Differences of Opinion

[adrift]

Spiritmeadow suggested that free thinking and exploring Catholics have been condemned through history, even called heretics, but that some of their ideas are now accepted by the Church.

I don’t know if the Church officially called these things heresies, but surely we can agree the Church has changed its position on these issues (sometimes more than once): married priests, translation of the Mass into vernacular, translation of the bible into vernacular, the role of women in the Mass, the role of the laity in general in the Mass, the validity of scientific inquiry into the particulars of the creation (Galileo, evolution, etc.).

I think there are many more, but I am trying to list those that most would agree have changed over time. Am I wrong?

Yes.

And if you keep looking, you will find, a quite goodly number of those once banned, once heretical things, now the law of the Church. It has always been that way.

This is what she said. Nothing you mention qualifies. There is no changing of position on marries priest. Priest are not allowed to marry. That has never changed. Priest not being married in the Latin rite is a dicipline and has never been declared a heresy. The translation into the vernacular is a changed from what? If you are going to say Latin, remember that at one time Latin was the vernacular.
It would take such a long post to answer your post so I am letting it go here.

 

[TMC]

Montanaman,

I don’t know anyone who wants to stay in the Church who wants to change the doctrine on the Trinity or the Eucharist. But I am guessing that there were people who consider some of the things I listed as big “T” traditions until they were changed when they became little “t” traditions. One I am thinking of that sets people’s hair on fire on this forum is women priests. The all male priesthood has certainly been the tradition for as long as we can tell. It is a tradition that could be changed. Are people who advocate women priests heretics? Should they be tossed out on their ear? Note - I am talking about those that advocate for women priests but follow the church, not those that go out and “ordain” women on their own authority.

 

[drpmjhess]

Catholicism has abosolute truths which cannot change.

As do Judaism, Islam, and other traditions.

 

[jmcrae]

Montanaman,

I don’t know anyone who wants to stay in the Church who wants to change the doctrine on the Trinity or the Eucharist. But I am guessing that there were people who consider some of the things I listed as big “T” traditions until they were changed when they became little “t” traditions. One I am thinking of that sets people’s hair on fire on this forum is women priests. The all male priesthood has certainly been the tradition for as long as we can tell. It is a tradition that could be changed.

Only by going back in time, and causing Jesus to be born female.

Are people who advocate women priests heretics?

No. They are well-intentioned, but don’t understand what the priesthood is.

Should they be tossed out on their ear? Note - I am talking about those that advocate for women priests but follow the church, not those that go out and “ordain” women on their own authority.

No. They need to become better educated about the Sacrament of Holy Orders.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

No, I don’t think you’re wrong. But these are practices or small ‘t’ traditions. It’s quite a different matter to change capital ‘T’ Traditions like the Trinity or the Eucharist.

I never stated otherwise if you will reread my OP. I merely asked to return to civilized discourse. As stated by others and me, the Church has reversed itself and will do so again I’m sure. As we learn more, we understand more. Galileo comes to mind. And would anyone have believed that the changes of Vatican II would have happened in say 1920? of course not. But they do.

I never received one post that was in the least supportive in any way. And I said nothing Nothing that was untrue as far as i can say, rude, or in any way pejorative. I acknowledge that the right is as necessary as the left. We come together to produce the Church.

Well I need not restate everything again. The internet does serve to give voice to the extremes and make it look like there is no middle. There are lots of us in the middle, we are just either very happy and have no need to discuss it or just plain intellectually interested enough.

I used Liberation theology as an example. To those who again seek to warn me, I thank you…I feel fairly certain that the priest and nun who taught me at a Catholic college, alerted me to the dangers. In fact many of the liberation theology theologians themselves point out these issues themselves in their books.

To those who think I have some following in PM…That’s not what I said. I said, that when somebody like me gets lambasted like this, i come back to find 5 messages from folks who like to post here but don’t want to be the subject of this kind of attack. So they message to say what they agree with. It’s sad that such a state has occurred. But I recognize that this is a very ultra conservative site. I see posts here claiming the UCCCB are heretical in their teachings…lol…

I suppose somehow I’ve offended again, and this will start all over. I opologize for the previous post. It was unkind. I was so hurt by the responses, I reacted in anger.

 

[adrift]

Montanaman,

. It is a tradition that could be changed. Are people who advocate women priests heretics? Should they be tossed out on their ear? Note - I am talking about those that advocate for women priests but follow the church, not those that go out and “ordain” women on their own authority.

The Pope disagrees

Further, in 1994 Pope John Paul II formally declared that the Church does not have the power to ordain women. He stated, “Although the teaching that priestly ordination is to be reserved to men alone has been preserved by the constant and universal tradition of the Church and firmly taught by the magisterium in its more recent documents, at the present time in some places it is nonetheless considered still open to debate, or the Church’s judgment that women are not to be admitted to ordination is considered to have a merely disciplinary force. Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Luke 22:32) **I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful” **(Ordinatio Sacerdotalis 4).

Women and the Priesthood

 

[SemperFidelis]

Montanaman,

I don’t know anyone who wants to stay in the Church who wants to change the doctrine on the Trinity or the Eucharist. But I am guessing that there were people who consider some of the things I listed as big “T” traditions until they were changed when they became little “t” traditions. One I am thinking of that sets people’s hair on fire on this forum is women priests. The all male priesthood has certainly been the tradition for as long as we can tell. It is a tradition that could be changed. Are people who advocate women priests heretics? Should they be tossed out on their ear? Note - I am talking about those that advocate for women priests but follow the church, not those that go out and “ordain” women on their own authority.

Big “T” Traditions have never changed. Anything that has to do with Church discipline or practice is not a big “T” Tradition. Women priests are a big “T” Tradition, and something that has continuously been declared as heretical. Celibrate priests are a little “t” Tradition, and something that can change. In fact it did change in the early second millenium. One can argue about why and why not the Church should force priests to be celibate, because it is Church discipline. If the Church ever overturned a big “T” Tradition, then the Church would be in error, in which case Christ’s promises would have failed. People who advocate women priests are heretics.

 

[SemperFidelis]

As do Judaism, Islam, and other traditions.

Well good for them, but that has no impact on Catholicism whatsoever.

 

[montanaman]

Montanaman,

I don’t know anyone who wants to stay in the Church who wants to change the doctrine on the Trinity or the Eucharist. But I am guessing that there were people who consider some of the things I listed as big “T” traditions until they were changed when they became little “t” traditions. One I am thinking of that sets people’s hair on fire on this forum is women priests. The all male priesthood has certainly been the tradition for as long as we can tell. It is a tradition that could be changed. Are people who advocate women priests heretics? Should they be tossed out on their ear? Note - I am talking about those that advocate for women priests but follow the church, not those that go out and “ordain” women on their own authority.

Heh, the idea of women priests doesn’t set my hair on fire, but that is one of the things that has never changed and never will. In order for the sacrament of Holy Orders to be valid, the matter has to be valid. That matter isn’t simply a “person:” it’s a man.

Yes, I know, that automatically makes me a woman-hating member of the oppressive patriarchy, but in reality that has nothing to do with whether women are “inferior” (read that as my shorthand for “I don’t care to get into all of the arguments pro/con women priests”). You can’t consecrate a Graham cracker, you can’t baptize with ice, and you can’t get married to a Buick.

 

[SemperFidelis]

the Church has reversed itself and will do so again I’m sure.

This is most absolutely not true.

And would anyone have believed that the changes of Vatican II would have happened in say 1920?

Vatican II changed absolutely nothing.

 

[adrift]

the Church has reversed itself and will do so again I’m sure.

And if you keep looking, you will find, a quite goodly number of those once banned, once heretical things, now the law of the Church. It has always been that way.

I would like you to name what the Church declare heretical that is now law.
Perhaps it is a misunderstanding on what is heretical that is what I am trying to determine but generalizations are usually what brings about misunderstanding.

 

[drpmjhess]

People who advocate women priests are heretics.

We could bring back the Spanish Inquisition. Remind me – does the “iconic argument” against ordaining women still exclude castrati?

 

[montanaman]

I never stated otherwise if you will reread my OP.

I was actually responding to someone else. I honestly don’t know what you were referring to in your OP.

I merely asked to return to civilized discourse.

I’m all for that, but I didn’t see anything that would be considered UNcivilized in this thread. You threw out some claims that needed clarification, and a few of us talked about them. No big deal. Perhaps my post where I speculated about why people stay in the Church when they want to change it’s very core, but I would hardly think that constitutes a “hurtful” post.

As stated by others and me, the Church has reversed itself and will do so again I’m sure.

Never on dogma. It simply can’t–it has no authority to do so.

I never received one post that was in the least supportive in any way.

I think you raised a number of questions either implicitly or explicitly. While I think that no matter how contentious the issues are, civil discourse is always necessary, that doesn’t mean we won’t pursue the answers to certain questions. It also doesn’t mean we won’t have strong opinions about them.

Again, I really don’t know what it was that made you so mad. I’ve seen some really heated “debates” online, (if you can call them “debates,”) and this just didn’t even come close, IMHO.

But I recognize that this is a very ultra conservative site.

Again, I don’t think “ultra conservative” is an accurate term. And 99% of the time I hear it, it’s used as a slur.

 

[SemperFidelis]

We could bring back the Spanish Inquisition. Remind me – does the “iconic argument” against ordaining women still exclude castrati?

The Pope has declared that it is absolutly not possible to have women “priests” and it will never happen. To deny this truth is heresy. You speak of the Spanish Inquisition. There was a lot less opposition to the true Catholic teachings in those days, so I say “yeah, bring it back.” Now before you go on a tirade claiming that I am some medieval, male-chauvantist, intolerant, bigot, you should read the facts about the Inquisition. Try reading a book called: Why Apologize for the Spanish Inquisition?. You can find it here at Loreto Pubs:

loretopubs.org/index.php?target=products&product_id=36

 

[drpmjhess]

The Pope has declared that it is absolutly not possible to have women “priests” and it will never happen. To deny this truth is heresy. You speak of the Spanish Inquisition. There was a lot less opposition to the true Catholic teachings in those days, so I say “yeah, bring it back.” 6

I’m sure the fires of the Inquisition saved a lot of souls from the fires of hell. Now, does the “iconic argument” against ordaining women still exclude castrati?

 

[adrift]

B

I recognize that this is a very ultra conservative site

.Again, I don’t think “ultra conservative” is an accurate term. And 99% of the time I hear it, it’s used as a slur.

As you can see she views herself as middle even though at the same time she says she is progressive.

There are lots of us in the middle, we are just either very happy and have no need to discuss it or just plain intellectually interested enough.

It is understandable than why she say “ultra conservative” because she does not see herself as being “Ultra liberal” but being middle.

 

[jmcrae]

We could bring back the Spanish Inquisition. Remind me – does the “iconic argument” against ordaining women still exclude castrati?

As well as men who are paralyzed, mentally disabled, or who are missing limbs.

The matter for the Sacrament of Ordination is a whole male person, due to the requirement that the Sacrificial Victim (in whose person he stands) be an unblemished male.

 

[drpmjhess]

As well as men who are paralyzed, mentally disabled, or who are missing limbs.

The matter for the Sacrament of Ordination is a whole male person, due to the requirement that the Sacrificial Victim (in whose person he stands) be an unblemished male.

There must be some discretion on the part of the bishop; my diocese has deaf and blind priests, and one who is missing a leg. So missing some parts is a bigger deal than missing other parts. And if some parts can be gone, and if maleness is in the genes rather than in the jeans, I still wonder about the castratus issue.

 

[wildleafblower]

[msg.1]
In any case, you continually act appalled and tell me the Magisterium has spoken. I’ve been warned countless times not to read any number of things about liberation and feminist theology. And I understand if you strictly follow what you understand as Church dogma, you have every right.

Hi SpiritMeadow

SpiritMeadow, you stated in message 1, “I’ve been warned countless times not to read any number of things about liberation and feminist theology.”

It would be helpful to me to review the links on Catholic.com, prior to your posting here in message number 1, where you [SpiritMeadow] were **warned **not to read any number of things about liberation and feminist theology. And would you please be specific as to letting me know who the “YOU” is that you are referring to in your message number 1 instead stating, “I know most of you are conservative to very conservative.” By the way, how can you know beforehand who is conservative unless you are suggesting that you only desire conservatives to participate in this discussion. How do you [SpiritMeadow] measure a ‘very’ conservative to that of a conservative? What’s your definition of a conservative?

 

[jmcrae]

There must be some discretion on the part of the bishop; my diocese has deaf and blind priests, and one who is missing a leg. So missing some parts is a bigger deal than missing other parts.

How in the world do they perform their duties?

I see my priests climbing around on the roof of the Church to change the seasonal decorations, etc., especially around Christmas time - and how does the guy with only one leg chase after people who try to steal the Eucharist?