What Is Tradition?

[JReducation]

Hi Scylla

I would like to help with some of the points that you make here. I know they are serious to you. But let’s look at them in a more positive light.

What you say here is 100% correct.

The traditions I am speaking of that have changed are essentially small traditions and can certainly be changed. There is nothing really stopping us from changing them, and this is why they have been changed.

For example out here on the west coast (at least in my diocese) I have noticed that many of the Priests\Sisters rarely wear their habits. Now the Sisters never do, at least the ones I see here.

The decision to have a habit and when to wear it or not is an internal affair of a religious community. Neither bishops nor laity have the authority to intervene here. Religious communities were asked to rewrite their constitutions and submit them for approval by the Holy Father, if they were Pontifical Communities or the to the local bishop if they were diocesan communities. Once these constitutions are appreoved, it is the responsibility of the competent authority who approved them to take up the slack.

For example, you will notice that the mendicant and the monastic orders such as Carmelites, Franciscans, Benedictines, Dominicans, Augustinians, Trinitarians, still wear habits. The habit was written into the rule of the order and could only be taken out by a Pope. This is not the same for other communities. The members had the authority to take the habit out. With the communities that I mentioned, the most that they could do was to ammend their constitutions to say that under specific circumstances approved by their major superiors, they could wear other clothing. The Holy Father approved this ammendment. We may wish that they wore a habit all the time, but the Holy Father didn’t think it was reasonable.

In my parish we have friars. They get two habits and are allowed to wash then only once per week. Can you imagine living with the “odor of sanctity” in a hot climate?

I am not sure how this reflects our Catholic faith as it did before when the tradition was to wear a habit and visibly express the faith to the public.

One of the holiest group of women whom I have had the honour of working with are the Carmelite Sisters of Charity. They don’t have a habit. The Holy Father approved the elimination of the same. However, those who know them see poor women wearing clothes from Goodwil, hand-me-downs, thrift-store clothing and serving the poor, at prayer, doing great works of penance. They truly give witness to the Perfection of Charity. Religious are not called to announce to the world that they are religious. The Church does not expect that of them. The Church expects them to be examples of the Perfection of Charity. The habit is not going to make them more or less charitable.

This can also be said with public processions of the faith, Corpus Christi, stuff like that, in many places they have been replaced with sometimes nothing or maybe a car wash.

In some places the processions are still there. In other places they were taken out for practical reasons. The procession was harassed by hecklers. For example, bishops and religioius superiors did not want to expose the Blessed Sacrament to hecklers on the street during a Corpus Christi procession or worse, having eggs thrown at it. Things like this happened.

In other places the civil authorities would not grant the police protection. It was not worth the risk.

In our worship I see this too, in replacing kneeling with standing,

This came from religious communities such as Franciscans and Benedictines where the religious stood for communion as a sign of their equality with the priest. There was a tendency to put priests on pedestals. Benedict and Francis wanted to keep all of the Brothers as equals, while preserving the reverence to the Eucharist and the respect for the priesthood. In their religious houses they stood and bowed for communion.

This is not a new custom. It’s new to the laity, not to the Church.

having the rosary before Mass to the liturgy of the bulletin, which is before Mass, and after Mass, and sometimes during Mass.

Good liturgy should have neither before mass. The rosary is a beautiful devotion. But the time before mass should be devoted to getting ready to celebrate the sacred mysteries. It should not be at time for reading the bulletin either.

On a practical note, some parishes don’t have the time to insert space for private recitation of the rosary between masses. In my parish we have five masses back to back, not counting the Saturday and Sunday evening masses.

The time between masses is about 15 minutes. I don’t know how many masses you have in your parish.

Thank you for letting me share with you.

JR

The path to God is tough narrow and sometimes, like the path between a sea monster and a whirlpool.

 

[scylla]

What you are giving are good reasons for the changes in practice, which generally can always be given. I agree, for some situations there are good reasons given.

Most of the time the changes have not been done for the reasons you have given. And yes I do agree that the Pope has the authority to change many things, whenever he pleases. And in many cases people do have the freedom to adjust or change tradition in many ways. I just argue that many times in the last 40 or so years it has been done for the wrong reasons, even if other reasons were given.

I disagree about the rosary, as there should always be some time set aside in parishes for recitation of the rosary before the Blessed Sacrament, it doesn’t have to be before Mass and in some cases such as the one you have given, it cannot. The rosary honors the blessings, Jesus gave us in His incarnation.

I agree that habits are not going to make anyone more holy, but that is a lousy reason not to have them. There are indeed some religious who have shed their habits and stayed faithful to the Church, I will argue they are the exception, not the rule.
Their personal behavior aside, if they are holy or quite rebellious if they do good works and do not witness the Catholic faith to others then they are only doing half their jobs. We should be extremely concerned about the salvation of souls and witness Christ in every way possible. We do good works because we see Jesus in others, other people can do it because it makes them feel good or to look good, but Catholics have a specific reason, the salvation of our soul and to bring others to Christ.

An example,
I know an atheist who is very kind, yet advocates abortion and plenty of other evils, yet she is indistiguishible from the sister who works at my Church. Except she goes out in the community and helps people, (the atheist).

Going on to kneeling, though it might be a custom which comes from earlier times it is done for the wrong reasons and quite evil in its basis of thought. If I am doing something to show equality to the Priest, then my focus of worship is wrong. I agree that in certain situations such as you have given it might be ok, but to bring this to the laity has sent a wrong message and has contributed to a loss of belief in the Real Presence of Christ.

We should not put any man on a pedestal, but no matter how crummy the Priest, he still is the man who stands for Christ, and we honor his office. We should kiss his hand and kneel for a blessing from him. Now we shouldn’t let him get away with anything or dishonor his office either, always remembering he is just a man.
This is another way of recognizing the power of Christ and His Church.

Everything ties together, as you change tradition you can change belief very easily which can lead to a reinforcement of faith or a destruction of it. There are many forms in which we witness Christ in our faith, take them away and no longer is Christ the center but whatever we have replaced Him with. Most of the time it is ourselves or nothing.

God Bless
Scylla

 

[JReducation]

I just argue that many times in the last 40 or so years it has been done for the wrong reasons, even if other reasons were given.

You realize that this is always going to happen. People are going to look at the resons from different perspectives and see different views. The important thing is holiness. What would be the response of someone like a Vincent de Paul? Would he have spent much time on this topic as people do on these forums? Not really. The hungry, poor, sick, lonely, sinner were more important to him. These things he left to the hierarchy. He got himself canonized for it.

I disagree about the rosary, The rosary honors the blessings, Jesus gave us in His incarnation.

Again, the saints would agree with you. Montforte always gathered a group to pray the rosary in front of the Blessed Sacrament. But he never linked it with the mass. The mass was Christ’s time to shine, without any other devotion before or after it. There was no greater promoter of the Holy Rosary and its place in Christian spirituality than Montforte.

I agree that habits are not going to make anyone more holy, but that is a lousy reason not to have them. There are indeed some religious who have shed their habits and stayed faithful to the Church, I will argue they are the exception, not the rule.

We do not know the state of another person’s soul.

We should be extremely concerned about the salvation of souls and witness Christ in every way possible.

But you have to remember why St. Benedict and St. Scholastica started religious life in the first place. They founded religious life for the sanctification of the religious themselves. The religious community was a haven where they could live according to the perfection of charity.

We incorrectly believe that religious life exists for the benefit of the laity. That has never been the belief of the Catholic Church. Their work was a form of prayer. It was taken from St. Benedict’s rule “Ora et labora”, pray and work. Even if a religious never leaves his or her religious house, he or she is already making a contribution the the Catholic Church by virtue of his obedience, his prayer, his detachment, his fidelity to his rule, his adherence to the Gospel, and his love of God. These are the principals upon which religious life was founded.

Serving the laity is the function of secular priests, secular deacons, secular bishops. Because of a shortage of secualr clergy, many founders had to lend religioius to the bishops and we became confused about why religious exist.

The first group founded to be of service to the laity was the Vincentians and the Daughters of Charity. They are apostolic societies. There are many apostolic institutes today. Let’s not confuse them with religious life. The take vows, but they are not religious and were not meant to live like religious. In fact the Daughters of Charity to this day may not live in convents and may not be called nuns or take perpetual vows. They make vows only for a year at a time. They can leave any time they want.

If a group wants to wear a habit, the habit is a symbol of their brotherhood and their relationship to each other. It is not for our benefit. It is for their benefit. Whatever benefits them, will benefit us because we are part of the same Church.

I know an atheist who is very kind, yet advocates abortion and plenty of other evils, yet she is indistiguishible from the sister who works at my Church. Except she goes out in the community and helps people, (the atheist).

We go back to the founders. Many founders did not want the members of their communities to stand out in public. They didn’t at first. Fashions changed and these communities didn’t change their form of dress. Elizabeth Ann Seton did not wear a habit. She was a widow and wore the clothing of an Italian widow. Many of her sisters loved her so much that they adopted her form of dress. Years later they realized that this was not in Elizabeth’s plans or desires.

Fr. Judge the founder of the Trinitarian Sisters did not want them to wear habits. They never did. Opus Dei does not allow their sisters to wear habits. They are to wear professional dress. The work of God is to be done without perception. I can’t think of a more traditionalist group in the Church or more Orthodox.

Going on to kneeling, though it might be a custom which comes from earlier times it is done for the wrong reasons and quite evil in its basis of thought. If I am doing something to show equality to the Priest, then my focus of worship is wrong.

What St. Francis wanted to stress was the common brotherhood shared by all. He certainly had very high respect for priests and for the Eucharist. There is a difference between brotherhood and disrespect. No one has the right to disrespect either the priesthood or the Eucharist. If people read Francis writings on both, this comes through loud and clear.

The disrespect for the Eucharist is not new. It goes further back than the Middle Ages.

There are many forms in which we witness Christ in our faith, take them away and no longer is Christ the center but whatever we have replaced Him with. Most of the time it is ourselves or nothing.

You should only remove those traditions that no longer have the effect that they were intended to have. If a tradtiion is to be replaced, you must replace it with one that achieves the desired effect. We should be careful how we manage changes.

Changes are part of life and they’re going to happen. Sometimes they work and sometimes they don’t. We can’t always see ahead. Hindsight is always 20/20.

JR

 

[scylla]

You realize that this is always going to happen. People are going to look at the resons from different perspectives and see different views. The important thing is holiness. What would be the response of someone like a Vincent de Paul? Would he have spent much time on this topic as people do on these forums? Not really. The hungry, poor, sick, lonely, sinner were more important to him. These things he left to the hierarchy. He got himself canonized for it.

newadvent.org/cathen/15434c.htm

It seems you have only painted half the picture of Saint Vincent de Paul, he was certainly concerned with the Christian faith, correcting errors and converting those to the Church of Christ. This is primarily what these forums are for, to point to Christ and correct errors. There are many people who are serving Christ by witnessing His truth on these forums and others. Our primary work in life is to bring ourselves to Christ and bring others to Christ, and because of Christ in others were serve them.

Again, the saints would agree with you. Montforte always gathered a group to pray the rosary in front of the Blessed Sacrament. But he never linked it with the mass. The mass was Christ’s time to shine, without any other devotion before or after it. There was no greater promoter of the Holy Rosary and its place in Christian spirituality than Montforte.

This makes no sense, the rosary has to be sometime before the Mass or after it. I am not saying the rosary is part of the Mass I am saying it should be encouraged to be prayed when Mass is not being conducted in front of the Blessed Sacrament. And naturally since this is in a Church it would happen sometime before Mass or after, preferably when people are in the Church so it naturally falls at a time close to the worship of God at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

We do not know the state of another person’s soul.

I agree we cannot judge a persons soul but by their actions I can certainly rebuke them and let them know they should be witnessing Christ rather than living their lives looking like secular humanists. When a person focuses only on social justice ignoring the salvation of souls, doctrinal fidelity and the conversion to Catholicism, something is wrong.

I will respond to the rest of your post later, as my wife is telling me to go get dinner. Tradition is a reflection of truth and should not be discarded just because of antiquarianism.

I can explain why antiquarianism which is very prevalent today is wrong if you like.

God Bless
Scylla

 

[elt1956]

newadvent.org/cathen/15434c.htm

It seems you have only painted half the picture of Saint Vincent de Paul, he was certainly concerned with the Christian faith, correcting errors and converting those to the Church of Christ. This is primarily what these forums are for, to point to Christ and correct errors. There are many people who are serving Christ by witnessing His truth on these forums and others. Our primary work in life is to bring ourselves to Christ and bring others to Christ, and because of Christ in others were serve them.

This makes no sense, the rosary has to be sometime before the Mass or after it. I am not saying the rosary is part of the Mass I am saying it should be encouraged to be prayed when Mass is not being conducted in front of the Blessed Sacrament. And naturally since this is in a Church it would happen sometime before Mass or after, preferably when people are in the Church so it naturally falls at a time close to the worship of God at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

I agree we cannot judge a persons soul but by their actions I can certainly rebuke them and let them know they should be witnessing Christ rather than living their lives looking like secular humanists. When a person focuses only on social justice ignoring the salvation of souls, doctrinal fidelity and the conversion to Catholicism, something is wrong.

I will respond to the rest of your post later, as my wife is telling me to go get dinner. Tradition is a reflection of truth and should not be discarded just because of antiquarianism.

I can explain why antiquarianism which is very prevalent today is wrong if you like.

God Bless
Scylla

Was Mother Theresa only a humanist? Sometimes the way to a person’s soul is through social justice. When your stomach is empty and you have a bunch of children to feed, no food and no job, I don’t think the person suffering this would be thinking about evangelizing unless one is a Saint and is so wrapped up in the afterlife, the here and now means little, at least for that individual.

Jesus cured the lame and the blind, fed several thousand people who wouldn’t have been able to listen to Him unless their bellies were first taken care of. Only after they were fed, were they able to listen to Him.

AND sometimes He did this social justice on a Sabbeth!!!

 

[scylla]

Was Mother Theresa only a humanist? Sometimes the way to a person’s soul is through social justice. When your stomach is empty and you have a bunch of children to feed, no food and no job, I don’t think the person suffering this would be thinking about evangelizing unless one is a Saint and is so wrapped up in the afterlife, the here and now means little, at least for that individual.

Jesus cured the lame and the blind, fed several thousand people who wouldn’t have been able to listen to Him unless their bellies were first taken care of. Only after they were fed, were they able to listen to Him.

AND sometimes He did this social justice on a Sabbeth!!!

We should look at the whole of Catholicism, not just social justice. Salvation is first and foremost. Even Mother Theresa witnessed Catholicism in her habit and her profound love of Jesus.
Our traditions are a whole package of witnessing Christ.

“Many people mistake our work for our vocation. Our vocation is the love of Jesus.”
Mother Teresa

I am not saying there is anything wrong with social justice, we are all called to it, but it is only part of Catholicism. Mother Theresa evoked Catholicism and spoke of it even denouncing abortion when she received her Nobel Prize.

It is a package, salvation, tradition, Catholicism, social justice, they are all parts of the same whole and are interconnected. I agree that social justice is important, but salvation is more important. You can help someone be comfortable but should also witness Jesus to them or they might die comfortable, but hating God.

Here is a good illustration of that,
Which is better, to die suffering in agony and be saved?
or to die comforted and happy but go to hell?

Of course this doesn’t discount social justice, it just illustrates that salvation is more important. Jesus didn’t free the good thief from the cross suffering next to Him, He offered Salvation.
We should seek to offer both to others, if we can.

Our traditions communicate out faith, and even if the founders of orders didn’t envision the development of some traditions, if they help communicate the faith they should be kept.

In Christ
Scylla

 

[JReducation]

From the early days of the Church, religious life formed an integral part of Church tradition. There are many forms of religious life, which if I began to explain them all here it would never end.

Hermetical
Mendicant
Apostolic
Contemplative

The hermetical life really describes those who live monastic life separated from the world. To this group belong only Religious Orders. Religious Congregations do not belong in this group as they do not make solemn vows. They make simple perpetual vows, which is a different status in the Church. Monastic communities can be divided into two groups, communal and hermits. Communal monastics are Trappists, Cistercians, Cloistered Carmelites, Benedictines, Poor Clares, Cloistered Dominicans, and Visitandines. Hermits are Camaldolese and Carthusians. There are a few others, but they are not as well known. All of these groups follow the spirit of St. Benedict in one form or another. They exist first for the sanctification of their own members and second for the sanctification of the Church through their prayer and physical labour.

The mendicants are religious orders also, because they too make solemn vows. They combine monastic life with apostolic activity. However, they were founded for the salvation of their members and the sanctification of the Church through their lives of liturgy, private prayer, silence, penance, on-going conversion, poverty, obedience to their superiors and founders, and corporal works of mercy. They leave the enclosure of their communities to perform corporal works of mercy.

They believe and teach that preaching and corporal works of mercy are equal in necessity and efficaciousness for the salvation of souls. Preaching is not above charity, it is part of charity. They base their theology on the Beatitudes and on James statement on faith without works as deaad faith.

They are contemplatives in action. Among them you find the five religious orders in the Church: Franciscans, Augustinians, Carmelites, Benedictines and Basilians in the Eastern Rite. All other orders in the Church must use one of these rules or have no rule at all. For example, the Dominicans use the rule of St. Augustine. The Jesuits do not have a rule. They follow the spiritual writings of St. Ignatius, but these are not legally binding. They are spiritual guidelines.

The key here is that what some people call social justice, religious orders call corporal works of mercy and the perfection charity. They teach it as equally necessary to preaching and correcting errors. St. Francis told his Brothers that they should always preach through corporal works of mercy, only when necessary use words.

St. Anthony asked for permission to teach the Brothers theology so that they could fight off heresy, Francis responded that it would be permissible only if it did not extinguish the spirit of prayer. Fighting error was second, contemplative prayer in silence and solitude was first. This has been a custom in the Franciscan family for 800 years. No friar may give up his four hours of Divine Office, daily liturgy, daily hour of silent prayer, daily community recreation, daily community meal, annual community retreat to fight heresy.

Their call in life is to live the Gospel as Francis wanted them to live it. When they make their solemn vows they promise to “Live the Holy Gospel according to our Holy Father St. Francis, in obedience, without property and in chastity.” Observe the order of priorities: Gospel, Francis, obedience, poverty and chastity. Ministry is part of their religious commitment only as it is described in Francis’ rule, example and other writings. There is no way around it.

Prayer and corporal works of mercy took priority over fighting errors. It was the most efficacious way to bring men to Christ. Preaching flowed from prayer and acts of mercy. Preaching is a product of prayer and service.

Each community uses the means and the mode established by their founder.

Mother Teresa followed St. Francis. Therefore, she was not going to preach to the Muslims or Hindus using words, if she could avoid it. She would preach through the good works mentioned in the Gospels under Corporal Works of Mercy and in St. James. “If you want to be my disciple give what you have to the poor. Take up your cross and follow me,” and “Lord when did we see you hungry, naked, in prison, sick?” What mother Teresa did was use words to teach the Christian faith, only when the actions did not serve alone. Other than that, she stuck to Francis’ spirituality. “Teach through works of mercy and use words only when needed.”

This is why on October 4th the Church’s liturgy calls Francis the Mirror of Perfection. He brought the Corporal works of mercy into harmony with preaching and through his life taught the Church that they are equally necessary for salvation and that salvation uses both as a means. You cannot correct error if you have never fed the poor, according to Francis’ successor, St. Bonaventure.

As our superior told us this morning, “This is not up for debate. These are the desire of our Holy Father approved by a Papal Bull.”

By the way, Mother Teresa did not dress as a sister. She wore the common garb of Hindu nuns. She placed a tiny cross on the shoulder and a rosay at the waist.

JR

 

[elt1956]

We should look at the whole of Catholicism, not just social justice. Salvation is first and foremost. Even Mother Theresa witnessed Catholicism in her habit and her profound love of Jesus.
Our traditions are a whole package of witnessing Christ.

“Many people mistake our work for our vocation. Our vocation is the love of Jesus.”
Mother Teresa

I am not saying there is anything wrong with social justice, we are all called to it, but it is only part of Catholicism. Mother Theresa evoked Catholicism and spoke of it even denouncing abortion when she received her Nobel Prize.

It is a package, salvation, tradition, Catholicism, social justice, they are all parts of the same whole and are interconnected. I agree that social justice is important, but salvation is more important. You can help someone be comfortable but should also witness Jesus to them or they might die comfortable, but hating God.

Here is a good illustration of that,
Which is better, to die suffering in agony and be saved?
or to die comforted and happy but go to hell?

Of course this doesn’t discount social justice, it just illustrates that salvation is more important. Jesus didn’t free the good thief from the cross suffering next to Him, He offered Salvation.
We should seek to offer both to others, if we can.

Our traditions communicate out faith, and even if the founders of orders didn’t envision the development of some traditions, if they help communicate the faith they should be kept.

In Christ
Scylla

You deny that “sometimes” the human touch works best. Not everyone is an intellectual. Peace.

 

[JReducation]

Without the human touch there would have been no salvation. For this reason the Incarnation had to happen, so that he who was spirit and life, could also become human, not because the Divine was lacking anything or that it needed anything from humanity, but because humanity needed the Divine.

Yes, Christ must touch the wounds of the poor for salvation to be efficacious. If there were no need for corporal works of mercy Christ would not have said what he said, “as long as you did it for one of these the least of my brothers, you did it for me”.

What we need to understand is that corporal works of mercy are not for the spiritual benefit of the receiver, they are for the salvation of the giver. Maybe this is the confusion here.

The receiver benefits from our corproal works of mercy in the physical sense and maybe in the spiritual sense if he or she can perceive Christ through us. But we, the doers of the action do cooperate with the Incarnate Christ. Just as Christ had to die a physcial death, we have to engage in a physical ministry to join him on the cross.

This physical ministry could be manual labour, as do religious who are monastic and never leave their monasteries. It can be corporal works of mercy as St. Vincent de Paul and Mother Teresa showed us to do.

But this physical mystery of salvation is necessary for our salvation. We do need to perform corporal acts of mercy, even if it’s gardening and offering it up for souls.

Monastic life has made this theological statement, which the Church believes and incorporates into her spirituality.

Why do you think that monks and nuns never leave their monasteries?

They don’t have to. Their life includes the two necessary elements for their salvation, prayer and physical work, just like Christ’s life.

Teaching and correcting error is not on their list of priorities. And yet, the Church has declared that this is the highest form of Christian life and the most noble of all Christian vocations and the perfect form of Gospel living.

This is the Church writes that these forms of monastic life are necessary to the life of the Church, because they restore the Church and renew her with a fresh dose of grace every day.

Maybe we are too obsessed with correcting error and not preocupied enough with what the Church considers to be the noblest form of the Christian life: contemplation, silence and work for love of God and neighbor.

We can’t put handcuffs on the Holy Spirit. He will work and do what he has set out to do. We have to do what Christ and the saints have taught us to do: pray, contemplate, and love. Only when absolutely necessary, use words.

These are the oldest traditions of the Christian faith.

JR

 

[scylla]

Monks and those dedicated to prayer rarely have to address sharing the faith, because they are surrounded by Catholics or alone, when correction or sharing the faith is not necessary. The same with all the examples you provided. Prayer, dedication to Christ is first, I agree, but when there are souls in jeopardy of damnation, part of our dedication to Christ involves sharing Christ with them.

This is illustrated in your example

St. Anthony asked for permission to teach the Brothers theology so that they could fight off heresy, Francis responded that it would be permissible only if it did not extinguish the spirit of prayer.

Did he just pray and wait, no they did both, prayer and a dedication to fighting the doctrinal errors.

St Francis went to the Muslims to bring them to Christ and correct their errors. True faith is dedicated to Salvation of our souls, others, and this I agree is by our prayer, dedication to Christ, yet if we see error we should point it out.

To allow error is to allow Christ to be misrepresented and to betray Him. Who is the Father of lies, we should never allow lies to be presented as truth or we don’t serve Christ. To allow error is to ignore Christ’s command to be perfect, at times by the power of Christ we can be and ultimately must die to ourselves to reach His perfection. (a bit of Purgatory is what most of us will need)

Our traditions are what evidence our faith in the truth of Christ and can be expressed in many ways as long as they are true to putting Christ first rather than our selfish desires.

Regarding Mother Theresa, I would disagree about her outfit, it clearly is a Catholic habit, in that it is a distinctive garb which evidences the Catholic faith, in traditional fashion. A Caholic habit doesn’t have to have to be black with a wimple. Regardless if it reflected Indian culture, it clearly is Catholic in expression. A veil, the rosary, the cross and the distinctive garb all express Catholicism.

Now I notice something about the responses…
Please don’t misunderstand me, I see some statements that seem to understand my statements as if I am against social justice. Please understand me properly. We need faith, hope and love, the greatest is love, but without truth. I can love error, I can love evil, I need to have a love of truth, of Christ, of others, and evidence this in my prayer, charity and fidelity.
Not just one.

Just because social justice, or charity is stressed it should never be to the negation of truth. Fidelity to representing Christ faithfully and obedience to the Church Christ founded, as our obedience is to Christ, is a whole package.

(I agree we need the treasury of prayers, that is oh so important, it is all part of indulgences and the treasury of merits available to all of us)

God Bless
Scylla

 

[JReducation]

Monks and those dedicated to prayer rarely have to address sharing the faith, because they are surrounded by Catholics or alone, when correction or sharing the faith is not necessary.

Don’t miss the essential of what St. Anthony of the Desert and St. Benedict tried to teach. This is highest form of Christian living. It is to this form of life that we should all aspire, within our circumstances, to live as detached from the world as possible.

Did he just pray and wait, no they did both, prayer and a dedication to fighting the doctrinal errors.

St Francis went to the Muslims to bring them to Christ and correct their errors. True faith is dedicated to Salvation of our souls, others, and this I agree is by our prayer, dedication to Christ, yet if we see error we should point it out.

I don’t know if you’re a Franciscan or not, but based on your response, I would guess that you’re not. Francis did go to the Muslims. But he never told his Brothers that they were going to correct “error”. They were going to preach the Gospel. Our Holy Father’s attitude was always very positive. He focussed on the Gospel.

Is is obvious that the Gospel is free of error. But there is an essential difference between preaching the Gospel and correcting error. When you take it upon yourself to correct error you are approaching the other person on the offensive. You start off with the idea in mind that they are wrong and your are right.

When you approach the person with the goal of sharing the Gospel, you go in as a gift bearer. This is what impressed everyone about Our Holy Father. He always approached everyone with joy because he had somethng good to share. He did not point to the error. He alays pointed to the Gospel.

By the way, Francis did very little preaching among non Christians. It was not a priority to him. His priority was living the Gospel. When he sent his Brothers to other parts of Europe and Asia he sent them to establish fraternities where the Gospel would be preached by the life of the Brothers.

In his letter to Anthony he gives permission to study theology on the condition that the contemplative life is not compromised for the sake of combating heressy. The contemplative life always takes priority over any attempt to contradict error, even if heresy was on your front porch.

Haven’t you noticed that Franciscans to this day do not do much outside of their firaries or parishes? It’s not necessary. Our Holy Father believed that these errors would be healed through the life of prayer, obedience to him, community and detachment.

We have to beware that it is not our mission to fight heressy. It is our mission to live and preach the Gospel. If we live and preach the gospel as our Holy Father taught the Church to do, errors will collapse from their own weight.

Regarding Mother Theresa, I would disagree about her outfit, it clearly is a Catholic habit, in that it is a distinctive garb which evidences the Catholic faith, in traditional fashion. A Caholic habit doesn’t have to have to be black with a wimple. Regardless if it reflected Indian culture, it clearly is Catholic in expression. A veil, the rosary, the cross and the distinctive garb all express Catholicism.

These were the words of her successor who is Indian. Mother selected the colours and added the cross on the shoulder and the rosary. By the way, it’s not a veil that they wear. It’s a sari. It starts at the head and wraps around the body. It’s a Hindu garment that represents virginity. But it doesn’t matter. Because a habit does not make the monk, neither does it make the sister.

Mother Teresa’s nuns wear a habit. But we never see them. The only ones whom we see are the sisters. The nuns may not be seen in public. I don’t believe there are more than two houses of them.

I think the difficulty in understanding you post may be the term “social justice”. Though social justice a concern for the Church, corproal works of mercy are different from social justice. They are required virtues. They are evangelical.

I’m wondering if we’re not all talking about the same thing using the two terms interchangeably. They aren’t. Corporal works of mercy are certainly part of social justice, but social justice does not require corporal works of mercy.

Maybe we need to make sure that when we post we define which one we mean, social justice or corporal works of mercy.

This happens a great deal on these threads. People often argue and debate over words, when they saying the same thing using different terms, if you know what I mean.

JR

 

[scylla]

I am sorry, you are right, I have been sloppy with my language. I think you understand my points though. I was not particulary concerned with addressing the correct terminology, which is why I used the term veil for the sari. I see the headcovering and the distinctive garb which distinguished the missionaries of charity.

I seem to have a different point of view than you as I do live on the west coast where the faith has been corrupted to the point of many of us having to close our eyes at Mass to maintain an air of charity. Bishops allow horrible misrepresentations of the truth, blasphemy and sacrilege reigns. But enough complaining.

Your right I am not a Franciscan, I spend my time involved in my community, speaking with non-catholics and sharing the faith with other Catholics. We must correct errors, I know it sounds terrible, but there are genuine errors. Catholicism is 100% perfect and it is the truth, it does not come from me, all I can do is share the truth of Christ with others. This comes from Christ and not is any of my doing. It isn’t too fashionable these days to care about truth very much.

I understand that we might have different points of views on sharing the Gospel, I would just stress that to tolerate error is to tolerate insulting Jesus. To allow error is to misrepresent God’s truth and to not have perfect love of truth.

The way you explained presenting the Gospel is certainly beautiful and I agree. I will certainly try to take the attitude a bit more as you present it, it does seem helpful. I am not so sure about your portayal of St Francis, I am not a Franciscan, but it seems a bit different from what I have read. I will be off the internet until probably Saturday night. I am off to go to a Humanae Vitae conference, in the morning.
Thank you for your (name removed by moderator)ut.

God Bless
Scylla

 

[elt1956]

Monks and those dedicated to prayer rarely have to address sharing the faith, because they are surrounded by Catholics or alone, when correction or sharing the faith is not necessary. The same with all the examples you provided. Prayer, dedication to Christ is first, I agree, but when there are souls in jeopardy of damnation, part of our dedication to Christ involves sharing Christ with them.

This is illustrated in your example

Did he just pray and wait, no they did both, prayer and a dedication to fighting the doctrinal errors.

St Francis went to the Muslims to bring them to Christ and correct their errors. True faith is dedicated to Salvation of our souls, others, and this I agree is by our prayer, dedication to Christ, yet if we see error we should point it out.

To allow error is to allow Christ to be misrepresented and to betray Him. Who is the Father of lies, we should never allow lies to be presented as truth or we don’t serve Christ. To allow error is to ignore Christ’s command to be perfect, at times by the power of Christ we can be and ultimately must die to ourselves to reach His perfection. (a bit of Purgatory is what most of us will need)

Our traditions are what evidence our faith in the truth of Christ and can be expressed in many ways as long as they are true to putting Christ first rather than our selfish desires.

Regarding Mother Theresa, I would disagree about her outfit, it clearly is a Catholic habit, in that it is a distinctive garb which evidences the Catholic faith, in traditional fashion. A Caholic habit doesn’t have to have to be black with a wimple. Regardless if it reflected Indian culture, it clearly is Catholic in expression. A veil, the rosary, the cross and the distinctive garb all express Catholicism.

Now I notice something about the responses…
Please don’t misunderstand me, I see some statements that seem to understand my statements as if I am against social justice. Please understand me properly. We need faith, hope and love, the greatest is love, but without truth. I can love error, I can love evil, I need to have a love of truth, of Christ, of others, and evidence this in my prayer, charity and fidelity.
Not just one.

Just because social justice, or charity is stressed it should never be to the negation of truth. Fidelity to representing Christ faithfully and obedience to the Church Christ founded, as our obedience is to Christ, is a whole package.

(I agree we need the treasury of prayers, that is oh so important, it is all part of indulgences and the treasury of merits available to all of us)

God Bless
Scylla

If one loves error, it isn’t love, If one loves evil it isn’t love. This is truth. Mother Theresa taught the truths of the Church only those who asked to be taught, such as the young girls who were drawn to her through her acts of mercy to those in need. As JR reminded me, acts of Mercy are as spiritually beneficial to the one who gives as the one who receives. Peace.

 

[JReducation]

I am sorry, you are right, I have been sloppy with my language. I think you understand my points though. I was not particulary concerned with addressing the correct terminology, which is why I used the term veil for the sari. I see the headcovering and the distinctive garb which distinguished the missionaries of charity.

We are all sloppy with our language. If the gospel writers had been more careful with their own, we would have less problems. Unfortunately, we tend to forget that our listener is not inside our heads to hear us think. Be not afraid, eventually we can all break through language barriers through poverty of spirit, by acknowledging that we do not posses the Wisdom of Solomon and that we must ask in order to understand and that we must seek to understand , rather than be understood.

I seem to have a different point of view than you as I do live on the west coast where the faith has been corrupted to the point of many of us having to close our eyes at Mass to maintain an air of charity. Bishops allow horrible misrepresentations of the truth, blasphemy and sacrilege reigns. But enough complaining.

You have said one great truth that St. Teresa of Avila will bless you with her prayers. If we complain too much about the heresy, errors and blasphemies in others, we run the risk of becoming Lords over those whom we should call brothers. However, if we acknowledge that we too have errors to correct and begin there, we may attract someone’s attention, without puffing ourselves up.

Your right I am not a Franciscan, I spend my time involved in my community, speaking with non-catholics and sharing the faith with other Catholics. We must correct errors, I know it sounds terrible, but there are genuine errors.

As Jesus said to his Apostles, “The poor will always be with you.” Those who are poor are not only those who lack material good, but also those who lack Divine wisdom. Maybe this is why we see Jesus handle one case at a time, instead of agonizing over the errors of his time. He answered one question at a time and preached to those who were willing to listen and allowed those who were uncomfortable with his message to leave without chasing after them. Instead he went to his Father and prayed, “that they may all be one as you and I are one.”

Catholicism is 100% perfect and it is the truth, it does not come from me, all I can do is share the truth of Christ with others. This comes from Christ and not is any of my doing. It isn’t too fashionable these days to care about truth very much.

I would just stress that to tolerate error is to tolerate insulting Jesus. To allow error is to misrepresent God’s truth and to not have perfect love of truth.

To teach error is a serious offense against God and man. To allow man to make his own choices is to coincide with God’s will. It is to accept man’s freedom. God also tolerates error and all forms of evil. Six million Jews died in World War II, millions of other people have been killed by terrorists and fascist governments. In our own country we allow children to die of disease and hunger. God allows it all, not because he is pleased with any of it.

God’s method is to reveal truth and grant man the freedom to accept it or reject it. Man must then bear the responsibilities for the choices he makes. We are to communicate the truth, as those who share a gift. We are not to be juge, jury and prosecutor of our brothers and sisters who do not see the truth.

If you make it a campaign of yours to dispel error through hand-to-hand combat, you place yourself out of the Church’s tradition. There are times, places and apppropriate people to debate the truths of faith. However, this activity can never take priority over finding that inner peace where God speaks to your soul. This is as much and as an important activity in Christian tradition as is preaching. Mystical union between your soul and the Divine is your primary responsibility to Truth. There is no higher truth, than the union of your soul with Christ. In this inner space, he will show you what to do.

Don’t ever let your zeal for combating error take away from your inner silence or steal time from you life of contemplation. Otherwise, you are not an apostle, you are a jurist. They are not the same.

The way you explained presenting the Gospel is certainly beautiful and I agree. I will certainly try to take the attitude a bit more as you present it, it does seem helpful.

This shows great humility on your part. Since humble people can’t applaud themselves, let me applaud you.

I am not so sure about your portayal of St Francis, I am not a Franciscan, but it seems a bit different from what I have read.

He is not an easy person to understand by just reading him. However, you can’t imagine the wonderful things that you learn about Christ when you immitate Francis. Its like being a the most delightful banquet that you can ever imagine. It is the banquet of perfection.

I am off to go to a Humanae Vitae conference, in the morning.

I can’t think of a more evangelical mission than to spend the day reflecting and teaching on the dignity of life. You are truly blessed by this opportunity.

JR

 

[JReducation]

While I was at mass this morning the priest mentioned something that made me think of this thread. Let me see if I can quote it exactly. “The fourth Sunday of Easter is traditionally Vocation Sunday. It’s a tradition that began about 40-years ago.”

I was wondering. Isn’t it interesting how traditions develop? They all have a beginning. We tend to think about tradition from a very narrow perspective. We tend to think of tradition as that which is either very old or goes back to the Apostolic community and we forget that much of what we call tradition, at some point in the history of the Church, it was new. Nonetheless, it had to begin somewhere.

As I thought about his words during the homily I though to myself, what is wrong with dedicating a Sunday as Vocation Sunday or another as Mercy Sunday? NOTHING!!!

The object of our love is not tradition. The object of our love is Christ, the Church and our neighbor. Traditions, both old and newer ones, are gifts from the Holy Spirit that draw us ever deeper into the mystery of the Trinity. They are means that the Holy Spirit gives us to reach union with Divinity.

Elizabeth Ann Seton said it best, “Eternity.”

Traditions bring us into a mystical contact with Eternity, even when we feel nothing. Saints like Teresa of Avila and Mother Teresa of Calcutta were faithful to traditions and yet felt nothing for many years. In her diary, Mother Teresa writes about her lack of faith in God’s existence. She says that if God does not exist, then Christ is not real. She felt no love, no emotion and no desire to serve. However, she followed the tradition of our Holy Father Francis. Everyday she and her sisters, nuns, priest and lay brothers pray “Lord, make me an instrument of your peace . . . “before they begin their day.

She followed Francis tradition. She imitated his love for the Gospel and for Christ on the cross, even though she felt nothing, not even love.

St. Teresa spent 20-years praying according to the tradition of the desert fathers, which is the tradition of the Carmelite Order. She felt nothing. Finally, when Christ made himself present to her, where she could feel his presence, she scolded him and refused to talk to him. She looked at him straight in the face and she was angry. She said, “I’ve been waiting for you for 20 years and now you show up? Where have you been?”

If we look at all of the above, we see tradition at its best. It brings people into a very close union with the Lord, so close that the individual feels relieved and comfortable enough to argue with God and to scold him. This is true faith, because God is so personal, so real, so much a part of the person’s belief system, even when they feel nothing.

My daughter and I were commenting on Vocation Sunday, because she’s asking herself whether or not she’s in the right line of work. She was explaining that she doesn’t know. I asked her if she felt that she had served the children entrusted to her. She said she did. I asked her for a picture of the children and then had her explain what she did for each child and how the child had responded. Every child had changed for the better. Every child was not healthier and happier. Looking at her I said, “There is the answer to your question. If you have done the right thing and it has born fruit, what you feel or don’t feel is irrelevant.”

I share this personal experience to show how a relatively new tradition, such as Vocation Sunday, helped one person discover that she is where God wants her to be. As long as we are where God wants us, then the tradition serves its purpose.

The sole purpose of tradition is to lead men into intimate communion with Christ, even when we don’t see it or feel it.

JR