Is it just me?

[catharina]

I know I have seen posters respond to an original poster with lots of Catechism quotes, or “harsher” calls to penitence and following the teachings…when a quick peek at the user’s profile shows the OP is an atheist, or a Wiccan, or ____. Talk about missing the target!

Another thing I have learned the hard way in real life (but I’m glad I learned) is that some people have a very personally vested interest in certain topics. Over reaction, angry reactions or crazy reactions might not be just an evil or weird person on the computer. They might actually be someone who is hurting very much and responding out of hurt and unhealed trauma.

For example, I find that the most outspoken and plain crazy prochoice protestors are those who have suffered abortion. They are lashing out in anger and hate and unhappiness. No amount of reasoning or responding with anger will do anything.

Except my posts on school and marriage, I remain naive and inexperienced in most topics on this forum, so I have the ability to not be emotionally connected to such topics as divorce, infidelity, death of a child, abortion, euthanasia, homosexuality et al. But, everyone, let’s remember that someone might have a very close connection to a very traumatic issue.

I do understand that many folks are personally invested in certain topics. At the same time, Jesus tells us to welcome the stranger. This forum is least likely to do so. Instead people seem to anticipate an attack where none is intended or planned. It’s an absolute contradiction of what should happen for people to learn to respect tradition. How did it come to this? Why is this so?

 

[catharina]

What better place to vent than here? Here I find comfort to know that I am not alone. It is a good feeling to know that there are other Catholics that have had enough with irreverence.5 years ago I would have been shocked to read what many say on this site about the Mass. But not anymore.
Catharina, maybe you are one of the lucky ones. Maybe your parish Church has never had a priest removed because of an improper relationship and maybe your Mass is reverent.
When my parish priest told the congregation that we would no longer genuflect before entering the pew, I knew that something wasn’t right. For years I accepted the cross above the altar without the body of Christ, I accepted the fact that there was no tabernacle in the sanctuary or anywhere in view, I accepted the church without any statues, I accepted the fact that that nothing around me looked Catholic.
I accepted the four altar girls, I accepted accepted 8 EMHC when none were needed, I accepted the silly homilies and the applause during Mass. But then I woke up.
I began to read about how the New Mass was created, how the *Constitution on the Liturgy *was ignored, how communion in the hand and EMHC actually started.
I am not talking about conspiracy theories. I am talking fact. I was shocked after reading The Rhine flows into the Tiber about how liberal bishops and theologians took over the council. Shocked to see how so many at the Council believed that the Virgin Mary was a threat to ecumenism and she should be marginalized. I felt ill after reading *Good-bye Good Men *about the homosexual seminaries. That book verified what I had been told in 1985 by a young man that left the seminary because of the homosexual agenda. He left the Church completely.
And let me say I am disappointed that Pope John Paul did nothing about it.Pope Benedict is trying to restore reverence in the Mass and he is finding strong resistance. Liberalism is a threat that he is fighting at every level. Catholics need a place to vent. What better place than here, in full view, where all the issues can be discussed.
By the way, I was born in 1950

Maria, surely you misspoke. I don’'t believe in luck and I’m certain you don’t either.

However, I do count myself among the blessed in terms of parishes. Technically, I had a choice of three. I chose the one closest to home. The previous pastor at my parish was indeed removed and prosecuted for sexual abuse of a child (an altar boy). That the Church took action is a great blessing and an associate priest was hounded endlessly for having the morals and fortitude to turn in his pastor. I can’t imagine the ongoing wound to his soul. (His greatest “fault” was turning to the public prosecutor when the archdiocese refuse to act in the first place.

You are depending upon “facts” that spring from the disgruntled - including one who has left the Church. I am thankful that the Papacy stands - in my lifetime as in yours: Pius XII, John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II and now Benedict XVI. I have NO personal issues or wishes as to what they might have done, should have done or di, in fact, do. I’m am completely unworthy by grace and standing to make such judgments - never having been Pope.

To me, it’s that simple.

Perhaps the fact that I was already studying in an exremely conservative Roman Catholic university when the Documents of Vatican II became available and therefore I was taught the documents in the most reverent way. In other words, I never fell asleep. The Church has enemies now as it has always had enemies.

I couldn’t care less what this or that presumptious individual says about marginalizing Mary or liberal theologians. The FACT is that the Church has never taught that; the Church remains my mother, my teacher, my sanctuary. Those who doubt her holiness are as nothing to me.

 

[stmaria]

I couldn’t care less what this or that presumptious individual says about marginalizing Mary or liberal theologians

 

[Pious_Mat]

Good post, Catharina.

I know I was a bit snappy earlier in this post, but I’d like to change my tune, and explain by saying that I whenever someone has asked me a question in this forum, I typically answer charitably, and try my best to live the Tradition I love, and the precepts of Vatican 2, which I think in themselves are marvellous. It’s kind of annoying have to take the flak for the few rotten apples in the TC forum.

That said, I’d like to say that patience is a virtue, and over the past year I’ve learned to be far more patient with my NO Parish, and with my NO pastor, who actually isn’t such a bad guy. He may have seemed liberal and unconcerned with the things important to me at first, but when I started delving deeper, I found that he was concerned, but had a rather crafty way of dealing with them, and was often forced not to deal with them due to a sort of “political” pressure within the parish. His Mass is a very plain OF one, but it contains no liturgical abuses, and whenever he and I discuss liturgy, we always come up with more common points than opposing ones. Also, even when I’m at an OF Mass that is quite irrevent, I try to focus on the fact that the Blessed Sacrament is up there, and even if some more liberal people don’t like it, all the irreverence in the world isn’t going to change that. That doesn’t mean, however, that I’m not going to try to stop these abuses from happening.

Also, Vatican 2 is still a spring chicken. It takes a long time to implement an ecumenical council. In the instance of our beloved Trent, it took about 100 years for the last of the reforms (seminary reforms) to really take hold. We’re all a little disillusioned about the time frame, because the last council before V2, Vatican 1, was a rare exception, and seemed to fit right in its place on the shelf the day after it was closed.

Most of us probably won’t even be alive to really see the Council come to fruition.

Mat.

 

[catharina]

catharina;3303037:

.

Father Ralph Wiltgren was a “presumptious individual?”
You know nothing about him. He was pro-council. he was a simple priest/journalist that was there and wrote what he saw. It is obvious that you don’t want to know anything that might upset you.

Is he a presumptious individual? I have no idea. Most of those who deride Vatican II (on both extremes) do tend to come across as presumptious individuals. What I do know about Father Wiltgren is that he is one man and he has given one man’s opinions. I have a very serious problem with those who attain cult-like status for their criticisms.

It might have been more helpful if you’d responded to more of my post than this singular point - but then it does seem that some doors are always about to be slammed closed…

 

[catharina]

Good post, Catharina.

I know I was a bit snappy earlier in this post, but I’d like to change my tune, and explain by saying that I whenever someone has asked me a question in this forum, I typically answer charitably, and try my best to live the Tradition I love, and the precepts of Vatican 2, which I think in themselves are marvellous. It’s kind of annoying have to take the flak for the few rotten apples in the TC forum.

That said, I’d like to say that patience is a virtue, and over the past year I’ve learned to be far more patient with my NO Parish, and with my NO pastor, who actually isn’t such a bad guy. He may have seemed liberal and unconcerned with the things important to me at first, but when I started delving deeper, I found that he was concerned, but had a rather crafty way of dealing with them, and was often forced not to deal with them due to a sort of “political” pressure within the parish. His Mass is a very plain OF one, but it contains no liturgical abuses, and whenever he and I discuss liturgy, we always come up with more common points than opposing ones. Also, even when I’m at an OF Mass that is quite irrevent, I try to focus on the fact that the Blessed Sacrament is up there, and even if some more liberal people don’t like it, all the irreverence in the world isn’t going to change that. That doesn’t mean, however, that I’m not going to try to stop these abuses from happening.

Also, Vatican 2 is still a spring chicken. It takes a long time to implement an ecumenical council. In the instance of our beloved Trent, it took about 100 years for the last of the reforms (seminary reforms) to really take hold. We’re all a little disillusioned about the time frame, because the last council before V2, Vatican 1, was a rare exception, and seemed to fit right in its place on the shelf the day after it was closed.

Most of us probably won’t even be alive to really see the Council come to fruition.

Mat.

Thank you, Mat. Frankly, if you’ve ever been snappish with me, you couldn’t prove it by me. Literally, I have no memory of it.

I agree the time of post-Vatican II is still in the process of unfolding. There is no doubt that it addressed a world of rapid delivery of international news and international travel and a greater diversity in many previously stable populations. Such facts are hugely relevant to the focus of Vatican II and I believe we must be grateful for it even if we acknowledge that we can’t fully understand it. Amazingly, I have no sense of disillusionment that could be atrributed to Vatican. Thanks be to God! and (repeating myself) Deo gratias!

 

[stmaria]

Is he a presumptious individual? I have no idea. Most of those who deride Vatican II (on both extremes) do tend to come across as presumptious individuals.

What I do know about Father Wiltgren is that he is one man and he has given one man’s opinions. I have a very serious problem with those who attain cult-like status for their criticisms.

 

[catharina]

catharina;3303133:

Is he a presumptious individual? I have no idea. Most of those who deride Vatican II (on both extremes) do tend to come across as presumptious individuals.

But you are assuming something that isn’t true. It wasn’t his opinion. Because he was a priest he had access to all of the notes and documents. He recorded interviews and put them in his book. It was he who suggested to Pope Paul that non-christians come to the Council. Again, he loved and praised the Council. That is why his book cannot be judged as being written by someone with an agenda. It is a history of what actually took place at Vatican II. You should read it.

Sorry, but I had nothing else to say

Actually, I’m assuming nothing. One man’s report is one man’s report.

Regarding “nothing else to say” - hmmm - you still believe I’ve been “lucky” then?

 

[stmaria]

=catharina;3303188]

Actually, I’m assuming nothing. One man’s report is one man’s report.

Actually you are assuming that Father Wiltgen is a “presumptious individual” because he writes what you consider to be a negative observation of Vatican II. I understand that you don’t want to hear anything negative about the Church. For me and many others we want to stay informed and are not afraid of the truth. You are perfectly happy with your situation. But not all are as “lucky” as you

Regarding “nothing else to say” - hmmm - you still believe I’ve been “lucky” then?

Yes you are lucky to have a Mass that is celebrated with reverence. Many are not. I left my parish and now I have to drive a great distance to attend the Traditional Mass. On Holy Days I make a point to go to various parishes in hope of finding a reverent Mass of the Ordinary Form. Out of ten, I have found two. The others are all lacking, all are celebrated differently. The last two have been the worst. No elevation of the host or chalice and no bells rung at the consecration among other things. At one of them the EMHC gave communion from large salad bowls. Maybe you like that. I don’t. I consider it a lack of sacredness.

 

[catharina]

Actually you are assuming that Father Wiltgen is a “presumptious individual” because he writes what you consider to be a negative observation of Vatican II. I understand that you don’t want to hear anything negative about the Church. For me and many others we want to stay informed and are not afraid of the truth. You are perfectly happy with your situation. But not all are as “lucky” as you

Yes you are lucky to have a Mass that is celebrated with reverence.

**Maria, I’m Catholic. I don’t believe in luck. **
I’m sure your Father Wiltgren doesn’t believe in luck either.

Many are not. I left my parish and now I have to drive a great distance to attend the Traditional Mass. On Holy Days I make a point to go to various parishes in hope of finding a reverent Mass of the Ordinary Form. Out of ten, I have found two. The others are all lacking, all are celebrated differently. The last two have been the worst. No elevation of the host or chalice and no bells rung at the consecration among other things. At one of them the EMHC gave communion from large salad bowls. Maybe you like that. I don’t. I consider it a lack of sacredness.

**What a horribly perverse and untrue comment. **
Then again, you believe in luck so who knows what else you might believe.

 

[stmaria]

STMaria quote
At one of them the EMHC gave communion from large salad bowls. Maybe you like that. I don’t. I consider it a lack of sacredness.

=catharina;3304274]
What a horribly perverse and untrue comment.
Then again, you believe in luck so who knows what else you might believe.

What is horribly perverse? The salad bowls? I agree. I have no idea what you consider to be reverent and what isn’t. This parish priest has no problem with it.
What else do I believe? I believe that the Church has been in a crisis the last forty years and many, like you, refuse to believe it. The priest shortage is an undeniable fact that things are not right in Holy Mother Church.

 

[catharina]

What is horribly perverse? The salad bowls? I agree. I have no idea what you consider to be reverent and what isn’t. This parish priest has no problem with it. What else do I believe? I believe that the Church has been in a crisis the last forty years and many, like you, refuse to believe it. The priest shortage is an undeniable fact that things are not right in Holy Mother Church.

What is perverse is your suggestion that maybe I like it.
Perverse. Untrue. Wildly uncharitable. Un-Christian.

Many of us have been fully aware of crisis in the Church for all of those forty years. We did NOT suddenly “wake up” five years ago and go on a personal mission to attack the faith of others.

 

[catharina]

PS to Maria. Believing in luck is indeed “un-sacred.”

One believes in Jesus Christ or one believes in luck.

The two beliefs cannot exist together.
Maybe I won’t have to repeat that again. Maybe.

 

[stmaria]

=catharina;3304326]What is perverse is your suggestion that maybe I like it.
Perverse. Untrue. Wildly uncharitable. Un-Christian.

Oh Please… I don’t know anything about you. There are those that like those kind of things in the Mass.

Many of us have been fully aware of crisis in the Church for all of those forty years. We did NOT suddenly “wake up” five years ago and go on a personal mission to attack the faith of others.

No one is on a personal mission. No one is attacking your faith. You need to have thicker skin if you are going to come on the Traditional Forum and post your viewpoint.

]

 

[stmaria]

=catharina;3304354]PS to Maria. Believing in luck is indeed “un-sacred.”

One believes in Jesus Christ or one believes in luck.

The two beliefs cannot exist together.
Maybe I won’t have to repeat that again. Maybe.

Thank you. I will tell that to the priest in my next confession.

 

[catharina]

Oh Please… I don’t know anything about you. There are those that like those kind of things in the Mass.

No one is on a personal mission. No one is attacking your faith. You need to have thicker skin if you are going to come on the Traditional Forum and post your viewpoint.

]

maria, sorry to say that I remember quite of few of your previous posts in various threads wherein you took great issue with the Holy Father. As a result, I’m less than inclined to trust your viewpoint regarding anything.

If you don’t recognize that you often sound like you’re on the attack - and will even target Popes on an otherwise slow day - then that’s your problem, not mine.

Maybe you’ll get “lucky” soon and change your approach.

 

[catharina]

Thank you. I will tell that to the priest in my next confession.

Maybe you’ll ask your priest about it.
You can’t be guilty of holding the belief in luck if you didn’t know it’s wrong.

 

[Irish_Saints]

1 Peter 3

**8 **And in fine, be ye all of one mind, having compassion one of another, being lovers of the brotherhood, merciful, modest, humble:

**9 **Not rendering evil for evil, nor railing for railing, but contrariwise, blessing: for unto this are you called, that you may inherit a blessing.

**10 **For he that will love life, and see good days, let him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no guile.

**11 **Let him decline from evil, and do good: let him seek after peace and pursue it:

**12 **Because the eyes of the Lord are upon the just, and his ears unto their prayers: but the countenance of the Lord upon them that do evil things.

**13 **And who is he that can hurt you, if you be zealous of good?

**14 **But if also you suffer any thing for justice’ sake, blessed are ye. And be not afraid of their fear, and be not troubled.

**15 **But sanctify the Lord Christ in your hearts, being ready always to satisfy every one that asketh you a reason of that hope which is in you.

**16 **But with modesty and fear, having a good conscience: that whereas they speak evil of you, they may be ashamed who falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ.

**17 **For it is better doing well (if such be the will of God) to suffer, than doing ill.

Almighty God and Father, may I have these words of your servant, Peter, suffused throughout my being and sown deep in the fallow ground of my heart. Too often I am guilty of speaking words in anger, despite my intense desire to only convey your goodness and grace. Grant, O Lord, that I should speak no word at all rather than speaking your Truth with a spirit of malace toward my neighbor. Through Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, now and forever. Amen.

I just needed to say that. Please forgive my rash words.

 

[stmaria]

=catharina;3304397]maria, sorry to say that I remember quite of few of your previous posts in various threads wherein you took great issue with the Holy Father. As a result, I’m less than inclined to trust your viewpoint regarding anything.

Yes I was very disappointed that Pope John Paul participated at Assisi. Disappointed that he allowed non-Catholics to receive communion, even with so-called restrictions. let’s not forget that President Bill Clinton received communion in 1998 while in mortal sin thanks to this change] Disappointed in the way he handled the priest scandals, disappointed in the way he held back the Traditional Mass disappointed that he approved of Mass without the words of Consecration and disappointed that speaking of conversion to the Catholic Chuch was not one of his priorities.

Maybe you’ll get “lucky” soon and change your approach.

Not a chance

 

[brotherhrolf]

I have to admit I had classmates who were overjoyed by what happened in 67-69. But I still maintain that there were large numbers of us who did not. As an anthropologist, (Lord I would have loved to have conducted some interviews in 69) - not only my classmates but my neighbors. Ten of the fourteen families on my block were Catholic - but it was New Orleans and our self righteous brothers and sisters would not doubt find fault with that.