What is the real crisis?

  • Thread starter Thread starter lucybeebee
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

lucybeebee

Guest
I’m going to state that the current crisis in the Church is not the result of VII or the NO. If the NO was abolished tomorrow and the TLM made mandatory, it wouldn’t change a thing.The Orthodox Church didn’t change anything, and they still can’t attract people in their former strongholds. It simply can’t fight against the toxic residue of communism. I simply don’t see how the TLM could fight against the roaring Zeitgeist of the 1960s, with its free love, anti-authority stance, and emphasis on individualism.

In the materialistic West, people simply don’t care about traditional religion, be it Catholicism, Judaism or what have you. I think most people would rather pick, choose, and make their own religion rather than submit to any kind of authority. This is why Christianity is spreading places like sub-Saharan Africa, where traditional and ritual are still valued. They see it as the fulfillment of something they’ve been waiting for their whole lives. We, on the other hand, live in a post-Christian society, so for us it’s “been there, done that, what’s next?”

The Church’s real competitor is not Protestantism, but the “I’m spiritual, but not religious” line or religious indifference. Indeed, the most popular “mega-churches” cater to a prosperity gospel, not anything remotely resembling what the early Protestant reformers taught (Protestantism 2.0, maybe?). For most people, religion is just one type of entertainment among many to choose from. I bet most Protestants probably don’t even know what their denomination actually believes. I think also that assimilation played a big role in the drop in mass attendance and vocations. The “white ethnics” were no longer on the margins of society and didn’t want to be part of a suspect religious group. They didn’t feel like they needed the protection of the bishops anymore and wanted to go outside of the “Catholic ghetto.” A substantial number of Catholics were already using ABC prior to Humanae Vitae because reliable contraception was scientifically feasible for the first time in history.

Simply put, I think that even if many people are introduced to the TLM it won’t make a difference. Modern society seems to be detrimental to traditional norms in general; the failure of groups like the Moral Majority illustrate the antipathy of trying to establish some sort of moral crusade. I don’t know what to do…😦
 
It is Atheism and secularism, and the political/social/scientific ideologies which promote them: Communism, Socialism, Neo-Environmentalism, and in a weird way, Islamofascism. (On the latter, I find that the Muslim terror threat is driving more people away from religion.) This is the evil and the crisis.

If I had to point to one organization, it would be the United Nations.
 
lucybeebee said:
I’m going to state that the current crisis in the Church is not the result of VII or the NO. If the NO was abolished tomorrow and the TLM made mandatory, it wouldn’t change a thing.The Orthodox Church didn’t change anything, and they still can’t attract people in their former strongholds. It simply can’t fight against the toxic residue of communism. I simply don’t see how the TLM could fight against the roaring Zeitgeist of the 1960s, with its free love, anti-authority stance, and emphasis on individualism.

In the materialistic West, people simply don’t care about traditional religion, be it Catholicism, Judaism or what have you. I think most people would rather pick, choose, and make their own religion rather than submit to any kind of authority. This is why Christianity is spreading places like sub-Saharan Africa, where traditional and ritual are still valued. They see it as the fulfillment of something they’ve been waiting for their whole lives. We, on the other hand, live in a post-Christian society, so for us it’s “been there, done that, what’s next?”

The Church’s real competitor is not Protestantism, but the “I’m spiritual, but not religious” line or religious indifference. Indeed, the most popular “mega-churches” cater to a prosperity gospel, not anything remotely resembling what the early Protestant reformers taught (Protestantism 2.0, maybe?). For most people, religion is just one type of entertainment among many to choose from. I bet most Protestants probably don’t even know what their denomination actually believes. I think also that assimilation played a big role in the drop in mass attendance and vocations. The “white ethnics” were no longer on the margins of society and didn’t want to be part of a suspect religious group. They didn’t feel like they needed the protection of the bishops anymore and wanted to go outside of the “Catholic ghetto.” A substantial number of Catholics were already using ABC prior to Humanae Vitae because reliable contraception was scientifically feasible for the first time in history.

Simply put, I think that even if many people are introduced to the TLM it won’t make a difference. Modern society seems to be detrimental to traditional norms in general; the failure of groups like the Moral Majority illustrate the antipathy of trying to establish some sort of moral crusade. I don’t know what to do…😦
Click to expand...
Excellent points! Hear Hear!!!
 
John_Higgins said:
There is no crisis; wasn’t and isn’t.

John
Click to expand...
St. Augustine says that humans are always searching for God and won’t be satisfied till they find Him. That doesn’t seem to be the case today. Many people are content to self-medicate themselves with TV, the Internet, sex, drugs, booze, etc, and they’re perfectly content. From a utilitarian angle, religion doesn’t pay the bills or have immediate gains so there’s no point to it. So the real crisis is that man no longer knows his real end and has no interest in finding it. The problems in Church and liturgy can’t be solved if people don’t even understand their importance to begin with.
 
lucybeebee said:
St. Augustine says that humans are always searching for God and won’t be satisfied till they find Him. That doesn’t seem to be the case today. Many people are content to self-medicate themselves with TV, the Internet, sex, drugs, booze, etc, and they’re perfectly content. From a utilitarian angle, religion doesn’t pay the bills or have immediate gains so there’s no point to it. So the real crisis is that man no longer knows his real end and has no interest in finding it. The problems in Church and liturgy can’t be solved if people don’t even understand their importance to begin with.
Click to expand...
In the context of today, drugs, alcohol and sex are god. They’re still looking for God, and they think they found him. It’s only when people realize that they’re not (ie, when they hit rock-bottom) that they may break the cycle. It’s the easy lifestyle of the West that is destructive. I don’t usually like to quote South Park, but there is one episode where it is said that people in America are really bored. And when they’re bored, they protest stupid things.
 
Cajetan said:
If I had to point to one organization, it would be the United Nations.
Click to expand...
Please elaborate and meaningfully defend this position…this is such a tired and poorly understood argument that is trotted out again and again…

As for crisis…I agree there is one brewing in our beloved Church~and it seems to center on the strict traditionalists or fundamentalists of the faith and those who are otherwise. There is growing intolerance within the doors of the Catholic Church itself among some of the faithful for their own who are not perceived to be towing the line, as it were, in terms of professing, living or believing exactly the “right” things and down to the last detail of dogma. Those who fall short in any discernible way are quickly labeled “cafeteria Catholics” or “CINO” and dismissed. It is highly off-putting and offensive~and not just when one is the target, but an affront to be part of an organization that would tolerate such disloyalty towards, and some would say even abuse of, its own members.

For those who respond that they are only calling out the fallen, the stumbling, the public dissenters–I respond that those who have the gifts of faith and understanding as well as the courage to live it out have an even higher duty and calling to take on challenges in the community of believers with charity, patience and most of all discretion so that the honor and character of the entire Church is never degraded or subjected to negative public scrutiny.
 
Yes, there is a crisis. It is modernism, secularism, relativism and a whole bunch of other isms. In America particularly, many confuse their rights of freedom of choice to extend to the moral law. Just because the laws of this nation say it is OK, it does not mean that it is morally correct. People need discernment to make this distinction. That in itself is one thing that is pitifully lacking in many instances.
Prayers & Blessings
Deacon Ed B
 
Island_Oak said:
As for crisis…I agree there is one brewing in our beloved Church~and it seems to center on the strict traditionalists or fundamentalists of the faith and those who are otherwise. There is growing intolerance within the doors of the Catholic Church itself among some of the faithful for their own who are not perceived to be towing the line, as it were, in terms of professing, living or believing exactly the “right” things and down to the last detail of dogma.
Click to expand...
It’s just a case of passionate Catholics defending the faith, which is what we are all called to be and do. Combating dogmatic/doctrinal dissent, from within and outside the Church, is what faithful Catholics do. It’s what saints did. Were St. Dominic and St. Ignatius Loyola “fundamentalists”? No, they were men who really believed in their religion and it showed when they spoke about the faith.

There are too many people out there today teaching others as Catholics – representing the Church – and not giving an authentic presentation of the faith. This is a serious problem, because students of the faith deserve an authentic presentation; without it they cannot make an informed personal decision. Conclusions based on shaky premises are shaky conclusions.

From my perspective, it sounds like you just want the Catholic Church to be more like the secular world. You know what? We’re not of the secular world! We’re religious people.
 
Cajetan said:
From my perspective, it sounds like you just want the Catholic Church to be more like the secular world. You know what? We’re not of the secular world! We’re religious people.
Click to expand...
…and it sounds to me like you didn’t bother to finish reading my post.
 
Cajetan said:
It’s just a case of passionate Catholics defending the faith, which is what we are all called to be and do. Combating dogmatic/doctrinal dissent, from within and outside the Church, is what faithful Catholics do…

There are too many people out there today teaching others as Catholics – representing the Church – and not giving an authentic presentation of the faith. This is a serious problem, because students of the faith deserve an authentic presentation…

From my perspective, it sounds like you just want the Catholic Church to be more like the secular world. You know what? We’re not of the secular world! We’re religious people.
Click to expand...
But do we TEACH the faith to our children and grandchildren? Or, do we get into hostile arguments with people after it’s too late?

Do our kids/grandkids know what a cruet is? a novena? a cassock? Do they know the difference in a crucifix and a cross?

Did WE teach them any of this, or did we dump them off at CCD while we went shopping, and then complain when they didn’t learn it, and grew up not really knowing anything about their faith?

And, now when they don’t know their faith, we go off on diatribes against them and call them names?

If there is indeed a crisis in the Church, perhaps the cause is in the mirror?

🤷
 
Is this really a Trad Cath forum?

I almost left the Church for Orthodoxy because of the abysmal liturgies I had to endure and the complete lack of doctrinal formation we were given. No one in my confirmation class knew the first thing about the Faith- our lessons were on being nice and not giving into peer pressure, and the only time we ever learned anything it was to clarify “Christ” was not Jesus’ last name.
 
ethelzguy said:
But do we TEACH the faith to our children and grandchildren? Or, do we get into hostile arguments with people after it’s too late?

Do our kids/grandkids know what a cruet is? a novena? a cassock? Do they know the difference in a crucifix and a cross?

Did WE teach them any of this, or did we dump them off at CCD while we went shopping, and then complain when they didn’t learn it, and grew up not really knowing anything about their faith?

And, now when they don’t know their faith, we go off on diatribes against them and call them names?

If there is indeed a crisis in the Church, perhaps the cause is in the mirror?

🤷
Click to expand...
I don’t know about your situation, sir, but I don’t have kids. But I assure you, if and when I do, they will be properly instructed in the faith. They will be free to be Catholic or not be Catholic once they reach the age of reason, but their decision will be solidly informed.
 
General apostasy, from the top on down. When the shepherd is struck, the sheep shall scatter. Christ is presently in the tomb, like he was between Good Friday and Easter Sunday. We must relive his passion out in the Mystical Body. The New Mass was his Crucifixtion.
Cardinal Manning gave a set of conferences in 1861 in England. It was on the Present Crisis concerning the Holy See. It talks of the condemned teaching of religous liberty/separation of church and state having to take hold of governments and people. He explains how this is necessary before the great apostasy can take place. He also tells of how the papacy is the greatest obstacle to this happening and that the pope has to be taken out of the picture for the man of sin to appear. He also alludes to their being empty churches.
He uses Scripture, Church Fathers,Popes and the such to back himself up. This was written by a doctrinally solid Churchman and given approval; his work was never condemned. He is not a modern day writer/traditionalist. I know that would be reason for some here to not pursue acquiring and reading this well thoughtout and scholarly,timely work.
The book is called “The Pope and the Antichrist.” It is published by tradii books. I believe lulu.com is the only one selling it presently. It is a relatively short read of about 90 pages.

If the poster is serious about getting a furthur insight into this crisis, than that is where I would recommend him to start.

Joe
 
I agree with the OP. The concept that Vatican II and the Pauline Mass somehow caused the problems we have is simply logically nonsensical. If Vatican II and the Pauline Mass are so bad that they turned an otherwise faithful and orthodox group of clergy and laymen into irreverant, heretical liberals, then how on earth did it get written that way in the first place? From a very logical, commonsensical point of view, there had to have been irreverance, dissidence, unorthodoxy, and liberalism in the Church prior to Vatican II. Those folks were the ones that would have had to make Vatican II so terrible. Same goes for implementing it. There had to be all sorts of really liberal bishops in the Church for the Council to have been implemented so liberally. If everyone in the Church was so fantastic before the Council, then nobody would have either written the council documents liberally, if one believes they were written so, or implemented them so liberally, if one believes that implementation was the problem.

Anyone who has done any reading about the state of the Church prior to the council understands that there were lots of liberal dissidents in the Church before the Council. They weren’t out in the open, but they were certainly there. I’ve even heard SSPX guys acknowledge things like this.

My personal belief is that all of this stuff was coming one way or the other, and that the Holy Spirit inspired Vatican II as the antidote to this stuff.

It must be remembered that the world changed more in the 50 years from 1920-1970 then it did in the 500 before that - or maybe even 1,000. Now the Church has always adapted to the culture and changes in the world. She has never compromised with the world, but She’s always adapted in uncompromising ways. For example, at one time Latin was introduced into the Liturgy because few westerners spoke Greek anymore. When we’re talking about the adaptations of Vatican II, we’re talking about the Church having to come to terms with, as I said, more change in 50 years than it had ever seen in 10 times that long before. Many people saw all sorts of “changes” and “unorganic” growth in the Church, when the reality is that they were simply seeing a tremendous amount of legitimately organic growth and perfectly valid adaptations all crammed into a short period of time.

I personally believe we’re now seeing the fruits of the council in the positive signs we’re seeing. I think that without the Vatican II, every problem we lament in the Church today would be far, far worse. We seem to have hit the low point in vocations, and are now beginning to see growth in that area. If not for Vatican II, the bottom of that pit may have been much, much deeper.

I know many will vehemently disagree with me, but this is my opinion.

Peace and God bless
 
Cajetan said:
I don’t know about your situation, sir, but I don’t have kids. But I assure you, if and when I do, they will be properly instructed in the faith. They will be free to be Catholic or not be Catholic once they reach the age of reason, but their decision will be solidly informed.
Click to expand...
They will be held to their passed-down Catholic faith only until the “age of reason”? Surely, your expectations are higher than that?

🤷
 
ethelzguy said:
They will be held to their passed-down Catholic faith only until the “age of reason”? Surely, your expectations are higher than that?

🤷
Click to expand...
You bet they are. But freedom is massively important theologically, and I don’t see any sense in screaming and yelling (or in any other way punishing) at my reason-aged child if he or she does not want to be Catholic any longer, which may serve only to harden his or her heart toward the faith. We believe that faith is a free response from man to God. By placing impediments upon this freedom (“If I don’t stay Catholic, my parents will kill me,” etc.) we degrade the act of faith. At the age of reason, therefore, our children must be granted permission to genuinely exercise that freedom which they possess through rationality.

I would sincerely hope that this apostacy would never happen, however, and a proper Catholic education (within a faithful, prayerful, healthy Catholic family) will in all likelihood prevent it. I see the difference between properly catechised and poorly catechised young adults every day at my college; it is striking. Effects have causes.
 
Cajetan said:
(“If I don’t stay Catholic, my parents will kill me,” etc.)
Click to expand...
I suspect that’s the way it was, for decades, if not centuries.

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Fear is a powerful tool, or at least it was back in our day 👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top