Restoring Tradition

[Marie5890]

I was too young to remember. For sure that was not the cultural idea in my extended family because it was accepted as a fact that relations with post-pubescent boys were homosexual acts and that people with those tendencies should have not been allowed in position where they could endanger children. Even if my extended family was border line anti-clerical they always thought that the priesthood was a place for real men only.

However, your comment is not out of place. Probably a lot of parents considered their “effeminate” boys as some kind of weaklings that needed the protection of the priesthood. This is still a common idea. When the son of a friend of mine announced that he wanted to enter seminary the first thing the relatives asked the “Opus Dei” father was “Is your son gay?”

Thanks. I have of recent wondered if such thought processes were part of some of the Catholic culture through out the generations, if not the older generations.

I realize its not a black and white issue, but it does sound like there is/was a gray area of thinking

 

[ChurchTorch]

Yes. They were very well catechized, but that is how strongly they felt about it. They remained loyal to God in their home, and begged daily for his Mercy for not attending Mass. They had a confessor come to their home weekly. He also administered the Eucharist. They certainly weren’t ‘stupid’ about it.

The liberties that were taken by individual Clergy after VII tore many people apart. My Uncle was a Pastor of a Parish where one of his co-Priests proudly introduced his “Fiancee” during one of his Masses. The older Priests were forced out of their Parishes to make room for the progressives. Said Uncle ended up selling newspapers at the Airport until being taken in by the Arch Bishop of Chicago and assigned to a Parish where he served until his Death.

It was not the Council itself that did damage. They never intended to change everything - it was individuals. Many individuals that chose to make their own interpretations.

“that is how strongly they felt about it”?

Their pride was so strong that in essence they might well have given up on the chance at eternal life? Again that does not make any sense for any well catechized Catholic. That truly stuns me.

If they defiantly refused to attend Mass each week then their sins were not being absolved – despite their weekly home confessions. Further, receiving Holy Communion at home when they had the ability to attend Mass smacks very strongly of a rejection of the Church. It’s abusive.

Pride.

 

[Joe_5859]

Can anyone think of a more powerfull argument to removing the novus ordo, restoring full tradition and cleaning house of the V-II crowd than the current scandal? I know God uses calamity to bring about good, so I cannot help but wonder at what is happenning now whithout thinking this is a cleaning process in the making. I certainly am praying for that result!

Yes, I can see the headlines now:

Vatican Institutes Latin Mass in Response to Sex Scandal

And the whole world goes “What? ”.



I appreciate your desire to look for good coming out of evil, but I don’t think that’s a realistic expectation.

 

[Erin_Anne]

“that is how strongly they felt about it”?

Their pride was so strong that in essence they might well have given up on the chance at eternal life? Again that does not make any sense for any well catechized Catholic. That truly stuns me.

If they defiantly refused to attend Mass each week then their sins were not being absolved – despite their weekly home confessions. Further, receiving Holy Communion at home when they had the ability to attend Mass smacks very strongly of a rejection of the Church. It’s abusive.

Pride.

Fortunately, it is not for you to judge. Only God.

 

[Lormar]

“that is how strongly they felt about it”?

Their pride was so strong that in essence they might well have given up on the chance at eternal life? Again that does not make any sense for any well catechized Catholic. That truly stuns me.

If they defiantly refused to attend Mass each week then their sins were not being absolved – despite their weekly home confessions. Further, receiving Holy Communion at home when they had the ability to attend Mass smacks very strongly of a rejection of the Church. It’s abusive.

Pride.

It’s not for you to say if their sins were being absolved or not. Frankly, it’s not for you to be so judgmental about this. What do you know? Are you able to catch a glimpse of their interior state? Has Our Lord imparted His Knowledge to you?

Pride abounds everywhere and in everyone.

 

[choy]

I think that one of the things that attracts people to the Catholic church is its uncompromising stand on moral issues such as the sanctity of human life. People are seeking a moral compass, something they can believe in. It is true that the sex abuse crisis is perceived to have weakened the Church but at least the Church is starting to deal with this, actually has been more proactive than many other organizations. I don’t see this as an argument for the EF over the OF, I think that what is needed is a return to the core teachings of the Church as were taught pre VII such as the existence of Hell, how we only have a short time here on earth accept God’s grace and be reconciled, the need for confession, that we receive Jesus’ body and blood in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. It is these kinds of traditions that will strengthen the Church.

everything you mentioned is still being taught today, so i don’t know what you mean by them being pre-Vatican II

 

[LoyalViews]

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. No. I’m not a sedevacanist. I didn’t mean I don’t go by what the Pope says. What I mean was I don’t go by what Vatican II does/says. Most Traditional Catholics don’t.

Sorry for the misunderstanding…

My mistake.

 

[dmorgan]

I still stand by my assertion: the modernization/destuction of the Mass and the weak enforcement of the tenents of our faith have led to our current situation. I feel that a return to Tradition can cure many of these ills. Not all, but many.
If you have the time, and an open mind, please read this blog and be sure to read all of the comments. I am not a Church historian but many of these posters are and give facts and first person information to support their opinions, not just canned or emotional responses.

wdtprs.com/blog/2008/05/petrus-amazing-interview-with-card-noe-paul-vis-smoke-of-satan-remark-concerned-liturgy/

Pax Vobiscum

 

[choy]

ah yes, blogs, the source of unbiased opinion

 

[Julianna]

I still stand by my assertion: the modernization/destuction of the Mass and the **weak enforcement of the tenents of our faith **have led to our current situation. I feel that a return to Tradition can cure many of these ills. Not all, but many.
If you have the time, and an open mind, please read this blog and be sure to read all of the comments. I am not a Church historian but many of these posters are and give facts and first person information to support their opinions, not just canned or emotional responses.

wdtprs.com/blog/2008/05/petrus-amazing-interview-with-card-noe-paul-vis-smoke-of-satan-remark-concerned-liturgy/

Pax Vobiscum

Do tell how…should the Church go about the “enforcement” in order to prevent what you say has/is destroying the Church?

I will wait for your answer.

 

[otjm]

Quite so. A look at early Church law shows that clerical sexual crime was known from the earliest times in the Church. The Didache, for example, condemns many sexual practices including a specific ban on ‘corrupting youth’ and the Council of Elvira (309AD) also specifically condemns men who sexually abuse young boys and sets out ways and means by which youth may be protected from predatory clergy.

St Peter Damian, a monk who became a bishop and later a Cardinal, wrote extensively about the sexual crimes of the clergy of his day (c1050AD) particularly condemning clergy who abused young boys. He attacked the Church hierarchy who ordained offenders and who failed to expel them. Sounds sadly familiar.

On 30 August 1568, Pope Pius V issued Horrendum which addressed the issue in no uncertain terms and ordered that priests who offended were to be stripped of the priesthood, deprived of all income and privileges and handed over to the secular authorities (this would have meant their execution).

More recently in 1947, Fr Gerald Fitzgerald founded the Servants of the Paraclete to minister to struggling and ‘fallen’ priests. His correspondence and files, released in 2008, reveal that sexual abusers among the clergy had become a very real concern for him. In 1957 he wrote to the then Bishop of Santa Fe: that he thought it unwise to ‘offer hospitality to men who have seduced or attempted to seduce little boys or girls’ …‘If I were a bishop I would tremble when I failed to report them to Rome for involuntary laicization. Experience has taught us these men are too dangerous to the children of the parish and the neighborhood for us to be justified in receiving them here…They should ipso facto be reduced to lay men when they act thus’. Again, how sadly familiar.

The first report on clerical sexual abuse here in Ireland was the Ferns report (2005) which independently investigated a sample number of over 100 credible allegations of sexual abuse made between 1962 and 2002 against 21 priests in that diocese. With the exception of 2 of the priests, the offenders were brought up and ordained in the pre-Vatican II church. The Ryan and Murphy reports show a similar pattern.

My point here is not to suggest in any way that something about the pre-Vatican II Church bred offenders, rather that there was never a ‘golden age’ of the Church in which the sexual abuse of children by clergy did not occur. It undoubtedly has continued post Vatican II although one hopes and prays that in another 40 years we will not have reports similar to the ones that have made the headlines over the last couple of decades.

A final point. In his recent letter to Irish Catholics, Pope Benedict suggested that ‘the rapid transformation and secularisation of Irish society’ were to blame for clerical abuse. With all due respect to His Holiness, this is unconvincing argument here in Ireland and he is either poorly informed on the situation here or he has allowed his preoccupation with secularisation and its evil twin, relativism, to cloud his analysis. As one Irish commentator noted ‘clerical abuse predated the process of secularisation – and it was in fact the very absence of secularisation that postponed its exposure’. And as a follow on from that point it should be noted that it was the secular state rather than the Irish Church in Ireland that exposed the whole scandal.

Thank you for an excellent post!

 

[otjm]

I think that is wildly inaccurate. I would suspect that the people who left or are leaving the church are not in their 60s, but in their 20s or 30s or 40s and have absolutely no knowledge of, or affinity for, the pre-V2 Liturgy.

I’ve talked to a few friends who are lapsed Catholics or who have outright rejected Catholicism. When I ask why, they usually give the same sets of answers:

1. Clergy Sexual Abuse;
2. Perception that women are considered second-class members of the Church;
3. Disagreements on moral issues: Homosexuality, abortion, birtch control, fornication, etc.
4. Finally, some complain about a perception that the Church hoards wealth.

Obviously, I’m not in agreement with these people. But I’ve never, ever met a single person who left the Catholic Church claiming that Vatican II reforms were the problem. Really? Where would these people go? Anglican? Greek Orthadox? Coptic?

Time does not favor this continual argument. Every day, fewer and fewer people are familiar with the pre-Vatican 2 liturgy - so every day fewer and fewer people care about any perceived conflict over V2 reforms.

Pax,
OA

I have been invovled with a program called CAtholics Returning Home, have spoken with others involved similarly, and have actually worked with Catholics who have left the faith. Reasons for leaving:

Lack of catechesis - they simply did not know their faith
Lack of home catechesis - parents were lacidasical at best
Sexual activity outside of marriage - shacking up
Mixed marriage, coupled with the above (some or all)
Mixed marriage, partner of stronger faith
Divorced (and presumed excommunicated)
Divorced and remarried, no decree of nullity
Catechized better by Protestants
Lazy - sloth when it comes to Faith
Mad at (Father so and so, Sister so and so) who said/did something offensive
Life intervened (too busy to go to Mass - golf, family, lack of priorities)

Notice that none have said they left because of changes in the Mass.

Notice that none have said they left because of liturgical abuses in the OF.

The fact that none have said this does not mean that some have not left for those reasons; but the consistency of the reasons for leaving - as outlined above - leave one with the evidence that the leaving is for reasons other than the Mass format.

 

[ChurchTorch]

Fortunately, it is not for you to judge. Only God.

Yet God gives us very clear guidelines through His Church here on Earth…

 

[ChurchTorch]

It’s not for you to say if their sins were being absolved or not. Frankly, it’s not for you to be so judgmental about this. What do you know? Are you able to catch a glimpse of their interior state? Has Our Lord imparted His Knowledge to you?

Pride abounds everywhere and in everyone.

Bull.

Someone didn’t like the Mass of Pope Paul VI so they stopped attending Mass. That’s at least one mortal sin/week. Someone claims they went to confession every week. To be absolved of their sins they would have to make The Act of Perfect Contrition:

*“O my God, I am heartily sorry for having offended Thee, and I detest all my sins because I dread the loss of heaven and the pains of hell, but most of all because they have offended Thee, my God, Who art all good and deserving of all my love. I firmly resolve, with the help of Thy grace, to confess my sins, to do penance and to amend my life. Amen.” *

And they did that KNOWING they would be missing Mass (and committing another mortal sin) the following Sunday?

On top of that they received Holy Communion (from whom I wonder?) each week even though they did not attend Mass?

You’re right – ultimately it’s God’s call but to offer such a horrifically sad story as if was tacitly OK because (and let me quote) “that is how strongly they felt about it” is pernicious.

 

[dmorgan]

Juliana said
"Do tell how…should the Church go about the “enforcement” in order to prevent what you say has/is destroying the Church?

I will wait for your answer."

Juliana the Church can enforce these changes just as She has always enforced doctrine, through the Magestierium. Only it will require real enforcement instead of what we see today which is luke warm or no enforcement of Church doctrine and teaching by many of the Bishops Conferences around the world. Just as the changeover to the NO mass removed most of the Sacred elements from the Mass, the “spirit of V-II” removed faithfull following of Magesterial teaching by many Bishops.
I believe that Pope Benedict has already started this process and I pray daily that He will continue. Modernism and relativism invaded the western Church and what we have now is the fruit of this invasion. I know many of you do not agree, and that is your right as an individual. But I still maintain that a return to Sacred Tradition is the elixer that can heal the Church. This is my last post on this thread.
Pax Vobiscum

 

[ChurchTorch]

Juliana said
"Do tell how…should the Church go about the “enforcement” in order to prevent what you say has/is destroying the Church?

I will wait for your answer."

Juliana the Church can enforce these changes just as She has always enforced doctrine, through the Magestierium. Only it will require real enforcement instead of what we see today which is luke warm or no enforcement of Church doctrine and teaching by many of the Bishops Conferences around the world. Just as the changeover to the NO mass removed most of the Sacred elements from the Mass, the “spirit of V-II” removed faithfull following of Magesterial teaching by many Bishops.
I believe that Pope Benedict has already started this process and I pray daily that He will continue. Modernism and relativism invaded the western Church and what we have now is the fruit of this invasion. I know many of you do not agree, and that is your right as an individual. But I still maintain that a return to Sacred Tradition is the elixer that can heal the Church. This is my last post on this thread.
Pax Vobiscum

You had better learn what “Sacred Tradition” means in the context of the Catholic Christian faith.

 

[Lormar]

Bull.

Someone didn’t like the Mass of Pope Paul VI so they stopped attending Mass. That’s at least one mortal sin/week. Someone claims they went to confession every week. To be absolved of their sins they would have to make The Act of Perfect Contrition:

“O my God, I am heartily sorry for having offended Thee, and I detest all my sins because I dread the loss of heaven and the pains of hell, but most of all because they have offended Thee, my God, Who art all good and deserving of all my love. I firmly resolve, with the help of Thy grace, to confess my sins, to do penance and to amend my life. Amen.”

And they did that KNOWING they would be missing Mass (and committing another mortal sin) the following Sunday?

On top of that they received Holy Communion (from whom I wonder?) each week even though they did not attend Mass?

You’re right – ultimately it’s God’s call but to offer such a horrifically sad story as if was tacitly OK because (and let me quote) “that is how strongly they felt about it” is pernicious.

Who do you think you are?

 

[crazzeto]

Can anyone think of a more powerfull argument to removing the novus ordo, restoring full tradition and cleaning house of the V-II crowd than the current scandal? I know God uses calamity to bring about good, so I cannot help but wonder at what is happenning now whithout thinking this is a cleaning process in the making. I certainly am praying for that result!

Well I certainly can’t think of a weaker argument anyway…

 

[puzzleannie]

I still stand by my assertion: the modernization/destuction of the Mass and the weak enforcement of the tenents of our faith have led to our current situation. I feel that a return to Tradition can cure many of these ills. Not all, but many.
If you have the time, and an open mind, please read this blog and be sure to read all of the comments. I am not a Church historian but many of these posters are and give facts and first person information to support their opinions, not just canned or emotional responses.

wdtprs.com/blog/2008/05/petrus-amazing-interview-with-card-noe-paul-vis-smoke-of-satan-remark-concerned-liturgy/

Pax Vobiscum

O I was about to ask for proof, again, yet see you have provided an infallible blog, whose blather is protected from error by the Holy Spirit.

 

[Bbigam]

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. No. I’m not a sedevacanist. I didn’t mean I don’t go by what the Pope says. What I mean was I don’t go by what Vatican II does/says. Most Traditional Catholics don’t.

So in other words, you have rejected the teachings of an Ecumenical Council of the Church, called, overseen, and affirmed by all the Popes since that time. That’s not following the Pope, and it’s not “Traditional.”

On the other hand, the so-called “spirit of Vatican II” isn’t traditional either. Being a truly Traditional Catholic includes submitting oneself to the teaching Magisterium and all of Sacred Tradition, which includes Vatican II, properly understood in the context of all that came before, whether one prefers the Ordinary Form or the Extraordinary Form of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (or an Eastern Liturgy, of course).