Criticism of Things Catholic

[PaixGioiaAmor]

This is not criticism of things Catholic, most of these people uphold all things Catholic, they just dislike insults to the Catholic faith. Most of them love the Catholic faith and want it to be always upheld and promoted authentically.

Isn’t it terrible when you go into a Catholic Church and wish to have a faithful Mass but then you see EMHC’s when there is no extraordinary circumstances for them to be needed, little reflection of the Catholic faith but innovation and disrespect for our Lord Jesus, etc?

The Pope came to promote fidelity and of course we know that United States Catholics are pretty unfaithful to the Church, and this is reflected in our behavior. I see the Masses as pretty darn good considering the state of the Church in America. I don’t have much to complain about as I can imagine how ugly and banal Mass would be presented to the Pope out here in California. I think we did a good job considering the source.

But some people come from much more faithful parishes and they see the problems much more clearly than the rest of us. They are not complaining against Catholicism but against unfaithfulness to Catholicism. They are upholding the beauty of Catholicism, we just are used to uglyness that we see any criticism of this as equated with criticizing Catholicism, but I am sure that isn’t the desire of most the people complaining.

Look at both sides from a charitable view and you will see that the people complaining actually have good reason but it is hard to see as most of us have become used to the “American Catholic Church” I don’t hate the NO Mass I grew up in it and serve in it, but we can always do better, we are certainly not the example for the world to follow.

In Christ
Scylla

This is really not true.

I remember hearing now retired Theodore Cardinal McCarrick speak eloquently on this subject. He said that whenever he met with the Holy Father (John Paul II), he reminded him that the Catholics of the United States are the most faithful Catholics in the world.

He went on to explain his remarks: He said that when the “We are Church” movement was going BIG in Europe and other parts of the world, it never gained too much traction here. When people have sought to undermine the hierarchy, they have been limited to mere handfuls in this country.

Considering those things and the fact that Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist and the like have been historically overused MUCH more in other regions on earth and had been used earlier on before being used here, I don’t think that American Catholics are so unfaithful.

 

[scylla]

This is really not true.

I remember hearing now retired Theodore Cardinal McCarrick speak eloquently on this subject. He said that whenever he met with the Holy Father (John Paul II), he reminded him that the Catholics of the United States are the most faithful Catholics in the world.

He went on to explain his remarks: He said that when the “We are Church” movement was going BIG in Europe and other parts of the world, it never gained too much traction here. When people have sought to undermine the hierarchy, they have been limited to mere handfuls in this country.

Considering those things and the fact that Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist and the like have been historically overused MUCH more in other regions on earth and had been used earlier on before being used here, I don’t think that American Catholics are so unfaithful.

I would strongly disagree, so much so I would ask you to carefully re-consider what I said and look at the state of American Catholicism. Look at American Catholicism carefully not what we look like on the outside, but the actual state of the Church. If you would like I can bring up statistics and we can make a new subject out of the faithfulness of American Catholics.

We are pretty unfaithful, there are plenty of examples, here is one easy example.
Contraception.
What percentage of Catholics in the United States are using Contraception?
The answer, the majority.
This is directly against Catholic teaching and proves most Catholics directly ignore Catholic teaching on this subject or their Pastors are not doing their jobs by teaching them about the subject. Either way, there is gross disobedience.

The late Pope John Paul II was a beautiful man who was very kind and gave a lot of praise. He said almost the same thing of Mexico, “Siempre Fiel” (always faithful). On the outside Mexico might look healthy, just check out what is happening with this generation of Mexican Catholics. Mexico is in bad shape.
Skeletons are usually kept in closets, not paraded around in front of the Holy Father.

God Bless
Scylla

latinmasslover thanks for the compliment, (I try to lurk more and get some work done at my store.)

 

[Marauder]

But there is far more to being Catholic than just the Mass.

I am a member of a reverent NO parish … I’ve also been a member of the choir for the last 25 years.

We drive 25 miles …
I “know” what it means to be Catholic.

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.

 

[Carolinagirl411]

Contraception.
What percentage of Catholics in the United States are using Contraception?
The answer, the majority.
This is directly against Catholic teaching and proves most Catholics directly ignore Catholic teaching on this subject or their Pastors are not doing their jobs by teaching them about the subject. Either way, there is gross disobedience.

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

 

[brotherhrolf]

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.

No, I do not have so much pride in my heart. But if you think that you are a Catholic and you weren’t raised before Vatican II you have another thought coming. I “AM” a Catholic who was raised before Vatican II. It’s not just the Mass but an entire ethos of behavior. I am sick of this. I do NOT want to go back to the TLM. I DO want to continue those Traditions and traditons we have had. Y’all think that everyone for forty years ago accepted what has come to pass. NO! I

 

[PatrickJT914]

There is a lot to comment about on this thread. Maybe at a later time,When I’ll be able to. My time is limited right now. So, I’ll keep it simple. Is not the Catholic Church 2000 years old? If so shouldn’t we embrace all things Catholic? That includes earlier ways of doing things. Which at times is more traditional than the Traditional Orthodox Catholicism. Some of what Vatican II and the post-V II documents did or try to do was revive our earlier roots. Sorry, I’ve got to go now.

 

[I_Believe]

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.

Not to argue. I’m tired of arguing. But Revolutionary Changes are what caused the division to reach the degree it has reached.

If every Catholic would learn what the terms Revolutionary Change, Rationalism, and Modernism, truly mean, and then realize that Popes have been denouncing such, century after century, it would be clear to all why there is this level of division.

Anything short of this will continue to take it’s toll on each of us.

 

[Marauder]

But if you think that you are a Catholic and you weren’t raised before Vatican II you have another thought coming.

And that shows division more then anything you can say. You basically have said that anyone born after 1965 can not consider themselves Catholic, nice. The church I am a member of is a living church. Things change with times, the church does to. You keep saying you don’t want to go back, but it sounds like you don’t want to look forward either.

I will follow the Holy See and the guidance offered it by the Holy Spirit. I will accept the church in all its approved flavors. If you can not see much you sound like the Pharisee in Luke 18:10-14, then you are missing something. I am Catholic and will follow a path of continual conversion as called to by my church.

 

[revelations]

Are you being vague on purpose?

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

 

[Marauder]

Not to argue. I’m tired of arguing. But Revolutionary Changes are what caused the division to reach the degree it has reached.

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.

 

[revelations]

^^^ Solid post marauder, stated wonderfully

 

[Marauder]

The only one I remember is that 51% of American Catholics approve of abortion.

Just remember that most of the statistics like that are heavily biased. They usually include the Catholic that don’t ever go to church and the Christmas/Easter Catholics in those numbers. The numbers go down considerably if they only figure in the ones that go every week. Also the numbers change depending on how they ask the questions.

 

[I_Believe]

^^^ Solid post marauder, stated wonderfully

Well then, if you agree that the Holy See is to be relied on for the truth of the matter, what are your thoughts on what the man who called VII commanded and decreed, concerning Revolutionary Changes (as applied to the liturgy in this case )? It’s right there in black and white. And the language is not ambiguous.

adoremus.org/VeterumSapientia.html

 

[revelations]

**Although the Constitution on the Liturgy permitted use of vernacular languages at Mass, it also stressed the importance of Latin. (from link above)

**That’s the phrase that jumped out at me. I agree that latin is a wonderful language. I dont think there’s anything wrong with it, and frankly, i look forward to my monthly latin mass at my local parish.

However, the NO masses i go to are masses as well, Jesus Christ is there and present. I agree that there have been abuses that were made easier with the advent of VII, but that doesn’t mean VII is to blame. Rather, it would be from a lack of spirituality. I personally look very forward to getting involved in our local catechesis organization, it is ripe with liberals and border line heretics. Teach the people right, and they will know what is wrong and what isnt.

 

[Marauder]

Well then, if you agree that the Holy See is to be relied on for the truth of the matter, what are your thoughts on what the man who called VII commanded and decreed, concerning Revolutionary Changes (as applied to the liturgy in this case )? It’s right there in black and white. And the language is not ambiguous.

The problem with what you quote as is quoting Pius X and others is that no Pope may bind future Popes or the Holy See in matters of practice. They are allowed to bind in matters of faith and morals but practices are allowed to change. Just like the early church changed the readings from Greek and Aramaic to Latin.

 

[I_Believe]

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.

If one embraces Revolutionary Change, the one must also embrace what enables it. Modernism. One can not do this without rejecting the warnings and condemnation of Modernism by Popes throughout the centuries.

I don’t reject VII. I reject the agenda of the wolves BXVI spoke of at his Inaugural(sp?) Mass.

A traditionalist speaks against Communion in the hand and is scorned on this forum. A member of the Curia speakes against it (Bishop Ranjith), and is ignored by those who attack the traditionalist. But the wolves do not ignore him. They are trying to send him to Sri Lanka. But don’t take my word for it. Pope BXVI will have to deal with this very soon. We’ll see.

 

[Marauder]

If one embraces Revolutionary Change, the one must also embrace what enables it. Modernism.

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.

 

[I_Believe]

**Although the Constitution on the Liturgy permitted use of vernacular languages at Mass, it also stressed the importance of Latin. (from link above)

**That’s the phrase that jumped out at me. I agree that latin is a wonderful language. I dont think there’s anything wrong with it, and frankly, i look forward to my monthly latin mass at my local parish.

However, the NO masses i go to are masses as well, Jesus Christ is there and present. I agree that there have been abuses that were made easier with the advent of VII, but that doesn’t mean VII is to blame. Rather, it would be from a lack of spirituality. I personally look very forward to getting involved in our local catechesis organization, it is ripe with liberals and border line heretics. Teach the people right, and they will know what is wrong and what isnt.

You have avoided defending your support of someone that has blatantly voiced defense of Revolutionary Change.

I want to know how you feel about Revolutionary Change, and what enables it. And also, how we can discard the teachings and warnings against such, by previous Popes.

Take your time answering. I respect your opinions, thay are as valid as mine as far as opinions go. But please, make sure you know what the terms Modernism, Revolutionary Change, Rationalism, and Heresy truly mean before you support the opinions of someone simply because those opinions scorn the traditionalist mindset. You have to understand it before you can question it.

I’m off of here for a while to run errands…

 

[brotherhrolf]

And that shows division more then anything you can say. You basically have said that anyone born after 1965 can not consider themselves Catholic, nice. The church I am a member of is a living church. Things change with times, the church does to. You keep saying you don’t want to go back, but it sounds like you don’t want to look forward either.

I will follow the Holy See and the guidance offered it by the Holy Spirit. I will accept the church in all its approved flavors. If you can not see much you sound like the Pharisee in Luke 18:10-14, then you are missing something. I am Catholic and will follow a path of continual conversion as called to by my church.

Pish, tosh! I have not said anything like that. Did the Holy Ghost (Spirit) not move during Vatican II? NO! I am one of those whose voices were not hear back in the late 60’s/early 70’s. I speak for my mother and my neighbors who voted with their feet rather than subject themselves to the “a’grinnin’ and a"strummin” that we got after Vatican II

I am NOT a radical traditionalist. I speak with the voice of those of us who were members of HMC back then. I speak for all of us who were not happy with what happened. I speak for all of us who have kept our mouths shut for the last 40 years in deference to the Magisterium of HMC.

You don’t know us. You assume that everyone back then embraced what happened after Vatican II with open arms. The Church in which I grew up is not the Church of today. I cannot nor will I not refute the Church in which I was baptized, made my First Communion and was Confirmed.

I am a voice crying in the wilderness. We didn’t leave HMC. We’ve been here for 40 years. If it were not so we would not have had such a big disareeement over the Mass in DC.

 

[revelations]

You have avoided defending your support of someone that has blatantly voiced defense of Revolutionary Change.

I want to know how you feel about Revolutionary Change, and what enables it. And also, how we can discard the teachings and warnings against such, by previous Popes.

Take your time answering. I respect your opinions, thay are as valid as mine as far as opinions go. But please, make sure you know what the terms Modernism, Revolutionary Change, Rationalism, and Heresy truly mean before you support the opinions of someone simply because those opinions scorn the traditionalist mindset. You have to understand it before you can question it.

I’m off of here for a while to run errands…

I want you to tell me what revolutionary change is.

Second, no one is out the scorn the traditionalist mindset here. I don’t even have a formed opinion on all this, I’m just more than thankful enough that Jesus had the mercy to call me to His holy church. He could have left me to rot.

One statement i will make, neither traditional nor liberal, is that regarding orthodoxy. I follow holy scripture, and the catechism of the catholic church. If it’s against either of these two books, it aint catholic.

Finally, i don’t think i have to DEFEND my support of the Pope, i’m almost certain that is a pre-requisite to being catholic. I think this constant criticism of our holy father is disgusting, shows a lack of humility and recognition of the see of Peter, and is just downright non-catholic.

Fact is, the church is dealing with problems a lot greater than whether we should kneel to receive communion or not.