Clericalization of the Laity/Q. for JReducation

[Jeanette_L]

---

Nice try with your post – but it is expected from those who have become JR’s groupies.

“JR Groupies”?

My goodness! He is one of the few here who can articulate without losing his thoughts to emotion. His posts are with steady hand and are well thought out and researched.

He must be getting under you skin a bit, no?

I’ll say, seems more than a bit under the skin though, that was pretty cold…

People do appreciate though, that a person can keep a cool head while continuing to explain the same things over and over and over again, with charity I might add, a rare thing around here most times, myself included.

Groupies… Silly…

 

[consumedconvert]

---

Call it what you wish. As to unsuitable post —take a look at your own post no. 51. Seems you missed the meaning of charity with that one. So Pot–quit trying to call the kettle black.

How often have I been guilty of prefering tearing down another to building up my own spirituality through prayer and charity?

Indeed, as I mentioned before, I have often been a pot. But black is black, and I think we ought not prefer blackness. If you have been uncharitable, that gives me no right to respond in kind, and vice-versa (speaking purely hypothetically, of course).

However, I never intended post 51 to be offensive. But really, I stand by what I said. You are mistakenly tearing down what ought not be torn down, and searching for heresy where none is to be found.

 

[JReducation]

Let’s take this in steps. There is nothing in the admonitions, teachings, rule or example of St. Francis that the Church finds questionable or has ever found questionable. Why you feel uncomfortable with having him quoted is beyond me.

If you want to discuss liturgy, we can discuss the greatest liturgical mind in the history of the Church, St. Benedict and he would tell you the same thing as St. Francis, as St. Augustine (another good liturgist), as St. Catherine of Siena (an excellent liturgist and theologian) or St. Padre Pio.

But the thread is not about liturgists it’s about clericalization of the laity. You have taken it out of there and turned it into an unnecessary conflict with my post.

My post was very specific and I used our Holy Father Francis, because he is an excellent example of someone who avoided the clericalization of the laity at all costs. We’re not speaking liturgy, we’re speaking clericalization.

Thefore what St. Francis says about the life and role of the faithful in relation to the Church and the clergy is applicable here.

You claim that this is word play. I assure you that it’s not. If the priest asks you to do something sinful you have no obligation to obey. This was very clear in my post. If he asks you to do something that is unusual, but not sinful that’s another story.

If it’s part of the mass, then you have no choice but to go with it and if you have a question, you have the right to ask it, in the proper manner and at the proper time. If you do not get a clear or satisfactory answer, then you ask his superior. You may never assume the role of his superior and decide that you’re going to correct him or teach him, because you don’t agree or you don’t understand his answer. Even if the answer is wrong, then he has a superior. That’s not the laity. The Church has no problem with that, neither do the great saints.

---

More word play JReducation. First you post St. Francis – to make the point that we are to obey a priest --even when he is wrong. You brought the pt. home with the priest “asking” us to stand on our heads–and the resulting obedience expected from the people.

Out of context, this quote makes no sense. You know this as well as I do.

Now to my example of the priest telling the people to stand around the Altar (which is against the Church) you change your tune by saying there is a difference --the priest is “inviting” the people to stand around the Altar.

That’s not a change of tune. That’s called good theology. If a priest invites you, he’s not ordering you. You can accept or decline an invitation. Also, the Church has not put a moral weight on standing around the altar.

The Church has stated that this should not be done, but it has not said that it is a sin to do it. There is a difference.

The material for sin here would be the disobedience. But we already establish using St. Francis and using logic, that you do not have to obey when you are invited or ordered to sin. There is no issue here. It’s very clear.

So really JReducation—now the priest is “inviting” the people to be disobedient to the Chruch. What happened to obeying the priest --as by your post —even if he asks/invites us to stand on our heads.

The above point has already been addressed.

One more thing —nice try with your last line. My fidelity to the Church is reflected in not using one of our own Saints – against what the Church Herself has mandated and bound everyone to do.

No one has used one of our saints against the Church. I used one of our saints to educate.

JR

 

[JReducation]

I fail to see the lack of charity in this post. If I break it down into its component parts here is what I see.

Why do you put words in people’s mouths?

This was in response to your allegation that I was using St. Francis as a means to disobey the Pope. Which was not the case and there is nothing in my post that suggests that.

Why are you “inventing” heretics?

You referred to a priest who invites people to stand around the altar as “errant”. Errant is a very strong word. It implies that he is in error. He may be disobeying, but there is no theological error here. At best, one may say that there is a venial sin of disobedience. That is an objective view. We really don’t know that much, because the Church has not made this an issue of morality, but an issue of discipline. One would have to let God make this judgement call, because it is not very clear if there is any culpability for sin. People often do things very spontaneously without an intention of doing harm. To be guilty of sin, one must have intent. In this case, even if there is intent to do it “my way” in the priest’s mind, the matter at hand is not grave. Therefore, at best it is a venial sin.

Perhaps it’s time to withdraw to prayer. Isn’t that a much more “Catholic” thing to do than to go “heretic hunting?” We in the Church are not each other’s inquisitioners. We are each other’s siblings.

These words were played out by St. Teresa of Avila in her life. While the world was engaged in fighting the Lutherans, she stressed to St. John of the Cross that he enclose himself in a Carmelite Priory to contemplate the Lord. When brought before the Inquisition she challenged them to fix the damage done by them, before going after innocent Christians who wanted to live a detached life, such as her.

We all have enough inner sin to drive out and combat, and that is the much more real and satisfying adventure. As posted above, if one want to improve the Church, one must improve himself. If one wants to be a reformer, one must reform onseself.

These were the teachings of Bernard of Clairvaux to his Cistercian monks and that’s why he took them away from larger Church community. He encouraged them to find their own sanctity. He believed that only if they found their own sanctity, would they be able to sanctify the Church, rather than take on the Church.

Love is at the heart of orthodoxy.

This can be found in James epistle. “Show me your faith and I will show you my works.” The works to which St. James made reference were works of faith, not ranting or discrediting one’s neighbor.

We should head these peaces of advice, for they are consistent with good Christian asceticism and mysticism.

JR