Is there anything I /we can DO about liberal Catholic theology in the Church?

[ANNE_2]

Yes, it is.

vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a2.htm

Catechism of the Catholic Church

The Magisterium of the Church

85 "The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ."47 This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/motu_proprio/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio_22071998_apostolos-suos_en.html

By itself the USCCB is NOT the Magisterium.

Further the Pope is only infallible in matters of Faith and Morals, - not scientific, historical political, philosophical, geographic or any other matters.

Both the CCC and Canon Code are correct.
Many times in the US we see statements from the USCCB supporting fake Global Warming, the DREAM Act, being involved in the budget of the USA, etc.
It was only this year that the USCCB formed a committee to scrutinize USCCB (CCHD) contributions that were providing funds to organizations that supported abortions, contraception and the gay lifestyle.

The USCCB many times also forgets to incorporate SUBSIDIARITY (CCC 1883, 1885, 1894 & 2209) into its appropriate Statements, and the responsibility of the individual.
Other times they have not been clear regarding the details of OBAMACARE, which supports socialised medicines for all - whether wanted or needed by individuals or not and thus usurping free will with the Govenment making health care decisions for all.

And sometimes they get involved in and promote politics that have nothing to do with Saving Souls or the Fundamental Rights of all Men and ONLY according to the Gospel (Mt, Mk, Lk, Jn) CCC 2245 & 2246.

In all fairness to our Bishops we must remember that (with the exception of its annual meeting which even then all US Bishops do not attend),
the USCCB is run and operated by Small Committees of Bishops along with staff made up of a few Priests and Laity.

This is why it is very important to read and use as a reference your “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition”.

 

[The_Old_Medic]

I am an officer in both the 3rd and 4th Degree Knights of Columbus. I am on the Parish Council, I am a Eucharistic Minister, a Lector, and i work with a number of other ministries in our parish.

I am not the least bit worried about “Liberal” Catholic practice. Jesus was a liberal, who advocated that people stop being ritualistic and actually get out and do things with the people. Over and over again, he told the Pharisees that being pious, following the rules exactly and doing the rituals perfectly were NOT what the Father expected.

It is amazing to me that it is exactly what Jesus preached against that is what so many “Catholics” are fighting against. The Church is reaching out to the poor, the disadvantaged, the downtrodden and those taken advantage of by society.

Yet there are still those that advocate going back to a ritualistic church, with a dead language that virtually nobody understood, one that served ONLY the faithful and let everyone else go by the wayside.

They don’t want any outreach, or any interaction, with other Christians. God forbid, the Pope is wrong, how can we make him stop this heresy?

How can we bring the Church back to the dark ages, back to when the Church was under attack from all sides? How can we ensure that we Catholics are insular, and only accept ourselves and reject everyone else?

How can we once again promote only the ritual, and forget the actual meaning of the liturgies?

That is what the “Conservatives” are really promoting.

I LOVE the Tridentine Mass. I converted into the Church while that WAS the only legitimate form of the Mass for the Latin Church. I learned the Latin, and what it actually meant. I learned the proper and the ordinary of the Mass. I spent time in Minor Seminary, and we studied the mass (along with a lot of other things).

I LOVE the Liturgical Music of the baroque era, and later. There is something majestic about the High (Sung) Masses of that era.

BUT, for the vast majority of Catholics, those Masses had little meaning. They did not understand the language. They didn’t have a clue about the meaning of any of it. It was ritual, just ritual, that they followed without thinking. No thinking was necessary, you just did what everyone else did.

The Church did not interact with anyone else. It was RIGHT, and everyone else was 100% wrong. That was that, and there was no reason to talk to anyone about it. We are right and you are wrong, and until you admit that you are wrong, why talk to you at all?

Well, I hate to tell you, but the Church was NOT 100% right. And not all other Christian churches were 100% wrong. And, having come out of a Protestant background myself, I can tell you that the Roman Catholic Church has a lot they can, and should, learn from our Protestant brethern.

The magesterium of the Church has acknowledged this is fact. That is why they have exumenical prayer services, why they acknowledge that true believers of those churches can go to heaven, etc.

Those that fight against these beliefs are, in effect, at war against their won church. It’s about time that they realize this.

The Church has opened up. Pope John XXIII knew that this was long overdue, and the Holy Spirit made certain that he was chosen at a perfect time to begin that process. It was wifely acknowledged that nobody really wanted him to become Pope. he was a really great guy, a scholar that loved people, he was way too old, he was a “bon-vivant”, and they wanted someone that was younger and more “traditional” to become Pope.

But, no candidate that met those criteria could get enough of a majority. Vote after vote, and no person could get enough votes. So, they turned to the “Old Man”, who wouldn’t do anything, who would just be a “caretaker”, while the other “candidates” got more support.

Well, the Holy Spirit wasn’t having any of what the Cardinals thought they were getting. Instead, he led them to elect a man who would stand the Church upside down, shake it hard, and force a lot of the dust, dirt and cobwebs of the centuries to be cleaned out. He called a Vatican Council, the first in centuries, to modernize the Church, and to bring it into the modern era.

And, the Conservatives have never forgiven him for doing that. They simply do not understand that absolutely none of the base teachings of the Church have been changed. Pope John Paul II was a conservative liturgically, but a liberal in many other ways. He reached out, to anyone and everyone, Just as Jesus had done.

And that really is the key. Does the church emulate what Jesus himself did? Or, does it withdraw once again behind its moat, and once again close itself off from the world?

Jesus never advocated withdrawal. He commissioned the Apostles to go out and convert the world. Do you really think that they never interacted with those that advocated other religions? Do you think that they didn’t provide aid to all who came, regardless of their religion?

 

[trials]

I am not the least bit worried about “Liberal” Catholic practice. Jesus was a liberal, who advocated that people stop being ritualistic and actually get out and do things with the people. Over and over again, he told the Pharisees that being pious, following the rules exactly and doing the rituals perfectly were NOT what the Father expected.

It is amazing to me that it is exactly what Jesus preached against that is what so many “Catholics” are fighting against. The Church is reaching out to the poor, the disadvantaged, the downtrodden and those taken advantage of by society.

Yet there are still those that advocate going back to a ritualistic church, with a dead language that virtually nobody understood, one that served ONLY the faithful and let everyone else go by the wayside.

They don’t want any outreach, or any interaction, with other Christians. God forbid, the Pope is wrong, how can we make him stop this heresy?

BUT, for the vast majority of Catholics, those Masses had little meaning. They did not understand the language. They didn’t have a clue about the meaning of any of it. It was ritual, just ritual, that they followed without thinking. No thinking was necessary, you just did what everyone else did.

The Church did not interact with anyone else. It was RIGHT, and everyone else was 100% wrong. That was that, and there was no reason to talk to anyone about it. We are right and you are wrong, and until you admit that you are wrong, why talk to you at all?

Well, I hate to tell you, but the Church was NOT 100% right. And not all other Christian churches were 100% wrong. And, having come out of a Protestant background myself, I can tell you that the Roman Catholic Church has a lot they can, and should, learn from our Protestant brethern.

The magesterium of the Church has acknowledged this is fact. That is why they have exumenical prayer services, why they acknowledge that true believers of those churches can go to heaven, etc.

Those that fight against these beliefs are, in effect, at war against their won church. It’s about time that they realize this.

The Church has opened up. Pope John XXIII knew that this was long overdue, and the Holy Spirit made certain that he was chosen at a perfect time to begin that process. It was wifely acknowledged that nobody really wanted him to become Pope. he was a really great guy, a scholar that loved people, he was way too old, he was a “bon-vivant”, and they wanted someone that was younger and more “traditional” to become Pope.

But, no candidate that met those criteria could get enough of a majority. Vote after vote, and no person could get enough votes. So, they turned to the “Old Man”, who wouldn’t do anything, who would just be a “caretaker”, while the other “candidates” got more support.

Well, the Holy Spirit wasn’t having any of what the Cardinals thought they were getting. Instead, he led them to elect a man who would stand the Church upside down, shake it hard, and force a lot of the dust, dirt and cobwebs of the centuries to be cleaned out. He called a Vatican Council, the first in centuries, to modernize the Church, and to bring it into the modern era.

And, the Conservatives have never forgiven him for doing that. They simply do not understand that absolutely none of the base teachings of the Church have been changed. Pope John Paul II was a conservative liturgically, but a liberal in many other ways. He reached out, to anyone and everyone, Just as Jesus had done.

And that really is the key. Does the church emulate what Jesus himself did? Or, does it withdraw once again behind its moat, and once again close itself off from the world?

Jesus never advocated withdrawal. He commissioned the Apostles to go out and convert the world. Do you really think that they never interacted with those that advocated other religions? Do you think that they didn’t provide aid to all who came, regardless of their religion?

thank you, ok, now I’m getting worried I sound like a Pharisee because I had the exact same discussion with someone else, outside of this forum, and they replied to me in the same way you have. They said there are many spiritual paths within the Church all leading in the same direction, and I should trust the Holy Spirit to do his work instead of behaving like a Pharisee and making God’s law into a legalistic kind of framework.

I accepted his criticism, since labelling people as liberals is probably not a healthy attitude, nor is focussing on the letter of the law. But now I’m wondering how to strike a balance because I still feel anguish when someone in a position of authority, contradicts doctrines in the Catechism, that is my problem, both cannot be right - surely I’m not over-reacting?

I totally agree with the outreach your talking about - Jesus was revolutionary in his ministry to the marginalised, and we need to embrace that of course.

As for the Church not being 100% right all the time, yes, we only have to look at history to know this. In fact I often think of the Church as a pilgrim on the path to Heaven, who though guided by the Holy Spirit, often veers in the wrong direction, and needs to shed behaviours / attitudes that are not healthy, such as was the case with the Reformation. Every individual pilgrim needs that. But still, we should work within the framework of the Church we have at any given time, should we not? It will never be perfect, but its Magisterial teaching needs to be wholeheartedly and universally accepted among Catholics. Base beliefs have not changed, you pointed out, and correct, they haven’t. But when Catholics preach against these base beliefs, that is surely a problem, is it not?

 

[thirddec]

thank you, ok, now I’m getting worried I sound like a Pharisee because I had the exact same discussion with someone else, outside of this forum, and they replied to me in the same way you have. They said there are many spiritual paths within the Church all leading in the same direction, and I should trust the Holy Spirit to do his work instead of behaving like a Pharisee and making God’s law into a legalistic kind of framework.

I accepted his criticism, since labelling people as liberals is probably not a healthy attitude, nor is focussing on the letter of the law. But now I’m wondering how to strike a balance because I still feel anguish when someone in a position of authority, contradicts doctrines in the Catechism, that is my problem, both cannot be right - surely I’m not over-reacting?

I totally agree with the outreach your talking about - Jesus was revolutionary in his ministry to the marginalised, and we need to embrace that of course.

As for the Church not being 100% right all the time, yes, we only have to look at history to know this. In fact I often think of the Church as a pilgrim on the path to Heaven, who though guided by the Holy Spirit, often veers in the wrong direction, and needs to shed behaviours / attitudes that are not healthy, such as was the case with the Reformation. Every individual pilgrim needs that. But still, we should work within the framework of the Church we have at any given time, should we not? It will never be perfect, but its Magisterial teaching needs to be wholeheartedly and universally accepted among Catholics. Base beliefs have not changed, you pointed out, and correct, they haven’t. But when Catholics preach against these base beliefs, that is surely a problem, is it not?

I’m weak like everyone else but if I was to behave properly when confronted by a problem like you outlined would be to ask them to fully explain their position including any clear scriptural or traditional backing they have ; then I would research fully my position and ask their opinions of what I found. I’n the mean time I would pray fot The Holy Spirits guidance and aid.

But more likely im going in their with all guns blasting

 

[Utmost]

…

As for the Church not being 100% right all the time, yes, we only have to look at history to know this. In fact I often think of the Church as a pilgrim on the path to Heaven, who though guided by the Holy Spirit, often veers in the wrong direction, and needs to shed behaviours / attitudes that are not healthy, such as was the case with the Reformation. Every individual pilgrim needs that. But still, we should work within the framework of the Church we have at any given time, should we not? It will never be perfect, but its Magisterial teaching needs to be wholeheartedly and universally accepted among Catholics. Base beliefs have not changed, you pointed out, and correct, they haven’t. But when Catholics preach against these base beliefs, that is surely a problem, is it not?

[emphasis mine]

I think the issue that *trials *is trying to address is when the Church is not following Magisterial teaching. Telling trials that the problem is him and not the people that are not following Catholic teachings is no help (see [post]7762241[/post]).

Trials, have you tried the principles outlined in Matthew 18?

[bibledrb]Matt. 18:15-17[/bibledrb]

Notice that it says *brethren * and not father, meaning fellow believers and not leaders. I think that is why God’s word says that we should call no one father (Matt 23:9-12).

Is there anything in the Canon Law that describes action that can be taken? I would think that this process of correction is very important and should be laid out in the law.

 

[Faira21]

thank you, ok, now I’m getting worried I sound like a Pharisee because I had the exact same discussion with someone else, outside of this forum, and they replied to me in the same way you have. They said there are many spiritual paths within the Church all leading in the same direction, and I should trust the Holy Spirit to do his work instead of behaving like a Pharisee and making God’s law into a legalistic kind of framework.

I accepted his criticism, since labelling people as liberals is probably not a healthy attitude, nor is focussing on the letter of the law. But now I’m wondering how to strike a balance because I still feel anguish when someone in a position of authority, contradicts doctrines in the Catechism, that is my problem, both cannot be right - surely I’m not over-reacting?

I totally agree with the outreach your talking about - Jesus was revolutionary in his ministry to the marginalised, and we need to embrace that of course.

As for the Church not being 100% right all the time, yes, we only have to look at history to know this. In fact I often think of the Church as a pilgrim on the path to Heaven, who though guided by the Holy Spirit, often veers in the wrong direction, and needs to shed behaviours / attitudes that are not healthy, such as was the case with the Reformation. Every individual pilgrim needs that. But still, we should work within the framework of the Church we have at any given time, should we not? It will never be perfect, but its Magisterial teaching needs to be wholeheartedly and universally accepted among Catholics. Base beliefs have not changed, you pointed out, and correct, they haven’t. But when Catholics preach against these base beliefs, that is surely a problem, is it not?

Please do not let anyone “shame” you into thinking you are a pharisee or something like that.

The “shame” tactic has done a lot of damage to our Church and it is a wide spread phenomenon in our culture today, not just in the Church.

I am not saying that is what the poster is doing. But I am just warning you to be on the look out for it.

This is what they do to get you on their side. They insinuate that you are a Pharisee, and then you start to doubt yourself. You think “oh my - I do not want to be a Pharisee!” No one wants to be a Pharisee - so they know you will not like that one.

Next they start insinuating that you are labeling people. You are not accepting enough. You are not tolerant. You are not kind enough. Charitable enough…on and on.

In other words, they want to make you feel bad about your position.

Eventually, because a person does not want to come across as some Pharisee who is unloving and labels people, they start doubting themselves. Then they start backing down.

Once you start backing down, it is over with.

Even if you never succomb to their way of thinking, backing down is not what the Church needs now.

No, we do not need Pharisees. We have to be on the lookout to avoid such an attitude and be very careful not to become one. And we do need to be authentically charitable and not go around name calling, etc.

But we also cannot let ourselves be shamed into silence because we allow others to judge us and say we are “Pharisees” or “not tolerant” or “labeling.”

The Church needs people to pray and practice authentic Catholicism in their lives and to be unafraid to speak up.

This cowarding in the corner and letting others shame us into thinking that if we speak up, we will be seen as not charitable enough, not tolerant enough, etc. is what has allowed so much of the faith to become watered down.

I feel for priests. Good priests who get up there and give a very authentic homily are so rare, because when they do, they probably get blasted by the other end saying “you were being intolerant.”

We need so much today for Catholics to speak up and be unafraid to defend their faith. Even if they are labeled or judged harshly.

We just cannot keep letting ourselves be shoved into the corner by those who use this shaming tactic and make us start doubting ourselves.

 

[Faira21]

Telling trials that the problem is him and not the people that are not following Catholic teachings is no help

 

[trials]

Please do not let anyone “shame” you into thinking you are a pharisee or something like that.

The “shame” tactic has done a lot of damage to our Church and it is a wide spread phenomenon in our culture today, not just in the Church.

I am not saying that is what the poster is doing. But I am just warning you to be on the look out for it.

This is what they do to get you on their side. They insinuate that you are a Pharisee, and then you start to doubt yourself. You think “oh my - I do not want to be a Pharisee!” No one wants to be a Pharisee - so they know you will not like that one.

Next they start insinuating that you are labeling people. You are not accepting enough. You are not tolerant. You are not kind enough. Charitable enough…on and on.

In other words, they want to make you feel bad about your position.

Eventually, because a person does not want to come across as some Pharisee who is unloving and labels people, they start doubting themselves. Then they start backing down.

Once you start backing down, it is over with.

Even if you never succomb to their way of thinking, backing down is not what the Church needs now.

No, we do not need Pharisees. We have to be on the lookout to avoid such an attitude and be very careful not to become one. And we do need to be authentically charitable and not go around name calling, etc.

But we also cannot let ourselves be shamed into silence because we allow others to judge us and say we are “Pharisees” or “not tolerant” or “labeling.”

The Church needs people to pray and practice authentic Catholicism in their lives and to be unafraid to speak up.

This cowarding in the corner and letting others shame us into thinking that if we speak up, we will be seen as not charitable enough, not tolerant enough, etc. is what has allowed so much of the faith to become watered down.

I feel for priests. Good priests who get up there and give a very authentic homily are so rare, because when they do, they probably get blasted by the other end saying “you were being intolerant.”

We need so much today for Catholics to speak up and be unafraid to defend their faith. Even if they are labeled or judged harshly.

We just cannot keep letting ourselves be shoved into the corner by those who use this shaming tactic and make us start doubting ourselves.

Wow, thank you. That advice is absolutely brilliant. It’s so hard isn’t it to get this balance right. I guess I need to get this balance through prayer. The Holy Spirit will know when I should speak out and when I should shut up.

 

[thirddec]

Please do not let anyone “shame” you into thinking you are a pharisee or something like that.

The “shame” tactic has done a lot of damage to our Church and it is a wide spread phenomenon in our culture today, not just in the Church.

I am not saying that is what the poster is doing. But I am just warning you to be on the look out for it.

This is what they do to get you on their side. They insinuate that you are a Pharisee, and then you start to doubt yourself. You think “oh my - I do not want to be a Pharisee!” No one wants to be a Pharisee - so they know you will not like that one.

Next they start insinuating that you are labeling people. You are not accepting enough. You are not tolerant. You are not kind enough. Charitable enough…on and on.

In other words, they want to make you feel bad about your position.

Eventually, because a person does not want to come across as some Pharisee who is unloving and labels people, they start doubting themselves. Then they start backing down.

Once you start backing down, it is over with.

Even if you never succomb to their way of thinking, backing down is not what the Church needs now.

No, we do not need Pharisees. We have to be on the lookout to avoid such an attitude and be very careful not to become one. And we do need to be authentically charitable and not go around name calling, etc.

But we also cannot let ourselves be shamed into silence because we allow others to judge us and say we are “Pharisees” or “not tolerant” or “labeling.”

The Church needs people to pray and practice authentic Catholicism in their lives and to be unafraid to speak up.

This cowarding in the corner and letting others shame us into thinking that if we speak up, we will be seen as not charitable enough, not tolerant enough, etc. is what has allowed so much of the faith to become watered down.

I feel for priests. Good priests who get up there and give a very authentic homily are so rare, because when they do, they probably get blasted by the other end saying “you were being intolerant.”

We need so much today for Catholics to speak up and be unafraid to defend their faith. Even if they are labeled or judged harshly.

We just cannot keep letting ourselves be shoved into the corner by those who use this shaming tactic and make us start doubting ourselves.

In the interests of balance I would like to point out the same shame and labeling tactic is used on both sides there are people who would claim that there way of seeing things is the authentic Catholic way so by insinuation your way must be inauthentic they would label you a Liberal because that would imply you are in the camp that somehow tolerates Abortion and all sorts of other things that have nothing to do with the point in hand so you feel shame and guilt at being in the wrong camp.

I would say be on the look out for those people in all the camps that would have you believe that they have the whole truth and are more concerned with their own agenda than the Unity of the Church. We should all strive to have the humility to listen carefully to what all our brothers and sisters have to say rather than paint them as Demons and then show them patiently where they may need to think their position further in the light of the scriptures and writings and life experiences you have. I agree the above mentioned approach to arguing is so easy to trip into ( i do often ) but often other posters remind me or I think about it later. If what we are talking about is not a Grave matter then its not wrong to agree to disagree. I hope this makes sence and doesn’t just become another excuse for arguement

 

[Faira21]

In the interests of balance I would like to point out the same shame and labeling tactic is used on both sides there are people who would claim that there way of seeing things is the authentic Catholic way so by insinuation your way must be inauthentic they would label you a Liberal because that would imply you are in the camp that somehow tolerates Abortion and all sorts of other things that have nothing to do with the point in hand so you feel shame and guilt at being in the wrong camp.

I would say be on the look out for those people in all the camps that would have you believe that they have the whole truth and are more concerned with their own agenda than the Unity of the Church. We should all strive to have the humility to listen carefully to what all our brothers and sisters have to say rather than paint them as Demons and then show them patiently where they may need to think their position further in the light of the scriptures and writings and life experiences you have. I agree the above mentioned approach to arguing is so easy to trip into ( i do often ) but often other posters remind me or I think about it later. If what we are talking about is not a Grave matter then its not wrong to agree to disagree. I hope this makes sence and doesn’t just become another excuse for arguement

I do not see how it would be an excuse for argument - I think you have valid points and I agree with most of what you say.

My only disagreement is that I believe there is an authentic Catholic Church with definite stands on important positions which all people should adhere to if they are Catholic. The whole truth is in the Catholic Faith, the problem is that today it seems very few within the Catholic faith can agree on what that truth us

But I agree with most everything you said. Some of the worst and most hurtful experiences I have had were when I was trying to honnestly dialogue with someone who thinks different than me, or trying to stand up for my faith, and then they get frustrated and start making it personal by insulting my character, person, etc. just because they do not agree (I am referring to real life encounters, not web-based).

That type of “shaming” is terrible no matter where it comes from. As someone who has always tried to stand up for my faith though, I have encountered it a lot and while I should be used to it, one can never get used to being put down as a person when trying to share/debate their beliefs with others.

 

[Highwayhound]

I do not see how it would be an excuse for argument - I think you have valid points and I agree with most of what you say.

My only disagreement is that I believe there is an authentic Catholic Church with definite stands on important positions which all people should adhere to if they are Catholic. The whole truth is in the Catholic Faith, the problem is that today it seems very few within the Catholic faith can agree on what that truth us

But I agree with most everything you said. Some of the worst and most hurtful experiences I have had were when I was trying to honnestly dialogue with someone who thinks different than me, or trying to stand up for my faith, and then they get frustrated and start making it personal by insulting my character, person, etc. just because they do not agree (I am referring to real life encounters, not web-based).

That type of “shaming” is terrible no matter where it comes from. As someone who has always tried to stand up for my faith though, I have encountered it a lot and while I should be used to it, one can never get used to being put down as a person when trying to share/debate their beliefs with others.

I am not sure where you are in your walk with Christ. I will let you know that when I learned a deep humility and love of God if was then that all these issues disappeared from my life. If anyone can look upon others as a child of God then it becomes a simple matter to look upon them with love. All their insults, protests, etc. simply fall by the wayside.

God bless

 

[RobbyS]

I am an officer in both the 3rd and 4th Degree Knights of Columbus. I am on the Parish Council, I am a Eucharistic Minister, a Lector, and i work with a number of other ministries in our parish.

I am not the least bit worried about “Liberal” Catholic practice. Jesus was a liberal, who advocated that people stop being ritualistic and actually get out and do things with the people. Over and over again, he told the Pharisees that being pious, following the rules exactly and doing the rituals perfectly were NOT what the Father expected.

It is amazing to me that it is exactly what Jesus preached against that is what so many “Catholics” are fighting against. The Church is reaching out to the poor, the disadvantaged, the downtrodden and those taken advantage of by society.

Yet there are still those that advocate going back to a ritualistic church, with a dead language that virtually nobody understood, one that served ONLY the faithful and let everyone else go by the wayside.

They don’t want any outreach, or any interaction, with other Christians. God forbid, the Pope is wrong, how can we make him stop this heresy?

;;;;;;’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’
And, the Conservatives have never forgiven him for doing that. They simply do not understand that absolutely none of the base teachings of the Church have been changed. Pope John Paul II was a conservative liturgically, but a liberal in many other ways. He reached out, to anyone and everyone, Just as Jesus had done.

And that really is the key. Does the church emulate what Jesus himself did? Or, does it withdraw once again behind its moat, and once again close itself off from the world?

Jesus never advocated withdrawal. He commissioned the Apostles to go out and convert the world. Do you really think that they never interacted with those that advocated other religions? Do you think that they didn’t provide aid to all who came, regardless of their religion?

Just read this. No, Jesus was NOT a liberal OR a conservative. But “Old Medic” is naive if he thinks the liturgical reforms of the post VII period have been profitable to the Church. Back in 1960, I was a “commonwealth” Catholic who welcomed liturgical reform. But I was --like Jacques Maritain, my hero–quite content to see the Mass translated into English. But it is not simply true according to my experience to say that for most Catholics the mass was an empty ritual. The majority of Catholics attended mass not because the Church MADE them but because they knew that they owed God this duty and that God was present. Everything lent itself to worship: the architecture, the ritual, the sacred language, and of course the silence. As for the people, today they are better educated in a worldly sense, but back in the’50s many more were better catechicized. Only a believer in “progressive” education despised rote learning. Does OM really think that the vapid religious education of the '70s and '80s was better than what the sisters used to teach?

To be sure, that trainign was little help when the Church itself because to "change"everything it seemed. But we have to notice that the reforms did not make the people more aware of Catholic teachings. Rather they made the Church seem almost methodist in its indifference to theology. The almost crazed experimentation with the liturgy, represented a break with the past. And it did not keep millions from abandoining the Church. If there is anything that it is UNCATHOLIC it is to suggest that we needed to do this.
Myself, I went for decades hoping for the best. It was not until --I guess the early '90s that it occured to me that things had not gone welll. That it was not a good thing for the American Church to sound very much like the Democratic Party at prayer. OM seems to think that the Gospel can be reduced nto the social gospel.

 

[TrueLight]

I am an officer in both the 3rd and 4th Degree Knights of Columbus. I am on the Parish Council, I am a Eucharistic Minister, a Lector, and i work with a number of other ministries in our parish.

I am not the least bit worried about “Liberal” Catholic practice. Jesus was a liberal, who advocated that people stop being ritualistic and actually get out and do things with the people. Over and over again, he told the Pharisees that being pious, following the rules exactly and doing the rituals perfectly were NOT what the Father expected.

It is amazing to me that it is exactly what Jesus preached against that is what so many “Catholics” are fighting against. The Church is reaching out to the poor, the disadvantaged, the downtrodden and those taken advantage of by society.

Yet there are still those that advocate going back to a ritualistic church, with a dead language that virtually nobody understood, one that served ONLY the faithful and let everyone else go by the wayside.

They don’t want any outreach, or any interaction, with other Christians. God forbid, the Pope is wrong, how can we make him stop this heresy?

How can we bring the Church back to the dark ages, back to when the Church was under attack from all sides? How can we ensure that we Catholics are insular, and only accept ourselves and reject everyone else?

How can we once again promote only the ritual, and forget the actual meaning of the liturgies?

That is what the “Conservatives” are really promoting.

I LOVE the Tridentine Mass. I converted into the Church while that WAS the only legitimate form of the Mass for the Latin Church. I learned the Latin, and what it actually meant. I learned the proper and the ordinary of the Mass. I spent time in Minor Seminary, and we studied the mass (along with a lot of other things).

I LOVE the Liturgical Music of the baroque era, and later. There is something majestic about the High (Sung) Masses of that era.

BUT, for the vast majority of Catholics, those Masses had little meaning. They did not understand the language. They didn’t have a clue about the meaning of any of it. It was ritual, just ritual, that they followed without thinking. No thinking was necessary, you just did what everyone else did.

The Church did not interact with anyone else. It was RIGHT, and everyone else was 100% wrong. That was that, and there was no reason to talk to anyone about it. We are right and you are wrong, and until you admit that you are wrong, why talk to you at all?

Well, I hate to tell you, but the Church was NOT 100% right. And not all other Christian churches were 100% wrong. And, having come out of a Protestant background myself, I can tell you that the Roman Catholic Church has a lot they can, and should, learn from our Protestant brethern.

The magesterium of the Church has acknowledged this is fact. That is why they have exumenical prayer services, why they acknowledge that true believers of those churches can go to heaven, etc.

Those that fight against these beliefs are, in effect, at war against their won church. It’s about time that they realize this.

The Church has opened up. Pope John XXIII knew that this was long overdue, and the Holy Spirit made certain that he was chosen at a perfect time to begin that process. It was wifely acknowledged that nobody really wanted him to become Pope. he was a really great guy, a scholar that loved people, he was way too old, he was a “bon-vivant”, and they wanted someone that was younger and more “traditional” to become Pope.

But, no candidate that met those criteria could get enough of a majority. Vote after vote, and no person could get enough votes. So, they turned to the “Old Man”, who wouldn’t do anything, who would just be a “caretaker”, while the other “candidates” got more support.

Well, the Holy Spirit wasn’t having any of what the Cardinals thought they were getting. Instead, he led them to elect a man who would stand the Church upside down, shake it hard, and force a lot of the dust, dirt and cobwebs of the centuries to be cleaned out. He called a Vatican Council, the first in centuries, to modernize the Church, and to bring it into the modern era.

And, the Conservatives have never forgiven him for doing that. They simply do not understand that absolutely none of the base teachings of the Church have been changed. Pope John Paul II was a conservative liturgically, but a liberal in many other ways. He reached out, to anyone and everyone, Just as Jesus had done.

And that really is the key. Does the church emulate what Jesus himself did? Or, does it withdraw once again behind its moat, and once again close itself off from the world?

Jesus never advocated withdrawal. He commissioned the Apostles to go out and convert the world. Do you really think that they never interacted with those that advocated other religions? Do you think that they didn’t provide aid to all who came, regardless of their religion?

I lean towards the traditional. The Latin mass was the first mass I attended and it left an indelible mark on my soul.

Having said that, I have to say this is an AWESOME post.

I read about Vatican 2 all over the boards, but I never read anything about the “Old Man” who surprised everyone.

Thanks!