I was tempted to Post this under Non-Catholic Religions

[emsvetich]

There have been several contentious topics in recent weeks that have really brought home to me the deep divisions among Catholics. The debacle in St. Louis with the excommunicated St. Stan’s parish, arguments about the Fatima Secrets, homosexuality,homosexual priests, heterodox parish priests and Bishops are just several that come to mind. I have been surprised at the level of rancor from both sides of any of these discussions/ arguments. The moderators have my respect for their restraint. Truth is relevant. It depends on an individuals’ take on a specific situation. Comments such as ( and I am paraphrasing) “I don’t care what the Pope says, in my opinion…” or “The archbishop has no authority to excommunicate St. Stan’s board and defiant parishioners” bring me up short. Who is in charge here? It reminds me of trying to reason with a 13 year old. Facts are irrelevant. Authority is irrelevant! I want to do what I want to do! You can’t make me!

If Catholics ( I don’t know if it should be spelled with a “C” or a small “c” as in non-catholic) cannot or will not even bring themselves to acknowledge the authority of the Pope or an Archbishop who is a recognized Canon Law scholar to make pronouncements regarding faith and morals or other determinations that affect our Catholic faith, where are we moving to as Catholics? I am old enough to remember when every clergy was treated with respect and when the Pope spoke for everyone who was Catholic. Scandals notwithstanding, how can anyone who claims to be Catholic refuse to recognize true Catholic authority and justify their disrespect by prefacing their comments by stating “In my opinion” ? When did this become a democracy? Why do we feel that we are better qualified to address theological or Canon Law questions than Rome is? Virtually every dialogue quickly degenerates into two opposing camps.

“In my opinion” is something that distingusihes every protestant denomination-all 30,000 and growing daily of them. How does that have any place in the Catholic Church established by Jesus almost 2000 years ago? “In my opinion”, or similar phrases should make us all realize that the Catholic Church has gotten much smaller in these secular times. Are many still claiming membership simply because they haven’t the courage to leave or do some just like to argue?

I am old school I guess. I have faith in the Church-warts and all. Is that what distinguishes the opposing camps, faith? I don’t have the answers, but I trust that when I have a question I can get one definitive answer from the Church rather than by putting it to a vote.

 

[Isaiah4031]

I hear you, emsvetich. In addition of “in my opinion” I also hear “we are ALL church”… implying, I guess, that the fact that “we are ALL church” imparts some special authority to the laity.

I live in the Diocese of LaCrosse (Wisconsin), which you may know is the diocese where Raymond Burke was bishop before he was appointed to St. Louis. He was frequently criticized by Catholics of this diocese for some of the actions he took while bishop here, and still gets spoken of disdainfully when news of St. Stans gets published in the local paper. Recently, a priest was installed at our parish who is orthodox, and he has come under fire at times as well. While their disagreements with Church authority bothers me, what bothers me more is the disrespect shown for our priests and bishops.

Last summer I completed the diocese’s Lay Formation program. Its two years of faith enrichment. During that program one of the instructors said that the number one impediment to a truly spiritual life is not trusting God. Two promises that Jesus made that I think a lot of Catholics have forgotten, or ignore, or maybe just don’t know, is that (1) when he made Peter the rock on which He would build His church, He said the gates of hell will not prevail against it, and (2) that He will be with us to the end of the age. So, if we really believe in Jesus, we have no reason not to have faith in the Church and her leaders (warts and all, as you put it).

So, I remain faithful, pray, and, I hope, evangelize by example.

 

[Toni]

Isaiah4031:

. Two promises that Jesus made that I think a lot of Catholics have forgotten, or ignore, or maybe just don’t know, is that (1) when he made Peter the rock on which He would build His church, He said the gates of hell will not prevail against it, and (2) that He will be with us to the end of the age. So, if we really believe in Jesus, we have no reason not to have faith in the Church and her leaders (warts and all, as you put it).

So, I remain faithful, pray, and, I hope, evangelize by example.

Good answer.
Our church has been through worse and has survived. My faith is simple I just keep it. I could not be more thankful to my parents for raising me in the Catholic faith, despite all the problems. We have the greatest gift in the Eucharist and the sacraments.

 

[findinghumility]

Papal authority was relinquished about 40 years ago. The modernism of John XXIII, Paul VI and so forth allowed this to happen by breaking with the (capital “T”) Traditions of the historic Church.

Collegiality has been encouraged by these modernist popes. When you allow this, you get dissent. You get “so called” catholic Colleges that teach what used to be called, “heresy”. You get Bishops who openly promote homosexuality (more heresy). You get the overwhelming majority of parish priests who disregard documents like Redemptionis Sacramentum and believe that the mass is their own and is open to improvisation.

And then, we “Conservative” catholics sit around scratching our heads wondering why these things keep going on. Well, I have found a Mass where the abominations are not found. Where rubrics are followed. Where reverence for God (NOT respect for persons) is the norm. No, we don’t follow the current pope, but then neither does any of the Novus Ordo clergy nor does most of the Novus Ordo laity (except for the fraction of the laity who deem themselves to be “Conservative” and are fighting to stop the abuses).

This has nothing to do with “my opinion” this has everthing to do with following the Traditional teachings of the One True Church of Christ. In fact, I had to overcome the “my opinion” problem in order to make the conversion.

 

[bear06]

OK, I’d like to give this a stab. We could respond to this poster or we could just ignore. We could try and argue with FH but what’s the point. I’ll ignore if you will.

 

[findinghumility]

Oh boy, the old, “i’ll ignore you” response? A very profound way to discuss an issue and get to the truth of the matter. Why not “respond”? Isn’t that what these posts are about?

The insinuation is that my opinion is not valid. Then explain why with logic. For almost a decade, I discussed the “abuse issues” with several N.O. priests and got nowhere. I took the Keating advice and “shopped” around for a more conservative parish even going so far as to sell my house and move to where I thought I had found one. Just to find the same situation. The bottom line is I shouldn’t EVER have to “shop” to find a true Mass. Prior to V2, a Catholic could travel anywhere and attend Masses with hardly any variances. Now even within’ a single N.O. parish there are socalled Traditional masses in the morning on Sunday and Contemporary masses afternoon, with the kids RocknRoll mass in the evening.

Please, by all means, tell me where I’m off base here.

 

[paramedicgirl]

findinghumility:

Oh boy, the old, “i’ll ignore you” response? A very profound way to discuss an issue and get to the truth of the matter. Why not “respond”? Isn’t that what these posts are about?

The insinuation is that my opinion is not valid. Then explain why with logic. For almost a decade, I discussed the “abuse issues” with several N.O. priests and got nowhere. I took the Keating advice and “shopped” around for a more conservative parish even going so far as to sell my house and move to where I thought I had found one. Just to find the same situation. The bottom line is I shouldn’t EVER have to “shop” to find a true Mass. Prior to V2, a Catholic could travel anywhere and attend Masses with hardly any variances. Now even within’ a single N.O. parish there are socalled Traditional masses in the morning on Sunday and Contemporary masses afternoon, with the kids RocknRoll mass in the evening.

Please, by all means, tell me where I’m off base here.

You make some valid points about what is wrong in the church today. There is definitely dissention and the Catholic colleges and schools do not all follow Church teachings. Some of them have even been stripped of their Catholic status.

Where I think you are wrong is in your unwillingness to acknowledge the Pope. As a previous poster said, we must remember that Jesus promised the gates of hell will not prevail against the church, and that Jesus will be with us until the end of time. I truly believe this. God has allowed the Church to be tried, but He will prevail. It would be heretical to not obey or follow the Popes. Pope Benedict XVI is the best possible man to lead the church through the current times. Have faith.

 

[TOME]

I don’t know where my response will lead, however, I would like to point out a couple of things.

First, I constantly see the mistake we (all of us at one point or another) make confusing “Tradition” and tradition. When the term Tradition is used it is suppose to refer to the Apostolic Tradition. This is the teaching of the Church which has it beginnings in the Apostles’ experience of Jesus of history through the Christ of the Resurrection and continuing with the “Commission of the Apostles” given by Christ at the end of Matthew. This Tradition was handed down in time through the Fathers of the Church and celebrated and proclaimed through the Liturgy and preserved the the Apostolic succession of the bishops of the Church through our doctrines and dogmas.

the tradition(s) of the Church is the Church’s practices over a period of time but is not the Apostolic Tradition even though it is used as such. The Triditine Rite is not the Apostolic Tradition nor is the Novus Ordo, these are the mean or metrix by which the Apostolic Tradition is celebrated and publicly proclaimed.

So it is wrong to say that the NO breaks Tradition, it does not because it is the Rite chosen by the those whose responsibility is to preserve the actual Apostolic Tradition (The Pope and bishops in union with the Pope) acting in authority given them by Christ Jesus’ Himself.

I read a reference to how the NO changed the tradition of the Church. Again, this statement is inaccurate in what it implies and also historically. As pointed out above, it doesn’t chance the Apostolic Tradition (the REAL Tradition of the Church). Nor does it reflect the changes the liturgy itself has constantly gone through from the time of the Apostles to the present. For example even in the TLR underwent revisions through out the years such as the prohibitions on the type of music to be used during the mass which came about in the late 19th or early 20th centuries or the fact that until the 20th century the readings were always done in Latin not English (of coarse I am refering to the Mass here in America).

So, I think that it is important that we as Catholics get a clearer understanding of what is meant by Tradition (Apostolic) and tradition (a long established practice that may be changed).

 

[pira114]

I understand the OP’s frustration with the “in my opinion” crowd. But I think it really depends on what you’re talking about.

If it’s a subject that cannot be changed, then the opinions don’t amount to much. Law is law.

But, if it’s the type of law that can be changed by the Church when it sees fit, then opinions might matter. Or at least they are relevant.

That’s just my opinion anyway.