Two Popes

[cathguy]

But how does one definitively determine that the actions or lack thereof of JPII caused said decline? How do we know that he didn’t put the brakes on a greater decline?

Therein lies the problem. This is God and the Holy Spirit we are talking about here. It’s not as simple as a graph or chart in a board meeting.

For all we know, JPII SAVED the Chruch from incredible destruction.

Okay…

First point: the Holy Spirit does NOT guide the Pope’s every action. The Holy Spirit ensure that the Pope will not err when teaching faith and morals through the exercise of the Magesterium. NOTHING MORE. Anyone remotely interested in the history of the Church would laugh at the claim that even some of the holiest Popes in history actions as Pontiff were guided by the Holy Spirit.

Once in the Church’s history they couldn’t decide on a Pope and they elected someone from outside the College of Cardinals. He was a hermit and VERY holy.

He had to resign. His pontificate was a near total failure.

Was the Holy Spirit with him? YES. Did it guide his each and action as Pope? Don’t think so.

With all due respect Ethelzguy, this is the problem with your viewpoint in general. You seem to think each Pope is divinely guided and therefore we are not free to question the direction Popes go and the decisions they make. This is NOT true! You are assigning the Pope more authority than he actually has! (and he has a TON to begin with).

The 2nd point is that the assumptions in the second part of your post flow from the flawed paradigm that inspired the first part.

Your argument essentially is “don’t question ANYTHING the Pope does because the Holy Spirit is guiding him, therefore, no matter how bad things are, it probably would have been worse to follow a different course.”

So… deepening the schism between East and West to further the national interests of one’s home nation and family was the fruit of the spirit? Having a lover and asking artisans to use her as a model for the Madonna in the Papal apartment is the fruit of the Spirit?

(I am not making this stuff up… don’t go running to your copy of Pope fiction to find out I am wrong… I am not… Read Warren Carrol’s “History of Christendom” to see that I am right).

Popes are MEN. It is my opinion that some of a more charismatic stripe who are deeply loyal to the direction the post VII Church has taken have a SEVERELY EXAGGERATED and MUSCULAR view of the Papacy which is dangerous. How could anyone with a knowledge of history give credence to a faith that claimed Popes are infallible and guided by the Holy Spirit in ALL things?

Common!

 

[Tommy_Joe]

Aren’t we supposed to pray one third of Mary’s psalter every day?

If one adds the luminous mysteries, it’s not a “psalter” anymore.

Most of the Catholics I know still pray Mary’s Psalter.

I get the impression here that there are people who feel it would be fine to add anything you want. If it has anything at all to do with Christ’s life you can meditate on it, squeeze the beads and say the prayers and it’s the “Rosary.”

(my apologies for the lack of big words and well put together paragraphs.)

 

[jeff417]

I’m actually agreeing with someone who loves traditional practices, as well as Sacred Tradition…something that hasn’t happened too often on this forum. I fully understand your view, cathguy.

I’m actually only learning much more now about the inner workings of the Second Vatican Council and how it was supposed to be implemented, much more than when I was younger. I understand that things went wrong in how changes were supposed to be made, but our current Holy Father is working on it.

Pray for the Sedevacantists who truly believe that they are preserving the faith as they understand it. God Bless Pope Benedict XVI for all of his work in building bridges to those “traditionalists” who don’t even recognize his authority!

 

[ethelzguy]

Cathguy,

You, among others, insist on blaming various Popes for what you personally deem to be “wrong” with the Church in various ways.

Yet, there is no concrete evidence that any Pope or Vatican II has caused demise within the Church. It is all mere speculation. Countless figures have been bandied about, as some sort of “evidence” of the alleged failings of the Church. Yet, as we examine the changes in society in the last 50 years, it can also easily be said that we should be thankful for what the Church has done to prevent TOTAL collapse in a society where decadence rules the day.

For those who must complain, there must be a target of their complaint. So be it.

There are a number of articles and writings out there, that are in dissent with the Church. They are frequently quoted here at CAF. Yet, those articles are not official Church documents. They are merely dissenting opinions.

There will always be dissenters. If that’s what makes you clock tick, so be it. I will continue to rebut those who criticize the Church. And, I will pray for you.

 

[nice2000]

I think what Duffy is saying here is that the Pope’s more immediate predecessors found the Rosary as it had developed to be relatively sacrosanct, and yet John Paul II went ahead and changed it when no one else would have.

I think that is more charitable reading recognizing the larger tradition and history of the rosary.

THAT SAID, I too pray the luminous mysteries, and like them.

What are the “luminous mysteries”?

In the meantime, I’ll search the internet to see what they are.

I never heard of the “Luminous mysteries”

 

[mullenpm]

I have read through all the very, very long postings; and first I wonder where are the statistics that say:

“statistics show the Church has been in STEEP decline since Vatican II. Statistics show that young men especially are fleeing our Church like rats fleeing a sinking ship. Statistics show that piety is down. Statistics show that 80-90 percent of Catholics either a) don’t believe or b) ignore the Church’s infallible teachings on Humane Vitae.”

How can statistics show that “piety is down”, do people actually answer surveys on that point; how can statistics show that 80-90 percent of Catholics don’t believe or ignore the Church’s infallible teachings on Humane Vitae, I don’t believe that is true at all?

Some statistics show that our seminaries are bursting at the seams.

I am of an age where I remember the Mass where all I saw was the back of the Priest; we were taught in Catholic school to pray the Rosary; use a Missal, etc. Now, I am happy to see the face of my Priest and hear him say the prayers, although I will say that I love the Daily Mass on EWTN wherein Latin is used. It is not the Latin I mind - it is the back of the Priest.

I don’t mind the addition of the Luminous Mysteries and I do include them when I say my Rosary - I think they are beautiful.

I will admit that the Stations of the Cross is not a devotion widely used, but I wish that our churches would promote it for First Fridays and Friday Holy Hours. Perhaps letters to our Pastors would help this cause.

I am sorry to intrude into these intellectual and hotly debated issues, with my simple comments of an aging Catholic who will accept whatever form of Mass is said in whatever church I happen to be in and will add to my Rosary whatever prayers the Holy Father wishes to include (I do wish they wouldn’t change the Stations though, and I really don’t like the back of the Priest).

 

[cathguy]

Cathguy,

You, among others, insist on blaming various Popes for what you personally deem to be “wrong” with the Church in various ways.

Yet, there is no concrete evidence that any Pope or Vatican II has caused demise within the Church. It is all mere speculation. Countless figures have been bandied about, as some sort of “evidence” of the alleged failings of the Church. Yet, as we examine the changes in society in the last 50 years, it can also easily be said that we should be thankful for what the Church has done to prevent TOTAL collapse in a society where decadence rules the day.

For those who must complain, there must be a target of their complaint. So be it.

There are a number of articles and writings out there, that are in dissent with the Church. They are frequently quoted here at CAF. Yet, those articles are not official Church documents. They are merely dissenting opinions.

There will always be dissenters. If that’s what makes you clock tick, so be it. I will continue to rebut those who criticize the Church. And, I will pray for you.

This post is just plain funny.

Thanks for the laugh!

 

[cathguy]

I have read through all the very, very long postings; and first I wonder where are the statistics that say:

“statistics show the Church has been in STEEP decline since Vatican II. Statistics show that young men especially are fleeing our Church like rats fleeing a sinking ship. Statistics show that piety is down. Statistics show that 80-90 percent of Catholics either a) don’t believe or b) ignore the Church’s infallible teachings on Humane Vitae.”

How can statistics show that “piety is down”, do people actually answer surveys on that point; how can statistics show that 80-90 percent of Catholics don’t believe or ignore the Church’s infallible teachings on Humane Vitae, I don’t believe that is true at all?

Some statistics show that our seminaries are bursting at the seams.

I am of an age where I remember the Mass where all I saw was the back of the Priest; we were taught in Catholic school to pray the Rosary; use a Missal, etc. Now, I am happy to see the face of my Priest and hear him say the prayers, although I will say that I love the Daily Mass on EWTN wherein Latin is used. It is not the Latin I mind - it is the back of the Priest.

I don’t mind the addition of the Luminous Mysteries and I do include them when I say my Rosary - I think they are beautiful.

I will admit that the Stations of the Cross is not a devotion widely used, but I wish that our churches would promote it for First Fridays and Friday Holy Hours. Perhaps letters to our Pastors would help this cause.

I am sorry to intrude into these intellectual and hotly debated issues, with my simple comments of an aging Catholic who will accept whatever form of Mass is said in whatever church I happen to be in and will add to my Rosary whatever prayers the Holy Father wishes to include (I do wish they wouldn’t change the Stations though, and I really don’t like the back of the Priest).

I can only reply that you are very poorly read.

I am sorry to say this, but it is true. You haven’t studied the state of the Church or the sociological data at all.

Given the current state of your knowledge, I recommend a popular book that provides a quick overview only:

“The Decline and Fall of the Roman Catholic Church in America.”

God bless.

 

[ethelzguy]

I can only reply that you are very poorly read.

I am sorry to say this, but it is true. You haven’t studied the state of the Church or the sociological data at all.

Given the current state of your knowledge, I recommend a popular book that provides a quick overview only:

“The Decline and Fall of the Roman Catholic Church in America.”

God bless.

You seem well versed with regard to writings of dissenters.

 

[TobyLue]

You see? You see the bias against tradition? The author speaks as if those who prayed the stations for centuries weren’t reflecting deeply enough on Christ’s passion! That what came before wasn’t good enough. Now WE can do better?

Personally I think that we are making way too much of the USCCB statement especially where it says “…reflecting more deeply…”. I don’t interpret this as saying it is better. Whether we use the old stations or the new they all help us “more deeply” reflect on Our Lords Passion. We have the old stations of the Cross and now we have the new stations.We have the old mysteries and we have an additional five mysteries. We have all of these options and **that **is the beauty of the CC. It is not mandated that we MUST pray the Luminous or that we MUST pray the new stations. Whichever we use they will “more deeply” help us to get closer to Jesus. If the Sorrowful Mysteries help us, great!!. That is wonderful!!! We must remember that neither the Stations or the Mysteries of the Rosaries are liturgical. We can pray those at home, in the car, at work, or wherever we feel comfortable. We don’t need a priest leading us.

 

[cathguy]

What are the “luminous mysteries”?

In the meantime, I’ll search the internet to see what they are.

I never heard of the “Luminous mysteries”

A new set of mysteries added to the Rosary by John Paul II. The recommended day for saying the luminous mysteries is Thursday.

They are:

1. The Baptism of Jesus by John in the Jordan
2. The Wedding Feast at Cana
3. The proclamation of the Kingdom
4. the Transfiguration
5. The institution of the Eucharist.

 

[cathguy]

You seem well versed with regard to writings of dissenters.

This book is hardly the work of a dissenter…

That is just plain funny.

Ethelzguy… you are good for a laugh, I’ll give you that!

 

[mullenpm]

CathGuy,

I did say that I was a “simple” Catholic; I love God and I attend Mass to worship Him.

Sorry I don’t meet with your “scholastic learnings” but that is not necessary to be an “informed” and devout Catholic.

 

[cathguy]

Personally I think that we are making way too much of the USCCB statement especially where it says “…reflecting more deeply…”. I don’t interpret this as saying it is better. Whether we use the old stations or the new they all help us “more deeply” reflect on Our Lords Passion. We have the old stations of the Cross and now we have the new stations.We have the old mysteries and we have an additional five mysteries. We have all of these options and **that **is the beauty of the CC. It is not mandated that we MUST pray the Luminous or that we MUST pray the new stations. Whichever we use they will “more deeply” help us to get closer to Jesus. If the Sorrowful Mysteries help us, great!!. That is wonderful!!! We must remember that neither the Stations or the Mysteries of the Rosaries are liturgical. We can pray those at home, in the car, at work, or wherever we feel comfortable. We don’t need a priest leading us.

I can agree with most of this. Thanks!

 

[nice2000]

What are the “luminous mysteries”?

In the meantime, I’ll search the internet to see what they are.

I never heard of the “Luminous mysteries”

I found them.

“Luminous Mysteries”

1. THE BAPTISM OF THE LORD
2. THE WEDDING OF CANA
3. THE PROCLAMATION OF THE KINGDOM
4. THE TRANSFIGURATION
5. THE INSTITUTION OF THE EUCHARIST

So are the above 5 luminous mysteries supposed to be added to the already 15 mysteries of the rosary?

Which would make it 20 mysteries…

How come they (Pope and his staff) removed the station of the cross of St. Veronica wiping the face of Jesus?

They(Pope and his staff) should of kept St. Veronica’s station(wiping Jesus face) on the stations of the cross.

 

[nice2000]

A new set of mysteries added to the Rosary by John Paul II. The recommended day for saying the luminous mysteries is Thursday.

They are:

1. The Baptism of Jesus by John in the Jordan
2. The Wedding Feast at Cana
3. The proclamation of the Kingdom
4. the Transfiguration
5. The institution of the Eucharist.

Thanks Cathguy,

I didn’t realize you posted this.

 

[Tommy_Joe]

cathguy,…you’re obviously very well educated and spend a lot of time in the books,…but with all due respect, you have an awful lot to learn about people.

 

[cathguy]

CathGuy,

I did say that I was a “simple” Catholic; I love God and I attend Mass to worship Him.

Sorry I don’t meet with your “scholastic learnings” but that is not necessary to be an “informed” and devout Catholic.

I apologize for any offense given. I misread your last sentence regarding the priest’s back as being provocative. It is clear I misread you. I am sorry.

 

[cathguy]

cathguy,…you’re obviously very well educated and spend a lot of time in the books,…but with all due respect, you have an awful lot to learn about people.

Given the two periodicals which you recommend (I read them both) it is stunning you would say such a thing. In comparison to much of the discourse in those periodicals, I would say I am quite tame!

 

[mansr27]

I am no scholar either, but I do know it is getting more and more difficult to find a Mass that is performed properly and with the proper devotion. Most Cantors think it is their show and seem to turn the event into Karaoke night. Many priest ad-lib and do not stick to the GIRM. It seems common sense that if a Mass is not performed with the proper reverence, people will stop going.

The Extraordinary Form seems to force people to act with more devotion and reverence and I think that is what our current Pope wants to encourage, a higher standard to the Mass in all forms. I think that Vat.2 may have gone to far in worrying about including the laity and making the mass more of a social event.

What I love about Pope Benedict is that he values the tradition of our Church. I know Pope John Paul II also did, but not with the passion of Pope Benedict. I think the closer we get to the tradition the stronger we will become.

BTW I don’t think I would read a book that said the Church has fallen. It has not and will not.