Reasons Why I Prefer the Pauline Mass

  • Thread starter Thread starter Spiller
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
cothrige said:
I am very uncomfortable with this approach which smacks a bit of clericalism. Being a priest does not make you impeccable or infallible.
Click to expand...
No, but it does make you the authority. Sorry, but that’s the way it is. 9 out of 10 posts I read on this subject seem to reflect a rejection of said authority in one way or another.

If a clergyperson is doing wrong, it will be taken care of in due course. But succumbing to personal pride and launching complaint after complaint against the Church or her clergy doesn’t solve this. We have merely engaged in sin of our own.

Two wrongs don’t make a right.
 
If a clergyperson is doing wrong, it will be taken care of in due course.

Boston, Boston, Boston. Los Angeles.

*** But succumbing to personal pride and launching complaint after complaint against the Church or her clergy doesn’t solve this. We have merely engaged in sin of our own.***

You haven’t even remotely shown that complaints about clergy are motivated by personal pride…this is merely an unsupported assertion of yours and, as such, is simply you claiming to know the hearts of others. Now, that (unlike all the imagined sins you try to point out) is actually wrong.

Shame on you.
 
Howard Roark;3805544You haven’t even remotely shown that complaints about clergy are motivated by personal pride…this is merely an unsupported assertion of yours and said:
And, in what way have you shown the thousands of complaints aired here at CAF to be motivated by anything else?

“The Church (and it’s clergy) doesn’t conform to MY interpretation of Scripture, Tradition, or Documents…therefore the Church (and/or it’s clergy) is WRONG.” :rolleyes:

As to who is claiming to know the hearts of others…I’m not the one posting that the clergy of the San Antonio area are “nuts”.

Shame on who??? 🤷
Click to expand...
 
Shame on you, because you’re one person I’ve seen claiming to know motivations.

I say the clergy are “nuts”. That means mentally defective, not that they are evil. I say they are liberal - a judgement of puiblicly expressed theology - perfectly within my purview. I say my Bishop is a tool - duped into advancing someone else’s agenda - much more charitable than saying evil is his own agenda.

Only you say that you know other people’s motivations.

You’ve been getting away with that for a long time here, haven’t you?
 
Your “due course” hasn’t really worked out so well…I’ll let the people who read this thread do a quick reality check about how well “due course” worked out in Boston.

And, yes, what you propose is rampant, hardcore clericalism.
 
ethelzguy said:
Don’t you think that’s a tad uncharitable towards a duly authorized EMHC?

After all, if they are authorized by the HMC, who are we to say that to receive from one “isn’t good enough for ME” ??? :eek:
Click to expand...
no given that many of them:
  1. do not actually believe Christ is in the Eucharist.
  2. scoff at people who receive on the tongue.
The priest is the one who consecrates the host.
 
Spiller said:
Tell that to my Byzantine-Ruthenian
Settle down. I’m not ranting. I’m just ignoring those who rely on emotion to try and make their points. All they carp about are “abuses” – the more obscure and inflammatory the better. I’m comparing the OF and the EF as defined by the Church – not as abused by man – and that goes for either form.
Click to expand...
say it…LATIN RITE CHURCH
Latin is supposed to be the norm.
 
Howard_Roark said:
Your “due course” hasn’t really worked out so well…I’ll let the people who read this thread do a quick reality check about how well “due course” worked out in Boston.

And, yes, what you propose is rampant, hardcore clericalism.
Click to expand...
Like posts that say that certain clergy are “nuts” ??? 👍

Yes, what has happened in Boston is unfortunate, and painful for some, yet, in God’s time these issues are being resolved. And, it’s not “my” due course, it is the due course of God and his Church on Earth.
 
Howard_Roark said:
Shame on you, because you’re one person I’ve seen claiming to know motivations.

I say the clergy are “nuts”.

Only you say that you know other people’s motivations.

You’ve been getting away with that for a long time here, haven’t you?
Click to expand...
Pot meet Kettle :rolleyes:
 
ethelzguy said:
No, but it does make you the authority. Sorry, but that’s the way it is. 9 out of 10 posts I read on this subject seem to reflect a rejection of said authority in one way or another.

If a clergyperson is doing wrong, it will be taken care of in due course. But succumbing to personal pride and launching complaint after complaint against the Church or her clergy doesn’t solve this. We have merely engaged in sin of our own.

Two wrongs don’t make a right.
Click to expand...
I have to say I see a couple of things here. First of all, no man has the authority to do what is not right. Consider that Pope John Paul II made it clear that he had no authority to ordain women. If your priest uses his authority to place on you a burden which is not his right to apply, then he actually has no authority to do that. Asserting that his authority is absolute, and extends to areas outside of the truth or orthopraxis certainly inclines me to think you are adhering to some form of clericalism.

Another thing which bothers me is that you are very comfortable accusing your fellow Catholics of sin, explicitly the sin of pride. Do you have cause for this? No. Is it within the scope of your authority, responsibility or even ability to judge the hearts of your fellow man? No. And further, what is the “sin” you see as proof of this pride? Criticizing the priests or clergy of the Church. You say that I have no right to say that what a priest does is wrong, even if it were an objective reality, but you do have the authority to correct me for doing that. So while I cannot criticize a priest, regardless of his actions, you can criticize me and every other Catholic, and further accuse us of the mortal sin of pride for merely appreciating the traditions of the Church. How is that anything but clericalism?
 
Good post, I agree (of course). Laissez-Faire attitudes like his allow all of these abuses to take place in the Church. All that is necessary for evil to triumph, of course, is for good men to do nothing. Or, in this case, for Ethelzguy to do nothing, either.
 
cothrige said:
I have to say I see a couple of things here. First of all, no man has the authority to do what is not right. Consider that Pope John Paul II made it clear that he had no authority to ordain women. If your priest uses his authority to place on you a burden which is not his right to apply, then he actually has no authority to do that. Asserting that his authority is absolute, and extends to areas outside of the truth or orthopraxis certainly inclines me to think you are adhering to some form of clericalism.

Please define “clericalism” as you apply it to my post(s)?

Another thing which bothers me is that you are very comfortable accusing your fellow Catholics of sin, explicitly the sin of pride. Do you have cause for this? No. Is it within the scope of your authority, responsibility or even ability to judge the hearts of your fellow man? No. And further, what is the “sin” you see as proof of this pride? Criticizing the priests or clergy of the Church. You say that I have no right to say that what a priest does is wrong, even if it were an objective reality, but you do have the authority to correct me for doing that. So while I cannot criticize a priest, regardless of his actions, you can criticize me and every other Catholic, and further accuse us of the mortal sin of pride for merely appreciating the traditions of the Church. How is that anything but clericalism?
Click to expand...
Ah, the old “complaining about the complainers” line again. The difference being, I am not complaining or criticizing my Church or her clergy, but rather my peers who do so.
 
ethelzguy said:
Please define “clericalism” as you apply it to my post(s)?
Click to expand...
I think I did actually, but…
Ah, the old “complaining about the complainers” line again. The difference being, I am not complaining or criticizing my Church or her clergy, but rather my peers who do so.
Click to expand...
And there you have it. You feel completely free to criticize all traditional Catholics, simply by their being traditional, and even accuse them of being guilty of mortal sin. Why can you do this? Because, you say, they criticize clerics. But, you can criticize them? How is it different? Well, because they are not clerics. How are you not seeing this?
 
cothrige said:
And there you have it. You feel completely free to criticize all traditional Catholics, simply by their being traditional, and even accuse them of being guilty of mortal sin. Why can you do this? Because, you say, they criticize clerics. But, you can criticize them? How is it different? Well, because they are not clerics. How are you not seeing this?
Click to expand...
Apples and Oranges.

First off, your comment that I feel completely free to critcize “all traditional Catholics” is way off base. I am a traditional Catholic. But, my tradtional Catholicism also includes obedience.

Second, I guess I’ll resort to analogy. A teenager is mouthing off to a parent or other elder. A second teenager steps in and says to the first one “hey man, you’re getting out of line here”. Does that clear the picture up?

Third, I become amused when someone chastises me for “complaining about the complainers”…What a cop out. You feel free to bash away at the HMC, but when someone takes you to task for it, you hide behind the “your being judgemental” card, when it is your judgemental attitude toward the HMC that incited the whole thing to begin with.

🤷
 
ethelzguy said:
Apples and Oranges.

First off, your comment that I feel completely free to critcize “all traditional Catholics” is way off base. I am a traditional Catholic. But, my tradtional Catholicism also includes obedience.

Second, I guess I’ll resort to analogy. A teenager is mouthing off to a parent or other elder. A second teenager steps in and says to the first one “hey man, you’re getting out of line here”. Does that clear the picture up?

Third, I become amused when someone chastises me for “complaining about the complainers”…What a cop out. You feel free to bash away at the HMC, but when someone takes you to task for it, you hide behind the “your being judgemental” card, when it is your judgemental attitude toward the HMC that incited the whole thing to begin with.

🤷
Click to expand...
Please provide a citation from official Church teaching that states that it is unacceptable to question prudential decisions.

What I see here is certain progresives on this forum establishing themselves as the “True defenders” of HMC. So if that’s the case, support your position with official Church teaching… show me where the Church has said that it is unacceptable to question prudential decisions.
 
SJP said:
Please provide a citation from official Church teaching that states that it is unacceptable to question prudential decisions.

What I see here is certain progresives on this forum establishing themselves as the “True defenders” of HMC. So if that’s the case, support your position with official Church teaching… show me where the Church has said that it is unacceptable to question prudential decisions.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t. I have never stated that it is wrong to “question” the Church. My beef is with those who endlessly whine, bellyache, gripe, carp, moan, groan, etc…

Questions are asked, and answered…Once the question has been answered it’s time to move on. Unless you somehow feel that you are above the authority of the Church and/or her clergy.
 
Clergy are not above doctrine. Get that straight. Catholicism is not a matter of some priest’s opinion. They may spend their whole lives teaching heterodoxy…then there is no way to “move on”.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top