when that person ceases to exist? If I believe he does exist but he does not in fact exist, how do I reconcile this conflict? Is it possible that he can both exist and not exist at the same time? That would be relative would it not? Of course it could on the other hand be self-contradictory. D-oh! Do you think it is possible for it to be both relative and self-contradictory at the same time? :hmmm:
 
40.png
Brad:
I don’t even care that much who honors me now but I really won’t care once I’m dead.
Whew. buffalo and I have been fighting over who would honour you. He insists he should be the one to honour you because he thought of it first. I insist it should be me who honours you because it’s my turn. The following tome – tome, not a tomb! – is for you. I hope you find it practical:

The “Talents” and Our Testing

The turmoil, confusion and conflicting forces that currently exist in the Roman Catholic Church in America have led to an instability of the faithful that is unprecedented in its history. The devastation is brought to the utmost by the very fact that the disrupters are within and very often are not only the ordained but members of the Church hierarchy itself. A deadly combination indeed! We cannot beguile ourselves, however, in thinking we were not forewarned because the New Testament writers gave extensive and specific warnings of these times and the nature of its leaders.

These days, then, have brought demands upon the individual faithful that are unique and which do not allow, in many instances, the conventional institutional remedies of the past. We shall here speak specifically of the ecclesial (Church)) authority and teaching of faith and morals. One finds themselves in the midst of a maelstrom of opinions concerning teaching and dissent from those teachings. In what we would call normal times, dissent (heresy, schism, apostasy, etc.) was quickly disproved and suppressed by the legitimate governing authority of the Church. Such acts of governance provide real charity to those that are venturing into error, and its subsequent loss of faith, while at the same time sparing the faithful from being led down deadly paths.

Otherwise, governing is an absolutely essential function in maintaining union/unity in the Church. Law, any law, is of no significance if it is not, or cannot, be enforced. Without governance, you have anarchy, which is another word for chaos, a condition that exists in many areas of the American sector of the Church today. It is significant to note that even with all the lather whipped up by the infallible imbeciles demanding changes (corruption) of faith and morals, the Church’s official teachings have not bent at all in acceding to these demands. It must be acknowledged, however painful as it may be, that governance in the Catholic Church (beginning with Rome and the Vatican itself) has for all practical purposes come to naught in recent times. This is often referred to as the “pastoral” approach, but that disastrous policy is a subject for another page. Still, the Law is intact and in place but the lack of resolve to govern renders the Law functionally ineffectual.

continued…
 
Coupled with this emasculation of governing is the further dissembling of the Church institution in the overabundance of bishops currently in place who are best described by no less than Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, the Vatican Prefect for the Doctrine of the Faith, in the following manner: “‘The words of the Bible and of the Church fathers rang in my ears, those sharp condemnations of shepherds who are like’ mute dogs; in order to avoid conflicts, that let the poison spread. Peace is not the first civic duty, and a bishop whose only concern is not to have any problems and to gloss over as many conflicts as possible is an image I find repulsive.” 1

What is related above certainly is not “news” to any observing Catholic. What it has done, however, is create a new (if not aberrant) perspective amongst a great number of the faithful. Whereas in the past the Catholic Institution could always be depended upon for its unerring rudder in voyage and sound anchor in moorage, this can no longer be looked to by many. When anarchy reigns in the provincial church, then that institution is no longer an arbiter of truth for the faithful. This reality has had a devastating effect upon the faithful, for a religion without immutability is a belief logically subject to question. “You vary, therefore you are not the truth!” 2

Where these conditions exist, now quite predominately, it is no great mystery that you have a scattered sheepfold. It is no less a mystery that the fallen away number is at an all time high and the percentage of Catholics attending Mass regularly is at an all time low. Certainly there are churchmen culpable in the spawning of these deplorable conditions, and they will answer for every instance of their miscreant conduct. But does that scandal provide the individual exoneration for his/her departure from the true teachings and responsibilities bestowed by Christ upon His Church? The answer is a resounding NO!

Before proceeding, we shall dwell here on a particular phenomenon (a potentially dangerous one) that is a direct by-product of the current chaos in our local church. This is the unprecedented flocking of so many of the faithful to a storm of so-called “apparitions, sightings, visions, prophecies” and “encounter movements” which are daily being announced. Our Archbishop Brunett himself has addressed this in his column in The Catholic Northwest Progress of May 21, 98, pg. 4. We quote extracts: “Each day we pick up the paper to read about another apparition, to another person and yet another place. This has spawned the frenzy to seek after the bizarre, the strange, the unusual, consequently to drain from the life of the church the energy’ that should be expended to bring others to Christ and to share his love by our service for his kingdom. So we see in these visions not the power of that redemptive love, but the charisma and attraction of the visionary, who then becomes a kind of Christian guru. This attraction to visionaries makes their followers vulnerable to every word spoken, and willing to believe and practice whatever they are told, even if it is not focused in the life of the church… All too often the faithful are led on pilgrimages to the four comers of the world where some new sighting is claimed. Their conduct is not far removed from those who chase UFOs, looking for secrets from some distant planet.”

continued…
 
What the good Archbishop might not be aware of is that this very behavior can be attributed directly to the instability that has been generated in the faithful by the acts of his own churchmen calling to question the teaching and authority of the Church and its leadership. People are not normally drawn to these things unless they are searching for security and assurances that they find lacking in their local church. People often are drawn to private revelations (many of the current ones totally bogus) when they come to have question of the sanctification they should be attaining from their own parish. The all too frequent witness to open dissent, contradiction, and liturgical aberrations over a period of time will bring doubts and uncertainty to the most steadfast of the faithful. That is when private revelations start providing escalated allurement. The fact that the demonic is undoubtedly behind some of these bizarre movements is a truth that cannot be denied and their activities are going to be an ever-growing source of more disruption and apostasy. ABP Brunett is quite correct in being concerned, but the answer is in his own church. A man does not seek water unless he is thirsty.

Getting back on focus. One thing that has changed is our comfort zone. It is always easier to go with the crowd. Our thinking and responsibilities are programmed for us by the institution. We find it comforting to huddle in the herd, as it were. The assembly provides us the (false) security that is thought to be assured in numbers. Christ, however, did not bestow the inestimable gift of Faith to the masses or groups. He conferred it upon specific individuals. Furthermore, we are informed that this gift is of such eternal worth, that those who do not place it before all persons and things are not worthy of it. cf. Mat. 10: 34-38, Luke 12: 51-53.

Faith, then, is never that to be taken for granted, much less given scanty attention. Such actions lead to the loss of faith and the heavenly doctor, Thomas Aquinas, informs us that no greater ruin can befall man. Faith is the cornerstone to every man’s eternity with his Creator. Has Christ spoken to this?

Most all of us are familiar with the parable of Christ’s teaching pertaining to the “Talents” (Mat. 25: 14 - 30), but one might wonder how many had acquired the extremely important message it conveyed.

This is where the master (God) departing to a far country gathered his servants and delivered to them his “goods.” The “goods” (faith/graces) he gave in measures known as “talents.” To one he gave a measure of five “talents,” to another “two” and the third he gave “one talent.” Upon the Lord’s return “after a long time,” there was an accounting called for. The first two servants had invested the Lord’s talents in profitable works and those efforts had doubled the return for their Lord. They were praised by their Lord and greatly rewarded for their prudence. The third servant, however, had buried his one 'talent" and had only this to return to his Lord. The pretense put forth by this unfortunate servant, and the Lord’s response, is the vital key to this teaching. The servant: “Lord, I know that thou art a hard man; thou reapest where thou hast not sown, and gatherest where thou hast not strewed: And being afraid, I went and hid thy talent in the earth: behold here thou hast that which is Thine. And his Lord answering, said to him: Wicked and slothful servant, thou knoweth that I reap where I sow not, and gather where I have not strewed. Thou ought, therefore, to have committed my money to the bankers, and at my coming, I should have received my own with usury. Take ye away, therefore, the talent from him, and give it to him that hath ten talents. For to every one that hath, shall be given, and he shall abound: but from him that hath not, that also which he seemeth to have shall be taken away. And the unprofitable servant, cast ye out into the exterior darkness. There shall there be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”

continued…
 
Here the Lord acknowledges that he does not need the servant in order to attain returns for himself but the servant was given the trust of the talent to put it to use, not bury it. The returns spoken of here have nothing to do with money but with souls that the Lords “goods” (faith/grace) have the power to gain when employed ("…And unto whomsoever much is given, of him much shall be required: and to whom they have committed much, of him they will demand the more." Luke 12: 48). In our present-day scenario you might properly employ the likeness of a bishop being entrusted with 5 talents, the clergy with 2 talents and the loyal faithful with 1 talent. Otherwise, the bountiful gift of faith has with it the individual responsibility in striving to further that gift by using its powers to bring a return of more souls to the Lord. God apportions no one with more trust and obligation than are of his or her own capabilities.

We are learning two very important lessons here. First, when it comes to judgment (accounting), it is each individual him/herself who shall answer to the Lord. Second: “Thus not only the rapacious, the unjust, and evil doers, but also all those who neglect to do good, are punished with the greatest severity.” 3

Our being sheep, we find it natural and good to seek sanctuary in the flock of our good shepherds. When a “hireling” displaces the shepherd, however, then the flock shall be scattered and Christ warns us of these days. At such times, the true faithful know that the faith (truth) does not change and will seek and recognize the voice of the true shepherd. The answers do not lie with “huddling in the herd,” for that would be burying the 'talent." Rather, we take that “talent” (the legitimate catechism of the Catholic Church, as example), put it on as armor, and stand unwavering until we have a true shepherd again before us. And: “His Lord said to him: Well-done, good and faithful servant: because thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will set thee over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy Lord” Mat 25: 23.
 
40.png
Brad:
You’re still missing the point about the funeral mass. It is about those still living. I don’t give a hoot who honors me once I’m dead (actually I don’t even care that much who honors me now but I really won’t care once I’m dead).
Then we should determine whether they get a funeral by the sinfulness of the survivors, not the deceased.

If we don’t know of any “good” Catholics that want to attend the funeral, then shouldn’t we just can it?

Alan
 
40.png
Brad:
It takes effort but not as much as liberal pundits make it out to be - as if we can never understand something written 100 years ago.
Maybe you think it’s simple, but with all of today’s modern surveillance technology, the First Lady of the United States doesn’t even know with whom her husband is sleeping until after she goes on TV and viciously defends him, calling the whole idea a “vast right wing conspiracy.”

Besides, the reason it doesn’t bother me too much, is that me and the saints don’t pay as much attention to the literal meaning of the Bible as it more profound and deeper meanings beyond allegorical and into Divine Union. That’s what I’m going for, so whether an actual fish swallowed Jonah is not as important to me as what the fish story tells us about Christ. It’s all about Christ and His two greatest commandments; confrom unto Him and everything else is just mundane detail.

Alan
 
40.png
Brad:
I object because you belittle the kindhearted efforts of those that put their neck on the line to defend the Church’s teaching and help save a soul or 2 in the process.
Oh, I’m sorry if you were offended, but then again maybe you needed it.

Do you think He was belittling Himself by comparing himself to scattered seeds? Bread? Wine?

Truth is truth no matter what scale it’s on. If you believe a spiritual law to be absolutely in effect, then you are being relativistic to suggest that its truth depends on a subjective human evaluation of whether it is serious.

I appreciate those who have given their lives to the Church, but I have given my sanity for it. Please do not try to confuse me by claiming relativism is bad and then practicing in it. It makes me get all nasty and judgmental and stuff. Maybe it’s a personal problem; one of these days I’ll realize that logical absolutism isn’t a goal for everyone like it is me.

Alan
 
40.png
Brad:
Originally Posted by AlanFromWichita
Code:
               *Yes, judging.  He objectively broke a specific forum rule.
In the world of moral absolutists, he should suffer the penalty.

In the world of loving relativists, we should let him be.

In the world of CAF, we should not discuss moderator actions.

Alan*

All relativists are loving. How certain are you of that?
I’d say probably about as certain as I am that all absolutists are moral.

Alan
 
Ani Ibi:
Did you write something? I thought I was reading something you wrote. I thought I was reading that you wrote you don’t exist any longer. I think I can possibly be certain that you wrote something, but I think I cannot be certain I read it. If you wrote something, then how can you not exist? If I cannot be certain I read that you do not exist how can I be certain that you exist? I cannot hear, see, smell, feel, or taste you. I have to conclude that you wrote something even though you don’t exist. I’m happy now.
We’re sorry but you have reached a number that has been disconnected or is no longer in service.

This is a recording.
 
Ani Ibi:
I agree that fix should have absolutely no say in whether or not he exists, since I have no evidence of his existence.
:rotfl:

You all are cracking me up. You know, you might want to come over to the dark side a little more often. You would make really great relativists!

(Sorry fix a little lame but since you don’t exist I trust you don’t mind my stealing your name-calling strategy. I’ll get more used to it as I practice. To whom am I writing this? Who am I? Am I? Oh, no, I don’t know if I dare say, “I am.”)

Alan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top