Courtship and twenty-something Catholics

[Cruciferi]

I fully support and encourage having at least one credit card. I got mine several years back and it helped me get financing for my car after my neighbor totaled my old sedan.

Credit isn’t evil. It’s a tool.

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

I’m considering putting things like my Amazon Prime and Spotify subscriptions on it, just to get credit for paying it all off.

 

[otjm]

All I said was “Let men and women interact more.” In what world is that depraved and sex-obsessed?

I can’t speak for the poster, but often I have found that people who take things out of context and drive them to the extreme have and underlying issue which impels them to extremes.

 

[Cruciferi]

The saints all advocated that men and women constantly be separate, or only be allowed limited interaction? If that is the case then, quite frankly, I don’t trust their judgement.

I wouldn’t join any group that gave me zero prospects of interacting with members of the opposite sex. Quite frankly, what’s the point then? I’m certainly not looking to be a curmudgeonly monk…

 

[otjm]

We have a goodly number of posts by young people.

It would appear that we have several people who like to toss a word around as if it is authoritative to the Church in the 21st century, to wit: “modernism”. Perhaps a bit of history will be of use. Or not.

Pope Leo 13th and Pope Pius 10th were dealing with an issue which arose from German Protestant scripture scholars in the late 1800’s. The [problem was that the scholars were using a new (then) form of scripture research called the historical-critical method; however, some of them had strayed from viewing Scripture as Scripture, and had moved to a (basically) atheistic approach, treating Scripture as simply some old writings, putting then on a par with other writings (an example of ancient non-scriptural writings might be the Iliad and the Odyssey attributed to Homer). The use of the historical-critical method, sans sacred writing and held as revealed, crept into the Church and at least two Catholics, Father Alfred Loisy (French scripture scholar) and Father George Tyrrell, SJ (Irish born scripture scholar in England) were excommunicated.

The term “Modernism” was concocted to describe the movement. On June 29th, 1908 Pope Pius 10th publicly admitted that Modernism was a dead issue.

And yet we continue to see people, who are somewhere between very conservative and arch conservative sling the word around as a catch-all phrase for anything they do not like or do not understand or feel is somehow not within the accepted range of Catholic thought in union with the Magisterium. There is a term for such word usage within the political field, but I will refrain from using it to try to keep the conversation civil. It does have the perceived value of the users as indicating their views of Church matters, to others.

 

[Anesti33]

. . . .

There’s nothing new under the Sun. Modernism has been with us, and will be with us, just as Pelagianism, Nestorianism, or Jansenism.

. . . . Modernism is known as the “synthesis of all heresies”, is notoriously difficult to define, and goes much deeper than some faulty Scripture scholarship.

If Pope St. Pius X considered Modernism dead, then it’s curious that two years later he issued the “Oath Against Modernism”. . . .

The Oath Against Modernism | EWTN

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I’m glad you understand. My posts will therefore serve to correct the mistaken impression your posts gave which could easily mislead someone else on the forum with less understanding.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Yeah, there are plenty of places that expect you to have a card (debit or credit) for a guarantee. Debit cards are way more risky; the credit card has far more protections and is a useful tool. During the recent COVID, and even before it, many retailers don’t take cash, or they don’t take cash after a certain hour in the evening. These days, there is a change shortage and they want everyone who can to use a card or Apple Pay.

Credit cards are just a tool, not some big usurious immoral thing. That’s kind of antiquated thinking especially if you pay off the card every month. If somebody doesn’t want to have a card fine, but it makes stuff a lot harder in US, and even more so in Europe where a lot of things like transport tickets went chip card only years ago.

 

[Sarcelle]

I have a credit card which I pay off every month.

It gives me protection not having to carry cash and more protection than a debit card when buying things online and in stores.

With debit cards, thieves can directly access your checking account.

 

[otjm]

You pretended to offer a definition of Modernism, well, you did a poor job. Modernism is known as the “synthesis of all heresies”, is notoriously difficult to define, and goes much deeper than some faulty Scripture scholarship.

Just curious - do you have a degree in philosophy?

And does it even cross your radar that Pope Pius 10th publicly admitted that Modernism was a dead issue?

You pretended to offer a definition of Modernism, well, you did a poor job. Modernism is known as the “synthesis of all heresies”, is notoriously difficult to define,

By your won words “it can’t be defined” then you have no possible rational basis for applying it to anything - and that is just my point; if no one can define it (and I disagree with your point) then it becomes a meaningless statement - something which has no definition has no content.

And if you are going to refer to the oath as having to do with Modernism, allow me to quote parts:

" reject that method of judging and interpreting Sacred Scripture which, departing from the tradition of the Church, the analogy of faith, and the norms of the Apostolic See, embraces the misrepresentations of the rationalists… - sure sounds like it goes back to what I was stating, that the issue was the misuse of the historical-critical method which was no longer treating Scripture as revealed truth, but simply as another ancient document.

declare that I am completely opposed to the error of the modernists who hold that there is nothing divine in sacred tradition…’’ - same point stated differently. It had to do with scripture scholarship.
(continued)

 

[otjm]

(continued)
.firmly hold, then, and shall hold to my dying breath the belief of the Fathers in the charism of truth, which certainly is, was, and always will be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles. The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed to be different, may never be understood in any other way… - not surprising addition, as taking an approach that scripture was not revealed truth leads to errors in doctrine. Like atheism.

The “Jesus Seminar” (and I think there were a couple of whacko “catholic scholars” in it, though it was primarily liberal Protestants) might be an example of the continuation of Modernism, specifically removing God from the equation, but while they had their 15 minutes of fame on television and in talks, they were considered an anomaly by both the Church and the great majority of Christian ecclesia. Meaning, after they got done patting themselves on the back for their “brilliance” the rest of the world moved on without them.

Why did Pope Pius 10 make the oath mandatory? Most likely because Loisy (d. 1940) and Tyrrell (d. 1909) both had had some influence on other Catholic scholars and he wanted to put a stop to any spread of their ideas and influence.

The Church no longer uses the term “modernism”; and in 1967 Pope Paul 6 put an end to the oath. And Scripture scholarship has not gone down that rabbit hole, so it too is a dead issue.

Only those on the very conservative to arch conservative end of the Church use the term, and they use it for anything and everything they do not like including much of what the Church currently does.

As the Church does not use it, and I firmly believe the Holy Spirit still guides the Church, I do not concur with that end of the spectrum and it is the fuzzy non-logic of the misuse of the term which I find so misapplied.

You are welcome to dislike things the Church does, but it is not being done by "modernists’ in the Church - nor members of the Masonic order, or any of the other conspiracy theories which are floating around,.

Me - I just follow the Magisterium.

 

[RolandThompsonGunner]

I’m considering not even marrying now since I am past the average age.

Your fixation on age and timelines is really weird. I know you won’t accept that, and I hope you don’t interpret it as a put down, but the way you think about this stuff is just odd. Why would you decide not to marry just because you’re past the average age? Who cares? If you meet the right lady at 29, are you really going to go, “yeah, sorry, I’d love to date you, but I’m past the average age for marriage. Sorry, missed the window.”

I got married at 30. I have a happy marriage and two beautiful kids. So what if I was past the average age? It literally never occurred to me to be bothered by it in the slightest.

 

[tuffsmurf]

If everyone waited to get married until they had all those things, there would be few children born…

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

I can always count on you to come and try to put me down. Good on you

He didn’t put you down. He pointed out the odd nature of your intense fixation on averages and how you’re “old” at 25. If that’s offensive to you, then your sin must be thinner than gold foil because that shouldn’t offend you.

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

He did put me down. He knows it and doesn’t care. He has been doing this since I joined the forum. I’m not offended because I really don’t care for his opinion.

I’ve seen your interactions and I know this isn’t true. But, just to humor you: what did he say that put you down, exactly?

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

Calling me weird,

He called your particular age obsessions weird, not you.

straw manning a position I don’t have,

As if you haven’t repeatedly said on this forum “I’m past the average age of marriage so I’ll probably be alone forever” and “I am 25, so I am getting old.”

going out of his way to speak only negative about me.

He spoke negatively about your ideas. He never said anything bad about you as a person. Your inability to see that is the reason everyone thinks you have thin skin.