On Defense of the Truth

[bear06]

Bahahahaha! I think it’s funny that both sides seem to be thinking that Quaere Verum is addressing them. If you look, Quaere Verum didn’t really address people in error. That could be one on either side of the “Traditionalist/Novus Ordo” debate. The issue was not are you right or wrong being a traditionalist but are you right or wrong in the way you correct people! You guys have taken a “what’s the best way to defend Truth” question and turned it into a “Traditionalist/Novus Ordo” debate.

Quaere Verum - back to your conversation…

A blanket answer probably wouldn’t do it. Sometimes you have to pick and choose your battles and speak by actions and not words. That said, we are still not all called to the same way of dealing with people. And frankly, we are not always called to use the same way with everybody. I think, sometimes, that people have a “policy” to do things a certain way which leads people to act the same way with everyone. This doesn’t allow for the fact that some don’t react the same way to the same things. Tactics that might work for some may not be the best for others. We have to learn to get out of our heads and into other’s. Sometimes this requires going outside our “comfort zones” and using tactics that we aren’t used to.

For example - When the parental consent law was up for a vote here, it was necessary to get the word out. I’m not at all comfortable with passing out literature and picketing but that was what was necessary. (first example off the top of my head!)

 

[YinYangMom]

Quaere Verum:

At first glance it may appear that you are at odds with one another. Looking more closely, however, one thing is evident – most of you have a deep love for the Church. While reading your passionate defenses of the Church I begin to wonder, “Is it ever O.K. to just sit back and have faith in Truth and faith in your Catholic brothers’ love for the Church?” Is it ever O.K. to say, “If my Catholic friend dies in error or if I die in error, it will not change the Truth for Truth always prevails over error?” Or is it always important to speak out against error even when minor?

Thanks for helping me to understand this.

As with all things, we each have been put on this earth for a purpose. Some are granted the graces to live out the faith, others to profess the faith, still others to do both, and so on. We are not all created equal in talents nor in gifts, but given from the Lord that which He deems necessary to bring souls closer to Him.

I am grateful for whatever gifts and graces God blesses me with to do His will. Sometimes it’s through the written word, my spoken word, in my actions, in my thoughts. That some on this board are able to recognize things are ‘off’ within a liturgy is in itself a gift, imo. That they are further gifted with courage to address the ‘offness’ is even more awesome to me. Whether they profess too loudly or too roughly is not as important to me as that they have been moved by the Spirit to do something where I, can only sit back and observe since I was not gifted as such. Yet I am not sad about my state, but joyful and reassured that God is taking care of His church so that I may fully benefit from His Truth.

 

[mosher]

Quaere Verum:

Some topics exist which will flame into a raging wildfire if you but breathe their name. They roar so loudly that you soon forget they began with a whisper. I believe that God’s Truth resides deep within my soul. However, I do not have the gift which many of you have to access Truth or put Her into words, so I just sit back and read with great interest.

At first glance it may appear that you are at odds with one another. Looking more closely, however, one thing is evident – most of you have a deep love for the Church. While reading your passionate defenses of the Church I begin to wonder, “Is it ever O.K. to just sit back and have faith in Truth and faith in your Catholic brothers’ love for the Church?” Is it ever O.K. to say, “If my Catholic friend dies in error or if I die in error, it will not change the Truth for Truth always prevails over error?” Or is it always important to speak out against error even when minor?

Thanks for helping me to understand this.

We have an obligation to share the truth with all. If we allow someone to wallow in their error then we do not truly love them.

 

[YinYangMom]

Quaere Verum:

I come from a family that if you don’t speak loud enough nobody listens. Once a friend joined us and thought all those aunts, uncles, and cousins at the table were arguing but couldn’t understand why they were smiling & laughing as well. Everybody was happy as long as they were talking; it didn’t seem to matter that nobody was listening.

We must be related How ‘ya doin’, cuz?

 

[YinYangMom]

Quaere Verum:

But, could we inadvertently offend Truth in our attempt to defend Her? That is to say, by upsetting the peace between ourselves and our brethern, are we not offending Truth?

Were there not quarrels over Truth even in the beginning that we have witness to in scripture? This is why Jesus gave the keys to Peter and why we have the Pope. We (you, me, other Catholics) can discuss and debate as much as is necessary for Truth to prevail, so long as we all agree the Pope has the final word, no? It seems, mostly on these boards, we are helping each other come to better understand and appreciate the teaching of the magesterium so how could that be offending Truth?

 

[YinYangMom]

bear06:

Yes, we will get it wrong from time to time but Christ can even use us in our failings.

Boy, how true is that statement?! Much of the spiritual growth I’ve experienced from these forums the past year has come from such failings.

There’s that :ehh: moment which strikes at times when perusing a thread and coming across a post which just doesn’t seem ‘right’…questioning it, and my own gut instinct that it’s wrong, moves me to begin the internet search to verify the accuracy of the statement. It is through that process that I learn more history, more tradition, more facts about the topic and grow in my understanding, knowledge and faith.

Had the originator of the erroneous post not found the courage to put it out there I would not have grown in that matter at that time. Had the correct post which seemed wrong to me at the time not been posted I would not have questioned my own belief and thus learned the Truth.

 

[YinYangMom]

maryj:

I don’t feel as though peace is necessarily quiet! I can’t explain the peace in my life, I only know it is truly there. And I’m fairly certain it didn’t come quietly!! does that make any sense.

You must be a mom…'cause it makes perfect sense to me!

 

[Quaere_Verum]

You all are great. I always find some gems of wisdom in each and everyone of you.

I guess I look at myself and wonder how God has called me to defend Truth, and I’m reminded of King Pellinore in The Once and Furture King who spent 17 years of his life in search of the horrible Questing Beast. Sadly enough when he finally slayed the beast he tried to revive it because he had found purpose in the fight and not the outcome of the fight.

Now I know this is just a story. And I know until Jesus returns we will always have to defend Truth; the Questing Beast will never be slain by us. However, every time I choose to engage in a battle over Truth, I have to ask myself, “Am I truly seeking to defend Truth, or am I enjoying the process of the fight?”

I don’t engage in much debate here which leaves lots of debate with my husband (often much to his dismay) and family. And I’ve seen the result of what I believe to be defense of Truth. It’s not always pretty. So do I need to defend Truth? Most definately! However, I must be careful how to approach this defense. My husband likes to tell me that some people need a “soft sell” and that people can’t be forced into believing.

 

[netmilsmom]

bear06:

Bahahahaha! I think it’s funny that both sides seem to be thinking that Quaere Verum is addressing them. If you look, Quaere Verum didn’t really address people in error. That could be one on either side of the “Traditionalist/Novus Ordo” debate. The issue was not are you right or wrong being a traditionalist but are you right or wrong in the way you correct people! You guys have taken a “what’s the best way to defend Truth” question and turned it into a “Traditionalist/Novus Ordo” debate.

Who do you think is the Traditionalist and who is the Novus Ordo person that you are speaking to?
Actually, if you read my response, it is a matter that we all love each other and because of that we can disagree but still come together as Catholics at Mass
This statement…

Or is it always important to speak out against error even when minor?

begats a debate about correcting wrongs. Maybe you missed this in the original post.

 

[bear06]

Who do you think is the Traditionalist and who is the Novus Ordo person that you are speaking to?

I didn’t say Traditionalist and Novus Ordo person. I said debate. You know, the one where one brings up “Pharisees” and one says “those who defend traditions”

Actually, if you read my response, it is a matter that we all love each other and because of that we can disagree but still come together as Catholics at Mass

I competely agree with you on this!

begats a debate about correcting wrongs. Maybe you missed this in the original post.

Yeah, I must have missed it even though I quoted it. :whacky:

QV went on to clarify:

I’m referring to minor error. Yes, major error needs to be corrected, but what have you gained if you run a saber through someone for a minor infraction when a simple slap on the hand would do? And how do you cure the ignorant by chopping off their head? And since when do you run someone over when they were simply asking for direction?

Aren’t charity & peace part of Truth?

and then QV gave a more specific example

an example that jumps out is discussions on liturgical abuses. There is no doubt that people on both sides of the issues are devoted to the Church and the integrity of the Eucharist. Can both be right? Maybe! However, more than likely someone is in error but the error is probably minor. In these cases, should we just trust our Catholic brethren’s love for Truth and let these issues slide? After all, maybe my interpretation of what the Church states on these matters is the one which is flawed. Does defense or practice of minor error translate to purgatory time? How about inciting your brethren to anger? Which of these is a bigger offense?

BTW, If you’re talking about a liturgical abuse, QV, I don’t think people on both sides of the issue can both be right. Do you have an example of what you mean here? It would seem that, in regards to purgatory time, one would have to know the other’s culpability and yes, you may be right that them exploding about being corrected might possibly lead to a bigger offense on their part but I believe that you are probably still bound to transmit the Truth in some manor. Sometimes the manor might be correcting them and just letting them explode. Sometimes by example is the way to do it. For example, if someone is modeling the priests posture it might be better from the person to learn by seeing you not do it and approaching you as to why you don’t do it rather than saying “You know that you shouldn’t be doing that.” Although, once again, it relies on the person you are dealing with.

 

[bear06]

There’s probably more spelling errors but I meant manner in the above post.

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

Quaere Verum:

Some topics exist which will flame into a raging wildfire if you but breathe their name. They roar so loudly that you soon forget they began with a whisper. I believe that God’s Truth resides deep within my soul. However, I do not have the gift which many of you have to access Truth or put Her into words, so I just sit back and read with great interest.

At first glance it may appear that you are at odds with one another. Looking more closely, however, one thing is evident – most of you have a deep love for the Church. While reading your passionate defenses of the Church I begin to wonder, “Is it ever O.K. to just sit back and have faith in Truth and faith in your Catholic brothers’ love for the Church?” Is it ever O.K. to say, “If my Catholic friend dies in error or if I die in error, it will not change the Truth for Truth always prevails over error?” Or is it always important to speak out against error even when minor?

Thanks for helping me to understand this.

It’s too bad this thread, as so many others, has drifted off into a debate about specifics, such as the liturgy. It started off as a good general post, but then came the jabs at people who discuss their liturgical preferences conveniently broadbrushed as “complaints”.

It isn’t quite necessary to state one’s liturgical preference to get an idea of where one stands. When constantly being critical of those who enjoy valid traditional preferences, accepted by the same Catholic Church which authorized the contemporary practices, it just seems to paint certain picture of where that person’s preference may be.

With that, I do hope that yet another thread will not continue into liturgical issue jabs, along with jabs at people who discuss them. The original poster (OP) spoke not of a single issue or class of issues, but made a general comment. The thread actually has a chance of staying peaceful if we focus on the original topic.

Addressing the original topic: I believe there are times we need to address some of the error. And, there are times we need to address the error in full, with charity, but with conviction. I’ve experienced examples of both and have discussed them with my confessor.

He has, at times, asked me to talk to certain people after I raised a particular concern. I have raised an issue in order to let him judge whether I have any business being concerned with it in the first place (since it involves someone else’s actions), let alone saying anything to them. Each time he reminds me how sometimes God uses us to get someone else to think.

A few months back I had confessed to him that I encouraged a divorced relative to date. I almost didn’t tell him about it because I didn’t think it was a big deal. But, a friend told me this was a big no-no. I thought it would be best to check it out for myself. Needless to say, I ended up with a project.

He said, “I want you to…” and then proceeded to explain how I would be telling this person that I should not have encouraged him to date because he is a baptized Catholic who is still technically married in the eyes of the Church.

I gave a kind of half-chuckle and said, “Yeah, but he’s lapsed, doesn’t go to Church and…”

Right there he stopped me gently, saying, “No, no.”, then firmly repeated, “I want you to…”

At that point I realized that unlike all the other times he was not asking me if I would do something. In other words, this was not optional. I followed immediately with a sharp, “Yes, Father”

It took me three weeks to find the right opportunity. The good father was smart. The person took it very well and actually interrupted and said, “Yeah, I know, technically I’m still married”.

I then offered him assistance in working through an annulment if he desired, but he has not moved to pursue that. But, he knows I cannot show support for dating or marriage without that annulment, and he has accepted it. If anything, it is making him think.

 

[Joysong]

Diane:

It’s too bad this thread, as so many others, has drifted off into a debate about specifics, such as the liturgy. It started off as a good general post, but then came the jabs at people who discuss their liturgical preferences conveniently broadbrushed as “complaints”.

I reviewed all 31 posts prior to Diane’s mention of “complaints” (plural) in #32, and saw the word complain used only once throughout the entire thread, in post #16. It was a valid response to another’s initiation of the subject in post #15.

I would pray that the accusations of “jabbing” cease. They are directly of a personal nature, off topic, and not at all relevant, especially in light Q.V.'s posts reprinted below.
Quaere Verum:

I’m referring to minor error. Yes, major error needs to be corrected, but what have you gained if you run a saber through someone for a minor infraction when a simple slap on the hand would do? And how do you cure the ignorant by chopping off their head? And since when do you run someone over when they were simply asking for direction?

You asked for an example bear06, and an example that jumps out is discussions on liturgical abuses.

Does defense or practice of minor error translate to purgatory time?** How about inciting your brethren to anger?** Which of these is a bigger offense?

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

Joysong:

What is amusing to me is that some seem to believe that because I am vocal with those who complain about liturgical changes, it means I prefer and/or accept some of these manners of celebrating. Never, to my knowledge at this writing, have I stated my preference other than that the tabernacle remain behind the altar of celebration.

HI Carole,

Hopefully you can see here how the plural “complaints” was derived from the expression “…because I am vocal with those who complain about liturgical changes”

The statement, while may not intended, applies a label of “complaint” to “liturgical changes”, which is plural. Furthermore, many of those “liturgical changes” did not replace previous practices, but became optional. It is hardly a complaint to talk about practices that are legitimate.

I take offense to the use of “complain” being applied against such discussions. If I flip it around, I could say that there are people on these forums who complain about people who want to discuss more traditional liturgical preferences, allowable by the Church. Yes, that too is a “complaint”.

Lets just find another word, huh? Its less offensive.

Also, if you hadn’t brought up the issue of people who “complain” about liturgical changes here, this whole thread drift would never been initiated. Because it was that drift, coupled with the talk about “pharisees” again, which triggered a deeper drift and made the thread into something contentious. If we remove the talk about liturgical changes and pharisees, we wouldn’t be having this conversation in a thread about another topic.

This keeps happening in so many threads and it needs to end. Not all discussions need to jump on the “liturgical changes” complaints bandwagon.

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

Quaere Verum:

You all are great. I always find some gems of wisdom in each and everyone of you.

I guess I look at myself and wonder how God has called me to defend Truth, and I’m reminded of King Pellinore in The Once and Furture King who spent 17 years of his life in search of the horrible Questing Beast. Sadly enough when he finally slayed the beast he tried to revive it because he had found purpose in the fight and not the outcome of the fight.

Now I know this is just a story. And I know until Jesus returns we will always have to defend Truth; the Questing Beast will never be slain by us. However, every time I choose to engage in a battle over Truth, I have to ask myself, “Am I truly seeking to defend Truth, or am I enjoying the process of the fight?”

I don’t engage in much debate here which leaves lots of debate with my husband (often much to his dismay) and family. And I’ve seen the result of what I believe to be defense of Truth. It’s not always pretty. So do I need to defend Truth? Most definately! However, I must be careful how to approach this defense. My husband likes to tell me that some people need a “soft sell” and that people can’t be forced into believing.

This is the very thing I sensed with the relative I mentioned a some posts up who was divorced and I encouraged to date. When the priest told me to basically retract my encouragement, all kinds of things went through my head. In the end, it was the soft sell that got me through the deed.

My pastor told me early on when I met him that with some people, you can hit them right between the eyes and they get it and they are greatful. Others, you have to get there through a round about way.

 

[Marian_Carroll]

GENERAL REMINDER

It may be helpful to keep in mind that this is the Liturgy & Sacraments Forum; and therefore threads/posts in it would be deemed by most to be referring to matters on those subjects. It is also often helpful to others reading a thread, to relate one’s initiating post to the area of specific discussion.

For those wishing to post on less specific topics please take the opportunity to review: Choosing Your forum Wisely
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=65750

Liturgy & Scraments Forum is described there as :

…Are you typing the name of any sacrament (including holy orders or priesthood issues), or are you are asking about the Mass or the divine liturgy? Including such issues as religious hymns, translations for the readings, extraordinary ministers, etc.? It goes into the Liturgy & Sacraments forum.

 

[maryj]

YinYangMom:

You must be a mom…'cause it makes perfect sense to me!

how’d you know!!! I’m also the youngest of 11!!!

 

[Quaere_Verum]

Sorry for starting this thread in the wrong place. Most of the heated issues I’ve read have been on the Mass, thus, the question. Can we move this thread?

I guess if this thread can’t be moved & needs to be concluded I’ll end with this. The overriding consensus is that Truth always needs to be defended. How we defend that Truth is up for discussion; however, nobody would disagree that it depends on how God chooses to direct us, and, of course, humility is crucial.

I think of this $1 store very fragrant rose soap my 7 year old bought me this Christmas. As it has gotten smaller its sweet fragrance has grown more intense. This soap was created simply, no name brand, and its fragrance is somehow concentrated in its smallness. That’s how I want to be – simple & humble, and, hopefully, in that smallness I can radiate God’s love to others even on matters of error.

Thank so very much for responding. Your love for the Church, the Mass, and the Sacraments has blessed me.

 

[Joysong]

Net:

It makes me laugh that some of the people who are into innovations or excuse abuses as “just little ones” constantly use the Pharisees as an example.

Joysong:

What is amusing to me is that some seem to believe that because I am vocal with those who complain about liturgical changes,** it means I prefer**** and/or accept**** some of these manners of celebrating.** Never, to my knowledge at this writing, have I stated my preference other than that the tabernacle remain behind the altar of celebration.

Diane,

Once again, you are putting a deliberate spin on my words to depict me unfavorably. This must be read as a reply to Net who implied, wrongly, that I was an innovator who excused abuses.

My answer was that I have never given my opinion whatsoever in any thread or post where I had been vocal in the past with unnamed persons who complained about changes. So nobody is able to determine which side I am truly on. That is all the post was … period! To twist it further as you described below is a wrongful slant designed to demean my post. What is your motive in scrutinizing my words and taking them completely out of context? I previously explained to you how they were used, yet you do not accept the spirit in which they were written.

Diane:

I take offense to the use of “complain”** being applied against such discussions**. If I flip it around, I could say that there are people on these forums who complain about people who want to discuss more traditional liturgical preferences, allowable by the Church. Yes, that too is a “complaint”.

 

[Marian_Carroll]

Thread now closed. Thanks to those who made a positive contribution to it.