The smaller, but more conservative, Catholic Church

8,694 Views | 99 Replies | Last: 6 mo ago by 747Ag
Captain Pablo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
hockeyag said:

This from a radio broadcast by Cardinal Ratzinger in 1969 where he predicts a smaller Church…the reasons are still relevant:

Let us go a step farther. From the crisis of today the Church of tomorrow will emerge a Church that has lost much. She will become small and will have to start afresh more or less from the beginning. She will no longer be able to inhabit many of the edifices she built in prosperity. As the number of her adherents diminishes, so it will lose many of her social privileges. In contrast to an earlier age, it will be seen much more as a voluntary society, entered only by free decision. As a small society, it will make much bigger demands on the initiative of her individual members. Undoubtedly it will discover new forms of ministry and will ordain to the priesthood approved Christians who pursue some profession. In many smaller congregations or in self-contained social groups, pastoral care will normally be provided in this fashion. Along-side this, the full-time ministry of the priesthood will be indispensable as formerly. But in all of the changes at which one might guess, the Church will find her essence afresh and with full conviction in that which was always at her center: faith in the triune God, in Jesus Christ, the Son of God made man, in the presence of the Spirit until the end of the world. In faith and prayer she will again recognize the sacraments as the worship of God and not as a subject for liturgical scholarship.

"The Church will be a more spiritual Church, not presuming upon a political mandate, flirting as little with the Left as with the Right. It will be hard going for the Church, for the process of crystallization and clarification will cost her much valuable energy. It will make her poor and cause her to become the Church of the meek. The process will be all the more arduous, for sectarian narrow-mindedness as well as pompous self-will will have to be shed. One may predict that all of this will take time. The process will be long and wearisome as was the road from the false progressivism on the eve of the French Revolution when a bishop might be thought smart if he made fun of dogmas and even insinuated that the existence of God was by no means certain to the renewal of the nineteenth century. But when the trial of this sifting is past, a great power will flow from a more spiritualized and simplified Church. Men in a totally planned world will find themselves unspeakably lonely. If they have completely lost sight of God, they will feel the whole horror of their poverty. Then they will discover the little flock of believers as something wholly new. They will discover it as a hope that is meant for them, an answer for which they have always been searching in secret.


Wow
Captain Pablo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Bob Lee said:

Sapper Redux said:

Bob Lee said:

Sapper Redux said:

Bob Lee said:

Sapper Redux said:

Bob Lee said:

Sapper Redux said:

I thought the idea was to grow the Church?

We've traded orthodoxy for membership for decades, and all we have to show for it is a bunch of Christine's. People whose faith is so fragile, as soon as the Church doesn't serve their perceived self interest, they split. What have we lost REALLY when all the Christine's leave? If all it takes for you to leave the body of Christ is exposure to right teaching, and outward signs of metaphysical realities, what's the difference?


So what exactly do you get when you drive off more than half the parish in your zeal and wind up having to shut down things like schools because of a lack of interest in your brand of Catholicism? Conservative Christians mock mainline Protestant denominations as weak for losing members and then turn around and find ways to lose members. But somehow it's a sign of strength and a positive?

I think the opposite happened. Treating the mass irreverently and inculturation, subordinating Catholic culture to popular culture has decimated Church membership. Large dioceses like Baltimore, St. Louis, Pittsburgh and others have had to close a lot of Parishes, and it didn't happen because of what's being described in the article.


What's your evidence that Church membership would not have tanked if they had just been way more conservative and strict?

It's impossible to know what would have happened. I just know what happened.


Im assuming that if you're going to argue that "the opposite has happened" and that a reversal will improve things, you have some evidence to support that argument? Right now it seems like a lot of projection that "because I like 'x,' it will result in good things while 'y,' which I do not like, only results in bad things."

Everything being equal, higher Church membership is good. read the article though, what are people's apparent grievances with the shift? Teaching the four last things. Purgatory. Young families following the Church's teaching on human sexuality and not using contraceptives. Mantillas? At what point do we just say, yeah you actually hate Catholic doctrine and Culture? And what are we supposed to do about that?
We have to put first things first if we want to form saints, which is the actual "idea" as you put it. 1 Corinthians 11:27 says whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. Do the stakes get any higher than that? What should we say has gone right when 30% I think it is, of mass going Catholics believe in the dogma of transubstantiation? That is bleak.
Trying to make the Church more attractive to people who hate the teachings of the Church is self defeating.


Excellent post
747Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
hockeyag said:

This from a radio broadcast by Cardinal Ratzinger in 1969 where he predicts a smaller Church…the reasons are still relevant:

Let us go a step farther. From the crisis of today the Church of tomorrow will emerge a Church that has lost much. She will become small and will have to start afresh more or less from the beginning. She will no longer be able to inhabit many of the edifices she built in prosperity. As the number of her adherents diminishes, so it will lose many of her social privileges. In contrast to an earlier age, it will be seen much more as a voluntary society, entered only by free decision. As a small society, it will make much bigger demands on the initiative of her individual members. Undoubtedly it will discover new forms of ministry and will ordain to the priesthood approved Christians who pursue some profession. In many smaller congregations or in self-contained social groups, pastoral care will normally be provided in this fashion. Along-side this, the full-time ministry of the priesthood will be indispensable as formerly. But in all of the changes at which one might guess, the Church will find her essence afresh and with full conviction in that which was always at her center: faith in the triune God, in Jesus Christ, the Son of God made man, in the presence of the Spirit until the end of the world. In faith and prayer she will again recognize the sacraments as the worship of God and not as a subject for liturgical scholarship.

"The Church will be a more spiritual Church, not presuming upon a political mandate, flirting as little with the Left as with the Right. It will be hard going for the Church, for the process of crystallization and clarification will cost her much valuable energy. It will make her poor and cause her to become the Church of the meek. The process will be all the more arduous, for sectarian narrow-mindedness as well as pompous self-will will have to be shed. One may predict that all of this will take time. The process will be long and wearisome as was the road from the false progressivism on the eve of the French Revolution when a bishop might be thought smart if he made fun of dogmas and even insinuated that the existence of God was by no means certain to the renewal of the nineteenth century. But when the trial of this sifting is past, a great power will flow from a more spiritualized and simplified Church. Men in a totally planned world will find themselves unspeakably lonely. If they have completely lost sight of God, they will feel the whole horror of their poverty. Then they will discover the little flock of believers as something wholly new. They will discover it as a hope that is meant for them, an answer for which they have always been searching in secret.
These comments did come to mind when I read the OP article a week or so ago. Prescient.
PabloSerna
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
If you are seeking the sage wisdom of Pope Benedict XVI or Cardinal Ratzinger regarding modernity and the church, one would do well to read his theological commentary on Vatican II. May surprise some of you.

ETA:

"trying to make the church more attractive" - You have no idea do you? Please immerse yourself in the Vatican II documents free in many languages on the Holy See's website. Please start with Gaudium et spes, "The Church in the Modern World" which is an excellent summary of the vision of Vatican II. "Attractive"?? Come on man!

There is so much, but here is a snippet:

"The council brings to mankind light kindled from the Gospel, and puts at its disposal those saving resources which the Church herself, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, receives from her Founder. For the human person deserves to be preserved; human society deserves to be renewed. Hence the focal point of our total presentation will be man himself, whole and entire, body and soul, heart and conscience, mind and will."
Bob Lee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PabloSerna said:

If you are seeking the sage wisdom of Pope Benedict XVI or Cardinal Ratzinger regarding modernity and the church, one would do well to read his theological commentary on Vatican II. May surprise some of you.

ETA:

"trying to make the church more attractive" - You have no idea do you? Please immerse yourself in the Vatican II documents free in many languages on the Holy See's website. Please start with Gaudium et spes, "The Church in the Modern World" which is an excellent summary of the vision of Vatican II. "Attractive"?? Come on man!

There is so much, but here is a snippet:

"The council brings to mankind light kindled from the Gospel, and puts at its disposal those saving resources which the Church herself, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, receives from her Founder. For the human person deserves to be preserved; human society deserves to be renewed. Hence the focal point of our total presentation will be man himself, whole and entire, body and soul, heart and conscience, mind and will."

I've read the Vatican II documents. I know them pretty well actually. If we stuck to implementing what's in the documents we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Sticking with the article,
Can you explain why the lady in the article who typifies so many like yourself is enraged by people adhering to Church teaching? To the point she's leaving the Church. Would it also make you want to leave the Church if people start to infiltrate your parish who go to confession (gasp), and have 5 or EVEN MORE kids?

The whole article is about the dichotomy between the small group of people who are adhering to Church teaching, and the ones who've casually ignored Church teaching for a long time. And the former are supposed to be the bad guys.
Where do the documents forbid Latin? Where does it say women can't cover their heads? Where does it say the celebrant shouldn't be ad orientem? Where's it say contraception is A okay now? Where does it forbid talking about death, judgement, heaven and hell? That 95% of people should receive communion in the hand?

It's sickening to think there are people out there, Catholics who are disgusted when they see people living the faith.
747Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Bob Lee said:

Where does it say the celebrant shouldn't be ad orientem?


Fun fact... At the Orate Fratres prayer in the rubrics of the current missal...

Quote:

P. Pray, brethren, that my sacrifice and yours may be acceptable to God, the almighty Father.

S. May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands for the praise and glory of His Name, for our good and the good of all His holy Church.


...the priest/bishop is directed to turn and momentarily face the congregation. Why would he need to turn around if he's already facing the congregation?
jrico2727
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
747Ag said:

Bob Lee said:

Where does it say the celebrant shouldn't be ad orientem?


Fun fact... At the Orate Fratres prayer in the rubrics of the current missal...

Quote:

P. Pray, brethren, that my sacrifice and yours may be acceptable to God, the almighty Father.

S. May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands for the praise and glory of His Name, for our good and the good of all His holy Church.


...the priest/bishop is directed to turn and momentarily face the congregation. Why would he need to turn around if he's already facing the congregation?
PabloSerna
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ask that lady yourself.

I don't know anyone who is upset about going to confession or adherence to the church's teaching on contraception- assuming they actually read Humane Vitae.

I don't think anyone on this board has more kids than I do (8). That God has chosen my wife and I (36 years and counting) to raise this family is not insignificant.

You, sir, are the one not hearing what I am saying.

(Hit post too soon)

I am glad you have read all 16 documents, that is impressive. Our lay Dominican chapter, did Pope John Paul II's, Chrisiti Fediels, which is a good resource for the laity and what our role is in the mission of the Church. It references the V2 documents quite a bit. It was, for me, an eye opening call to evangelization.

Before that, I do recall, being more focused on what I saw as wrong with the church. I had to ask myself, is this what Jesus wants from me at this time? Instead, I began to see a real need in my area for advocacy on behalf of urban and regional planning, affordable housing, land development codes, zoning, and historical preservation. All from a Catholic formed conscious and love for Christ.
Bob Lee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It's remarkable how effortlessly you throw out red herrings. I was talking about not accommodating people's hatred of Church teaching to retain members. That's what I said was self defeating. You took exception with that, but didn't unpack it at all, and then quoted Gaudium et spes. And I can't make the connection between your point, and specifically what I said that you were responding to.
Bob Lee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Well there you have it! Lol
PabloSerna
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Well I thought it was pretty clear, that you cannot hate what you do not know.
PabloSerna
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Chief's kicker, Harrison Butker doubles down...

747Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
F16 discussion on the matter... some pearl clutching... some respectful discussion... some F16 antics...

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3460552
PabloSerna
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I don't think it is possible to have a rational conversation about religion on F16. Hard enough on this board sometimes and I know some of that is on me. However, I listened to every word and he is right on so many levels*, but unless you know the difference between a vocation and a career, all the world will focus on his comment about "homemaker."

*I do think that there are other areas he has not fully considered, because he has not walked that walk.

AGC
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Not a Catholic but…

"One might say that a church which seeks above all to be attractive would already be on the wrong path, because the Church does not work for herself, does not work to increase her numbers so as to have more power. The Church is at the service of Another; she does not serve herself, seeking to be a strong body, but strives to make the Gospel of Jesus Christ accessible, the great truths, the great powers of love and reconciliation that appeared in this figure and come always from the presence of Jesus Christ. In this sense, the Church does not seek to be attractive, but rather to make herself transparent for Jesus Christ. And in the measure which the Church is not for herself, as a strong and powerful body in the world that wishes to have power, but simply is herself the voice of Another, she becomes truly transparent to the great figure of Jesus Christ and the great truths that he has brought to humanity, the power of love; it is then when the Church is heard and accepted. She should not consider herself, but assist in considering the Other, and should herself see and speak of the Other and for the Other."

Pope Benedict XVI, September 2010
Serviam
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The Church is: the participation in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ

The Church is not: a concert venue, or a soup kitchen, or a Freudian psychoanalysis office, or a stage for the promotion and normalization of homosexuality or any other ridiculous fetish.

TSJ
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I know it's Orthodox, but here is a good talk about worship. Pablo, incense is a part of the sacrifice.

PabloSerna
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Nobody cares about the amount of incense or the flavor of the month. Focus on that and you are like the Pharisee's of Jesus time trying to tell him that his Apostles forgot to wash their hands.

This is religion 101, not hard to understand.

jrico2727
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
You tell him, and that heretic John of Patmos too. Why would we care that he shows incense as being part of the heavily worship and liturgy. Are we supposed to imitate heavenly things? NO, instead let's do what gives us the "feels" and the Good Lord will just have to accept it right. Who cares if incense has been used liturgically since the times of the old testament? I am sure since the time of Cain and Able God hasn't shown any preference to proper worship or silly rules.

You're right this is just like the Pharisees who realized that God made rules, and people can interpret and work around them as they see fit and then make their own rules, practices and traditions and then shame and ostracize those who don't conform or get with the times.
PabloSerna
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AGC said:

Not a Catholic but…

"One might say that a church which seeks above all to be attractive would already be on the wrong path, because the Church does not work for herself, does not work to increase her numbers so as to have more power. The Church is at the service of Another; she does not serve herself, seeking to be a strong body, but strives to make the Gospel of Jesus Christ accessible, the great truths, the great powers of love and reconciliation that appeared in this figure and come always from the presence of Jesus Christ. In this sense, the Church does not seek to be attractive, but rather to make herself transparent for Jesus Christ. And in the measure which the Church is not for herself, as a strong and powerful body in the world that wishes to have power, but simply is herself the voice of Another, she becomes truly transparent to the great figure of Jesus Christ and the great truths that he has brought to humanity, the power of love; it is then when the Church is heard and accepted. She should not consider herself, but assist in considering the Other, and should herself see and speak of the Other and for the Other."

Pope Benedict XVI, September 2010
Because this is a most excellent summary of the aim of Vatican II by one of the young "experts" at the time, I want to zero in on a few of the points Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (aka Pope Benedict XVI) makes:

1. The very first sentence should put to rest the idea that the Church is making any changes in doctrine for the sake of attracting new members. When this lie is repeated by media, I understand they don't know any better- but when this lie is repeated by our very own brothers and sisters- I see it as a failure in proper catechesis (religious instruction).

2. Just as important is his point about making the Gospel of Jesus Christ "accessible" - because that for many was the number 1 issue going into Vatican II. Accessible not in the sense of physical access, there were many bibles printed in various languages. He is talking about going out to the people, rushing the gates of hell, kind of thing. There were movements prior to Vatican II that were building, like the Catholic Worker, that was growing and was forming good people in the corporeal works of mercy. The world was changing rapidly and the Church recognized that the laity would be playing a larger role in the mission than they had previously.

3. The "power of love; it is then when the Church is heard and accepted." This is a central theme that I think gets lost when the focus shifts away from Christ's mercy for all and is replaced with man's judgement of who merits the love of Jesus. St. Paul said it best when he says that if he does not love then he is like a loud gong, clanging. No one wants to hear that and we, Christ's hands and feet, have failed in the mission.

To me, from all that I have read and learned, it begins with love and not an "ethereal experience" - because love is real and love never fails. I would rather love Jesus in rags, in a dilapidated shanty- than wear a suit in a gothic cathedral but feel no love.

ETA: Wanted to clarify that there were more than one laity driven movements around the world. This is an import aspect of Vatican II that needed to come into focus- the role of the laity in the mission.

ETA2: Our kids (all 8) attended the Cathedral School of Saint Mary in downtown Austin. It was originally built in 1866 and we have called the gothic church, St. Mary's, home since 1993. Several of my kids were altar servers in their time here and even I have prepared incense for mass as an adult altar server. This is not a criticism about the liturgy- just that I know some Catholics stay there in that "bubble", Harrison Butker referenced, and never come out.
PabloSerna
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Are you saying that God took issue with the incense or lack of incense between Cain and Abel? I hope not. It was the disposition of Cain's heart not the fragrance of the incense that was lacking. Carry on.

jrico2727
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
No what I am saying is Incense is part of the liturgical tradition handed down from Our Lord to the apostles and to us through the tradition of the church, which you disparage. To offer less than, purposely as sign that you find it unnecessary shows lack of faith and as Cain not giving fully to the Lord.
PabloSerna
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ah, well I am glad you have crawled into my heart and know me so well to cast such a judgement!
jrico2727
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PabloSerna said:

Ah, well I am glad you have crawled into my heart and know me so well to cast such a judgement!
You are right it is not my place to judge the state of your soul, nor do I claim to.

However, I am fully capable to gage your words and positions, especially with a lengthy posting history such as yours, Just as I am capable of pointing out the hypocrisy of posts like these when the genesis of this particular discussion is you casting judgement and proclaiming those who use liturgical incense as being like the Pharisees.
PabloSerna
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
jrico2727, I hear you. I know you are not wishing to break any commandments nor judge lest ye be judge in a similar manner. So go in peace- I have no ill will towards you.

I do think that it is unfortunate that we resort to personal attacks, and you are saying that I am calling out Catholics on this board, is a personal attack - you are right, that was wrong. Mea cupla.

But back to this incense thing...

Here's a quote you know well, from the Gospel of Matthew:
"Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?" He said to him, "'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. ' This is the greatest and first commandment. And the second is like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself."

I keep trying to make the point that I have seen Catholics lock in on liturgical liberties, musical instruments, language, facing the congregation/facing the altar, and now incense as a measure of what constitutes more meaningful worship. I'm here to say- it doesn't matter. What is in your heart is all that matters. I am pretty sure everyone knows this, but want to preserve an older, more refined liturgy so as to enter more deeply into the moment. I understand that and God knew we needed a meal to share in his mystery- we needed it, not God. So at some point, we have to (as the song says) look beyond the bread we eat. That is all.

jrico2727
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PabloSerna said:

jrico2727, I hear you. I know you are not wishing to break any commandments nor judge lest ye be judge in a similar manner. So go in peace- I have no ill will towards you.

I do think that it is unfortunate that we resort to personal attacks, and you are saying that I am calling out Catholics on this board, is a personal attack - you are right, that was wrong. Mea cupla.

But back to this incense thing...

Here's a quote you know well, from the Gospel of Matthew:
"Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?" He said to him, "'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. ' This is the greatest and first commandment. And the second is like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself."

I keep trying to make the point that I have seen Catholics lock in on liturgical liberties, musical instruments, language, facing the congregation/facing the altar, and now incense as a measure of what constitutes more meaningful worship. I'm here to say- it doesn't matter. What is in your heart is all that matters. I am pretty sure everyone knows this, but want to preserve an older, more refined liturgy so as to enter more deeply into the moment. I understand that and God knew we needed a meal to share in his mystery- we needed it, not God. So at some point, we have to (as the song says) look beyond the bread we eat. That is all.


Pablo, thank you and to be clear I do love you as a brother in Christ that is why I respond to you, as I do. I appreciate your love for the Lord and I honestly feel like we need to at times recognize that we do criticize each other in charity.

"Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?" He said to him, "'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. ' This is the greatest and first commandment. And the second is like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself."

I do recognize and realize what your point is. It's the subjective God knows what is in my heart argument. Which is true as we recognize at Mass "And all gathered here, whose faith and devotion are known to you" is a phrase from the first Eucharistic Prayer.

However, are our actions totally separated from all of our "heart, soul and mind"? Is there not to be any outward sign of our devotion? If we choose to give "all" shouldn't are actions be clear and definite, not subjective. Also, shouldn't our actions, in their outward appearance, be focused on the recipient not ourselves? What I am basically saying as Harrison Butkler, had stated during his epic commencement speech Do we worship God in the way we want, or do we worship him the way he wants? So the things that you say don't matter, the bells and smells, musical instruments, the orientation of the priest in prayer, do actually matter. Why because they matter to God. If you look at all historic Apostolic Churches, Catholic and Orthodox, their priest has the ad orientem posture to the altar, incense and such. Why? Because that is what is handed down, from Christ, honestly even before then if you look at the liturgical practices of the Israelites, which were commanded through scripture showing a importance to God.

Our Lord said a loving Father wouldn't give his son a stone if he asked for bread. Why would we give Our Lord a rock concert, or anything else when he has asked for a Holy Mass and a Divine Liturgy?
Bob Lee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PabloSerna said:

jrico2727, I hear you. I know you are not wishing to break any commandments nor judge lest ye be judge in a similar manner. So go in peace- I have no ill will towards you.

I do think that it is unfortunate that we resort to personal attacks, and you are saying that I am calling out Catholics on this board, is a personal attack - you are right, that was wrong. Mea cupla.

But back to this incense thing...

Here's a quote you know well, from the Gospel of Matthew:
"Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?" He said to him, "'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. ' This is the greatest and first commandment. And the second is like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself."

I keep trying to make the point that I have seen Catholics lock in on liturgical liberties, musical instruments, language, facing the congregation/facing the altar, and now incense as a measure of what constitutes more meaningful worship. I'm here to say- it doesn't matter. What is in your heart is all that matters. I am pretty sure everyone knows this, but want to preserve an older, more refined liturgy so as to enter more deeply into the moment. I understand that and God knew we needed a meal to share in his mystery- we needed it, not God. So at some point, we have to (as the song says) look beyond the bread we eat. That is all.



It does matter. These things appeal to the senses as a reminder that God is present. And they inform people's attitudes about the sacrifice of the mass. How we worship matters. In the moments after receiving the Eucharist, while our Lord's body, blood, soul, and divinity is on our tongues and we're a living tabernacle. I'm sorry but blasting guitar music is inappropriate. It distracts from the reality of the situation. It doesn't match with the reality. People instinctively know this. Certain environments, aesthetics, tones, and attitudes are appropriate to different situations. Magisterial documents don't say anything like that it doesn't matter. Pope Francis writes in Desidario Desideravi about kinds of cadences and mannerisms and things the celebrant can take on that are wholly inappropriate. Nothing that is part of the liturgy should distract from the reason we're there. To worship the sacrifice, and adore God. Everything should be ordered toward that.

I'd like to know why you think the majority of mass going Catholics don't believe that Christ is really present in the Eucharist. You don't think they're being fed by all these other tangential things that distract from our obligation? Also, you're very concerned you say that people's hearts are not in the right place. We're overly concerned with rigidity and signs and symbols when we should just be focused on God and Love. If these things "don't matter", then why the aversion to these things? It's a two way street. If I think it matters, and you think it doesn't, it seems like there's a very easy solution that everyone would be really happy with.

Eta an example of how music can help to orient or disorient us. Imagine the most suspenseful part of a movie accompanied by dueling banjos or the Looney Tunes theme song. It's confusing, right? Am I supposed to be on the edge of my seat or not? You'll probably think there's been a mistake. We instinctively know something wrong in that scenario.
TSJ
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Now I have this image of the Benny hill theme being played during communion… not good.
747Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Bob Lee said:

PabloSerna said:

jrico2727, I hear you. I know you are not wishing to break any commandments nor judge lest ye be judge in a similar manner. So go in peace- I have no ill will towards you.

I do think that it is unfortunate that we resort to personal attacks, and you are saying that I am calling out Catholics on this board, is a personal attack - you are right, that was wrong. Mea cupla.

But back to this incense thing...

Here's a quote you know well, from the Gospel of Matthew:
"Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?" He said to him, "'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. ' This is the greatest and first commandment. And the second is like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself."

I keep trying to make the point that I have seen Catholics lock in on liturgical liberties, musical instruments, language, facing the congregation/facing the altar, and now incense as a measure of what constitutes more meaningful worship. I'm here to say- it doesn't matter. What is in your heart is all that matters. I am pretty sure everyone knows this, but want to preserve an older, more refined liturgy so as to enter more deeply into the moment. I understand that and God knew we needed a meal to share in his mystery- we needed it, not God. So at some point, we have to (as the song says) look beyond the bread we eat. That is all.



It does matter. These things appeal to the senses as a reminder that God is present. And they inform people's attitudes about the sacrifice of the mass. How we worship matters. In the moments after receiving the Eucharist, while our Lord's body, blood, soul, and divinity is on our tongues and we're a living tabernacle. I'm sorry but blasting guitar music is inappropriate. It distracts from the reality of the situation. It doesn't match with the reality. People instinctively know this. Certain environments, aesthetics, tones, and attitudes are appropriate to different situations. Magisterial documents don't say anything like that it doesn't matter. Pope Francis writes in Desidario Desideravi about kinds of cadences and mannerisms and things the celebrant can take on that are wholly inappropriate. Nothing that is part of the liturgy should distract from the reason we're there. To worship the sacrifice, and adore God. Everything should be ordered toward that.

I'd like to know why you think the majority of mass going Catholics don't believe that Christ is really present in the Eucharist. You don't think they're being fed by all these other tangential things that distract from our obligation? Also, you're very concerned you say that people's hearts are not in the right place. We're overly concerned with rigidity and signs and symbols when we should just be focused on God and Love. If these things "don't matter", then why the aversion to these things? It's a two way street. If I think it matters, and you think it doesn't, it seems like there's a very easy solution that everyone would be really happy with.

Eta an example of how music can help to orient or disorient us. Imagine the most suspenseful part of a movie accompanied by dueling banjos or the Looney Tunes theme song. It's confusing, right? Am I supposed to be on the edge of my seat or not? You'll probably think there's been a mistake. We instinctively know something wrong in that scenario.

My old pastor used to ask: "Would you play that music at the foot of the Cross? Because that's where you are at the Consecration."

Which brings us to Sacrifice vs Communal Meal... The Sacrifice is first, the meal is a distant second. Yet, certain priests will de-emphasize the sacrificial element beyond the current rubrics with constant references to the table. This is an inversion.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Seems to me a sacrifice is a communal meal. I don't see how you can draw a distinction there…?
Serviam
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Zobel said:

Seems to me a sacrifice is a communal meal. I don't see how you can draw a distinction there…?


I think that tracks. It says "first" and "second", not either or.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
But a sacrifice in its essence is hospitality, a shared meal between the individual, community, and the deity. They are one and the same.
Bob Lee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It's true though there's been an effort by some pastors to downplay the mass as sacrifice or hide and diminish signs of sacrifice. Getting rid of crucifixes in favor of risen Jesus was a big one. That happened at the parish I grew up in.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It seems like when yall are saying sacrifice you're saying a different meaning somehow. It feels like you're using a word that means "death" there.
Bob Lee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The death and suffering parts of the Paschal mystery are essential to Christ's sacrifice it seems to me. Those are what are being muted. So I guess that is what I mean, and maybe that's deficient. I don't know how to call to mind Christ's sacrifice without calling to mind Calvary. Maybe I'm thinking about it wrong. I've heard this distinction made, and my children have been taught it too. If you have a book recommendation, I'd like that.
Page 2 of 3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.