Thoughts on Amazon Synod

  • Thread starter Thread starter zgraf
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Are you describing global Catholicism post-WWII, or American Catholicism? People on CAF forget that the US Catholic Church is a tiny percentage of the global Church.
If we’re talking Africa… it’s boomed since the council.
 
The short of your request is to ask me to prove a negative - my comment is that the Church - meaning, here, the Vatican - does not use the terms “Modernist(s)” and “Modernism”. The Vatican is not idle about speaking out against various movements within culture, with secularism and relativism both ranking high. But references to the issue which Pope Pius X was facing, and which continued on for some time within the larger (i.e. Christian, as opposed to specifically Catholic) context of Scriptural scholars has moved on, become passe, or is simply something done 100 +/- years ago and become something for history books; it has been several years since I have even heard a reference to the “Jesus Seminar”, which appeared to have at least some thread of Modernism running through its ruminations.

They (the terms modernism and modernist)are the whips used by certain elements within the laity (and perhaps some of the clergy) to scourge anyone with whom they differ and are used by people who have a conservative to arch conservative view and lash out at what they deem nefarious on other religious matters. I believe it was Pius X who called the move to look at scripture as if it were simply some ancient group of texts having no basis in Revelation, the mother of all heresies.

On that I would disagree with him, as the matter came and pretty much met a dead end; Gnosticism seem to have never been completely purged from society at large and it still rears its ugly head (see, e.g. Fr. Chad Rippinger YouTube at post 155, even in the Church).

In short, the term Modernism instead of being a mother of heresies - giving birth to others - is now taken as the"summation’ of all heresies. Clearly, the issue at play in Scripture scholarship of 100+ years ago was not any such summation.

I certainly would invite correction if the Vatican has been using the term, say, in the last 50 years (or since the time the oath was put to rest).
 
Actually I’m only asking you to provide a source supporting your claim that the oath against modernism was removed because “Scripture scholarship has moved on in the last 100 years.” It’s your opinion that the term modernism has “become passe” and “something for the history books,” and thus far it’s only your opinion. The only support provided for these claims is that the Church no longer requires the oath. Since you reference scripture scholarship as a basis for no longer requiring the oath, I assume you have some means of supporting that comment. Your subsequent claim that modernism is a “whip used by certain elements within the laity” also appears to be opinion but correct me if I’m wrong.
 
Ah. sorry if I implied a connection between the two: they are certainly coincidental, but that does not mean causation. and again, I invite anyone to correct me, that Rome has not been using the term “Modernism” when referring to problems within and without the Church.

As to the “whip” statement, there is ample usage within these forums as well as elsewhere by people who cannot even tell me what the term was applied to originally, and can provide absolutely no source as to why it is used, as I see it sued, to anything else going on within the activities in the priesthood, especially in terms of liturgy, although not limited to that.

For example, it gets applied to the results of the lat 50+ years of poor catechesis. Catechesis was not infected by Modernism when catechists decided to throw out the Baltimore Catechism and replace it for kids with cutting out sheep shapes and cluing on cotton balls. God, and Christ, were not removed from catechesis (as occurred in upper levels of Scriptural scholarship through ignoring Scripture as revealed, and treating it as only another document to be parsed, for example, along different writing styles), but instead we were given a “Jesus is my buddy” approach to (extremely) poorly move from a doctrinal approach to a more emotional approach.

The point I was making with “whip” is that most people using it have no background in Philosophy, none in the history of what was occurring is Scripture scholarship, and it is a favorite word for “I don’t like it and don’t think it is Traditional and/or traditional”. When it gets used, for example, concerning church architecture, it is beyond laughable. The architects who have designed churches in the half-round are not closet atheists. We may not like it, but Modernism has nothing to do with it. Neither does relativism nor secularism.

Yes, the term “whip” is an opinion, but I back it with repeated challenges I have given to define the term as used in the circumstances, and no one yet has been able to; at most they come back with something to the effect that it was the “mother of all heresies” and no clue as to what that content was. it is an important sounding word which gets thrown around for what people don’t like and does nothing to clarify the point in discussion - other than, “I don’t like it”.
 
Genesis315 said:
Vatican II didn’t postpone anything–the drop off was immediate and sharp as clergy and religious left and the people just stopped showing up. Protestants have moved further and further away from the truth.
Click to expand...
Vatican 2 did not start the drop off in attendance; that started before Pope John 23rd was made Pope. Interestingly, what are often referred to as the mainline Protestant churches experienced the drop-off at the same time, indicating something other than a future Council as the source/causation. and the drop-off was not sharp, as the series of various polls have show a gradual drop-off, finally slowing down in about the last ten years; CARA, Pew and Gallupall indicating similar results.

As to the loss of priests, at least within the diocesan priest I knew at the time, there had been discussion that Vatican 2 might allow priest to marry. Not only did it not, but those who left and many who stayed seemed unaware that in the history of the Church (including the Eastern rites), the Church has ordained married men, but there is no history of allowing celibate priests to marry after ordination (with the exception in the Eastern rites, of a married priest with young children being allowed to remarry if the wife dies). I suspect that if one were to go back to the time between, say, the end of Vatican 2 and 1980, one would find a very similar pattern of priests leaving the priesthood (laicized or otherwise) to get married.
 
So, from what I understand this is who the Catholics of Brazil and the Amazon have been devoted to for many years, not the “p” idol.

agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br

Two million gather to pay homage to Our Lady of Nazareth

The Círio de Nazaré takes place in the city of Belém, northern Brazil, on the second Sunday of October, when the image of Our Lady of Nazareth is carried back to her sanctuary in a 3.6km procession. Marcello Casal Jr/Agência Brasil Regarded as the country's largest Catholic celebration and among...
agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

How awesome it would have been to have her image at the synod.
Margaret_Ann said:
All SSPX priests will offer a Mass of Reparation Nov. 10th.
Click to expand...
I hope more priests and we all do similar
 
Last edited:
As a bird lover, I am deeply offended that so many birds have lost their lives for vain adornment…just sayin’.
 
CorydonMundi said:
I’ve got some non denominational friends who I was working on teaching the truth of Catholicism vs their misconceptions. They sent me these pictures and asked me to explain what was going on. I honestly don’t know how.
Click to expand...
Yeah, especially if the non denoms have missionary work there… where they actually help with food, medicine, living conditions, while teaching the Gospel in the Scriptures.
 
Could you clarify? Are you saying that Catholics don’t help?
 
Im saying if there are non Catholic Christians who work in these areas who spend their energy on living needs and proclaim the Gospel while expressing to the people their separation from pachamama devotion, than it is even more difficult not to tell these genuine non Catholic Christians, “Yes, something is wrong with Rome right now.”

I’m saying participating in pagan devotion isnt actually doing anyone a service. Especially among fellow Catholics!

Do you not think that devotees of pachamama give thanks to “her”?
 
Last edited:
otjm said:
…
I certainly would invite correction if the Vatican has been using the term, say, in the last 50 years (or since the time the oath was put to rest).
Click to expand...
  • “What is offered in the name of modernism is a distorted presentation tangibly artificial, evoking a negative response and defeating the very purpose of cross-cultural exchange.”
From: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...ppl/rc_pc_migrants_pom96-suppl_gonsalves.html

Other documents with reference to modernism.

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c..._doc_19670717_formula-professio-fidei_en.html

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...nts/rc_cti_1989_interpretazione-dogmi_en.html

Vatican I anathemas addressed modernist heresies and still hold.

Vatican II also rejected modernist ideas:
  • religious indifferentism – Lumen gentium 14
  • scriptural fallacy – Dei verbum 11
  • relativism – Gaudium et spes 19
  • abortion – Gaudium et spes 27
  • secularism – Dignitatis humanae 1
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top