May Laity Question, Critisize, or Complain about our Clergy? Vote and Discuss

[mosher]

palmas85:

I think this attitude has done much harm to the church and will continue to do so in the future. My feeling is that it results from a basic misunderstanding of Christ and His mission on Earth. Christ was not a politically correct, feel good, I love you you love me, we’re a happy family type of person. He was a by all acounts a very forceful, strong willed man who spoke the truth as He saw it and let the pieces fall where they may. He did not back down for fear of hurting others feelings or creating a disturbance. If people were wrong, and I mean anybody, HE TOLD THEM SO…He didn’t try to find a nice way to say it, He told them bluntly they were wrong, that they were in error, that they were hypocrites, etc.

When Jesus drove the money changers and sellers from the temple, He did not express nor show much in the way of charity or feel good expressions. He drove them out violently. When He chastized His disciples he did so with no small amount of anger and frustration. When He argued with the Jewish Priests He did not bow down, acquiese to ther demands and back slowly out of the picture… No He did what He knew to be the right thing and if people got angery or hurt so be it!!! The Kingdom of God was at hand.

There is definitely a time for charity. No doubt about that at all. There is also a time to take action. A Priest, Bishop, Cardinal or even the Holy Father himself are still men, not dieties and if they are wrong , they are wrong and should be taken to task and held accountable for their actions or lack therof.

I pause at times to winder whether or not Christianity would have survived and grown had the early fathers been afraid of hurting feelings or not displaying the right amount of charity to others.

Right, but what you miss completely is that the programme that I placed in my post is how Christ commanded us to handle doctrianl problems. It is a greater mark of virtue to have the patience and humility to submit to the method that Christ established rather than claim a supernatural intuition for truth. The actions of Jesus are His own but since He is both God and Man in a perfect state His ability to discern truth is quite a bit different then my or any other persons ability to know truth. Thus, prudence suggests that the only course of virtue is the path given to us by Jesus Himself.

 

[palmas85]

mosher:

Right, but what you miss completely is that the programme that I placed in my post is how Christ commanded us to handle doctrianl problems. It is a greater mark of virtue to have the patience and humility to submit to the method that Christ established rather than claim a supernatural intuition for truth. The actions of Jesus are His own but since He is both God and Man in a perfect state His ability to discern truth is quite a bit different then my or any other persons ability to know truth. Thus, prudence suggests that the only course of virtue is the path given to us by Jesus Himself.

It is if interest to note that the early fathers of the church did not adhere to the charity above all else position. A careful reading of the writings of the fathers shows that not only would they call others to task for their actions they would often do so in a not at all gentle manner. Sometimes tough situations require a tough response.

Don’t misunderstand, please. I don’t advocate disobedience or disrespect, but if someone in eclesiastical authority is wrong, it is not only our right but our duty as Christians to let him know, nicely and gently if possible but with great force and furious anger if necessary. We are not dealing with unimportant issues in this area, but rather the integrity of the Church and our salvation.

Our inaction or reluctance to act to correct wrongs can actually be viewed as complicity in the wrong act itself. Remember the ways in which a sin can be committed.

 

[mosher]

palmas85:

It is if interest to note that the early fathers of the church did not adhere to the charity above all else position. A careful reading of the writings of the fathers shows that not only would they call others to task for their actions they would often do so in a not at all gentle manner. Sometimes tough situations require a tough response.

Don’t misunderstand, please. I don’t advocate disobedience or disrespect, but if someone in eclesiastical authority is wrong, it is not only our right but our duty as Christians to let him know, nicely and gently if possible but with great force and furious anger if necessary. We are not dealing with unimportant issues in this area, but rather the integrity of the Church and our salvation.

Our inaction or reluctance to act to correct wrongs can actually be viewed as complicity in the wrong act itself. Remember the ways in which a sin can be committed.

This I think is a mis-characterization of the Fathers. The reason I say this is because all we have from the Fathers are their sermons and other writings. There is no record one way or the other if they all followed the Gospel rule. However, there is some evidence in the writings of St. Basil to his brother St. Gregory that there was much conversation that happened before they would preach against someone. In fact Basil chastises Gregory for not following proper political etiquette as a Bishop.

 

[spiritblows]

Hi everyone, I’m back. Looks like this topic started a lively and interesting discussion. Thanks for the responses.

 

[BarbaraTherese]

It is a greater mark of virtue to have the patience and humility to submit to the method that Christ established rather than claim a supernatural intuition for truth.

Agree…it shows wisdom and humility to follow that order established by Christ and in His Church.

The actions of Jesus are His own but since He is both God and Man in a perfect state His ability to discern truth is quite a bit different then my or any other persons ability to know truth. Thus, prudence suggests that the only course of virtue is the path given to us by Jesus Himself.

Jesus was fully human in all things except sin…exact ly like us! but without any trace of sin hence in complete unity with The Holy Spirit and His Father…The Holy Spirit lived in Him to the Glory of The Father and Jesus in His Humanity was perfectly docile to The Holy Spirit. Hence in the man Jesus we see God as a human being.

Don’t misunderstand, please. I don’t advocate disobedience or disrespect, but if someone in eclesiastical authority is wrong, it is not only our right but our duty as Christians to let him know, nicely and gently if possible but with great force and furious anger if necessary. We are not dealing with unimportant issues in this area, but rather the integrity of the Church and our salvation.
Our inaction or reluctance to act to correct wrongs can actually be viewed as complicity in the wrong act itself. Remember the ways in which a sin can be committed.

Hi Palmas85…excellent points!

However, there is some evidence in the writings of St. Basil to his brother St. Gregory that there was much conversation that happened before they would preach against someone. In fact Basil chastises Gregory for not following proper political etiquette as a Bishop.

He there Mosher…good point, but then seeking the advice of another wise etc. person is not always possible. Indeed some are entirely alone trusting only in God.

Peace…Barb

 

[Walking_Home]

BarbaraTherese:

Jesus was fully human in all things except sin…exact ly like us! but without any trace of sin hence in complete unity with The Holy Spirit and His Father…The Holy Spirit lived in Him to the Glory of The Father and Jesus in His Humanity was perfectly docile to The Holy Spirit. Hence in the man Jesus we see God as a human being.

Peace…Barb

---

Fully human without sin -yes, but what made Him in complete unity with the Father is our Lords divinity. Our Lord Jesus and the Father are one, inseparable even when Our Lord walked the earth.

Our Lord did not reflect God as a human being because he was perfectly docile to the Holy Spirit, But because He is God and the Holy Spirit flows thru Him. Our Lord is inseparable from the Father, before he walked the earth, while he walked the earth, and to eternity.

 

[BarbaraTherese]

------------------

Fully human without sin -yes, but what made Him in complete unity with the Father is our Lords divinity. Our Lord Jesus and the Father are one, inseparable even when Our Lord walked the earth.

Our Lord did not reflect God as a human being because he was perfectly docile to the Holy Spirit, But because He is God and the Holy Spirit flows thru Him. Our Lord is inseparable from the Father, before he walked the earth, while he walked the earth, and to eternity.

Hi there WalkingHome and thank you for the comments…Yes, Jesus was fully human and also fully God, and the two natures were separate but came together in Jesus. …to say else is I think is to say Jesus was not fully human since His Divine Nature informed His Human Nature - hence He would not be fully human but something different to the rest of us in nature.
This is how I see it - I will post into “Ask an Apologist” after doing a search and see if the matter can be clarified, for I think it is important…or perhaps some other Poster here can quote something from Church Documents which will clarify the matter of Jesus in His Human and Divine Nature?

Peace…Barb

 

[BarbaraTherese]

BarbaraTherese:

Hi there WalkingHome and thank you for the comments…Yes, Jesus was fully human and also fully God, and the two natures were separate but came together in Jesus. …to say else is I think is to say Jesus was not fully human since His Divine Nature informed His Human Nature - hence He would not be fully human but something different to the rest of us in nature.
This is how I see it - I will post into “Ask an Apologist” after doing a search and see if the matter can be clarified, for I think it is important…or perhaps some other Poster here can quote something from Church Documents which will clarify the matter of Jesus in His Human and Divine Nature?

Peace…Barb

Hi WalkingHome…you have me doubting my own understanding and I could well be wrong from the Search I did in “Ask an Apologist”…thank you for that because I would like to insight the truth of the matter.
Here is the question I posted to “Ask an Apologist”…I will post into this thread as soon as I get an answer, which as I understand how the Forum operates may take time:

Thread posted into Ask an Apologist by BarbaraTherese 28.1.06 …

Quote:
Our Lord did not reflect God as a human being because he was perfectly docile to the Holy Spirit, But because He is God and the Holy Spirit flows thru Him. Our Lord is inseparable from the Father, before he walked the earth, while he walked the earth, and to eternity.

Quote:
Yes, Jesus was fully human and also fully God, and the two natures were separate but came together in Jesus. …to say else is I think is to say Jesus was not fully human since His Divine Nature informed His Human Nature - hence He would not be fully human but something different to the rest of us in nature.

The above comments are from Posts in another thread. My question to settle the above, did Jesus’ Divine Nature in any way inform His Human Nature?..or was He human in every way like us?
I did do a Search before posting this and I read in a thread in answer to a posed question, that it was impossible for Jesus to sin since He was God…wouldn’t this make his human will not free?

Thank you…Barb

 

[BarbaraTherese]

Quoting WalkingHome…

Our Lord did not reflect God as a human being because he was perfectly docile to the Holy Spirit, But because He is God and the Holy Spirit flows thru Him. Our Lord is inseparable from the Father, before he walked the earth, while he walked the earth, and to eternity

Hi again WH…you really have me pondering and questioning myself now and that is entirely positive and healthy. Thank you.
Re the above quote from your Post…I think that we are saying the same thing in different words…yes, indeed the Holy Spirit flowed thru Jesus and that “who sees me sees The Father”…as a human being too as I stated he was perfectly docile to The Holy Spirit because He is The Spirit…hence reflected The Spirit…or who sees Jesus not only sees The Father but The Spirit too. Since Jesus is God. But I will wait until I get an answer from Ask An Apologist before I get into any further ‘hot water’! …I am certainly not au fait with the legal twists of mind in apologetics!

But I do thank you for raising the issue, as I say I would like to insight what is the truth of matters.
Peace…Barb

 

[mosher]

Barb: All we have been doing is emphasising the Divine Nature for the purpose of the discussion. Being God, and man in the preternatural state, Jesus has a “leg up” on us for determining what is right and what is wrong in the absolute. Let us not devolve into a discussion on the hypostatic union at this time.

 

[palmas85]

mosher:

This I think is a mis-characterization of the Fathers. The reason I say this is because all we have from the Fathers are their sermons and other writings. There is no record one way or the other if they all followed the Gospel rule. However, there is some evidence in the writings of St. Basil to his brother St. Gregory that there was much conversation that happened before they would preach against someone. In fact Basil chastises Gregory for not following proper political etiquette as a Bishop.

Well, I have to say that there is ample evidence, not only from the fathers themselves but other contemporary writers as well to the contrary. Unlike many these days, I do not adhere to the sola scriptura mentality.

 

[joshua_b]

Canon Law gives us the right to question those in authority within the Church, as long as it is done with respect and without scandal. The biggest problem with this issue is one of disobedience. We have the right to reasonably “question” but we, under NO circumstances, have the right to be disobedient, even if the answer we get is not the answer we want to hear.

 

[Walking_Home]

joshua_b:

Canon Law gives us the right to question those in authority within the Church, as long as it is done with respect and without scandal. The biggest problem with this issue is one of disobedience. We have the right to reasonably “question” but we, under NO circumstances, have the right to be disobedient, even if the answer we get is not the answer we want to hear.

---

Canon law gives us much more than the right to “question”.
It give us the right to have an abuse free Mass. It gives us the right to have true Catholic teachings not false teachings. It gives us the right to take our concerns to the Vatican when the priests and bishops do nothing or themselves contribute to the problem.

Our first “obedience” is to Our Lord Jesus Christ and His Church.
When we see error, no matter where it comes from, we need to address it.

Why do we find ourselves in the situation we are in. Masses that are manipulated, non catholic teachings in RCIA, etc.
Because people, for the last 40 yrs, did not know they have a “voice” in confronting the problems. We have for to long “gone with the flow”.

Yes, there are procedures for addressing these problems and we should use them. But if the problems are not corrected, we need to keep writing to the Vatican, and keep writing, no matter how many times it takes, but we still have the duty to our Lord Jesus Christ to confront whoever is manipulating His Church.

I thank Our Lord, that forums like these are available now. For the many people, that thru the guidance of the Holy Spirit, have made the time and effort to learn the true Catholic teachings and have helped many who post here with concerns.

The true Catholic faith must not be silenced, for that is what the deceiver wants.

 

[mosher]

palmas85:

Well, I have to say that there is ample evidence, not only from the fathers themselves but other contemporary writers as well to the contrary. Unlike many these days, I do not adhere to the sola scriptura mentality.

Perhpas but not from the saints. We must always remember that we must keep virtue in tact. We must keep our virtue in tact and we must not allow the other to fall into further vice. Thus it is necessary to always follow the model of virtue in all that we do and not give an excuse for acting otherwise.

I will submit that there are some things that are so grave and based upon the situation at hand the virtuous method calls for instant action but I would also submit that these cases are rare.

 

[Leeta]

Liturgical abuses denigrate the belief in the Real Presence of our most Holy Lord in the Blessed Sacrament.

All who are at Mass are affected negatively in their faith. The fruit of the Mass is lessened when a priest says the Mass with abuses.

It is a spiritual crime against God himself.

The Credo is essential to the Sunday Mass. It is more important than the Kiss of Peace or singing. There is a heirarchy of importance to the different parts of the Mass. If a priest has to make it to another Mass, he needs to know which parts are optional or non-essential.

Priests receive little training in Liturgy in the seminary and oftentimes it is skewed or plain wrong.

I believe it has to do with the incoherence and inconsistency of the New Mass with Church teaching on the Real Presence.

Also, as a parent I am obligated to tell my children what is right and true. When a priest teaches error, not just a slip of the tongue, in a homilly, I talk about it with them.

For example, at a daily Mass, the priest said that Jesus did not know he was God until the Resurrection!

One priest always offered the bread and the wine together at the offertory (although recently, an educational flyer from the Diocese of Lansing Office of Worship claimed that with the GIRM that the offertory is no longer the offertory), which is contrary to the rubrics . I asked him why he did that . He had been taught to do so at the North American Seminar in Rome In the late 70’s!! Most priests and bishops seem to be the blind leading the blind when it comes to liturgy.

I suppose I should stop going to communion in Chuches because like the one writer said, one needs to be in a state of grace.

That is one definite evil of liturgical abuses. Fewer people going to communion, fewer going to Mass, fewer believing in Jesus’ Real Presence. After all, if the priest is disobedient to the norms of the Church, why should the laity be obedient?

The Mass when properly celebrated should help one achieve union with God, especially at Holy Communion. A Mass with abuses makes this very difficult, especially for children.

My 3 year old is quieter at a 1 and half hour High Latin Mass than at an hour new Mass.

Ther have been many a Mass, like Christmas Midnight Mass where I have cried the whole Mass through and not been able to conceal it becaus eof the awful music and lack of respect for the Mass and Our Lord.

 

[BarbaraTherese]

mosher:

Barb: All we have been doing is emphasising the Divine Nature for the purpose of the discussion. Being God, and man in the preternatural state, Jesus has a “leg up” on us for determining what is right and what is wrong in the absolute. Let us not devolve into a discussion on the hypostatic union at this time.

Hi Mosher…I agree that Jesus has (and had while on earth)a “leg up” on us for determining what is right and wrong and effecting the former. Thank you for the comments…and drawing my attention to the fact that I am way off the subject of this thread. Apologies!

Peace…Barb

 

[mosher]

Leeta:

(although recently, an educational flyer from the Diocese of Lansing Office of Worship claimed that with the GIRM that the offertory is no longer the offertory)

just an aside:

That is true. The Novus Ordo does not have an Offertory as in the latin that portion of the mass is called “The Presentation of the Gifts.”

 

[bear06]

My 3 year old is quieter at a 1 and half hour High Latin Mass than at an hour new Mass.

I go to an abuse free Novus Ordo in Latin with chant and beauty and we’ve also been to our Tridentine. I’m here to tell you that this is far from true for everyone. 1 1/2 hours is 1 1/2 hours to my children. They do much better at the Novus Ordo.