Pope Benedict: Halt Cafeteria Catholicism!

[AlanFromWichita]

Brad:

Holiness is for everyone and the Church has provided everything we need to be holy. Most importantly, the sacraments. We can only be as holy as we are accessible to God and He is fully and completely accessible in the sacraments. Of course, we have to enter into the sacraments with an obedient heart towards Jesus.

This is all good stuff, but it is not the full Church. Why do you deny that the apophatic tradition of the Church is important? Have you ever studied mystic theology, or participated in any ongoing contemplative prayer program? If not, you really don’t know what you’re missing.

Plus, just because they provide it doesn’t mean Catholics know about it, much less that they take advantage of them. Catholics on the whole are completely uneducated on the spiritual journey, which is what the Church I think should be helping us travel, but they certainly know what the Church thinks about a particular political candidate.

Regarding the insinuation that anyone who gets frustrated or angry with another Catholic is doing something wrong, I beg to differ.

Anger is a natural tendency. Yes, Christ threw one temper tantrum, but if we are to be angry and standoffish against our brothers, then why did Christ compare harboring anger against our brothers to murder?

There are Catholics out there that are purposely misleading children away from Church teaching and into their notions of truth. This leads to potentially serious harm to body and soul. I have a right to get angry when it occurs (Jesus got angry at times - it provokes a reaction - how we react is also key) and respond accordingly. It is not correct for me to stay angry all time about it. I also, however, have the right to be frustrated when Church leaders allow same Catholics to obstinantly teach heresy despite the concerns of the faithful. This is natural and human. This is no attidude.

Yes, you have the right to be angry at everyone who doesn’t live up to your specifications, but that doesn’t mean it’s good for your soul – or your ability to teach and demonstrate the Love of God – when you are.

If you want someone to agree with you, try losing your anger and talk to them instead of at them and maybe you’ll have a better job of evangelizing and who knows – you may even learn something yourself or see an issue from another point of view!

Your anger is telegraphed in your word choice, and it automatically activates the intended targets shields. Why should they listen to an angry person about how to live a better life? So they can be angry like you? No thanks.

It’s old but it’s good: that’s the saying that it’s easier to catch bugs with honey than vinegar.

Alan

 

[BigPaulie]

AlanFromWichita:

Do you even know what I’m talking about? Have you ever studied any mystical theology? It is what the saints were all about. It has nothing to do with departure from dogma, but it adds to dogma.

Where has mystical theology, or anything else having to do with the Church’s apophatic tradition, being taught? Most Catholics have never even heard of contemplative prayer, Lectio Divina, or anything whatsoever about the spiritual journey. How can it be harmful to teach these things in conjunction with dogmatism?

How does knowing about such things as pseudo-dyonesius (sp?) and the Cloud of the Unknowing harm traditional Catholicism or create cafeterias?

It sounds like you are one of those I’m talking about. Maybe you can start by reading a Mystical Theology text or consult your spiritual advisor.

Theology in the apologetic sense is but one dimension of a person. Would you roughly call it the science of what is True?

Mystical theology is the science of love, which does not always adhere to “normal” rules of logic in terms that make sense to us who are clueless in this realm.

Without mysticism, dogma is just lip service.

Alan

Alan,
You seem to be an expert in mystical theology. You are correct in saying I don’t know that much about mystical theology. I can tell by your attitude however, you know very little about the virtue of humility. I did not say mysticism in and of itself causes cafeteria catholicism. You’ve got people in the pews today who think it is OK to live together (in sin) without getting married and the pastor of the church often says nothing and also lets them receive communion, think about that! This was not common practice in years or even centuries past. Your idea that this problem and others like it will be solved by studying mystical theology is ridiculous. By the way, your arrogance comes through loud and clear! What do you want to be when you grow up? How about Pope? Maybe you can be the first Pope in outer space! God Help Us, BigPaulie

 

[AlanFromWichita]

BigPaulie:

Alan,
You seem to be an expert in mystical theology.

Thank you, but I’ve really only dabbled. I did once read a text in mystical theology, but a lot of what I know has come from experience. In other words, I make a lot of it up as I go.

You are correct in saying I don’t know that much about mystical theology. I can tell by your attitude however, you know very little about the virtue of humility.

You are right. I make no bones about it that sometimes I don’t know the difference between prideful and honest disclosure. I guess I think I’m a little like Rush Limbaugh, almost always right and claiming confidence is misread as pride.

Actually it used to hurt me to say anything that would get a pain reaction out of other people, and that’s partly what drove me nuts.

One good exercise in humility is when one clerk, to the disagreement of anybody else in the work place, gets scared and starts a completely false rumor that I am a psycho who has gone off my medication, and makes a phone call on my behalf because she is my friend and knows I need help. Later that day, I was captured by men in white coats who strapped me down and took me to a lockup ward without my consent, without so much as even talking to a doctor, and refused to explain to me why I was locked up, and on whose authority. Then they tried to scare my wife into having me committed with threats of legal action, so just to help her out I signed myself in finally, two days after they illegally captured me. Finally on Monday I met the woman for the first time in my life who denied my civil rights without so much as telling me who she was or even interviewing me. If a criminal were treated this way the woman would lose her practice. As it is, she was a smug primadonna, always flanked by a half dozen myrmidons who were observing her greatness for their studies.

So I thought it was quite a lesson in humility. Or is it feeding my pride for martyrdom points to talk about it?

I’ve gotten beyond such concerns. I just go out and have fun, and if smoeone talks to me in a rude voice, I get distracted by the rudeness and enjoy exploring that more than the topic at hand.

I guess my mysticism is that I listen to my whims. I don’t know. Just take me for whatever I’m worth to you.

I did not say mysticism in and of itself causes cafeteria catholicism. You’ve got people in the pews today who think it is OK to live together (in sin) without getting married and the pastor of the church often says nothing and also lets them receive communion, think about that!

I know. When you think about it, probably more than half of them defiantly contracept or do other things, but they just don’t advertise it. Hey, what’s in the dark comes into the light. Once I was in line at a pharmacy counter when I overheard a technician placing a phone call about medicine for a good, staunch, pro-life friend of ours – prescribed by Tiller the Killer

, the infamous elective late term abortionist in Wichita. I’m not saying she had a late term abortion, but I know other Catholic women who will always remember their “care” from Dr. George Tiller.

I never said anything about it because I didn’t think it was my business to even know what I knew.

This was not common practice in years or even centuries past. Your idea that this problem and others like it will be solved by studying mystical theology is ridiculous. By the way, your arrogance comes through loud and clear! What do you want to be when you grow up? How about Pope? Maybe you can be the first Pope in outer space! God Help Us, BigPaulie

Thank you for noticing my arrogance. Your judgment came through loud and clear. I do not deny my arrogance, although I do not intentionally nurture it. It seems to grow unbounded until someone strikes me down again.

I love your ideas. I don’t think I wanna be pope, because I think it’d get hot wearing all that stuff, people would call me the anti-Christ and want to kill me and disembowel me and work voodoo against me and stuff. Too much for me.

What would be better is if I could be the World’s Attitude Monitor And Adjuster. Also known as the Happiness Finder. The pope could come to me for words of comfort. If he called with a problem, I would listen.

If you are not happy with the way I write to you, how would you have me diferent? Please teach me and I’ll try to learn.

Peace,
Alan

 

[BigPaulie]

Alan,
Have a blessed Lord’s Day.
Peace, BigPaulie :tiphat:

 

[AlanFromWichita]

BigPaulie:

Alan,
Have a blessed Lord’s Day.
Peace, BigPaulie :tiphat:

Thank you, and the same to you as well.

As soon as I send this comment, I get to go to Mass and play music for people!

As I did a few weeks ago, I think I will dedicate one piece to the pope Benedict XVI. I read that he plays piano, and prefers Beethoven and Mozart.

Before Mass (Mass starts in 35 minutes from right now) I will play the second movement of the Pathetique Sonata, with a little extra passion in it than usual, God willing.

Alan

 

[AlanFromWichita]

BigPaulie:

Alan,
You seem to be an expert in mystical theology. You are correct in saying I don’t know that much about mystical theology. I can tell by your attitude however, you know very little about the virtue of humility.

Actually it’s worse than than I had let on. I do know a little about humility. That’s partly what makes it seem so elusive that I just don’t bother claiming to be anything but proud.

Courtesy poster Grace and Glory who dug this up in another thread, is a sample of this “mysticism” I’m talking about. It’s the best thing I’ve seen on pride, from the Dark Night of the Soul by St. John-of-the-Cross.

Here is describing the errors made by souls who are beginners on the spiritual journey. See if this makes any sort of convoluted sense because if it does, maybe you can explain it to me:
St. John of the Cross:

As these beginners feel themselves to be very fervent and diligent in spiritual things and devout exercises, from this prosperity (although it is true that holy things of their own nature cause humility) there often comes to them, through their imperfections, a certain kind of secret pride, whence they come to have some degree of satisfaction with their works and with themselves. And hence there comes to them likewise a certain desire, which is somewhat vain, and at times very vain, to speak of spiritual things in the presence of others, and sometimes even to teach such things rather than to learn them. They condemn others in their heart when they see that they have not the kind of devotion which they themselves desire; and sometimes they even say this in words, herein resembling the Pharisee, who boasted of himself, praising God for his own good works and despising the publican.

1. In these persons the devil often increases the fervour that they have and the desire to perform these and other works more frequently, so that their pride and presumption may grow greater. For the devil knows quite well that all these works and virtues which they perform are not only valueless to them, but even become vices in them. And such a degree of evil are some of these persons wont to reach that they would have none appear good save themselves; and thus, in deed and word, whenever the opportunity occurs, they condemn them and slander them, beholding the mote in their brother’s eye and not considering the beam which is in their own; they strain at another’s gnat and themselves swallow a camel.

Isn’t that stuff just too cool? That’s a sample of what I call mystical theology.

Alan

 

[BarbaraTherese]

…scuse me buttin in …as I understand things and because I quote something does not mean I consistently put it into practise…every bit as much a reminder to me as to anyone…

St Teresa of Avila wrote…

…" but the surest and safest way to Union is through love of neighbour…"… some other saint wrote…" and if your brother interrupts your prayer, then let love of neighbour be your prayer…"…(loving others is a work of mercy and a prayer…)…

The summit of holiness or Union is that one is at one with God’s Will…the object of any brand of spirituality is God’s Will and God Will is to be loved and served and the surest sign that we are loving God is love of neighbour… and in loving neighbour we are serving God…

“how can you say you love God whom you cannot see if you cannot love your neighbour whom you can”

If it is God’s Will one travels the mystic road…well and good…if it is not His Will…well and good…t he important thing is that we are united to God’s Will no matter what it may be…

We are called to follow Jesus…not the mystical road in all cases…and Jesus became human, lived and died for love of others…

We all need to be wary we are not missing the wood for the trees…though I grant you no wood but for trees…if you know what I mean…

only me…regards…Barb

 

[AlanFromWichita]

BarbaraTherese:

The summit of holiness or Union is that one is at one with God’s Will…the object of any brand of spirituality is God’s Will and God Will is to be loved and served and the surest sign that we are loving God is love of neighbour… and in loving neighbour we are serving God…

“how can you say you love God whom you cannot see if you cannot love your neighbour whom you can”

I like that. Thank you.

If it is God’s Will one travels the mystic road…well and good…if it is not His Will…well and good…t he important thing is that we are united to God’s Will no matter what it may be…

We are called to follow Jesus…not the mystical road in all cases…and Jesus became human, lived and died for love of others…

Often when one thinks of mystics, one thinks of those who dedicate their lives to it. Because it is true that God calls us to mystic truths and seeking thereof of it be His will, then my faith should be that I do not have to say anything. However, my enthusiasm cries out to share what is beautiful, so it could be my lack of faith speaking or it could be God calling others to deeper prayer through me.

My contention is that “mysticism” is, in itself, just as much a part of being human as any focused knowledge. Mysticism in itself is simply the science of love, so every human being is controlled by “natural law” of mysticism whether they know it or not.

Certainly not all are called to an intensive program of study or a significant change in life style, just as not all are called to become an apologist. Is that what you were getting at?

Nevertheless, I assert that, 1) if people are fed constantly from only one half of the Church tradition and not the other, they may be prone to serious errors in the other half and don’t even know it (for example someone who can quote all scripture but has not love), and 2) as a minimum, every Catholic should at least be made aware of the importance of all three types of prayer.

The CCC seems to back up my second assertion, by saying prayer life “should” include contemplative prayer. This, to me, is a critical link between the two halves of the Church. If a person claims to follow the literal teachings of the Church, then one cannot miss CCC 2697-2724 which, in essence, ties in mysticism and theology. One who claims to mental assent with the Church but does not consider contemplation an important prayer, misses out – according to the book to which they claim assent.

Others can decide and be guided as God wills. I cannot help but speak of the tremendous benefits that come with acknowledging a complete surrender to the Church.

When Jesus appeals to a higher Truth above the written code, such as working on Sunday or washing cups, He is actually establishing the mystical or apophatic tradition of the Church because it is a Truth based on love which is more powerful than the written down half of the Truth.

only me…regards…Barb

You have been such a blessing to me and doubtlessly to others, it’s hard to regard you as “only” you. Of course, we are all no more than we are, so of course you are demonstrated the right attitude. Sorry if I offend by my noticing. It’s just that, when two or more are here in His name, I am sure God is here with us – so when we read each other’s communications I believe God is with us.

I like some of the words to a song called “Brother’s Keeper” by Rich Mullins: “I won’t despise him for his weakness, nor regard him for his strength.”

That sounds strange, living in a world where it is considered intrinsically good to praise and reward accomplishments in others. That sounds like a new thread waiting to be born!

Alan

 

[BarbaraTherese]

** My contention is that “mysticism” is, in itself, just as much a part of being human as any focused knowledge. Mysticism in itself is simply the science of love, so every human being is controlled by “natural law” of mysticism whether they know it or not.**

I sure hope this comes out right Alan…I hold that the mystical road is far more common than we realize…the dynamics of mysticism are the dynamics of spirituality…after all you may be concentrating on serving others through works of mercy and that much maligned word: charity…and you find it very hard going with no consolations or nothing in it…to perform these works simply because you care about others more than you care for your own feelings etc and all for the love of God…now this would I daresay have some description in mystical spiritual theology…this is what I meant by “though I grant you, no wood but for the trees”…i.e. mystical spiritual experiences explained in mystical theology are far more common than we realize.

We all need to be wary we are not missing the wood for the trees…though I grant you no wood but for trees…if you know what I mean…

To make it I HOPE a bit clearer if trees = mystical theology…the wood = love of God

Also without prayer a spiritual life could not be sustained…many I think do have normal contemplative prayer states (by normal I mean excluding unusual mystical phenomena)…and would truly be bowled over to know it!!!

For example…how many Catholics on going into a Catholic Church feel very happy to be there…one cannot pray in the normal sense…perhaps thoughts very distracted…but just very happy to be there…they would be bowled over to know that such is a contemplative experience…simply because mystical spiritual theology has come to be claimed as some sort of spiriutal elitism…but I say, far far far more common than that!..and no exclusive superiority to be claimed…as you said Alan…

Mysticism in itself is simply the science of love, so every human being is controlled by “natural law” of mysticism whether they know it or not.

No wood without THE trees!

Of course where two or more are gathered in The Lord’s name, there is The Lord in our midst … but still, Alan, tis only me! The pauper has sat down with the saint as it were and The Lord sees only His friends…his co-workers… and both of equal importance to Him and also equal value…

Regards…tis only me still! smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/26/26_11_5.gif
ps This Post is absolutely marvellous…because I THINK I may have this quote-box thing finally mastered!!!

 

[BarbaraTherese]

Certainly not all are called to an intensive program of study or a significant change in life style, just as not all are called to become an apologist. Is that what you were getting at?

We can in reality only be what we are…and we are what we be as it were… and yes… if I am a foot, then be a foot in the mystical body of Christ and give myself totally to it with joy and gratitude…and if you be an eye…than be an eye…etc. etc.

Trying very hard to concentrate and think about what you are saying Alan…I insight we are both saying precisely the same…I too ponder homilies that may encourage us to pray…but do not touch on the problems we can run up against when we pray…in other words to help us to insight mystical spiritual theology applying in our own everyday lives … homilies that tell us what politician we should vote for…but do not speak of the real Church’s mission to help us to grow as spiritual people…not only for our own good to praise and thank God always…but that we in turn may go out into the world and help others to understand how to be truly spiritual people and how The Catholic Church’s incredibly beautiful mystical spiritual theology gleaned from Scriputre has answers for modern man’s day to day problems as well as his more complex ones…social problems…etc… and is this why the word is in such a mess…is the salt loosing its taste…and is the yeast failing to rise…questions…

Alan…my poor head!..it aches as I write…

All the best my friend…
Tis Only I:whacky: .........:D ........... [smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/23/23_144_4.gif](http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZNxdm824YYAU)

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Barbara Therese, I heard you have marriage counseling experience.

What would you say to a couple who comes in and one says the other one doesn’t think right about important things, and therefore the is not a “good” spouse? Would you suggest that the person who is “not good” should shape up or ship out?

Yes, I know this is contrived, but I’m trying to pick your experience for actual strategy tips in handling this dysfunctional family that is the Body of Christ.

Alan

 

[Brad]

AlanFromWichita:

This is all good stuff, but it is not the full Church. Why do you deny that the apophatic tradition of the Church is important? Have you ever studied mystic theology, or participated in any ongoing contemplative prayer program? If not, you really don’t know what you’re missing.

I haven’t denied that the apophatic tradition is important. I don’t even know what it is. I know what contemplative prayer is, and if done properly can be tremendously beneficial. Many of the saints practiced accordingly. Anything that can deepen our prayer life, as long as Jesus is at the center, is very good.

AlanFromWichita:

Plus, just because they provide it doesn’t mean Catholics know about it, much less that they take advantage of them. Catholics on the whole are completely uneducated on the spiritual journey, which is what the Church I think should be helping us travel, but they certainly know what the Church thinks about a particular political candidate.

Catholics on the whole are completely uneducated about most things Catholic. The main reason a lot of them know about the political candidates is because of the media

AlanFromWichita:

Anger is a natural tendency. Yes, Christ threw one temper tantrum, but if we are to be angry and standoffish against our brothers, then why did Christ compare harboring anger against our brothers to murder?

I’d say Jesus was a little miffed in the Garden and when He called the Pharisees a “brood of vipers”, and this is only the recorded times.

He did say we should not harbor anger which is why I said it is not correct to stay angry.

AlanFromWichita:

Yes, you have the right to be angry at everyone who doesn’t live up to your specifications, but that doesn’t mean it’s good for your soul – or your ability to teach and demonstrate the Love of God – when you are.

If you want someone to agree with you, try losing your anger and talk to them instead of at them and maybe you’ll have a better job of evangelizing and who knows – you may even learn something yourself or see an issue from another point of view!

Your anger is telegraphed in your word choice, and it automatically activates the intended targets shields. Why should they listen to an angry person about how to live a better life? So they can be angry like you? No thanks.

It’s old but it’s good: that’s the saying that it’s easier to catch bugs with honey than vinegar.

This has nothing to do with “living up to my expectations”. This has to do with teaching the truth in obedience to the Bishop who is to be in obedience to the Holy Father and Magisterium of the Church.

My word choice telegraphs my anger? How exactly? Which word bothered you? And I don’t know about you, but I don’t want my children walking around thinking that’s it’s ok to fornicate, engage in homosexual relationships, that sin doesn’t matter much, Mary is no big shakes, Hell doesn’t exist, purgatory is conceptual only, people spend too much time praying, parents are all schizos, and we don’t really know what Jesus said or who He was, nor did He.

This is for starters. I won’t get into the belittling of St. Paul, St. Augustine and the others. I don’t know about you but it makes my stomach turn - this is natural.

Honey? Absolutely. Talk and dialogue? Plenty. Angry during conversation? Never. Tolerant? Very.

Seems to me like you don’t have a grasp at how the dissenting crowd of priests and bishops operate and/or you support them.

It is the orthodox that become marginalized and criticized, in public and in private by the religous and priests. It is in disagreeing with them however politely that they see as a venomous attack of anger against them. It is then that the name-calling and attacks begin in an effort to silence the faithful. Now, I ask you, is that any way for a priest to function?

By the way, as far as “learning something”, I tried all the pearls of wisdom of the dissenting crowd. It doesn’t work. That’s why I go to Church.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Brad:

I haven’t denied that the apophatic tradition is important. I don’t even know what it is.

My point exactly. That’s why I wrote to the Holy Father, “These things have been great blessings to me and I think there are many who hunger for it and don’t even know it exists within Catholicism.”

I know what contemplative prayer is, and if done properly can be tremendously beneficial. Many of the saints practiced accordingly. Anything that can deepen our prayer life, as long as Jesus is at the center, is very good.

Catholics on the whole are completely uneducated about most things Catholic. The main reason a lot of them know about the political candidates is because of the media

You are right that many Catholics don’t know what the Church teaches, and I’m no glaring exception I suppose. As far as the media, that may be partly true but the Catholic Church has become quite vocal about voting issues, and in fact the whole way I came upon Catholic Answers was that I had heard about their “voter’s guide.” I think the Church places quite a bit of emphasis on how to vote – IMO disproportionately to teachings about transforming the heart and mind to the likeness of Christ.

I’d say Jesus was a little miffed in the Garden and when He called the Pharisees a “brood of vipers”, and this is only the recorded times.

You’ll notice the other recorded times when he spoke harshly, it was nearly always against those who looked down at people who were not “as good” as them because they were sinners.

This has nothing to do with “living up to my expectations”. This has to do with teaching the truth in obedience to the Bishop who is to be in obedience to the Holy Father and Magisterium of the Church.

Perhaps I am accusing you unfairly in part of this. I just reviewed the thread a little and see that you have generally been very fair. I am not without feelings on these things, and it is possible that my frustration with others came through in my words to you. For that I apologize.

My word choice telegraphs my anger? How exactly? Which word bothered you? And I don’t know about you, but I don’t want my children walking around thinking that’s it’s ok to fornicate, engage in homosexual relationships, that sin doesn’t matter much, Mary is no big shakes, Hell doesn’t exist, purgatory is conceptual only, people spend too much time praying, parents are all schizos, and we don’t really know what Jesus said or who He was, nor did He.

No, I don’t want my kids thinking those things are OK. Neither, however, do I want them to presume themselves “good” compared to others, which is implied when we say they are “not good” for their particular sins.

Seems to me like you don’t have a grasp at how the dissenting crowd of priests and bishops operate and/or you support them.

Maybe I don’t, but I don’t get why this threatens the Truth, unless we get a cafeteria pope.

Frankly, I think the Holy Father would be totally justified in putting the smackdown on dissenting priests and bishops, and we shouldn’t even have to hear about it. He’s their boss, and if they teach against him he has every right to fire them.

Maybe he needs to get rid of half of them, making a more pure set of teachings. That way we won’t have a priest surplus when we throw out all the members who dissent.

It is the orthodox that become marginalized and criticized, in public and in private by the religous and priests. It is in disagreeing with them however politely that they see as a venomous attack of anger against them. It is then that the name-calling and attacks begin in an effort to silence the faithful. Now, I ask you, is that any way for a priest to function?

Without specific examples (not that I’m asking for them) I’m not sure what you mean. Yes, I do know that Catholics are vilified 24/7 for their beliefs, even those who are correct. It is very frustrating, for sure. That is all the more reason we have to stay above using their tactics out of frustration. If we tell them, “you’re bad and I’m good” then we are really advancing barriers, not taking them down. Say they’re “wrong,” and you have judged their wrong beliefs. Say they’re “bad” and you have judged them.

By the way, as far as “learning something”, I tried all the pearls of wisdom of the dissenting crowd. It doesn’t work. That’s why I go to Church.

Fair enough.

Alan

 

[Brad]

AlanFromWichita:

My point exactly. That’s why I wrote to the Holy Father, “These things have been great blessings to me and I think there are many who hunger for it and don’t even know it exists within Catholicism.”

Yes. I’d like to learn more.

AlanFromWichita:

You are right that many Catholics don’t know what the Church teaches, and I’m no glaring exception I suppose. As far as the media, that may be partly true but the Catholic Church has become quite vocal about voting issues, and in fact the whole way I came upon Catholic Answers was that I had heard about their “voter’s guide.” I think the Church places quite a bit of emphasis on how to vote – IMO disproportionately to teachings about transforming the heart and mind to the likeness of Christ.

Voters issues get emphasized because they are important in light of pro-abortion, pro-homosexual marriage etc. politicians consistently being voted for by Catholics. These are not just minor issues. These are radical offenses against God that cry out for Christians to stand firmly against or see society sink. The Bible is full of such examples. Different times call for different emphasis. The emphasis today needs to be righting the ship. It does start with personal conversion but a good society supports conversion, a bad society does not. Both have to be pursued.

AlanFromWichita:

You’ll notice the other recorded times when he spoke harshly, it was nearly always against those who looked down at people who were not “as good” as them because they were sinners.

Perhaps. But that is usually the cry of the dissenters. They say
the orthodox pray a lot but really aren’t that good.

My particular beef has nothing to do with dissenting laypeople who have no authority. It has to do with dissenting laypeople and religious who do have authority. And it is not a matter of looking down upon them. It is a matter of grave concern about the impact they are having on the faithful - leading them astray.

AlanFromWichita:

Perhaps I am accusing you unfairly in part of this. I just reviewed the thread a little and see that you have generally been very fair. I am not without feelings on these things, and it is possible that my frustration with others came through in my words to you. For that I apologize.

No problem. We are all there one time or another.

AlanFromWichita:

No, I don’t want my kids thinking those things are OK. Neither, however, do I want them to presume themselves “good” compared to others, which is implied when we say they are “not good” for their particular sins.

Well, it depends. I teach my children that all people are good - they were made in the image and likeness of God. However, many of them act badly and we are not to imitate or follow them in their bad actions. Further, if their bad actions largely define them or pose a threat, the they should stay completely away from them.

AlanFromWichita:

Maybe I don’t, but I don’t get why this threatens the Truth, unless we get a cafeteria pope.

The Truth is never threatened. However, the perception of truth can be severly threatened. In a local parish community, the person most see as the authority is the local priest, secondly the local Bishop. They don’t usually bump into the Pope. This is especially true with impressionable children. When you add to the equation that the dissenting individual is extremely bright and good with words, and has a motive of “converting” others to his “way”, it poses a major threat to perception.

AlanFromWichita:

Frankly, I think the Holy Father would be totally justified in putting the smackdown on dissenting priests and bishops, and we shouldn’t even have to hear about it. He’s their boss, and if they teach against him he has every right to fire them.

He has the right to discipline and it is necessary in some situations. It should have been done more the past 40 years or so.

AlanFromWichita:

Maybe he needs to get rid of half of them, making a more pure set of teachings. That way we won’t have a priest surplus when we throw out all the members who dissent.

Not interested in throwing out layperson dissenters as I said. I’m interested in orthodox priests, religious, and teachers. This has been shown to increase congregation, seminarians etc.

 

[Brad]

AlanFromWichita:

Without specific examples (not that I’m asking for them) I’m not sure what you mean. Yes, I do know that Catholics are vilified 24/7 for their beliefs, even those who are correct. It is very frustrating, for sure. That is all the more reason we have to stay above using their tactics out of frustration. If we tell them, “you’re bad and I’m good” then we are really advancing barriers, not taking them down. Say they’re “wrong,” and you have judged their wrong beliefs. Say they’re “bad” and you have judged them.

No doubt. That’s the right way to go.

 

[BarbaraTherese]

Hi Brad…re your Post #75…just having a wander around the Board here and there…

I quote you:

***"Perhaps. But that is usually the cry of the dissenters. They say
the orthodox pray a lot but really aren’t that good.

My particular beef has nothing to do with dissenting laypeople who have no authority. It has to do with dissenting laypeople and religious who do have authority. And it is not a matter of looking down upon them. It is a matter of grave concern about the impact they are having on the faithful - leading them astray. "***

---

I tend to think that if now and then here and there we had homilies on the dynamics of the spiritual life and of the necessity for daily prayer and perseverance daily that we would start to be transformed into the heart and mind of Christ and not need so much instruction from the pulpit etc. on how to vote on serious moral issues. We would just do it!!! If we are not voting in accord with our Catholic beliefs…then our spirituality is failing. Prayer (intrinsic to spirituality) is the meeting place of the soul with God and it is a relationship and like any relationship the going can get a bit rough at times and need hard work. And like any relationship people communicate (in this instance prayer) in very many ways …
But all the same, I enjoyed reading your Post and also Alan’s and picked up a few things I needed to think about and also I learnt some things I needed to know…thank you both .

Barb

---

---

---

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Brad:

The emphasis today needs to be righting the ship. It does start with personal conversion but a good society supports conversion, a bad society does not. Both have to be pursued.

I’m not sure I’m with you here.

My particular beef has nothing to do with dissenting laypeople who have no authority. It has to do with dissenting laypeople and religious who do have authority. And it is not a matter of looking down upon them. It is a matter of grave concern about the impact they are having on the faithful - leading them astray.

There really isn’t a good argument against this, although some would have us believe otherwise. Gosh, if they can’t obey a worldly boss whom they can see, how are they going to obey a heavenly boss whom they cannot?

Personally I think some of these people have good points and should be listened to, but to teach against the Church using the authority she has vested in them? :tsktsk:

Not interested in throwing out layperson dissenters as I said. I’m interested in orthodox priests, religious, and teachers. This has been shown to increase congregation, seminarians etc.

I’m in your camp here. Even if I didn’t like what the Church teaches on something I’d still have to admit she needs her “insiders” to stay on message.

How can you even know if you think Church teachings are right if every leader has an individual view of what those teachings are? How do I know when I safely dare to suppose my understanding of the CCC or a teaching from Rome really is clearer than the view of any bishop in good standing? This makes way for lots of noise and little fruitful dialog.

Alan