Criticism of Things Catholic

[catharina]

And so, my entire generation is ignored. We got “had” after Vatican II and we got posters who say that their parent’s remembrance of what went before is “vague”.

I am not going to back off. Not all of us rolled over and played dead. Forty years later for all the good it is goinng to do me

I’m OK ; your’e OK.

brotherrolf, I doubt that you grasp how aggrieved and filled with self-pity you might sound to others. You are talking about customs that have been changed. That is not earth-shattering. Weren’t you taught to accept the authority of the Church in regard to changes? Yes, you can say, I can say, “I miss this or that” but to state that any in our generations suffered actual deprivation is to deny the reality of the suffering in the Catholic Church around the world, prior to Vatican II and now too. Isn’t it possible that our sacrifice of preferences has led to amazing things, at least in part? Mexico has abandoned its anti-Catholic traditions (and LAWS) of a hundred years. Communisim has fallen in most of the world. Yet China and most of Asia still presents only suffering and persecution to most Christians and usually to all Catholics. If some in our generation were called to sacrifice our comfort levels, our desires, maybe that was an incredibly wonderful thing. Only God can do those equations; I’m simply wondering about it.

You said the following and it surely sounds overly dramatic to me.

"How do you deal with growing up and singing traditional Catholic hymns until your junior year in high school. And then everything changes and you end up singing Simon and Garfunkle for your graduation Mass. The 100th and LAST graduation class for your high school?

I grew up in a city and a world in which Catholicsm was the norm.
Did you know that the movie theatres and resteraunts shut down on Good Friday in New Orleans? I feel so bad about bringing these things out because I really value those of you who are members of the Tiber Swim Team. The Catholic World was vastly different in 1965 and I can't make it go away. 

What has been lost is that I am not alone. I'm not the only one who remembers what it was like to be Catholic before Vatican II.

Like it or not, it WAS different and we are ignoring that basic fact.
I get assaulted with contempt simply because I adhere to what I was brought up with. 

I sit here at 56 years old. I am a graduate of 13 years of Catholic education. The World was different. It changed in 1968. 

We Catholics of that era deserve to have our voices heard. I am a voice crying in the wilderness. I wouldn't do anything against our converts but there are a whole bunch of us who are Catholics from before Vatican II. We remember".

I’m 62 yrs old. We accept Church Teaching. We adjust. We hope that our sacrifices might count for something, as small and insignifcant as they are. Please know that when you speak for you, if your tone is bitter, then you do not speak for me. OK?

 

[elt1956]

I’m new to the Catholic faith. Most of you know that already due to previous posts but anyway. Before becoming Catholic I was always impressed with the uniformity of the Church. No matter what church/parish you went to, you always knew what to do and what to expect. After I joined I realized…that wasn’t always the case. In Some parishes people kneel after communion, others stand. Some people accept on the tongue, others don’t approve of that. Some have Tridentine masses, others have very modern ones.

This is very confusing for a new Catholic and I sort of wish that things would be more uniform. I love the tradition but I have read in other threads that since Vatican II things have gone a little haywire. I’m not bashing Vatican II I’m just saying it brought a lot of change. I think this is why a lot of cradle Catholics “criticize” b/c they are used to uniformity and tradition now there isn’t as much. Others like the changes so they don’t understand the criticisms.

I also heard that there was a movement in the Church to bring it back towards tradition…I’m not sure how well that will go given all the people who love all the new things but I would love to see the Catholic Church grow strong again and go back to Its roots. Then again I’m new to the faith so I have yet much to learn

Being a former teacher, of course my answer is to educate, educate, educate, especially the young/sters, in the absolutes of the Church. ie doctrine, dogma. I really think Parish priests, or an assistant to the Priest should check lesson plans, thoughts, beliefs of those teaching Religion either in the classroom, or CCC or whatever it is called these days; also drop in once in awhile to see what the teachers are up to in the classrooms, or CCC. I went to Catholic Schools for all of my child, teen years and somewhat into College years. I internalized the faith of the Church as taught then and these teachings still remain with me. While my understanding of some have changed, they are still at the heart of my beliefs. Peace.

 

[elt1956]

Not to sidetrack Deacon Ed’s thread (always thought provoking Sir). But quickly, Caroline, as a Cradle Catholic, my best advise is try not to get too caught up in the Vat I vs Vat II battles. We live in a time where the Holy Spirit is very much alive and inspiring our Church and lives. There’s room for the many view points as long as we all follow the magisterium and of course our Pope. Welcome to our great Church.

Deacon Ed…a little point on your question regarding why so many criticisms of our church. Guess part would be folks trying to defend what they perceive to be the “right” point of view, whether it is indeed correct or not. Very many of us were around before JPII and grew up right after the changes of Vat II. So there’s a lot of folks that grew up during that transitional period.

That transitional period must have been VERY confusing. I am glad I was grounded pre-Vatican II in the Faith, although I think Vatican II has done MUCH good. However, I do believe some of the clergy remain confused as to what attitudes, teachings they promote.

 

[elt1956]

No no not at all I’m sorry, i’m at school right now in the midst of exams so i didnt have time to expand on my point as i was on the run but wanted to get my two cents in.

What i meant in saying it’s a big lesson in humility is that a lot of people expected the Pope to come over here and wipe the floor with certain people, and finally put to death their “horrible” parishes, and to do away with liberalism, all while they sit in their comfy recliners at home wagging their finger at the TV saying told you so.

One of the high ranking Arch Bishops responded to a viewer question on EWTN, the question was “what do you think the pope is goign to say about communion in the hand, etc stuff like that”

And the response was “dont try to get the pope to say things you want to hear. Instead, listen very closely to what he does say, because he has prepared it prayerfully, and thoughtfully”

And that really hits at the heart of the matter right now. I think our holy father did a solid job. He came over here, and dealt with some SERIOUS issues about credibility, and the deep wounds that have been caused in the past.

That’s not saying those things aren’t important. But the holy father addressed what he feels the Holy Spirit guiding him to, not what we want him to do. When we make statements like what we have been reading, it shows a great deal of pride, and a lack of humility.

So, i think in the Pope’s visit he is teaching many people to be humble, pick up their cross, and get involved in their local parishes instead of hoping someone else will take do it for them. We have to help our priests and pray for them so that they may be holy, and in doing so spirituality and reverence for the mass will return.

Is that long enough for ya** latinmasslover** lol

-revelations

A good healthy attitude.

 

[elt1956]

My mother, who is Catholic, gave me some statistics the other day that her Bible Study teacher at her parish gave her. The only one I remember is that 51% of American Catholics approve of abortion. I told her that had to be false and she was just as shocked…There are quite a few others that blew me away. If needed I could call and ask her but I’m sure these statistics can be found just as easily on the net.

shocking

I have no idea what the statistics are, but I am sure that also lumped in there are those Catholics who are Pro-Choice. They rationalize that while they are personally against abortion, they think an individual has the right to choice. They think this lets them off the hook. So wrong.

 

[elt1956]

Thanks for this thread, Deacon Ed B!

One of the principles I learned as a Protestant was to allow everyone to practice the spiritual gifts that they are given by the Holy Spirit and not try to be someone in the church that we are not gifted to be.

One of the reasons that many Protestant churches split is because everyone wants to “be the pastor” or “be the music director” or “be the treasurer” or even “be the decorating committee chairperson!”

They criticize everything, plant doubts and dissension while using the Bible (the Supreme Authority of the Protestant fellowships) to justify their criticisms. Inevitably schisms in the fellowship develop, often the pastor or other beleaguered and discouraged leader quits, and the church splits. Usually there are bad feelings and broken hearts. Sometimes there is utter spiritual ruin as disgusted members reject Christianity entirely after experiencing the rottenness.

I’ve seen this happen over and over again, and it makes my stomach hurt to see Catholics mimicking this behavior, only instead of using the Bible to justify their litany of complaints, they use the “writings” of the Popes and other bishops. Wake up, Catholics! You are acting like the Protestants!

I think that we should all be docile and submissive to our Church leaders, and if they do something that appears (to our little minds) to be out-of-kilter, we should follow the approved procedure for attempting to correct this, all the while remaining humble and open to the possibility that perhaps WE are wrong, not our leaders.

I agree wholeheartedly. But I do think a tighter rein needs to be held on what is being taught in our classrooms and CCC. It is these places where misconceptions begin and they can last a lifetime. Peace.

 

[elt1956]

It’s attitudes that that, that cause division. Do you honestly believe that celebrating the older style you “know” what it means to be Catholic any more then a person celebrating a valid newer style Mass? If so, I think you need a little more humility. Both versions of the Mass are just as valid and just as Catholic. The entire purpose of MP is to allow for the celebration either way, not for one to overcome the other. It was attitudes like what you are describing that lead to them prohibitting general use of the older style Mass. Because people felt the one was better then the other.

Just because some parishes have taken the “Spirit of Vatican II” to the extreme doesn’t mean all parishes are that way. Let the Pope do his job, let him in charity reign in the people that aren’t following the rules.

I have wondered since VII what happened to TLM. It just seemed to disappear down the tube. Since I was no longer in school in the 60s, I just sort of went with the flow. To me both the NO and TLM, when done with reverence, are essential in the Catholic faith. Some of the ideas and attitudes about dogma and doctrine leave me in confusion. I can only go by what I was taught pre-Vatican II, read, talk, and open my mind and heart to the changes after Vatican II. I do get irritated with the belief of some that MY form of the Mass is BETTER than YOUR form of the Mass. Peace.

 

[Cat]

brotherhrolf, what exactly are you looking for?

I don’t understand.

I don’t blame you at all for being nostalgic for the Church of your childhood. If my Conference Baptist church was still the same church I grew up in, I would probably not be Catholic at all.

It was a wonderful church. I was safe and loved, and we received excellent teaching. I started playing the piano when I was in 6th grade and received constant encouragement and appreciation. When I got married, the dear women of that church arranged everything, and it was beautiful.

And throughout the next 30 years, my husband and I always had good experiences in the evangelical churches that we were involved in. When we moved away from North Carolina and our Christian and Missionary Alliance church, I cried all the way out the door. If I think about it too much now, I will cry again.

I wish with all my heart it could have stayed that way. As much as I love the Catholic Church, I miss the church of my childhood and young adult years.

But then we were kicked out of our last evangelical church, and treated like dung. We suspect that our daughter was abused. For months I had nightmares about being pursued and horribly executed by the people, especially the pastors, in that awful church.

It’s over. That part of our life is over now. I try to remember the good parts with gratefulness, and I try not to be bitter about the bad parts.

I am thrilled to be a Catholic, and I hope that somehow in the rest of my life, I can make up for all the years that I wasn’t Catholic.

There are times, I’m ashamed to say, when I want JUSTICE against those in that last church who were so cruel to me, my husband, and especially our daughters. For years, my older daughter has harbored a fantasy about entering one of the church services, standing up, pushing the pastor away from the pulpit, and telling everyone in that church what happened to us and demanding a full and humble apology.

A few weeks ago when she was received into the CatholicChurch, she told me that she has dropped this fantasy and has forgiven them entirely.

I admit that I still, in dark moments, bring up the same kind of fantasy. But I have confidence, because of the beautiful doctrine of Purgatory, that these people will pay the temporal penalty for their sin against us. It’s not up to me, it’s up to GOD whether or not they deserve any temporal punishment, and what kind of punishment that will be.

So as I asked, brotherhrolf, what are you looking for? Do you want people to listen to your stories about growing up Catholic? Well, that’s fine. I love listening to real-life stories.

But if you are looking to return to those times, well, it’s not going to happen. We’re grown up now.

Are you looking for vengeance against those who stole away the Church of your childhood?

That’s not going to happen, either.

Are you looking to educate people about what happened and put them on their guard so that it will never happen again?

That’s certainly a worthy goal. Elie Wiesel, in his book Night, says that we should “never forget.” (He’s talking about the Holocaust.)

But why not just come out and say “Look out brothers and sisters! I see signs of the same upheaval coming!”

Do you just want to vent? Well, as the king in the old fairy tale told the wronged princess, “Tell it to the oven.” Or get together with real-life friends once in while just to “wax nostalgic” about a past that is gone, never to return.

Or is there something else you are looking for that I’m failing to see?

Here’s one suggestion–create a “fictional character”, perhaps a little boy, and write up your “childhood church” into a book or series of books for children (and grownups who still like children’s books!). I have a set of Streets and Roads readers from a Catholic school, and I love reading the stories of the Catholic children in those books! It’s all pre-Vatican II, and very different from the life I grew up with AND the life I have now. I think those books helped me to eventually become Catholic–not that I want to return to that idyllic time (because it’s gone and I accept that), but because they gave such a positive, loving picture of the Catholic Church.

 

[I_Believe]

Modernism isn’t the only cause for revolutionary change. There can be many other reasons. It was said that St. Francis of Assisi caused revolutionary change in the church during his time. Many other Saints have caused revolutionary changes in human aspects of the church and those changes put the church back on the right path.

To reject change just for the sake of rejecting change will cause stagnation. The church even had revolutionary changes during it’s infancy when Peter and Paul started preaching to the Gentiles.

A church that has the ability to change and a mechanism like the Holy See to regulate that change is a sign of a living breathing religion.

Yes, but perhaps our definitions of Revolutionary Change differ.
I realize organic change occurs, and always has.

At least we agree there is such a term

 

[Simon_X]

That transitional period must have been VERY confusing. I am glad I was grounded pre-Vatican II in the Faith, although I think Vatican II has done MUCH good. However, I do believe some of the clergy remain confused as to what attitudes, teachings they promote.

Agree…

 

[elt1956]

In the words of Queen Quenivere in Camelot “Tell me sirrah, when was the last time you jousted with humilite”?

Had you taken the time to review some of my posts, you would have seen that I am not one of those who wants a return to the EF. But there is far more to being Catholic than just the Mass.

I am a member of a reverent NO parish - a cathedral parish to be precise and I put my money where my mouth is - I’ve also been a member of the choir for the last 25 years.

We drive 25 miles (one way) as we have for the last 25 years (living in two Catholic parishes). Why? Because my parish adheres to that which I grew up with (before Vatican II). It’s not just the Mass, it is things like “reach over and introduce yourself to your neighbor” or hearing Broadway tunes or having Father running up and down the aisles for the sign of peace.

My “attitude” comes from being raised before Vatican II. Not all of us were happy with what came in 68. I was 17 years old at the time and I was not happy. Guess what, surprise, surprise…I do not want to go back to the TLM but I sure do want to see reverence, use of Latin, and an abandonment of all things protestant which have crept into the worship of HMC in the last 40 years.

I “know” what it means to be Catholic. You may think me a dinosaur but I had the roots pulled out from under me 40 years ago as did many others on these forums. We’re not dead; we didn’t like what happened; and we’ve kept our mouths shut for 40 years. We’re not radical but our voices need to be heard.

Hi, what kind of dinosaur are you, TRex, Diplodocus? I am a Triceratops who would like to know what Protestant bleifes, teachings have crept in to the teachings of the Catholic Church. I have been out of school for at least a thousand years and have lost touch with many of the changes. Thanks. Peace.

 

[elt1956]

You list all your “qualifications” and you state that you “know” what it means to be Catholic, but do you honestly think that being part of the pre-Vatican II church and celebrating the old-style Mass makes you any more Catholic or “know” what it means to be Catholic then someone that celebrates the newer style Mass. You may want to read Luke 18:10-14. I know many people that have grown up on the newer style Mass that really know what it means to be Catholic. Many newer priests that never saw the older style Mass follow church teaching closer then their pre-Vatican II brothers.

I personally think for anyone to say they totally “know” what it is to be Catholic has too much pride in their hearts. I think the only people qualified to say they totally know what it means to be Catholic are those that have been persecuted for the faith (not just a comment or two, but truely persecuted.)

Your Catholic faith should include continuous conversion.

I don’t think that people raised pre-Vatican II are dinosaurs, I know serveral that have a vibrant faith. I do think that people that feel they “know” everything about being Catholic can be like dinosaurs.

Hello. Don’t know if this will make sense, but I think I know what the Trads. are trying to say about being Catholic. For me, I am on the border line of change, no change. My Catholicism, for me, was absorbed Pre-Vatican II. I was “surrounded” by Catholicism, lived it, ate it every day by attending Parochial Schools. There were no questions, only belief. Sometimes we didn’t understand what we were supposed to believe in, but boy, did we believe!! We really felt as though we “belonged” to the Apostolic Catholic Church. We were a World Community; this was given a lot of emphasis in our classes. I think this “we know what it means to be a Catholic” is a remnant of this type of education and understanding of the Faith. Just as someone immersed in a certain culture can say with all their heart, “I am Italian, Polish etc.” and really know what it means to be such. Pre-Vatican II, I think now, had as much to do with culture, almost to the extent one can say, I was raised in a Catholic culture. But, I truly don’t think this culture can be regained, or reinstated. Those who have been exposed to Catholic teachings after Vatican II have been exposed and have internalized a new and different Catholic culture. This culture is something some raised in the Traditional format cannot in the depths of their hearts and souls accept. They have seen changes, changes to their way of thinking, changes to liturgy and have felt isolated, abandoned and frightened. I know I have felt all these things. But I also believe the Spirit of Vatican II, the Holy Spirit, is alive and well. If we are all open enough to Him, eventually we can come to an understanding of one another and work TOGETHER to overcome what are really the abuses that effect the teachings of the Catholic Church. Has anything in Doctrine, or Dogma changed since VII? Not really. Maybe interpretations by individuals who are not grounded in the letter of the LAW are giving a new spin to what they think are the truths of the Catholic Church. But, I truly believe, the root of the teachings is still the same. Peace.

 

[elt1956]

Sometimes Revolutionary Changes are what is needed. An example is the sexual abuse scandal. If the revolutionary changes that have happened, had happened earlier the problem might not have existed.

I will trust the Holy See in the Revolutionary Changes they made at Vatican II. The Holy See as an entity is lead by the Holy Spirit. I will trust it more then your personal opinion and as for my own opinion if I doubt their decisions I look at why I am doubting their opinions and figure out why I think that.

Many (name removed by moderator)roper things have been done in the “spirit of Vatican II” but those things aren’t what was written in Vatican II, they were personal inovations. Let the Pope and/or his Bishop do their job and reign those things in.

It doesn’t serve anyone to say things like “The old Mass is more Catholic.” “People born before Vatican II don’t know what it is like to be Catholic.” etc. That is only attempting to cause division among people that should be united. If you like the Traditional Mass, go to it. If you like the newer style Mass go to it. If you like Mass of another approved rite go to it. That is the beauty of the Catholic church, that you can have a valid Mass in numerous flavors (as long as they are approved version), all of which is authentically Catholic.

I, for one, believe there have ALWAYS been abuses within the Catholic Church. But DOGMA and DOCTERINE are not to blame, but human error. Some of these errors come to light, some don’t and are held close to the chest for whatever reasons the Vatican sees reason to do so.

 

[elt1956]

Consider it a “teaching moment!”

I consider it a ‘critical moment’, pun intended. Would you, who have been critical of change, refuse to obey dictates of the Pope, consider this to be the unamed one’s forage for souls and division? Let’s consider the fact, that many of the posts are NOT pulling us together.

 

[elt1956]

What exactly is the purpose of this thread? Are you asking that traditionalist stop advocating their call to a return to traditional practices native to the Latin rite?

Tell me, is there a place to deposit my brain before entering the Church, perhaps they have a check-out near the coats?

I could have sworn that having a critical outlook was a good thing. And I do not want to see that overused argument that by being critical we are somehow like Martin Luther. The difference between liberal critics and traditionalists is that the liberal rejects Catholicism while the traditionalist strives to uphold what is true and dear to our Catholic tradition.

Read my post #2 of today, 5:27 P.M. It should at least clarify what I think about this whole discussion. It is great to have a “critical” mind, keeps all of us on our toes. But it is quite different to engage in destructive criticism which some Trads. and Modernists (as we are called) do. Nothing can be settled that way. Peace.

 

[pray4peace]

Why do so many find it necessary to criticize things of our Catholic Church. I have seen criticisms of:

1. The Cross the pope carried.
2. The vestments worn by priests
3. How we receive Communion
4. Calling a pope a heretic
5. The popes homilies
6. The mass itself
7. The way some people chose to pray
8. Questioning the wording of the mass

I could keep going on, but am sure you all get the point and probably could add much, much more to this list. I for one am really saddened in seeing so much animosity about the Church Your thoughts please.
Prayers & Blessings
Deacon Ed B

You know, I never knew of this unrest until I discovered this site. It does bother me that this goes on. We must pray more and criticize less.

Blessings

 

[Marauder]

You have a serious problem/dillusion. Perhaps you should make a list yourself… of all those who have posted that they hate …

I think you must reconsider the charity of your posts. You should discuss content of the post, not the person behind it.

I can find hundreds examples of places where people say they hated the music in DC, hate the fact that we have EMHCs etc. There is no need to sugarcoat what people believe. Not many of the people that post on this forum do.

Also note that hating the concept is different from hating the people.

 

[MrS]

I think you must reconsider the charity of your posts. You should discuss content of the post, not the person behind it.

I can find hundreds examples of places where people say they hated the music in DC, hate the fact that we have EMHCs etc. There is no need to sugarcoat what people believe. Not many of the people that post on this forum do.

Also note that hating the concept is different from hating the people.

This is true…which is why I was critical of your comment:

" … People that hate EMHCs …"

You have been quite uncharitable in painting those who object to the “changes” these past 40 years as actually hating those who promote or participate in those changes… most of which coincide with growing problems in the Church.

 

[Marauder]

This is true…which is why I was critical of your comment:

" … People that hate EMHCs …"

You have been quite uncharitable in painting those who object to the “changes” these past 40 years as actually hating those who promote or participate in those changes… most of which coincide with growing problems in the Church.

Oh I am sorry that I didn’t explicitly say hate the idea of EMHCs. Does that give you the right to call me delusional? You could have just asked me to clarify. I really think you need to consider the charity of your posts. I have been extrememly charitable in my posts, I at no time called anybody names. You would see that if you read the future posts, not just the one.

 

[brotherhrolf]

botherhrolf, what exactly are you looking for?

I don’t understand.

I don’t blame you at all for being nostalgic for the Church of your childhood. If my Conference Baptist church was still the same church I grew up in, I would probably not be Catholic at all.

Cat, I have considered your words most carefully. You forget one thing. While you may be a convert, I cannot forget my own living memories. Am I to be reduced to some sort of ecclesial dinosaur? I went through Vatican II. I was an altar boy during the period. I am a product of 13 years of Catholic education. I left HMC for many years in the 70s because I could not stand what was going on. I went to an SSPX Mass once in the late 70s but when I found out they were not in Communion with HMC, I never went back.

I am particularly disturbed by your condesension and trivializing of my memories. I am not happy that you are treating me as some kind of fossil. I’m only 56 and there are a whole bunch of us from that Baby Boom generation who are still alive and remember HMC from our childhood.

Which puts me and mine in an awkward place. I realize that you entered HMC in a vastly different environment than me. And that is wonderful. But do you realize that your words place me in the unenviable position of commenting on your conversion? Do you have any idea of how I feel when my thoughts and words are “pooh poohed” simply because I am a cradle Catholic baptized in 1951? I grew up in a different era. That era is not yours but it is no less valid. I don’t wax nostalgic about a church that was lost. That church is still alive and even if I have to drive 25 miles to attend Mass, it is worth it.

Forty years ago I submitted to the Magesterium of HMC. I didn’t run off and convert to the Episcopalians (who at that time were more Catholic than the pope) nor did I join our eastern brethren. I stopped going to Mass. I don’t want to greet my neighbor; I don’t want to sing sacro-pop or now sacro-salsa; I don’t want to hold hands for the Lord’s Prayer or do the “wave” after. I don’t do any of these things at my parish. "I’m not OK; you’re not OK and my focus is on the Sacrifice of the Mass to which I give my all.

I am getting tired of hearing that that which I grew up with is “not with the flow”. You have no idea of the anguish I felt when the communion rails were removed in the early 70s. I have never received in the hand and on those few occasions I am able to make Mass at St. Agnes here, I cry because I can kneel to receive Communion. My experience is valid and I am not trying to beat you into my experience.

But there is a whole bunch of y’all who just plain “dis” us. I’m tired of it. I am a Latin Rite Roman Catholic born and raised before Vatican II and I make no apologies. I share the Faith of my fathers and mothers going back centuries. I have never on these forums expressed anything which was contrary to HMC.

I am not a “let’s return to the Church before Vatican II” person. I have my opinions on music, I’ll grant you. But I have to say my brothers and sisters that I am getting real tired of being bashed because I was born before Vatican II. I was not a hippy. I enlisted. My hair has always been short. I did not participate in what my generation did after Vatican II. I am who I am and I have felt this way for the last 40 years. Why cannot I be accepted for my own genuine views?