What is the real crisis?

[Volodymyr_988]

The real crisis is us, the lukewarm laity.

If we were on fire and having like 7 kids who were on fire, then this problem would vanish within a generation.

 

[lucybeebee]

The real crisis is us, the lukewarm laity.

If we were on fire and having like 7 kids who were on fire, then this problem would vanish within a generation.

But to make sure those seven kids remain Catholic, they have to be in an environment that reinforces Catholic behavior. This was easier in the past when you had pariochal schools and parishes that reinforced the faith, but now those same institutions churn out apostates. Homeschooling is great, but there’s no guarantee that they’ll remain Catholic once they leave home. In the past, familial disapproval was enough to keep most kids Catholic. That’s not the case anymore. The sense of Catholic identity is vague, particularly when you have people who haven’t darkened a church in years and still call themselves Catholic. Creating a Catholic culture is difficult even at TLM parishes since the parishioners probably come from a wide geographical area. The traditionalist movement has failed to produce any actual deep-rooted culture; no significant artists, writers, or musicians to my knowledge.

 

[Volodymyr_988]

Well, even if only 4 of them stay good Catholics (the family I know who has 10 has all of them as good Catholics and they’ve even converted others through marriage) that still is twice as many Catholics out there than secularists.

 

[wraithx]

In response to the OP - the orthodox are a schismatic church - their liturgy is the least of their problems. The Catholic Church, on the other hand, does not draw people because of how its liturgy appears - it draws people because it is truth. The crisis with the liturgy is the fact that the novelties do not teach people that truth. So in our case, a full traditional catechesis programme would certainly help things a lot - and the loss of that has to be largely to blame for the crisis.

 

[wraithx]

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.

This is a first - Vatican II as the antidote to liberalism? Tres amusant!

The fact is true that there were liberals etc. before the council - hence the need for Pope Pius IX The Greater (he he) to write so much against modernism.

Alas, Vatican II gave many Bishops the tacit approval to make the liberalism public (note I say tacit - the documents themselves do not support liberalism in most cases). We might say one day that this was good - because it has shown the face of the enemy - but only time will tell.

And let us not make dogmatic a council which is not - the Pope specifically said that he did not want a dogmatic council - if a future pope wished to totally reject the council, he could. In fact, I think this WILL happen unless Pope Benedict XVI The Restorer is able to get it all understood in the light of tradition.

 

[Lui]

In the context of today, drugs, alcohol and sex are god. They’re still looking for God, and they think they found him.

This isn’t just what is happening today. Atheists who only believe in here and now have always existed.

The Book of Wisdom
Chapter 2

5
For our lifetime is the passing of a shadow; and our dying cannot be deferred because it is fixed with a seal; and no one returns.
6
Come, therefore, let us enjoy the good things that are real, and use the freshness of creation avidly.
7
Let us have our fill of costly wine and perfumes, and let no springtime blossom pass us by;
8
let us crown ourselves with rosebuds ere they wither

 

[Cat]

But to make sure those seven kids remain Catholic, they have to be in an environment that reinforces Catholic behavior. This was easier in the past when you had pariochal schools and parishes that reinforced the faith, but now those same institutions churn out apostates. Homeschooling is great, but there’s no guarantee that they’ll remain Catholic once they leave home. In the past, familial disapproval was enough to keep most kids Catholic. That’s not the case anymore. The sense of Catholic identity is vague, particularly when you have people who haven’t darkened a church in years and still call themselves Catholic. Creating a Catholic culture is difficult even at TLM parishes since the parishioners probably come from a wide geographical area. The traditionalist movement has failed to produce any actual deep-rooted culture; no significant artists, writers, or musicians to my knowledge.

lucybeebee, you are absolutely right on! I agree with your OP and I agree with this post. Thanks for posting such wise things. I love filling my mind with your ideas.

Parents and parishes can and do do everything right–raise kids up in the fear and admonition of the Lord and educate them lovingly and thoroughly about the Catholic faith–and the kids still depart, not only from Catholicism, but from Christianity and all religion.

I agree with you–there are tremendous forces that simply didn’t exist in the past (when Pope Pius X was pope, e.g.,) that pull our children, teenagers, and US away from God and His Church.

Just yesterday I was involved in a work conversation. A very liberal Methodist lady–an older lady, not a young person–told me (and another Catholic) that we should each decide in our own heart what is right and wrong, that no church or organization of man should tell us anything, since they are just people, too.

I’m sure many of you can see the flaw in that argument. One of the reasons we are in such a state of sin in our culture today is that we are all deciding for ourselves what is right and what is wrong, and many of us have decided that having sex out of wedlock is right, or having an abortion is right, or spending all our income on ourselves is right, or even murdering another human that gets in our way is right.

I told her that I personally want something outside of myself, something that has God-given authority, to make the decisions about what is right and wrong. I am not qualified to make those decisions, as I am a sinful and selfish human being.

But she wouldn’t buy it. “It should be up to each individual and no one has the right to judge anyone else’s moral stands,” she said. When the OLD people, who should know better, take such a foolish stand, then of course the young people are going to be even more foolish. I wonder what she will say when someone decides in their heart that it is “right” to rob her house at gunpoint? Will that be “OK?” Will she refuse to judge their personal choice?

I was born and raised evangelical Protestant, and even though I am now happily Catholic, I still agree with something that the evangelicals used to teach–the need for revival brought about by the Holy Spirit. No man-made program or art or sermon or book or anything will make it happen. Revival will happen as the faithful continue to call upon the Name of the Lord and prevail upon Him to intervene in our land and make us holy.

I would be very interested in hearing the Catholic viewpoint of some of the great revivals that have occurred throughout history. E.g., the Great Awakening in the U.S. I have read that in these times, people would be walking by a church, and suddenly feel compelled to go into the church, confess their sins and profess belief in Jesus. I don’t know if this movement spilled over into Catholic churches or not.

I have heard personal testimony from a pastor who was a missionary in Viet Nam from 1954-1972. He said that when a revival fell upon Viet Nam, people who were completely unacquainted with Christian teaching would pound on the door of the missionaries’ homes and beg to become Christians. The Holy Spirit brought tens of thousands of Vietnamese to Christianity during the revival. Did it last? Yes. After Saigon fell, the missionaries were taken back to the U.S. (those who survived the Communists), and for many years, heard NOTHING from Viet Nam. But then in the mid 1980s, a communication was released that basically said, “We are still here, we still believe in Jesus.” In our church (Christian and Missionary Alliance), we sponsored 30 of these Christians to come to the U.S., and my husband and I had the privilege of housing three of the people and a child (and an unborn baby!).

I have heard priests mention the word “revival” only a few times, but I know that there is some kind of Catholic teaching about the Holy Spirit and revival. I’m not talking about an emotional experience that hypes everyone up on Sunday and then crashes them back to reality on Monday. I’m talking about a work of the Holy Spirit that changes culture and keeps a country from sliding into hell on a sled. I pray for it.

And I think the way it happens is not up to us. It’s up to the Holy Spirit. Our task is to remain faithful to God and to His Church, and to do whatever we can to work with God to bring about His Kingdom “on earth as it is in heaven.”

 

[bpbasilphx]

** It simply can’t fight against the toxic residue of communism.**

Not true. She survived Communism.

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

But to make sure those seven kids remain Catholic, they have to be in an environment that reinforces Catholic behavior. This was easier in the past when you had pariochal schools and parishes that reinforced the faith, but now those same institutions churn out apostates. Homeschooling is great, but there’s no guarantee that they’ll remain Catholic once they leave home. In the past, familial disapproval was enough to keep most kids Catholic. That’s not the case anymore. The sense of Catholic identity is vague, particularly when you have people who haven’t darkened a church in years and still call themselves Catholic. Creating a Catholic culture is difficult even at TLM parishes since the parishioners probably come from a wide geographical area. The traditionalist movement has failed to produce any actual deep-rooted culture; no significant artists, writers, or musicians to my knowledge.

The traditionalist movement has failed to produce any deep rooted culture? How about at one time and for hundreds of years France, Italy, Ireland, Spain, Poland, etc.? No significant artists, writers, or musicians? You mean like Palestrina, Beethoven, Mozart, Raphael, Rubens and Michelangelo? Writers like Dante? These aren’t significant?

Or do you mean that within one year of the Motu Proprio being released, when most traditionalists do not even have their own parish, they are supposed to be producing deep culture? Well, authentic Catholic culture surely is forming wherever Catholics embrace and promote tradition, just give it time. But then again, Mel Gibson comes to mind.

And what great artists and/or art has the Novus Ordo produced, which has surely had a much greater opportunity to do so in the past forty years than adherents to the TLM?

In fact, what would the state of Catholic art and architecture be if the Novus Ordo had been celebrated over the past centuries instead of the TLM? I think you could kiss goodbye just about all of the great Cathedrals, beautiful churches, the high altars, and the great altar pieces by artists like Rubens along with our musical heritage.

 

[lucybeebee]

The traditionalist movement has failed to produce any deep rooted culture? How about at one time and for hundreds of years France, Italy, Ireland, Spain, Poland, etc.? No significant artists, writers, or musicians? You mean like Palestrina, Beethoven, Mozart, Raphael, Rubens and Michelangelo? Writers like Dante? These aren’t significant?

Or do you mean that within one year of the Motu Proprio being released, when most traditionalists do not even have their own parish, they are supposed to be producing deep culture? Well, authentic Catholic culture surely is forming wherever Catholics embrace and promote tradition, just give it time. But then again, Mel Gibson comes to mind.

And what great artists and/or art has the Novus Ordo produced, which has surely had a much greater opportunity to do so in the past forty years than adherents to the TLM?

In fact, what would the state of Catholic art and architecture be if the Novus Ordo had been celebrated over the past centuries instead of the TLM? I think you could kiss goodbye just about all of the great Cathedrals, beautiful churches, the high altars, and the great altar pieces by artists like Rubens along with our musical heritage.

When I speak of traditionalist culture, I mean specifically the sub-culture that has arisen since 1969. The art and architecture style that we associate with the Novus Ordo is the modernist/post-modernist style, which is not peculiar to Catholicism. Almost every Protestant church and Jewish synagoge built within the last 40 years will also have that look. They just don’t seem to be as bothered about it (or maybe they are, I don’t know). If you go into any big urban city and look at the churches, they will look pretty “Catholic” regardless of their actual affiliation.

What I’m trying to say is that traditionalists need to start creating art, rather than churn out the same polemics that we’ve been reading for the past 40+ years. Maybe this means being the only traditionalist in a very liberal art school or in a writing program to rejuvenate the current trends in the fine arts world. Maybe it means selling a self-published book out of a van. It could mean becoming an architect. I just think we need to create more of what we ought to be seeing as opposed to just decrying what we hate.

 

[lucybeebee]

** It simply can’t fight against the toxic residue of communism.**

Not true. She survived Communism.

Yes, the Orthodox Church survived communism, but it’s questionable whether the people did. Correct me if I’m wrong, but the people living under the Iron Curtain haven’t really been flocking back to the Orthodox Church. Or any church for that matter. In Russia, more people are dying than being born. Is the Russian Orthodox Church doing much missionary work among its people?

 

[ethelzguy]

I wonder if people after Trent complained as much as the post-Vatican II traditionalist crowd does now?

But then again, they didn’t have the “world wide web” to share their disgrutlement and make it appear larger than it really is, in respect to the total Catholic community.

:tsktsk:

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

Good point. I think the crisis sometimes is in each of us as indiviauals as opposed to being in the Universal Church as some believe.
Prayers & Blessings
Deacon ed B

 

[JuanCarlos]

I wonder if people after Trent complained as much as the post-Vatican II traditionalist crowd does now?

But then again, they didn’t have the “world wide web” to share their disgrutlement and make it appear larger than it really is, in respect to the total Catholic community.

:tsktsk:

Trent didn’t change anything, really; it can be compared to a house that has stuff all over the place, where nothing is organized- and Trent just put everything back in the right place, and gave guidelines on how to keep the House clean.

Vatican II opened the windows of the House while there was a hurricane outside

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

When I speak of traditionalist culture, I mean specifically the sub-culture that has arisen since 1969. The art and architecture style that we associate with the Novus Ordo is the modernist/post-modernist style, which is not peculiar to Catholicism. Almost every Protestant church and Jewish synagoge built within the last 40 years will also have that look. They just don’t seem to be as bothered about it (or maybe they are, I don’t know). If you go into any big urban city and look at the churches, they will look pretty “Catholic” regardless of their actual affiliation.

What I’m trying to say is that traditionalists need to start creating art, rather than churn out the same polemics that we’ve been reading for the past 40+ years. Maybe this means being the only traditionalist in a very liberal art school or in a writing program to rejuvenate the current trends in the fine arts world. Maybe it means selling a self-published book out of a van. It could mean becoming an architect. I just think we need to create more of what we ought to be seeing as opposed to just decrying what we hate.

I don’t disagree with you in principle. Yes, all of us as Catholics, whether we consider ourselves traditionalists or not, should at least desire that the Church embody the highest forms of art, architecture, liturgy, and music which actually used to be the norm.

The reason I spoke about there not being very many traditionalist parishes is that you can’t just go into any Catholic church and start installing a beautiful high altar. You don’t have the authority to do so. I do not live near any traditionalist parishes, yet where they do exist I suspect one would find them wanting to have a beautiful church which embodies the faith and that they are working towards that. And there are traditionally minded people who are helping to restore a sense of Catholic culture. I think of St. John Cantius parish in Chicago or the monks at Clear Creek in Oklahoma.

So where traditionalists do have the ability and opportunity to work towards a restoration of beauty they are doing precisely that even if some people aren’t aware of it.

 

[lucybeebee]

I don’t disagree with you in principle. Yes, all of us as Catholics, whether we consider ourselves traditionalists or not, should at least desire that the Church embody the highest forms of art, architecture, liturgy, and music which actually used to be the norm.

The reason I spoke about there not being very many traditionalist parishes is that you can’t just go into any Catholic church and start installing a beautiful high altar. You don’t have the authority to do so. I do not live near any traditionalist parishes, yet where they do exist I suspect one would find them wanting to have a beautiful church which embodies the faith and that they are working towards that. And there are traditionally minded people who are helping to restore a sense of Catholic culture. I think of St. John Cantius parish in Chicago or the monks at Clear Creek in Oklahoma.

So where traditionalists do have the ability and opportunity to work towards a restoration of beauty they are doing precisely that even if some people aren’t aware of it.

In terms of architecture, the current “bunker” or “glass and steel” models are what’s popular. When an architect is hired to design a church, the diocese is held hostage to the tastes of the designer, who probably doesn’t know or care about what styles are appropriate for a Catholic church. It seems like the only way to combat this tendency is to have more Catholic architects and stained glass artists.

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

In terms of architecture, the current “bunker” or “glass and steel” models are what’s popular. When an architect is hired to design a church, the diocese is held hostage to the tastes of the designer, who probably doesn’t know or care about what styles are appropriate for a Catholic church. It seems like the only way to combat this tendency is to have more Catholic architects and stained glass artists.

Yes, I agree with that. Although I would say that the diocese is the one who hires the designer and can reject their design so it seems as if the steel bunker model has been prevalent because ultimately that is what many dioces have decided to go with. Or perhaps they become impressed with the credentials of some famous designer and just go with whatever he designs.

And it’s not unusual at all to have designers hired who are not even Catholic. I’m not saying they could not build a beautiful Catholic church, but too often that does not happen.

A case in point would be the Los Angeles Cathedral. A committee was set up to pick the design and designer. Now, from what I understand there was at least one, if not more, traditionally minded Catholic architects who submitted excellent designs. Do you think they got anywhere in the committee? No, of course not. Instead a famous designer who is not a practicing Catholic is selected who built the large bunker like cathedral we have today.

 

[ProVobis]

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

I wouldn’t disagree with this assessment. And it probably goes back way before Vatican II.

I wonder how much of this is related to the fact that Americans hate monarchies and since the Pope is seen as a sort of monarch, they wouldn’t look to him for moral leadership that is so necessary, I think. Just an observation on my part.

 

[Lazerlike42]

This is a first - Vatican II as the antidote to liberalism? Tres amusant!

The fact is true that there were liberals etc. before the council - hence the need for Pope Pius IX The Greater (he he) to write so much against modernism.

Alas, Vatican II gave many Bishops the tacit approval to make the liberalism public (note I say tacit - the documents themselves do not support liberalism in most cases). We might say one day that this was good - because it has shown the face of the enemy - but only time will tell.

And let us not make dogmatic a council which is not - the Pope specifically said that he did not want a dogmatic council - if a future pope wished to totally reject the council, he could. In fact, I think this WILL happen unless Pope Benedict XVI The Restorer is able to get it all understood in the light of tradition.

The Council was dogmatic. Matt1618 tackles this issue, in part saying:

It is clear beyond any shadow of doubt that VC II was convoked as an Ecumenical Council according to the manifest mind and intention of Pope John XXIII. Of course Pope John XXIII died before ratifying any of the Council decrees. Therefore it must be looked at to find out if his successor Pope Paul VI intended to follow in Pope John’s footsteps or if he changed his mind later on and made the council merely a “disciplinary” or “non dogmatic synod.” Certainly if anyone could tell us the intention of His Holiness in the matter it would be the Supreme Pontiff by his own words. Therefore, here are excerpts from the words of the closing allocution from the Council delivered on December 8, 1965:

The Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, assembled in the Holy Spirit and under the protection of the Blessed Virgin Mary, whom we have declared Mother of the Church, and of St. Joseph, her glorious spouse, and of the Apostles SS. Peter and Paul, must be numbered without doubt among the greatest events of the Church. In fact it was the largest in the number of Fathers who came to the seat of Peter from every part of the world, even from those places where the hierarchy has been very recently established. It was the richest because of the questions which for four sessions have been discussed carefully and profoundly.

And last of all it was the most opportune, because, bearing in mind the necessities of the present day, above all it sought to meet the pastoral needs and, nourishing the flame of charity, it has made a great effort to reach not only the Christians still separated from communion with the Holy See, but also the whole human family.
At last all which regards the holy ecumenical council has, with the help of God, been accomplished and all the constitutions, decrees, declarations and votes have been approved by the deliberation of the synod and promulgated by us. Therefore we decided to close for all intents and purposes, with our apostolic authority, this same ecumenical council called by our predecessor, Pope John XXIII, which opened October 11, 1962, and which was continued by us after his death. [4]

Pope Paul VI claims in his closing address several times that VC II is Ecumenical. Therefore, its decisions were clearly ratified as such as only the Sovereign Pontiff can make that determination. There can be absolutely no doubt that VC II was a valid Ecumenical Council of the Catholic Church - the twenty-first such Council held.

• matt1618.freeyellow.com/treatise6.html

The Council even defined new doctrines regarding the Sacrament of Orders which had not yet been taught by the Church, settling the dispute altogether.

 

[ProVobis]

The Council was dogmatic.

Anything dogmatic has to be universally accepted in the Catholic Church. Do you mean, then, that the Eastern Rites had to “retain” Latin in their liturgies among other things? I don’t think so. Compare that with Trent which was universal and anathematized all-vernacular liturgies among a lot of things and affected all rites within the Church.