Steubenville-Really??

[Gabriel_Serafin]

Steubenville-Really??

Well, at least they don’t seem lukewarm…

 

[Tampa_Dave]

My niece graduated from Franciscan University, entered a very conservative order of nuns, left, then ultimately married a devout Byzantine Catholic. Her younger sister, is currently a senior at FU. Their Catholic educational experience at Franciscan University was/is fantastic! Compared to Georgetown and Notre Dame, I’ll take the overall approach of Franciscan University any day. Think you’ll ever see Kathleen Sebelius at an FU commencement?

I am a traditional/orthodox Catholic who attends Latin Mass every Sunday and Eucharistic Adoration and Mass every Thursday. My wife attends another parish because she is a Charismatic Catholic who enjoys the weekly OF Mass, Catholic women’s prayer group, and monthly healing Mass. We are both devout Catholics. I have no problem with her form of worship, but its certainly not for me.

 

[Rich_C]

You may want to link directly to the blog post, you posted the link to the main page.

My bad. I’m terrible at using the Internet.

 

[Indyann]

Their recent news story in relation to “cancelling student insurance” out of conscience concerns over the HHS mandate was downright dishonest.

As I said, I do see real positives about the place, and it has had a positive influence on my own life and faith. It’s much better than most “catholic” universities in the US, but that is more of a condemnation of the others than praise for FSU. I would be very hestitant to send my children there.

Pax

Dan, what was dishonest about the news story? Just curious.

Your last paragraph is puzzling. If FU has " had a positive influence" on your life and faith, why would you not want your children to go there?

 

[curlycool89]

I agree with you that if one’s emotions are actually ruling one’s reason then they are in a disordered state. (For those of you who don’t know, this is a necessary conclusion from the most basic principles of Thomistic philosophy). However, I would like to point out that feeling stron emotions does not equate to having ones emotions or passions rule ones reason. If said emotions are in line with the dictates of reason and ones reason sees that they are good and appropriate for a certain occasion then there is nothing wrong with having an intense emotional experience. If you want to use this principle as a charge against charismatics you must show that the charismatic movement is in fact ordered towards the disordered state of emotions ruling reason rather than the perfectly acceptable and good state of experiencing emotions in line with reason.

Ah, passions ordered towards virtue, got it.

Also, I second the request for evidence that the primary goal of charismatic worship is to evoke emotion, let alone disordered emotion. As I understand it the primary end is worship of God. It is done through a particular mode, through being in touch with ones emotions, but the end of the worship is not to evoke emotion. It is an important distinction to make.

I think that’s an important distinction to make here too. Any sort of worship is ordered towards God alone as the end. Something like Charismatic prayers styles are means to that end (one of many means to that end), not ends in themselves.

Actually, it’s not. Ask Mother Theresa who loved God for decades by consistently choosing self-sacrifice without a fuzzy feeling. Thankfully, God does give most of us loving emotions toward Him at times, and allows us to feel His love through consolations at other times.

But love is still a choice, and, forgive me to pointing this out, it’s not always the most rational choice to make. Love to the point of self-sacrifice, the greatest kind of love, is by definition unreasonable, it is illogical, and yet Christ still did it for us.

I hope as you go through seminary you will consider giving trads the benefit of the doubt that they are actively participating at Mass even though they often appear to be doing something else.

That’s for another thread.

As an aside, I think anyone interested in this thread may like to read the following blog post: patheos.com/blogs/badcatholic/

Ah, Bad Catholic (link to article), great blog. Excuse the pun, but I read it fairly religiously . I really liked his thoughts on labelling and the pro-life movement (and other movements).

If I remember the post right, the point is that you don’t go and look for a religious experience, but that’s not what’s being done here. What we’re looking at here is worship of God. And as the post points out, we are a faith where God has come to us because it’s impossible for us to get to God on our own, and one way God comes to us is through Eucharistic Adoration. And since God has come to us, we worship Him.

When it comes to religious experiences, the guide I always use is the Transfiguration (from the point of view of Peter). Sometimes profound experiences are given to us by God to strengthen us for our journey of faith. They are only meant to last for a short time however, and even if we want to stay (like Peter) we must go back down the mountain and continue on our journey. Be glad for the grace you have received through this experience, but remember you must keep going.

 

[Rich_C]

Ah, passions ordered towards virtue, got it.
But love is still a choice, and, forgive me to pointing this out, it’s not always the most rational choice to make. Love to the point of self-sacrifice, the greatest kind of love, is by definition unreasonable, it is illogical, and yet Christ still did it for us.

But it’s not an emotion like you said previously. It’s important not to confuse that. Good point here, though.

That’s for another thread.

I just hope you think and pray about it, you might learn something.

If I remember the post right, the point is that you don’t go and look for a religious experience, but that’s not what’s being done here. …Be glad for the grace you have received through this experience, but remember you must keep going.

That’s a good summary of the blog post. I only read his blog when someone links and article, but I always enjoy it and gain new perspective.

 

[Joe_5859]

How representative is this of Franciscan University of Steubenville?

youtube.com/watch?v=d-Eg7via3q8&feature=channel&list=UL

If this is pretty much the way the spirituality is there, oy vey…

Hopefully you are aware that people sometimes use YouTube and video clips to distort what is actually happening. I know, it is shocking.

You’re looking at clips from a video called “Vatican II: The Best Council the Protestants Ever Had.” That should tell you something right there.

Trying to homogenize FUS would be like trying to homogenize the Catholic Church. Are there people there who are involved with the Catholic Charismatic Renewal Movement? Sure. Is every faculty member, sutdent, and staff person involved? No. I wouldn’t even say it’s a majority anymore.

The Charismatic Renewal Movement has been affirmed by recent popes and it has not had to be reigned in the way some other renewal movements have been. Again, that should tell you something.

For what it’s worth, I definitely would not describe my spirituality as “charismatic”. But I know a great number of people who would and they are some of the most orthodox, devout Catholics I know. I’m somewhat put off by the hand-waving sort of thing, too, but I know that simply because something makes me uncomfortable doesn’t make it “bad” or “un-Catholic.” Thank the Lord that that is true.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

Sounds like several folks on this thread would have problems with people going into ectasies, trances, floating, trembling, etc. Sort of like many Saints. Christina the Astonishing anyone?

 

[TS_Aquinas]

I think that’s an important distinction to make here too. Any sort of worship is ordered towards God alone as the end. Something like Charismatic prayers styles are means to that end (one of many means to that end), not ends in themselves.

Not all means are properly ordered by wisdom, which always dictates passion to maxim. When relativity is influential of passion, even the most reasonable objection will fall upon deaf ears.

But love is still a choice, and, forgive me to pointing this out, it’s not always the most rational choice to make. Love to the point of self-sacrifice, the greatest kind of love, is by definition unreasonable, it is illogical, and yet Christ still did it for us.

“The passions of the soul, in so far as they are contrary to the order of reason, incline us to sin: but in so far as they are controlled by reason, they pertain to virtue.” ST II, 24, 3.

 

[acarlson]

Many of the most faithful, orthodox Roman Catholics I’ve met went through the graduate Theology program at Steubenville. That says something. Alas, I can’t speak for the undergrad program.

 

[thewanderer]

Not all means are properly ordered by wisdom, which always dictates passion to maxim. When relativity is influential of passion, even the most reasonable objection will fall upon deaf ears.

“The passions of the soul, in so far as they are contrary to the order of reason, incline us to sin: but in so far as they are controlled by reason, they pertain to virtue.” ST II, 24, 3.

Are you implying that the charismatic movement is ordered towards relativity being influential over the passions? Because this is most certainly a claim that you would need to back up with solid evidence.

 

[TS_Aquinas]

Are you implying that the charismatic movement is ordered towards relativity being influential over the passions? Because this is most certainly a claim that you would need to back up with solid evidence.

The entire movement itself? No; I do not have a window that peers into all of which goes on in the movement at every single gathering, so I cannot make a generalization. But with gatherings like the one shown in the OP’s video, this is the case. How so? If there is a greater degree of piety that can be extracted from the form of piety, then by wisdom that should be done. If this is not done then either the person/s are ignorant of greater degrees of form, do not wish to do so for sloth dictates their passion, or they disregard* form of being*. Let us rule out the second since this gathering is more energetic then the higher forms. The first may be a possibility but given this is Steubenville, it is not probable. The third remains as the likely choice. When one abandons the form of being, relativity remains since one cannot judge between what is greater or lesser with reason. For example, their Eucharistic Adoration was lesser in piety then silent meditation, of which is greater. By what authority do I say this? If our shepherd on earth is our Holy Father, then let us proclaim what he teaches pastorally as the rule "the faithful can use vocal prayers and hymns, “but always laying the emphasis on silence so as to hear the Lord speaking within us, the Lord Who is alive and present in the Sacrament.’”

 

[RogerDeCourcy]

Sounds like several folks on this thread would have problems with people going into ectasies, trances, floating, trembling, etc. Sort of like many Saints. Christina the Astonishing anyone?

Anyone can generate that sort of phenomena, with a bit of coaching. It’s stock-in-trade for people peddling eastern mysticism.

Because saints had unusual experiences it does not follow that, if one has unusual experiences, you are a saint.

I would say that Catholics can be more easily gulled, in that there doesn’t seem to be an inquisition, that certifies that Guru A is the genuine article, while Guru B is a mere spiritualist. It’s not in the system.

Or even a reference work: “10 Ways To Spot a Demoniac and 7 Signs Of Sainthood; Delusion And Fact in Christian Mysticism”, by Roger DeCourcey, $10.99 on Amazon.

 

[Melchior_1]

By what authority do I say this? If our shepherd on earth is our Holy Father, then let us proclaim **what he teaches pastorally **as the rule "the faithful can use vocal prayers and hymns, “but always laying the emphasis on silence so as to hear the Lord speaking within us, the Lord Who is alive and present in the Sacrament.’”

From all the discussions I hear about Vatican II from traditionalists on here, I have learned that “pastoral” means “we don’t have to listen to it” and “it’s not authoritative”. So by saying the Pope was teaching pastorally, you invalidated your entire post.

Pastorally yours,

Melchior_

 

[clem456]

Anyone can generate that sort of phenomena, with a bit of coaching. It’s stock-in-trade for people peddling eastern mysticism.

]Because saints had unusual experiences it does not follow that, if one has unusual experiences, you are a saint.

I would say that Catholics can be more easily gulled, in that there doesn’t seem to be an inquisition, that certifies that Guru A is the genuine article, while Guru B is a mere spiritualist. It’s not in the system.

Or even a reference work: “10 Ways To Spot a Demoniac and 7 Signs Of Sainthood; Delusion And Fact in Christian Mysticism”, by Roger DeCourcey, $10.99 on Amazon.

I don’t believe anyone said that emotive or other experiences constitute sainthood.

Human being are not computers. We are given a complete psychosomatic makeup BY GOD. Catholicism appreciates the dignity of the human person, the WHOLE person. Emotions are not some kind of wacked out weakness we must merely tolerate, or part of some bizarre Eastern mysticism, and they are not a definitive sign of our “fallen nature”:

We are gifted with emotions, period. Who here will say they have not had their emotions released at adoration or prayer, whether it be tears of sadness, joy, feelings of ecstasy? Who can say that? It is simply absurd to say that a person’s feelings are not, or should not be, validly involved during prayer or adoration.

So why should worship not be designed to appeal to the whole person, in unity? Appealing to reason and intellect, sometimes evoking emotional reactions, sometimes not?

Ps I can’t find your book on Amazon or anywhere else for that matter.

 

[Reuben_J]

Hopefully you are aware that people sometimes use YouTube and video clips to distort what is actually happening. I know, it is shocking.

You’re looking at clips from a video called “Vatican II: The Best Council the Protestants Ever Had.” That should tell you something right there.

Trying to homogenize FUS would be like trying to homogenize the Catholic Church. Are there people there who are involved with the Catholic Charismatic Renewal Movement? Sure. Is every faculty member, sutdent, and staff person involved? No. I wouldn’t even say it’s a majority anymore.

That is a very sharp and discerning observation. Obviously the video clip was put up to disparage Vatican II and to put up what it represents in a negative light in the Catholic Church.

The Charismatic Renewal Movement has been affirmed by recent popes and it has not had to be reigned in the way some other renewal movements have been. Again, that should tell you something.
For what it’s worth, I definitely would not describe my spirituality as “charismatic”. But I know a great number of people who would and they are some of the most orthodox, devout Catholics I know. I’m somewhat put off by the hand-waving sort of thing, too, but I know that simply because something makes me uncomfortable doesn’t make it “bad” or “un-Catholic.” Thank the Lord that that is true.

The problem with the Charismatic Renewal in the Catholic Church is that it introduces a new form of spirituality that Catholics is not familiar with, perhaps as far as we can remember. It did not help that the phenomenon started with Protestant Pentecostal movements. There is not much Church history that really supports this spirituality though Catholic Charismatics would tell us otherwise; they even can tell us the saints who practiced such spirituality.

What many traditional Catholics refuse to acknowledge and that include me at one time, is that the Renewal is actually renewing the faith of the Catholics who are involved. Nearly 99 percent of Catholic Charismatics testify that their Catholic faith was renewed as a result of their involvement, usually during the first encounter. Personally I cannot say that is a bad thing. The key word is that the renewal is in the renewal of the Catholic faith of that person. Yes, in the early years there were Charismatics who left the faith but these were few and far in between.

The Charismatic praise and worship admittedly can be revolting for traditional Catholics but we must understand that it is not a mass. In fairness, its practices do creep into the mass but fortunately with the new mass liturgy now, they have been effectively controlled.

The basic idea of the Charismatic praise and worship is to be open, to surrender; to let what’s in the hearts to be expressed into our action. Inhibition is very often an obstacle to grow spiritually – we are afraid to show our feeling because of fear – mainly of rejection, of being ridiculed. We do not want to show our weakness, man should not cry and so on. If we fear, we can also fear against the action of the Holy Spirit. If we are not docile, the Holy Spirit may not work in us.

Now, this of course does not apply to everybody; there are introverts or traditional Catholics who are Holy Spirit filled. Not everybody is the same.

God bless.

 

[Dan_Daly]

Dan, what was dishonest about the news story? Just curious.

Your last paragraph is puzzling. If FU has " had a positive influence" on your life and faith, why would you not want your children to go there?

The University presented the story as “we are cancelling our student health insurance program, because the HHS mandate will force us to provide contraceptives which violate our conscience.”

FSU took this story to the press and got a lot of positive publicity for it. For example, The Wanderer ran a front page article praising the school. However, on a interview with Fox News, a FSU representative, under questioning, admitted that:

1. There was no student health insurance program. There was a requirement that students buy health insurance from someone else. So FSU wasn’t scrapping an insurance program, because there was no program.
2. That the decision was made primarily for financial reasons.

FSU didn’t do anything wrong, other than to try and pretend they were doing something else. Want to drop your insurance requirement because it saves some paperwork and a few dollars off the budget? Fine. That’s great. Go ahead. But don’t pretend you are doing something you’re not. It was dishonest.

As far as the school having a positive effect on my life, yes it did. I don’t think that’s inconsistent with not wanting my children to go there. Most people and organizations have positives and negatives. A man can have a positive influence on my life, that doesn’t mean I have to want him to marry my daughter.

Pax

 

[TS_Aquinas]

From all the discussions I hear about Vatican II from traditionalists on here, I have learned that “pastoral” means “we don’t have to listen to it” and “it’s not authoritative”. So by saying the Pope was teaching pastorally, you invalidated your entire post.

Pastorally yours,

Melchior_

And that isn’t true…

Lumen Gentium 25.
“Bishops, teaching in communion with the Roman Pontiff, are to be respected by all as witnesses to divine and Catholic truth. In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent. This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will. His mind and will in the matter may be known either from the character of the documents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking.”

If bishops are called to this level of assent, we’re not exempt. This does not pertain to his personal theological work in books but public declarations from a pastoral position.

 

[curlycool89]

If our shepherd on earth is our Holy Father, then let us proclaim what he teaches pastorally as the rule "the faithful can use vocal prayers and hymns, “but always laying the emphasis on silence so as to hear the Lord speaking within us, the Lord Who is alive and present in the Sacrament.’”

So you always make sure there is at least a good period of silence for people to pray and reflect. There’s nothing that says that didn’t happen at Steubenville because all we have is a biased video that was out to paint the university in a bad light.

I can tell you that when CCO does this, they always have periods of silence.

For example, their Eucharistic Adoration was lesser in piety then silent meditation, of which is greater.

So you’re clearing in the “we’ll shoot your for not being silent” group then.

From all the discussions I hear about Vatican II from traditionalists on here, I have learned that “pastoral” means “we don’t have to listen to it” and “it’s not authoritative”. So by saying the Pope was teaching pastorally, you invalidated your entire post.

The problem with the Charismatic Renewal in the Catholic Church is that it introduces a new form of spirituality that Catholics is not familiar with, perhaps as far as we can remember. It did not help that the phenomenon started with Protestant Pentecostal movements.

I think it’s worth nothing at this point another important distinction. Obviously, the Catholic Church has the fullness of truth. Non-Catholic groups and teachings can (and sometimes do) contains some truth though (just not the fullness of Truth). Just because it is not Catholic does not mean we have to throw out everything associated with it, but you do have to throw out anything that is incompatible with the faith.

The Charismatic praise and worship admittedly can be revolting for traditional Catholics

I’ve never really understood this. The tradition of singing inspired songs of worship for God goes back at least as far as David (The Psalms. Most of them seem to be similarly non-liturgical, that is not related to the sacrificial worship associated with the Temple).

The basic idea of the Charismatic praise and worship is to be open, to surrender; to let what’s in the hearts to be expressed into our action. Inhibition is very often an obstacle to grow spiritually – we are afraid to show our feeling because of fear – mainly of rejection, of being ridiculed. We do not want to show our weakness, man should not cry and so on. If we fear, we can also fear against the action of the Holy Spirit. If we are not docile, the Holy Spirit may not work in us.

Been there. Fear can cripple you and make you afraid of what other people will think (shame most likely being an important evolutionary emotion that kept tribes together and helped enforce norms. That has continued but the norms have changed to the point that worshiping God is seen as abnormal).

Now, this of course does not apply to everybody; there are introverts or traditional Catholics who are Holy Spirit filled. Not everybody is the same.

And that’s probably the most important take-away from all this. There are many different spiritualities in the Catholic Church (western and eastern) that are all fine for people to follow.

 

[TS_Aquinas]

So you always make sure there is at least a good period of silence for people to pray and reflect. There’s nothing that says that didn’t happen at Steubenville because all we have is a biased video that was out to paint the university in a bad light.

I can tell you that when CCO does this, they always have periods of silence.

Glad to hear this though the band music shouldn’t be used at all. When I attend Eucharistic Adoration at Miles Christi there is responsorial Latin prayers at the beginning and end but very briefly and at a low tone, wouldn’t you agree this should be the norm? Certainly the human instrument, the voice, is a higher degree of reverence over and above any crafted instrument.

So you’re clearing in the “we’ll shoot your for not being silent” group then.

People want to shoot others over this? That’s horrible.