- Status
A
anthonymarie
Guest
Doesn’t in remind you a little of Our Lord talking about John the Baptist:This sounds quite familiar and has the ‘ring of truth’ .
Keep asking the same question and getting the same answer from the same people for the same reason…and the only thing new is the warning not to be inflexible or insensitive and how mercy matters more than truth, etc, etc.
F
FollowChrist34
Guest
Excellent post. No one has really identified this as the approach but I think it’s a good call. I have been thinking about this - well, after a year, will there still be energy to resist? And let’s not be naïve - even IF this effort to “modernize” is soundly defeated in 2015, it still WON’T GO AWAY. It is a radicalized element that is PERMANENT - a reflection of the modern culture. I don’t think peace is really on the table, not true peace anyway. Saccharine, superficial compromise to avoid being called unmerciful, maybe. That’s the new good Christian, assuming you take the bait. However, many won’t bite. There’s the rub.
L
Lion_IRC
Guest
Great observation!
Thanks.
L
LongingSoul
Guest
If you think that the Church resembles a democracy you’d be wrong. The Magisterium is a body consisting of the Pope in communion with the Bishops and to that end, issues are necessarily raised and examined. Here is how distinguished theologian and scripture scholar Fr William Most explains the Magisterium…
"By the Magisterium we mean the teaching office of the Church. It consists of the Pope and Bishops. Christ promised to protect the teaching of the Church : “He who hears you, hears me; he who rejects you rejects me, he who rejects me, rejects Him who sent me” (Luke 10. 16). Now of course the promise of Christ cannot fail: hence when the Church presents some doctrine as definitive or final, it comes under this protection, it cannot be in error; in other words, it is infallible. This is true even if the Church does not use the solemn ceremony of definition. The day to day teaching of the Church throughout the world, when the Bishops are in union with each other and with the Pope, and present something as definitive, this is infallible. (Vatican II, Lumen gentium # 25). It was precisely by the use of that authority that Vatican I was able to define that the Pope alone, when speaking as such and making things definitive, is also infallible. Of course this infallibility covers also teaching on what morality requires, for that is needed for salvation.
**A “theologian” who would claim he needs to be able to ignore the Magisterium in order to find the truth is strangely perverse: the teaching of the Magisterium is the prime, God-given means of finding the truth. ****Nor could he claim academic freedom lets him contradict the Church. In any field of knowledge, academic freedom belongs only to a properly qualified professor teaching in his own field. But one is not properly qualified if he does not use the correct method of working in his field, **e.g., a science professor who would want to go back to medieval methods would be laughed off campus, not protected. Now in Catholic theology , the correct method is to study the sources of revelation, but then give the final word to the Church. He who does not follow that method is not a qualified Catholic theologian. Vatican II taught (Dei Verbum # 10): "The task of authoritatively interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on [Scripture or Tradition], has been entrusted exclusively to the living Magisterium of the Church, whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ."
L
LongingSoul
Guest
E
Elizium23
Guest
How does “voting by bishops on disciplinary matters” equate to “democracy” whose definition is “rule by the people”?
If the Church were a democracy, then I would have a vote. My choir would have a vote. Would altar boys get a vote too? Priests would have a vote, and they don’t now.
If anything, the Church can be mistaken for an oligarchy. But the reality is that her “leaders” are actually servants. The Holy Father’s title is “Servant of the Servants of God”. Jesus showed us in the Washing of Feet, how His relationship to the Apostles should be regarded, and how they should serve the people.
The Church is not a human institution, she is a divine one in pilgrim form. The Head of our Church is Christ Himself, and the “constitution” of the Church is Divine Law, which cannot be altered, abrogated, or amended. Not even the Servant of the Servants of God has the right to do so. All changes are merely disciplinary and ecclesial in nature. That is the reality of the Church. It is unlike any Earthly government we will ever see.
If the Church were a democracy, then I would have a vote. My choir would have a vote. Would altar boys get a vote too? Priests would have a vote, and they don’t now.
If anything, the Church can be mistaken for an oligarchy. But the reality is that her “leaders” are actually servants. The Holy Father’s title is “Servant of the Servants of God”. Jesus showed us in the Washing of Feet, how His relationship to the Apostles should be regarded, and how they should serve the people.
The Church is not a human institution, she is a divine one in pilgrim form. The Head of our Church is Christ Himself, and the “constitution” of the Church is Divine Law, which cannot be altered, abrogated, or amended. Not even the Servant of the Servants of God has the right to do so. All changes are merely disciplinary and ecclesial in nature. That is the reality of the Church. It is unlike any Earthly government we will ever see.
L
Lion_IRC
Guest
Why the need for “votes” at all if there is nothing democratic going on?
L
Lion_IRC
Guest
Nostra Aetate - the Declaration on the Relation of the Church with Non-Christian Religions of the Second Vatican Council - was passed in line with the votes of 2,000+ bishops.
L
Lion_IRC
Guest
It should also be remembered that many people “vote” with their feet when it comes to acceptance or rejection of certain church matters. 
F
FollowChrist34
Guest
Check out these comments (Phil Lawler). I posted this earlier accidentally in another thread - I was trying to get at the question of “voting.” (not saying this is authoritative, just interesting)It should also be remembered that many people “vote” with their feet when it comes to acceptance or rejection of certain church matters.
E
Elizium23
Guest
Is it because they truly understand these doctrines and thoroughly reject them in good conscience, or could some, or indeed many of these cases be that Catholics were taught wrongly, and through misunderstanding they came to believe that the Church is really not what she claims to be?It should also be remembered that many people “vote” with their feet when it comes to acceptance or rejection of certain church matters.
I can tell you that when I left the Church, it was after years of being exposed to liberalism and liturgical abuse and secularism and Hollywood and underground rock music. I knew (somewhat instinctively) how the Church was supposed to work, and I knew how the liturgy was supposed to be, but I never saw it happening that way. There was a fundamental disconnect between my ideal and reality. Therefore I stopped obeying Church authority, in fact I stopped obeying any authority at all, except for the rock bands I liked. I rejected sisters, and priests, and my mother and father. Nothing they said was true, for me, anymore.
Then I found out you could use the Internet to find out things about how the Church really works. And I dove in. And I found out I was right about liturgical abuse. There were really documents that regulated the liturgy and they were simply being ignored or flouted. There were documents explaining Church doctrine, elegant and beautiful documents, and they weren’t being mentioned in homilies.
Together with this realization and a direct call from God, I returned to the Church. In the first years I found more of the same. Liturgical abuse and liberalism. Hippies were running the show in the parish I joined. Yet I made my Confirmation, because now I knew that the Church I loved was the Truth, and I would find it somehow. Things improved when I moved parishes. Things improved greatly when I found an orthodox pastor who preached the faith in all its splendor. A pastor who talks the talk and walks the walk. My pastor is not a soft touch, but he provides the discipline and structure I needed and craved. He is a true Son of the Church.
Since finding that pastor and parish, and since realizing that my diocese has one of the best bishops in the country, I have found other great priests and bishops. I have cleaved to their teachings and refined my search for Truth to the capable hands of men whom I can trust. EWTN, National Catholic Register, Father Z, FSSP, Traditionalist circles that are in communion with Rome. Now I have a much better image of how Mass looks when it is faithfully celebrated according to the rubrics. And I have a better image of how the Faith sounds when it is preached according to Tradition. And I’m happier than I have ever been, because I came home.
F
FollowChrist34
Guest
Thank you for sharing this! You sound a lot like me. I wonder how many of us are out there? How strange.
J
Joe_Kelley
Guest
Re Poor Liturgies: My father warned me that at Judgement God will not ask “Who said the mass”; He’ll just ask "Were you there."
T
Tigg
Guest
The orthodox on this board get no credit for their driving motivation which is love of the Church; only accusations from the liberal camp that they are anti-pope. I find it quite ridiculous.
So let’s put that all aside and just remember the time in history when Pope John XX II publically preached The Beatific Vision could not be had until after the general judgment and the final outcome when it was so opposed and “overturned” by the majority of the faithful. It was truly sensus fidelium in action.
So in practical terms, how does one go about charitably, yet firmly opposing the novel ideas as put forth by some of the princes of the Church this time around?
I think the Lord Himself will have something to say about the “permanence” and I’m not looking at the strength of the opposition whom surely He could blow away by a single movement. Society needs to cleanse their hearts, and God is not too weak to help them, then surely He will see fit to “fix” our problems. Indeed, already certain positive signs are emerging and there is only reason for hope, not despair.
A
Arandur
Guest
Though I didn’t have as much a falling away experience, I and I think quite a few others have experienced much the same disillusionment with the abuses and lack of orthodoxy and orthopraxy, but were brought back and set on fire by a discovery of the Truth in the Church.
Regarding the Synod and pastoral practices, I have sympathy for a couple of very difficult questions the bishops face. Let me put them to you and ask what you all think. Here are the hypotheticals (which I think are actually, unfortunately, quite common).
- One spouse is divorced and remarried (assume it’s the other spouse’s first marriage), with children in the new “marriage;” second “marriage” is strong several years in, and at least a few of the children are young. Let’s assume that the first marriage was considered by a Marriage Tribunal to be valid–the original partners entered into marriage with sufficient knowledge and intent for it to be permanent and sacramental. The spouse involved in the second marriage fought for the life of the first, but was abandoned by the partner (assume, then, that there is less fault there, more of a victim). Let’s assume, also, that both were fallen away or non-Catholics, later converted; in other words, their confusion in getting into this situation in the first place (particularly given the culture) is even more understandable.
Children need their parents to set the example of a GOOD marriage for them to be best formed and prepared. They need both parents present in the house. So it seems to me that separation of the parents would be particularly bad for the children. Do they need to take the hard road of living “as brother and sister,” raising the children in that environment?
Does that introduce “too much scandal?”
Does that lifestyle mean that they cannot show physical or romantic affection (kissing, touching, romantic activity)? If so, they can’t model such a good relationship to their children…
Yes, I know that in this situation, the parents are in an adulterous situation. I know that hard choices and sacrifices may be their cross to bear. But what do they do for the sake of the children? What causes the least harm to/does the most good for them?
- Much the same situation, but in a polygamous culture, as many of the African bishops have to contend with. Or perhaps converts from Islam. There you have one man, many “wives,” children from each “wife.” What is the best pastoral approach for the sake of the “wives” beyond the first? What of the children?
So again, in those hard situations, how do you handle the mess that they’re in? How do you care for the other women and children?
L
LongingSoul
Guest
Understanding the nature of Church as ‘pilgrim’ and walking with the people of all ages not just as an historian but as Christ with us… will help you to understand these processes are normal and healthy.
Since Pentecost, the pilgrim Church has had the necessary to and fros regarding many a ‘novel’ idea which resulted in our current understanding of the humanity and divinity of Christ, the nature of the Trinity, the sacraments, how many books belong in the Bible, the nature of the Priesthood, even the nature of the papacy. Good faithful practicing Catholics can have varying ideas and opinions about what the Church should do but those good faithful practicing Catholics know also that their opinions and ideas aren’t superior to the Popes and College of Bishops. I can certainly tell you that as a life long Catholic, the respect for the papacy and the Church as Christ with us, always remains paramount in expressing our own opinions.
We know things like Thomas Aquinas was fervently opposed to raising Marys Assumption to a feast sealed with Dogma. We know that there was at that time another force to promote the ‘divinity’ of Mary. The process of discussion that took into account the teachings of the Fathers and tradition as well as the experiences of the ordinary people in little parishes around Europe… resulted in the Dogma we know and love today
Here today we have an effort to review and perhaps reformulate some doctrines as per the timeless tradition of the pilgrim Church on earth, to better witness to Christ and help people experience conversion. That is the first and foremost job of the Church in every age. It’s nothing new and it will result in one of Gods happy surprises as usual.
J
Joe_Kelley
Guest
*Identity Thievery, In Christ All Sinners Are Truly Made New by S. M. Hutchens & Anthony Esolen
**Just Christians **On Homosexuality & Christian Identity by S. M. Hutchens
The July/August article:
**Just Christians **On Homosexuality & Christian Identity by S. M. Hutchens
Read more: touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=26-04-003-e#ixzz3HNyqrPp2
E
EIF5A
Guest
Instead of “God hates fags”, perhaps we need a sign that says “God loves chastity”. That way, the message encompasses everyone – straight, gay, in-between, etc.
- Status