Liberals admit the OF is a fabrication. Do Conservatives?

[EasterJoy]

Avery Dulles, SJ is the liberal who admits the OF is a fabrication. The article quotes him. This is the liberal who admits it. But the article itself was written by a non-liberal,o.k.?

I think it a stretch to paint Avery Cardinal Dulles, elevated by John Paul II in recognition of his scholarly contributions to the Church when he was over the (voting) age of 80, with the single word “liberal”. A very big stretch. In spite of the prevailing mythology, “SJ” and “liberal” are not the same thing.

In any event, I like the way the article cited in the original post ends:

“In his wisdom, the Holy Father has reconciled the two Roman liturgies within the unity of one rite. It’s time those of us attached to them started working together, too.”

 

[po18guy]

I don’t often concern myself with this debate, since I find it academic. Does not the Lord observe our obedience? Does not the church have the authority to bind and loose? Our duty is to obey, even a “wrong” decision. Those who make the decisions are held accountable for their decisions, as we are for our obedience.

The earliest masses were in the vernacular, but morphed into Latin as the Gospel spread and a common, unifying language was needed. A valid argument can be made that we should celebrate exactly as the Apostles did, and in no other fashion. Obviously, some chronological and cultural changes have been made. So what? We’re still at Calvary, standing at the foot of the cross.

While we debate, the Evangelicals, Mormons and JWs are stealing our poorly catechized brothers and sisters.

 

[pnewton]

Avery Dulles, SJ is the liberal who admits the OF is a fabrication. The article quotes him. This is the liberal who admits it. But the article itself was written by a non-liberal,o.k.?

Got it. Then what we really know is that:

A Steve Skovec says that a Reverend Franklyn McAfee says that Cardinal Dulles said:

…the new rite of the Mass violated every norm for liturgical renewal prescribed by Vatican II. …it was the only Mass in history that was put together by a committee.

So no liberals were involved, only one individual so labeled. Put together by committee is changed to “fabrication.” Do you understand why this was so hard to figure out? It is one reason that the actual article title is a better thread title.

I didn’t know Cardinal Dulles carried such clout on this particular forum

 

[keepitreal]

I don’t often concern myself with this debate, since I find it academic. Does not the Lord observe our obedience? Does not the church have the authority to bind and loose? Our duty is to obey, even a “wrong” decision. Those who make the decisions are held accountable for their decisions, as we are for our obedience.

The earliest masses were in the vernacular, but morphed into Latin as the Gospel spread and a common, unifying language was needed. A valid argument can be made that we should celebrate exactly as the Apostles did, and in no other fashion. Obviously, some chronological and cultural changes have been made. So what? We’re still at Calvary, standing at the foot of the cross.

While we debate, the Evangelicals, Mormons and JWs are stealing our poorly catechized brothers and sisters.

This is all very strange. I know you have good intentions, but, are you saying that we should just obey, obey, obey? Is this the Church that Christ established: obey obey obey, don’t question, don’t ask, just OBEY? You know, one of the things that brought me to the Church (among many things) was that the Church used reason to explain its existence and it’s message (not only reason of course). It didn’t just say obey, obey, obey. It used logic, history, tradition, the teaching of the Church of the past ,the scriptures, etc. and an excellent understanding of human nature–to name just a few- to lead souls to the Church. But, now, we are to jettison our intellect and the spirit, wisdom, and acheivments of the Saints, the teaching of the Church of the past ,for something that we know is wrong? You said “Our duty is to obey, even a “wrong” decision.” So we must follow error. Is this what I joined up for, to follow error?
When I know, according to logic, reason, history, tradition, the teaching of the Church of the past that something is wrong, I must obey error anyway because, Does not the Lord observe our obedience?" So the Lord wants us to follow error and be obedient to error? This sounds just like the cult. This is Jim Jones. Do not question him,obey! This is the Moonies. Do not question with logic, reason, history, and tradition that something is wrong coming from the mouth of the Messiah Moon, I must obey error anyway.
Isn’t that grape Kool–Aid Pastor Jones, “Don’t ask questions!”, is the reply, “Obey, Obey, Obey”.

 

[pnewton]

Isn’t that grape Kool–Aid Pastor Jones, “Don’t ask questions!”, is the reply, “Obey, Obey, Obey”.

Is it equally acceptable to allow every priest to say Mass in anyway they want just because they think it is better? Isn’t that the exact thing that make traditionalist (among others) cringe?

The Catechism explains areas in which conscientious objection can allow one to follow conscience. But on purely disciplinary matters, then obedience is expected. Question all you want, though. If we only obey the things we agree with, then we have zero obedience. All we have is coincidence.

 

[po18guy]

This is all very strange. I know you have good intentions, but, are you saying that we should just obey, obey, obey? Is this the Church that Christ established: obey obey obey, don’t question, don’t ask, just OBEY? You know, one of the things that brought me to the Church (among many things) was that the Church used reason to explain its existence and it’s message (not only reason of course). It didn’t just say obey, obey, obey. It used logic, history, tradition, the teaching of the Church of the past ,the scriptures, etc. and an excellent understanding of human nature–to name just a few- to lead souls to the Church. But, now, we are to jettison our intellect and the spirit, wisdom, and acheivments of the Saints, the teaching of the Church of the past ,for something that we know is wrong? You said “Our duty is to obey, even a “wrong” decision.” So we must follow error. Is this what I joined up for, to follow error?
When I know, according to logic, reason, history, tradition, the teaching of the Church of the past that something is wrong, I must obey error anyway because, Does not the Lord observe our obedience?" So the Lord wants us to follow error and be obedient to error? This sounds just like the cult. This is Jim Jones. Do not question him,obey! This is the Moonies. Do not question with logic, reason, history, and tradition that something is wrong coming from the mouth of the Messiah Moon, I must obey error anyway.
Isn’t that grape Kool–Aid Pastor Jones, “Don’t ask questions!”, is the reply, “Obey, Obey, Obey”.

Strange indeed. When you and I are in the College of Bishops, we can raise our voices. You sound almost Protestant. Whose church is it, ours or Christ’s? Your statement appears to belie a lack of faith in God’s chosen successor to Saint Peter, and to the leading of the Holy Spirit. Saint Jerome disagreed, but obeyed. Luther disagreed and disobeyed. Using 20/20 hindsight, would Luther better have obeyed, since the reformation came anyway?

 

[po18guy]

Is it equally acceptable to allow every priest to say Mass in anyway they want just because they think it is better? Isn’t that the exact thing that make traditionalist (among others) cringe?

The Catechism explains areas in which conscientious objection can allow one to follow conscience. But on purely disciplinary matters, then obedience is expected. Question all you want, though. If we only obey the things we agree with, then we have zero obedience. All we have is coincidence.

Amen! Before following one’s own conscience, better ensure that it is a well-formed conscience.

Christ’s peace.

 

[keepitreal]

Amen! Before following one’s own conscience, better ensure that it is a well-formed conscience.

Christ’s peace.

Of course, this has nothing to do with doctrine or morals, of course not. And not even with the daily disciplinary decisions of the office of the bishop. This is about “immemorial tradition”. The Mass and other Sacraments. Quite a serious subject.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

This is all very strange. I know you have good intentions, but, are you saying that we should just obey, obey, obey? Is this the Church that Christ established: obey obey obey, don’t question, don’t ask, just OBEY? You know, one of the things that brought me to the Church (among many things) was that the Church used reason to explain its existence and it’s message (not only reason of course). It didn’t just say obey, obey, obey. It used logic, history, tradition, the teaching of the Church of the past ,the scriptures, etc. and an excellent understanding of human nature–to name just a few- to lead souls to the Church. But, now, we are to jettison our intellect and the spirit, wisdom, and acheivments of the Saints, the teaching of the Church of the past ,for something that we know is wrong? You said “Our duty is to obey, even a “wrong” decision.” So we must follow error. Is this what I joined up for, to follow error?
When I know, according to logic, reason, history, tradition, the teaching of the Church of the past that something is wrong, I must obey error anyway because, Does not the Lord observe our obedience?" So the Lord wants us to follow error and be obedient to error? This sounds just like the cult. This is Jim Jones. Do not question him,obey! This is the Moonies. Do not question with logic, reason, history, and tradition that something is wrong coming from the mouth of the Messiah Moon, I must obey error anyway.
Isn’t that grape Kool–Aid Pastor Jones, “Don’t ask questions!”, is the reply, “Obey, Obey, Obey”.

There is nothing wrong with questioning for understanding. This we should do. .If it is a matter of Church teaching and after being given the answer with explanation, if we do not agree, it is then that we must “obey, obey, obey.” We individually are not under the guidance of the Holy spirit. The Magisterium on the other hand IS. You mention blindly following orders. Well, look at St. Padre Pio. When he was told by Rome, that he could not celebrate public mass, his response was that he obeyed. When some told him to press the issue, his answer was, “Obedience. In all things obedience.”. He died in 1968 and has already been canonized. Those who pick and chose what to “obey, obey, obey” have not been so canonized.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[CradleCath]

This is all very strange. I know you have good intentions, but, are you saying that we should just obey, obey, obey? Is this the Church that Christ established: obey obey obey, don’t question, don’t ask, just OBEY? You know, one of the things that brought me to the Church (among many things) was that the Church used reason to explain its existence and it’s message (not only reason of course). It didn’t just say obey, obey, obey. It used logic, history, tradition, the teaching of the Church of the past ,the scriptures, etc. and an excellent understanding of human nature–to name just a few- to lead souls to the Church. But, now, we are to jettison our intellect and the spirit, wisdom, and acheivments of the Saints, the teaching of the Church of the past ,for something that we know is wrong? You said “Our duty is to obey, even a “wrong” decision.” So we must follow error. Is this what I joined up for, to follow error?
When I know, according to logic, reason, history, tradition, the teaching of the Church of the past that something is wrong, I must obey error anyway because, Does not the Lord observe our obedience?" So the Lord wants us to follow error and be obedient to error? This sounds just like the cult. This is Jim Jones. Do not question him,obey! This is the Moonies. Do not question with logic, reason, history, and tradition that something is wrong coming from the mouth of the Messiah Moon, I must obey error anyway.
Isn’t that grape Kool–Aid Pastor Jones, “Don’t ask questions!”, is the reply, “Obey, Obey, Obey”.

Obedience is a virtue, but I’ve only once known a Church teaching that did not SEEM to be one that I could obey & that was the teaching on artificial birth control. It troubled me so that I went to see my Pastor about it. He gave me a copy of Humana Vitae & explained the reason for the edict from Pope Paul VI. That, of course, erased my doubts. (If anyone still doubts the Truth of this doctrine, please read the encyclical that defined it.)

Many of our other disciplines also make intellectual sense to me. Fasting & abstaining from meat on Fridays…that, again, is a discipline not a matter of doctrine. We did/do that as a way…taught to us be Christ’s example…of doing penance & to honor the day on which Christ died for us. Mandatory Mass on Sundays & Holy Days?? Again…Christ said “Keep holy the Lord’s Day”, & I think that the Church has chosen a perfect way to "keep it holy "…observance at Mass.

I would challenge the posters on this board to present an issue where “blind obedience”… i.e. obedience without agreement, obedience without knowledge or reason…is necessary. I think that a Catholic whose mind is in tune with the Church has little need of this type of obedience.

 

[pnewton]

And not even with the daily disciplinary decisions of the office of the bishop. This is about “immemorial tradition”. The Mass and other Sacraments. Quite a serious subject.

Yes, it is about disciplinary decisions, as well as about the Mass. The branch of the curia on Sacred Liturgy exists precisely because there are many things concerning the Roman Missal subject to the discretion of the Holy Father. Does anyone here think that bishops that disagree with the wide and generous use of the TLM are right to disobey the Holy Father and ban the TLM? Shouldnt they obey, despite their own opinions?

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

Obedience is a virtue, but I’ve only once known a Church teaching that did not SEEM to be one that I could obey & that was the teaching on artificial birth control. It troubled me so that I went to see my Pastor about it. He gave me a copy of Humana Vitae & explained the reason for the edict from Pope Paul VI. That, of course, erased my doubts. (If anyone still doubts the Truth of this doctrine, please read the encyclical that defined it.)

Many of our other disciplines also make intellectual sense to me. Fasting & abstaining from meat on Fridays…that, again, is a discipline not a matter of doctrine. We did/do that as a way…taught to us be Christ’s example…of doing penance & to honor the day on which Christ died for us. Mandatory Mass on Sundays & Holy Days?? Again…Christ said “Keep holy the Lord’s Day”, & I think that the Church has chosen a perfect way to "keep it holy "…observance at Mass.

I would challenge the posters on this board to present an issue where “blind obedience”… i.e. obedience without agreement, obedience without knowledge or reason…is necessary. I think that a Catholic whose mind is in tune with the Church has little need of this type of obedience.

Very well said. Thank you for this.

Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[pnewton]

I would challenge the posters on this board to present an issue where “blind obedience”… i.e. obedience without agreement, obedience without knowledge or reason…is necessary. I think that a Catholic whose mind is in tune with the Church has little need of this type of obedience.

I agree, sort of, because you really ask about three different question. Blind obedience is never asked for. All obedience should include reason. When one’s mind is in tune with the Church, then of course it is easy. But how many of us are perfect in this. Let me give you my own example.

The use of the name of the Lord in liturgy may soon be eliminated in all circumstances. I do not understand why and when I first read it I disagreed. Yet I will do what we are told and not use it any more or any song that contains it. I understand the reasoning, but do not agree. I believe this has a tradition in the Church, but was not part of anything I knew about when I became Catholic. So I will keep on trying to understand why I read up on it more. I might never agree, except in a cursory sense that we borrowed a lot of liturgical devices from the Jewish synagogue.

 

[keepitreal]

I agree, sort of, because you really ask about three different question. Blind obedience is never asked for. All obedience should include reason. When one’s mind is in tune with the Church, then of course it is easy. But how many of us are perfect in this. Let me give you my own example.

The use of the name of the Lord in liturgy may soon be eliminated in all circumstances. I do not understand why and when I first read it I disagreed. Yet I will do what we are told and not use it any more or any song that contains it. I understand the reasoning, but do not agree. I believe this has a tradition in the Church, but was not part of anything I knew about when I became Catholic. So I will keep on trying to understand why I read up on it more. I might never agree, except in a cursory sense that we borrowed a lot of liturgical devices from the Jewish synagogue.

And I said before, obedience in matters of Faith and Morals are not options. We know they are true beacuse these are the promises of Christ. When dealing with liturgical matters, the substance is different. Errors can be made.

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

There is nothing wrong with questioning for understanding. This we should do. .If it is a matter of Church teaching and after being given the answer with explanation, if we do not agree, it is then that we must “obey, obey, obey.” We individually are not under the guidance of the Holy spirit. The Magisterium on the other hand IS. You mention blindly following orders. Well, look at St. Padre Pio. When he was told by Rome, that he could not celebrate public mass, his response was that he obeyed. When some told him to press the issue, his answer was, “Obedience. In all things obedience.”. He died in 1968 and has already been canonized. Those who pick and chose what to “obey, obey, obey” have not been so canonized.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

Hi Deacon Ed,

In regards to official teaching on Faith and Morals yes the Magisterium is under the guidance of the Holy Spirit so the Church will not officially teach error.

However, in regards to prudential decisions of Popes or Bishops these are not necessarily under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Yet I do agree with you that we are called to obey prudential decisions even if we do not agree with them, as Padre Pio obeyed.

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

Obedience is a virtue, but I’ve only once known a Church teaching that did not SEEM to be one that I could obey & that was the teaching on artificial birth control. It troubled me so that I went to see my Pastor about it. He gave me a copy of Humana Vitae & explained the reason for the edict from Pope Paul VI. That, of course, erased my doubts. (If anyone still doubts the Truth of this doctrine, please read the encyclical that defined it.)

Many of our other disciplines also make intellectual sense to me. Fasting & abstaining from meat on Fridays…that, again, is a discipline not a matter of doctrine. We did/do that as a way…taught to us be Christ’s example…of doing penance & to honor the day on which Christ died for us. Mandatory Mass on Sundays & Holy Days?? Again…Christ said “Keep holy the Lord’s Day”, & I think that the Church has chosen a perfect way to "keep it holy "…observance at Mass.

I would challenge the posters on this board to present an issue where “blind obedience”… i.e. obedience without agreement, obedience without knowledge or reason…is necessary. I think that a Catholic whose mind is in tune with the Church has little need of this type of obedience.

Hi CradleCath,

I agree that your examples make perfect sense and thus in that way are “easy” to obey because they do make sense especially in regards to how they complement and bolster the doctrines and sacraments of the Church.

However, an example of obedience without agreement for me would be communion in the hand. I personally don’t do it but attend church where it is practiced. I cannot miss Mass on Sundays or go to a schismatic church because I disagree with it.

Yet I agree that no obedience should be blind and I shouldn’t have to pretend that despite what I think and have reasoned about the issue, I have to think that it really was a wonderful decision to allow it even if I can see no reason why the decision is a positive good.

Thus, in our attempts to understand a prudential or disciplinary decision we may actually come to understand that perhaps it was allowed out of appeasement, or was initiated through disobedience. Yet regardless, we still have to obey even if we do not agree.

(And no, I’m not trying to start another debate regarding communion in the hand, just using it as one example–standing to receive Holy Communion would be another perfectly good example where I obey, but do not agree.)

 

[EasterJoy]

This is all very strange. I know you have good intentions, but, are you saying that we should just obey, obey, obey?

Well, yes, but one has to understand what “obey” means.

From the Latin “ob” (to) + “audire” (to hear)…it is placing yourself always in a position of listening, of hearing. Of course questions are in order, but not questions that have the purpose of challenging legitimate authority.

To disobey, then, is to go the direction of the Jews who could not hear Jesus’ teaching on the Eucharist: “this is too much! we can’t listen to this!”

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

This is all very strange. I know you have good intentions, but, are you saying that we should just obey, obey, obey? Is this the Church that Christ established: obey obey obey, don’t question, don’t ask, just OBEY? You know, one of the things that brought me to the Church (among many things) was that the Church used reason to explain its existence and it’s message (not only reason of course). It didn’t just say obey, obey, obey. It used logic, history, tradition, the teaching of the Church of the past ,the scriptures, etc. and an excellent understanding of human nature–to name just a few- to lead souls to the Church. But, now, we are to jettison our intellect and the spirit, wisdom, and acheivments of the Saints, the teaching of the Church of the past ,for something that we know is wrong? You said “Our duty is to obey, even a “wrong” decision.” So we must follow error. Is this what I joined up for, to follow error?
When I know, according to logic, reason, history, tradition, the teaching of the Church of the past that something is wrong, I must obey error anyway because, Does not the Lord observe our obedience?" So the Lord wants us to follow error and be obedient to error? This sounds just like the cult. This is Jim Jones. Do not question him,obey! This is the Moonies. Do not question with logic, reason, history, and tradition that something is wrong coming from the mouth of the Messiah Moon, I must obey error anyway.
Isn’t that grape Kool–Aid Pastor Jones, “Don’t ask questions!”, is the reply, “Obey, Obey, Obey”.

Hi keepitreal,

I agree with much of what you say in this post. I come from a Protestant background and what helped bring me into the Church was the fact that the official teachings of the Church made so much intellectual, historical, and logical sense. I could allow them to be challenged by other Protestants and the challenges only made the Catholic doctrines look stronger.

And thus when it comes to the prudential decisions of the Church, which are not infallible, I agree that we are not all of a sudden supposed to throw away our intellect or act as if prudential decisions are automatically guided from above.

So I agree we should not follow error, of course, but then again I take the stance that we have to obey prudential decisions even if we think they are imprudent or unwise. Thus I don’t know if I would put them in the category of “error” as, for instance, someone advocating for abortion would be in error.

I don’t know what examples you were thinking of in your post of following error, but I’m just throwing in my two cents.

 

[po18guy]

I read a good portion of the article regarding both pre and post Vatican II liturgy. I am a 48 and a new convert to the beautiful, Catholic Church. I was brought up in the conservative baptist church. I find the worship during mass the most meaningful worship towards our Savior I have ever experienced; Infact, I find myself fighting back tears of joy. What I find interesting is the similarities between catholics and protestants believers. In the catholic camp there is a rivalry regarding the old vs new liturgy, which is the method of worship. In the protestant camp there is disagreement regarding the preaching of the Word. There is a shift taking place from teaching to a congregation of saved christians (church members) towards preaching to the unsaved (church visitors). As a result, there are no longer sermons regarding sin, hell, judgement day or the wrath of God because many pastors do not want to offend anyone in the congregation (which is really an audience). I left my church of many, many years because I could no longer stomach the unbalanced sermons regarding God’s love for mankind, His desire to save us if we would just believe and say a prayer with no reference to God’s attributes of justice, angry towards sin, and the need for true repentance. The inticement to bring the unsaved to the altar was the “assurance of going to heaven from this day forward if you say the sinner’s prayer and mean it”. I am grateful for the experience because it put me on the quest for God’s Truth. The next church I went to was balanced in God’s Word and I was happy to be in it. I thought I finally found a NT Church! I made the decision to read the early church fathers and of course that information led me to the Catholic Church. For me, Catholics must always remember to Thank our Father above for the Eucharist, and spend their time serving Him, learning the Church history to give non-catholics their reason for their beliefs in The Church (therefore, Christ). The extra time can be spent in love and respect for Church authority. I wish Martin Luther would have worked out his differences with the Church in this manner! Love to all my brothers and sisters in Christ!

Welcome home, Cheryl! If only more posters in the non-Catholic religions forums could read your testimony. Actually, we Catholics could stand to hear a bit more about sin (although we have that market cornered) and eternal punishment, as well. We are still shaking off the hangover of the 60s and 70s.

Christ’s peace.

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

There is nothing wrong with questioning for understanding. This we should do. .If it is a matter of Church teaching and after being given the answer with explanation, if we do not agree, it is then that we must “obey, obey, obey.” We individually are not under the guidance of the Holy spirit. The Magisterium on the other hand IS. You mention blindly following orders. Well, look at St. Padre Pio. When he was told by Rome, that he could not celebrate public mass, his response was that he obeyed. When some told him to press the issue, his answer was, “Obedience. In all things obedience.”. He died in 1968 and has already been canonized. Those who pick and chose what to “obey, obey, obey” have not been so canonized.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

Excellent point, Ed - and it applies nowhere better than to disobedient clergy.

(Thanks again for that wonderful picture of St. Pio’s exhumed body.)