"Catholic social teaching finds Church teaching lacking." by Bishop Dowling

[Tantum_ergo]

At the point He revealed the importance a ministry to the poor is in the Truth. Certainly no later than about 1980 yrs ago.

Point is, that some --and I’m not saying you, Matt, nor even perhaps Bp. Dowling–are turning ‘ministry to the poor’–specifically in supplying the ‘social justice’ terms of food, clothing, shelter, ‘minimum wage’, ‘voting autonomy’, etc. as being the sum total of all that the Church should be doing– while it neglects giving to the poor–or to anyone– the spiritual fruits of Catholic teaching.

For there is much, much more to Catholic teaching than simply working for the ‘earthly’ satiety of a person’s body and considering that this is ALL Christ’s message. It is not. It is not even the most important part of Christ’s message though it is not unimportant.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Tantum, got a calculator right here. Now if you can let me know how much one of those robes costs, I’ll try to figure how many more loaves of bread it would buy. Every little bit more helps! Peace.

Gee, Matt, if the individual bishops went around BUYING said robes INSTEAD OF feeding the poor you’d have a point.

But you know, those robes are GIVEN to the bishops. And you know what else, the people who MAKE those robes have JOBS in part because they supply things like robes. The owners of the businesses make money selling things, and they like to show their APPRECIATION to God by GIVING to the bishops, nice robes. . .as a sign of their respect for God and for those whom God has placed in authority as their bishops.

And because those owners can give back in ‘kind’ (raiment’, as a gift to God, they can keep on hiring–and paying–their workers, who in turn don’t have to go out begging themselves–and who in turn can donate from their ‘surplus’ to the poor.

It’s a win-win situation Matt-- The owners can give to God, and in doing so, can give to their employees, and the employees can then give to the less fortunate.

**And I’m sure the owners ALSO give ‘food’ (earthly) to the poor ON TOP OF their gifts. For sure, part of the SPIRITUAL FOOD that we receive comes from our experience of liturgy, Matt. Otherwise, why would God have his priests under the high priest Aaron SPECIFICALLY NOTED to dress in RICH ATTIRE? **

Did Jesus come to FULFILL the Law and the Prophets? He did, right? Did Jesus then REMOVE the specific mandate to CHRISTIAN priests such that they were no longer to dress as the Jewish priests did, out of RESPECT FOR GOD?

I don’t think so. Perhaps you can quote the Bible verse and the relevant early Church teachings to support your theory. . .

 

[canadianguy1143]

Whatever simple attire and footwear or lack thereof Christ walked the earth in would suit me fine for his representatives. If it was good enough for our Lord should be good enough for His representatives. Well at least until a bishop walks on water wearng his cappa magna, transfigures himself, resurrects on the third day.

Well I don’t know. First off Jesus isn’t on Earth. He is in Heaven in all GLORY. It’s not up to us to decide how Jesus want’s his Apostles (that’s what Bishops represent) to dress. But I do remember in the bible the following account:

John 12:1-9:

[1] Jesus therefore, six days before the pasch, came to Bethania, where Lazarus had been dead, whom Jesus raised to life. [2] And they made him a supper there: and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that were at table with him. [3] Mary therefore took a pound of ointment of right spikenard, of great price, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair; and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment. [4] Then one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, he that was about to betray him, said: [5] Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor?

[6] Now he said this, not because he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and having the purse, carried the things that were put therein. [7] Jesus therefore said: Let her alone, that she may keep it against the day of my burial. [8] For the poor you have always with you; but me you have not always. [9] A great multitude therefore of the Jews knew that he was there; and they came, not for Jesus’ sake only, but that they might see Lazarus, whom he had raised from the dead.

 

[tpw]

Since you seem to lack any real knowledge of the social justice tradition perhaps rather using epithets and sloganeering why not read about the modern tradition which began in 1891 and has continued to unfold throughout the 20th and now 21st century with the support of virtually every pope since Leo XIII? It’s not relativistic - it’s challenging - just like the gospel.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Whatever simple attire and footwear or lack thereof Christ walked the earth in would suit me fine for his representatives. If it was good enough for our Lord should be good enough for His representatives. Well at least until a bishop walks on water wearng his cappa magna, transfigures himself, resurrects on the third day.

Just exactly where in Scripture or tradition does it tell us that God has **changed the mandate for priestly attire from that which He had required of His servants from Aaron on down? **

Just exactly where in Scripture or tradition does it tell us that the apostles and their successors were, in the course of their sacred priestly duties, to wear what, and only what "simple’ attire our Lord walked in?

Might be all right for temperate climates and all, Matt, but aren’t you a little unfeeling toward people in cold climates demanding they wear robe and sandals? They’d freeze. . .

Oh, wait, you would allow a simple attire ‘change’ that would reflect the ‘simplest’ of clothes for the particular climate? So one need not wear ‘exactly’ what Jesus wore, eh? Only what Matt deems ‘simple’ enough. . .nevermind that 2000 years of tradition in Christianity and another couple of thousand years of Jewish tradition demand something completely different. . .never mind that Jesus HIMSELF never ‘demanded’ that His priests wear ‘simple’ attire. . .

Some people are just so utterly SCANDALIZED at the APPEARANCE of ‘wealth’ (even though the bishops do not themselves buy the robes etc. etc. that are GIVEN TO THEM --but really given to GOD and for the USE of said bishops in doing the tasks GOD asks of them). . .even though the bishops don’t OWN the robes, in fact, they’ll get ‘passed down’ to another bishop should the original ‘wearer’ die, etc.

So you don’t want the owner of a fine clothing store to be able to give a robe to a bishop as an offering to God.

No, you will ONLY accept the KIND OF OFFERING that YOU find ‘acceptable.’ "Food for the poor’, and to HECK with “SPIRITUAL FOOD”.

Sad. It’s really sad.

Same kind of attitude that so many use in thinking that you can’t pray to the saints, that it somehow ‘takes away’ from Jesus. . .

People think you can’t give an offering to God in the form of a robe, or a gold chalice, or a CHURCH building, or altar linens, or paintings . .

It’s gotta be FOOD ONLY and it’s gotta be given by those dressed in the simplest and humblest garb meeting only in ramshackle buildings, because that is the ONLY thing that God will ‘accept’ from us. . .

Sad. It is really sad.

 

[St_Francis]

Tantum, got a calculator right here. Now if you can let me know how much one of those robes costs, I’ll try to figure how many more loaves of bread it would buy. Every little bit more helps! Peace.

Whatever simple attire and footwear or lack thereof Christ walked the earth in would suit me fine for his representatives. If it was good enough for our Lord should be good enough for His representatives. Well at least until a bishop walks on water wearng his cappa magna, transfigures himself, resurrects on the third day.

As Christ said, Man does not live by bread alone. Man, as a spiritual being, needs beauty and truth as well as bread.

Those robes may have inspired more people to give more money to th poor, to do more for the poor, than the mere cost of the robes themselves.

If the Church sold *all *her holdings, the poor would be fed for maybe 6 days. The poor would *never *again be able to be inspired by the beauty of the buildings, artwork, stained glass windows, but for 6 days they would be fed.

We seem not to even think of the poor as full human beings, only some sort of special animal which we are obligated to feed. The Salvation Army does a better job than the socialistic social justice “Catholics” who consider only the body and never the soul.

Bishop Dowling recommends distributing condoms because he thinks so little of the poor that he thinks they cannnot control themselves. If he were doing his job and encouraging conversions, then people would find God and His help, and be able to resist acting like brutes and spreading sexual diseases. But, no! Bishop Dowling perfers instead to spend his time trying to go against God’s Truth, for which men, women, and children have been martyred, in order to justify the easy but killing way of distributing condoms. South Africa now has the highest percentage of people with HIV/AIDS in the world.

 

[St_Francis]

Since you seem to lack any real knowledge of the social justice tradition perhaps rather using epithets and sloganeering why not read about the modern tradition which began in 1891 and has continued to unfold throughout the 20th and now 21st century with the support of virtually every pope since Leo XIII? It’s not relativistic - it’s challenging - just like the gospel.

Were you addressing this to anyone in particular? I only ask because a wide variety of ideas had been expressed on this thread…

 

[Via_Dolorosa]

OK, where exactly did Jesus teach that we should subvert federal law in support of social justice?What was the federal law in say 30a.d.? What are you referring to? Where exactly did He say we could water down the commandments (He didn’t say please, he said shalt not) for example, administering communion to those publicly advocating abortion and birth control; what prompted the Church to suddenly allow lay people to handle the consecrated host; etc?

I
I thought he gave us an example of how to live the commandments. Not so much the" Thou shalt t nots" as Blessed are the poor of spirits as told in the Beatitudes.
Your last sentence I don’t fully understand. Maybe if someone wrote it out on a chalkboard with several misspellings and nonseqitors I could make sense of it.

 

[rlg94086]

Now I know why I heard a priest in his homily a few mos ago say his answer to the poor is to get a job. And I was sitting there thinkng, man was that Jesus’s only answer? Now I know Rush has his hand in it. :doh2: Still saddens me :sad_yes: but at least I understand. Good pt.

Puh-lease.

I guess the lack of preaching regarding sexual purity, abortion, etc in liberal parishes is because the priests are afraid of Pelosi Catholics. If you truly heard a priest say that in a homily, it was due to erroneous teaching by that priest…not Rush Limbaugh. I’ve never heard a tradition-minded priest offer such advice to the poor - only prayer and charity.

 

[CMatt25]

Gee, Matt, if the individual bishops went around BUYING said robes INSTEAD OF feeding the poor you’d have a point.

Tantum you missed my point. “Robes” are just a symbol of the money spent by the Church that could be going to the poor whether it’s spent on robes or not.

Take just one parish. The parish I attended where the priest is, whose answer to the poor is to get job, had installed a new marble altar in the church and tiled the chapel which I of course have been in for daily Mass. Not on Nov 1 last yr but I have been. He tied his view on the poor into people complaining about the cost the church incurred on these superfical materials which could have been even more going to the poor. But instead his answer to them was for the poor to get a job in the recession and we will upgrade the decor of the church and chapel.

Now times that by how many parishes. Add in the Vatican’s splendor and you come up with a whole lot more that could be going to the poor. That was my only point.

But remember I’m the guy who is perfectly fine in a nice pair of shorts focusing myself on the Lord at Mass and not on what the lady next to me is wearing. Peace.

 

[Brendan]

I
I thought he gave us an example of how to live the commandments. Not so much the" Thou shalt t nots" as Blessed are the poor of spirits as told in the Beatitudes.

It was the same Christ who gave both the “Thou shall nots…” AND the Beatitudes.

Since both are from Christ, we are to live both.

 

[Brendan]

Whatever simple attire and footwear or lack thereof Christ walked the earth in would suit me fine for his representatives. If it was good enough for our Lord should be good enough for His representatives. Well at least until a bishop walks on water wearng his cappa magna, transfigures himself, resurrects on the third day.

Ah, but the Mass is a celebration of Christ’s Resurrection. Therefore the person who is in persona Christi should vest in a way that most resembles the Risen Christ, the Transfigured Christ, Christ in His Glory and Radiance.

For that is how Christ is now at this very minute, and that is how Christ will come again. The rags are gone, left in the tomb. Christ now sits in Splendor and Light upon the Cherubim Throne.

 

[CMatt25]

Were you addressing this to anyone in particular? I only ask because a wide variety of ideas had been expressed on this thread…

I wasn’t sure either but I suppose maybe to me. I’m always being judged to be lacking knowledge or being ignorant when someone disagrees. Sometimes I’m judged both and improperly catechized all in the same breath!

 

[CMatt25]

Puh-lease.

I guess the lack of preaching regarding sexual purity, abortion, etc in liberal parishes is because the priests are afraid of Pelosi Catholics. If you truly heard a priest say that in a homily, it was due to erroneous teaching by that priest…not Rush Limbaugh. I’ve never heard a tradition-minded priest offer such advice to the poor - only prayer and charity.

I truly did. And I haven’t been to a Mass in ages without hearing abortion. Once I’ve also heard war and peace @ another parish mentioned in the last yr or so and well you know the time I heard the poor mentioned. I still have a couple of parishes to check out though and maybe should further try out the one where ending war was mentioned. I’ve been there since though and no mention of it. Peace.

 

[St_Francis]

Tantum you missed my point. “Robes” are just a symbol of the money spent by the Church that could be going to the poor whether it’s spent on robes or not.

Take just one parish. The parish I attended where the priest is, whose answer to the poor is to get job, had installed a new marble altar in the church and tiled the chapel which I of course have been in for daily Mass. Not on Nov 1 last yr but I have been. He tied his view on the poor into people complaining about the cost the church incurred on these superfical materials which could have been even more going to the poor. But instead his answer to them was for the poor to get a job in the recession and we will upgrade the decor of the church and chapel.

Now times that by how many parishes. Add in the Vatican’s splendor and you come up with a whole lot more that could be going to the poor. That was my only point.

But remember I’m the guy who is perfectly fine in a nice pair of shorts focusing myself on the Lord at Mass and not on what the lady next to me is wearing. Peace.

I don’t know why this priest said what he said, but if money is given to the parish for the beautification or upgrading of the church itself, that is a good, and also the priest cannot do something else with it.

We are enjoined to give money to the Church *and /]to the poor. Suppose all those who complained about money being used to *glorify God *had, instead of complaining to the priest, given a little extra to the poor? Or used the time they spent complaining to visit a sick person, no matter what income?

People act like its either/or, when it’s not, and it’s not supposed to be. The splendor of the Vatican–isn’t the Vatican running over budget?–would feed the poor for a few days, but would take away something from the poor.

The Church is the largest charitable orgainzation in the world, but is supposed to look out for us *spiritually as well as physically, rich as well as poor. The concept of solidarity is not only to get the poor fed but to get together to build and beautify a church, to fund seminarians so they can become priests for us, to pray for each other, rich and poor.

 

[St_Francis]

I truly did. And I haven’t been to a Mass in ages without hearing abortion. Once I’ve also heard war and peace @ another parish mentioned in the last yr or so and well you know the time I heard the poor mentioned. I still have a couple of parishes to check out though and maybe should further try out the one where ending war was mentioned. I’ve been there since though and no mention of it. Peace.

Well, where we currently live, the only priest who mentioned abortion has died. None of the others mention abortion, abc, purgatory, etc.

But they do talk a lot about the poor! And this is not a bad thing, as they do it in a way which offers steps each person can take rather than saying that we should contact the federal government to get them to do more or arranging protests. We have a St Vincent de Paul Society, which gets a second collection as well as a box, we are a drop-off point for the food pantry, etc.

So I think that what is happening is that priests are swinging wildly around… there are the ones who focus so much on the physical needs of the needy that others swing a little too far in the opposite direction. Gradually I think that we will see an leveling out, but in the meantime, since you seem pretty solid on the Coproral Acts of Mercy, why don’t you consider going to a church which challenges you regarding God instead of trying to find one which suits you politically?

 

[Via_Dolorosa]

Ah, but the Mass is a celebration of Christ’s Resurrection. Therefore the person who is in persona Christi should vest in a way that most resembles the Risen Christ, the Transfigured Christ, Christ in His Glory and Radiance.

For that is how Christ is now at this very minute, and that is how Christ will come again. The rags are gone, left in the tomb. Christ now sits in Splendor and Light upon the Cherubim Throne.

I’m thinking that if Christ wanted the respledent image he never would have been born in a stable.

 

[St_Francis]

I’m thinking that if Christ wanted the respledent image he never would have been born in a stable.

So you disagree with the Church?

 

[rlg94086]

I truly did. And I haven’t been to a Mass in ages without hearing abortion. Once I’ve also heard war and peace @ another parish mentioned in the last yr or so and well you know the time I heard the poor mentioned. I still have a couple of parishes to check out though and maybe should further try out the one where ending war was mentioned. I’ve been there since though and no mention of it. Peace.

I converted and was confirmed in California, where I was taught that the “primacy of conscience” allows Catholics to be “pro-choice,” use artificial birth control, etc. I was also told by a priest, when confessing mortal sins of purity and the use of birth control, that “no one confesses those things anymore and it isn’t necessary.”. Meanwhile, he made sure that his homilies were focused on the progressive view of Catholic Social Teaching - the view that emphasizes government programs and ignores subsidiarity.

After experiencing many of such priests, I refuse to be lectured to by people making the ridiculous link between Rush Limbaugh and faithful Catholics. If/when progressives, priests and laypeople, start following Church on clear dogmatic teaching, then they will have some credibility when discussing the nuances of liturgy and different viewpoints on matters where prudential judgment is allowed.

I bought into the erroneous teaching of progressives for many years, until I studied Church teaching in more depth. I am particularly thankful to some “traditionalists” who weren’t afraid to fraternally correct a brother in Christ.

 

[CMatt25]

why don’t you consider going to a church which challenges you regarding God instead of trying to find one which suits you politically?

I have no idea what you’re talking about since my faith in the social Gospel of Jesus already dictates my politics. But thanks for your opinion. God bless you and peace.