S
sphilomena
Guest
Welcome to our beloved Church! Perceptive comments for a new Catholic!
- Status
D
Deacon_Ed_B
Guest
Well stated. Now you know why I started this thread.
Prayers and blessings
Deacon Ed B
I
I_Believe
Guest
There is no doubt why you started it.
and frankly, my only reply should have been,
Incoming !
Just as you have had your point made, so did the OP make mine. As I’ve said before, traditionalists have come under attack with a vengence ever since the efforts to close the TC forum failed.
You knew the topic would encourage division to again manifest. You knew it would encourage two of the Deadly sins.
And all the while, the wolves howl in delight.
And yes, I’m a fool for taking the bait.
D
Deacon_Ed_B
Guest
I don’t believe what I just read. I started this thread for people to look at what is being said about Holy Mother church and to try to start inner reflection. Not accusations such as you have thrown. Either you missed it or I missed it with the answer I gave of the post I gave that answer to. My whole and entire point is for God’s sake people, look at how some are maliciously using these forums to attack the church and all we hold sacred. A blind bat could see that. I don’t think it would have to be spelled out.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
I
I_Believe
Guest
Hi, Carolinagirl. You will be shocked at many things if you continue to read these threads and things on the net. But whatever you do, don’t allow yourself to get caught up in all of it as many of us have done.
If you do get caught up in it, you will wind up doing as many here do. Spend more time arguing about catholicism that practicing it. And the only one that pleases is Satan.
Just know Prudence is a Virtue
I’m slowly and stubbornly accepting that myself.
C
Chris_McAvoy
Guest
It is called charitable constructive criticism as opposed to destructive criticism. When people are legitimately frustrated they often need to vent their frustration by communicating it via criticism. However it is necessary to discipline oneself to not go too far or than criticism becomes destructive.
If one compares the west to the east, one finds far more problems and similarities to protestantism in the west. So I would say some criticism is necessary in order to have the church be closer to the apostolic model it was built on.
Though the east certainly as its problems as well and needs charitable constructive criticism too, generally the problems are less severe.
If one compares the west to the east, one finds far more problems and similarities to protestantism in the west. So I would say some criticism is necessary in order to have the church be closer to the apostolic model it was built on.
Though the east certainly as its problems as well and needs charitable constructive criticism too, generally the problems are less severe.
M
MrS
Guest
You have a serious problem/dillusion. Perhaps you should make a list yourself… of all those who have posted that they hate …
At least the deacon was PC enough to use the word criticism. However, I think a more realistic title to the thread could have been
RE: Criticism of Things Catholic Do
.
C
Cat
Guest
(boldface mine)
brotherhrolf, is this really what you meant to say?
It’s pretty tough. You are saying that I am not a Catholic. You are saying that anyone who is under 50 is not a Catholic.
I don’t believe this is what you meant at all. You are usually fairly reasonable. Was it just bad writing?
Thanks.
P
PatrickJT914
Guest
There is one person being left out of these statements. And that person is our founder, Our Lord Jesus Christ! What would he say about his church today? Jesus was not a revolutionary, but he did have revolutionary ideas.
- His disciples not fasting
- Talking to the Samaratians
- Curing on the sabbath
- Saying he was the Son of God
- Forgiving sins
- Performing miracles
- He was Lord of the Sabbath
- Talking and intermingling with undesirables
- Criticized the Pharisees for being
a. self-righteousness
b. hypocrites
c. placing burdens on others, not lifting a finger to help.
d. external practices
e. too legalistic in the law
f. spiritually dead
g. taking places of honor - He is the Bread of Life, eating his flesh
- Resurrecting people.
- The list goes on.
So, if we proclaim to follow the church, then do we not also follow Our Lord?, and not just the Mass alone?
I wonder what would happen to Jesus if he come today and started to speak against all the legalism. During Jesus’ time there were 613 laws. In today’s church we have: the Roman Canon
Law,GIRM, Catechism of the Catholic Church, etc. Granted Jesus did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it. He also said that not even the smallest letter of the law would pass. The fulfillment of the law was love, mercy, forgiveness, compassion. Or another way, the spirit of the law, not just the letter of the law. Maybe that’s why we are criticized. Because we put much emphasis on external things.
F
Freshman88
Guest
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.
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.
B
brotherhrolf
Guest
No, Cat. All I am trying to say is that those of us who grew up before Vatican II knew an entirely different Church. That’s not posutring on my part - it is abject fact.
I have agonized about posting how I feel. I know all too well that the Church I knew before 68 is not the Church I know today. But I want to speak for my brothers and sisters.
The Catholic world in which I grew up is far different from what you have been exposed to. Perhaps some of you can help me. How do you deal with the fact that your father is protestant and there is no salvation outside of the Church when your father is the one who wakes you up and brings you to church so that you can serve the 6 am Mass?
How do you deal with growing up and singing traditional Catholoic 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 remeber.
I have agonized about posting how I feel. I know all too well that the Church I knew before 68 is not the Church I know today. But I want to speak for my brothers and sisters.
The Catholic world in which I grew up is far different from what you have been exposed to. Perhaps some of you can help me. How do you deal with the fact that your father is protestant and there is no salvation outside of the Church when your father is the one who wakes you up and brings you to church so that you can serve the 6 am Mass?
How do you deal with growing up and singing traditional Catholoic 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 remeber.
H
hammer05
Guest
It is interesting to see that this thread started out as a noting criticisms of the Catholic Church and has turned into a debate over the post-Vatican II Church.
Being a person in my mid-20’s, I have grown up completely in the post-Vatican II era. I have never been to a Tridentine Mass. As far as I am concerned there is no debate. The Church of today is all that I have known.
My parents who are in their early-50’s have memories the of pre-Vatican II days, but those memories are vague.
While I don’t have the statistics at hand, it is probably safe to assume that most Catholics find themselves in similar position–either born after Vatican II or were so young when the changes were made that the impact on them as Catholics is of little note.
It seems to me that those who want a return to the pre-Vatican II days are very vocal group finding themselves in the extreme minority. In all of my interactions with my older individuals, I have never heard one say that the Church should return to the pre-Vatican II days.
However, there is a definite need in the Roman Catholic Church of today for uniformity. There are too many “liberal” and “cafeteria” Catholics among both the laity and the clergy.
Being a person in my mid-20’s, I have grown up completely in the post-Vatican II era. I have never been to a Tridentine Mass. As far as I am concerned there is no debate. The Church of today is all that I have known.
My parents who are in their early-50’s have memories the of pre-Vatican II days, but those memories are vague.
While I don’t have the statistics at hand, it is probably safe to assume that most Catholics find themselves in similar position–either born after Vatican II or were so young when the changes were made that the impact on them as Catholics is of little note.
It seems to me that those who want a return to the pre-Vatican II days are very vocal group finding themselves in the extreme minority. In all of my interactions with my older individuals, I have never heard one say that the Church should return to the pre-Vatican II days.
However, there is a definite need in the Roman Catholic Church of today for uniformity. There are too many “liberal” and “cafeteria” Catholics among both the laity and the clergy.
B
brotherhrolf
Guest
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.
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.
F
Freshman88
Guest
Don’t sweat it brotherhrolf, the Church you knew is very much alive, in the various traditionalist parishes throughout the world.
M
MrS
Guest
smaller…and … stronger…
H
hammer05
Guest
I did not mean to insinuate that Catholics of your generation or those that hold your views are irrelevant. If you took my comments as such, I apologize.
I personally believe myself to be very strong in my Catholic faith. My Catholic education came from Benedictine nuns who were certainly alive and were brought up in pre-Vatican II days (and for that matter very traditional). I believe the Catholic Church of today is strong. The dogma and fundamental teachings of the Church remain the same despite the passage of time and various ecumenical councils (Vatican II inlcluded).
The Catholic Church remains the world’s largest sect of Christianity. Worldwide, we have lost ground to Islam. However, the Church in America continues to grow, especially with the influx of Hispanics who are overwhelmingly more conservative and traditional than than the typical United States Catholic. The continental American Catholic Church hold nearly 50% of the world’s Catholics according to the Vatican.
I don’t see the Catholic Church of present becoming any more liberal, especially under the tutelage of Benedict XVI.
S
Simon_X
Guest
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.
M
mark_a
Guest
I think its because they’ve never been in a position of authority and don’t know how difficult a position of authority can be.
Take for example Billy Graham. As a young man he was as anti-Catholic as one can be.
But after realizing his position of authority, he has become a friend of the Church.
Another posibility is that if they can find fault with one Catholic thing, they feel free to give in to or justify their own demons.
C
catharina
Guest
Probably an oversight on your part, but seriously, the Catholic Church is not a sect. Christian denominations might be described as sects or denominations, but the Church is the Church. We have not “broken away from ourselves” to become a new section of anything or a newly issued denomination of anything.
The Catholic Church is indeed filled with Catholic Christians and it is “the Church.”
I
I_Believe
Guest
Ed,
Please accept my apology. It was out of line to be so crass. The Deadly Sins was a bit much as well. Someone “got my goat” earlier, and well, you know me here lately. I do need to step back and preview my text before I post when I’m iritated. And work on my social skills perhaps.
I’ll ask the moderator to delete the post. It’s not fair to the members of this forum, to have first time guests to the forum, see that kind of rant. It looks bad.
Again, please accept my apology.
- Status