Skip to comments.
The Simple Truth; A Layman Looks at the Case of Necessity
Catholic Family News ^
| August 2000
| Edwin Faust
Posted on 07/08/2003 10:31:27 AM PDT by Maximilian
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40 next last
To: Diago; narses; Loyalist; BlackElk; american colleen; saradippity; Polycarp; Dajjal; ...
I thought this was a pretty good article in general, but I was particularly struck by a few suggestions that I thought might be of service to all us Catholics here on FR (myself first of all):
Others, in an attempt to fight for the simplicity of Catholic truth, make the mistake of meeting the enemy on his own ground and with the weapons of the enemy's choosing.. With the best of intentions, these well-meaning souls try to enlighten their dim brethren by brandishing canon law, presenting selected quotations from the doctors and fathers of the Church, and firing off a barrageof historical precedents. In short, they come to sound too plaintive and verbose, too learned and legalistic. They, too, begin to sound subtle. And they engender distrust. Experience has also taught me to limit instruction to those who ask for it. Our guest was eminently content to remain in her error, which she prized as a form of latter day enlightenment, the absence of which in her earlier life, and in the life of the Church, she regretted. The memory of many ill-fated arguments in the past also counseled me to silence.
And I am ever less generally inclined to indulge in polemics. Few, if any, have been argued into the Church, and most of us lack the requisite charity and prudence to avoid doing more harm than good when we try to convince an opponent of his error and, what is perceived to be, our truth. Adversarial egos rear their ugly heads and the combat becomes personal.
To: All
Is Someone Else Carrying Your Water?
|
|
Donate Here By Secure Server
Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
or you can use
PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
|
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD- It is in the breaking news sidebar!
|
3
posted on
07/08/2003 10:39:28 AM PDT
by
Support Free Republic
(Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
To: Maximilian
Is this generally true, or is the author exaggerating for effect? Is there a particular region of the country where this is more prevalent?
This sounds like a particularly goofy "low church" Episcopal parish, not like a Catholic one. And even the goofiest Episcopal priest I know around here (and I do know some real doozies) would not dare to appear in public in spandex.
4
posted on
07/08/2003 10:58:49 AM PDT
by
AnAmericanMother
(. . . there is nothing new under the sun.)
To: Maximilian
When my Catholic neighbors look at me with incomprehension upon learning that I attend Mass at a chapel 50 miles from my front door, I say to them, "Should I let my boys grow up with Father Tim as their image of a priest? Can I expect them to admire and learn from Deacon Joe? Or acquire faith in the Blessed Sacrament from that circus of a Mass?" The pedophile scandal that has rocked the Catholic Church in the U.S. has been the best thing that ever happened to the traditional Catholic movement, if only because it allows us to be much more direct and brief when dealing with people like these "neighbors."
When my Catholic neighbors look at me with incomprehension upon learning that I attend Mass at a chapel 50 miles from my front door, I simply hand them several hundred clippings from the Boston Globe and ask them, "Are you f#cking kidding me?"
To: AnAmericanMother
I can only speak from my experience but yes, it is generally true. Some parishes have only a few problems, others resemble the one described here. Our local Episcopal Church is more conservative than the major Catholic parish. Several former parishoners now attend this Episcopal Church.
To: Maximilian
My impression of the article was negative for the most part. In fact, it seems to do what it argues we should not do: turn people off by the way we argue. This guy turned me off by his excess of attitude. He could have used a little of the suttlety he warns against. Too much is made, for instance, of Fr. Tim's appearance and too little of the real theological problems with his Mass. The fact that Fr. Tim waddles while he jogs is irrelevant and silly. Give the guy credit at least for trying. And what's the deal with blessing animals? It is Catholic enough and was done in the preconciliar Church in farm communities. I can just imagine what Sinkspur would make of this hit piece.
To: Maximilian
suttlety=subtlety
To: ultima ratio
guy turned me off by his excess of attitude. He could have used a little of the suttlety he warns against. Yes, this is true. He also seemed somewhat smug and complacent. However, I also believe he made some good points, even though perhaps he would benefit from taking some of his own medicine.
To: AnAmericanMother
Its not most of the Northest.
To: Maximilian
I then began a rather complicated apologia in which I explained the limits and right uses of authority; the permissibility and, in some cases, moral requirement to resist canonically established power when it is perverted from its ordained purpose. Ahhhhhh!!!! Obey the pope as long as he agrees with you!
Thus, every Catholic is his own pope!
To: Maximilian
We are not sure what it means when a Vatican press release or papal allocution tells us that the fullness of justice calls all of humanity to recognize and rightly grant to others the esteem that is demanded by the inherent dignity of the human person, a dignity that cannot be afforded its proper scope of actualization without a freedom whose exercise can only be perfected if undue and oppressive economic burdens be removed as obstacles and, therefore, a true Christocentric perspective of the polity of the developing nations must lead to the righteous request that Third World debt be forgiven. 1 Cor 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion.
You don't understand it, 'cause God didn't write it!
To: Maximilian
read later
To: Maximilian
Thanks for the article.
I'll read it later this evening.
14
posted on
07/08/2003 3:02:00 PM PDT
by
Northern Yankee
(Freedom.... needs a soldier !)
To: Maximilian
I wonder how many people recognize that each extreme in the Church uses the same strategy,just different tactics to diminish the Pope.
The left does it by praising the Pope on a personal level when he makes a statement with which they agree. This disguises their contempt for the Petrine Office,itself and allows many of their machinations to go unnoticed as they seek to dismantle the Catholic Church.
The right,on the other hand,gushes effusively over Tradition and the Petrine Office when it speaks ex cathedra,or with a defined magisterium of their liking.They also spend a lot of time stating that they pray for the Pope at every Mass.Thus they limit any need to listen to the Pope when he speaks. It,at the same time allows them to disagree and second guess just about everything he says or does.
So one side overtly praises the Pope for some personal remarks he made that they agree with while attacking the Office and the other limits the Office so that they feel free to attack everything the Pope says or does by praising the Office but assuring everyone that most everything he says and does is just not according to the Office Tradition and is just his personal (mis)interpretation and not worthy of consideration.
I found the article interesting,it contained much "food for thought" as we decide whether or not "the shoe fits". The writer probably needs to review his own advice,particularl about the "subtlety" issue.
Instead of just telling the poor,old,addled dinner guest that he was surprised that she didn't listen to the many times the Church,and the Pope specifically, has reiterated that the Catholic Church contains the "fullness of truth",she has chosen to take some action and interpreted it to mean what she and others feel or think it means that is more to their liking.Is it kind or honest to allow her to follow her whims without trying to use a little different approach, The fullness of truth gives much room for a enlightening discussion that can elevate understanding.
And then he goes on to say that he took his children aside afterward and explained to them that the Pope could be wrong,in grave error,yada,blah,blah.What thinly veiled "subtlety".Any excuse to diminish respect for the legitimate authority of this Pope,scripture and the Church Christ established.
Believe me if saving the Church in this country was an objective there would be far more emphasis on selecting the thousands of items that the Pope has addressed that are totally consistent and consonant with Catholic teaching through the ages and focus on that. Go to the Tridentine Mass because it feeds you,I truly understand that but for heaven's sake quit the constant complaints and work in your own parishes and diocese to bring Christ to your own neighborhood.The reason Christ gave His Church Peter was to have a visible head that would allow us all to come into union with the Triune God. We are supposed to help not hinder.
To: Onelifetogive
So what's the alternative; obey the Pope right or wrong? Or is everything said by the Pope right by virtue of his office?
16
posted on
07/08/2003 6:36:10 PM PDT
by
TradicalRC
(Fides quaerens intellectum.)
To: Maximilian
bttt
17
posted on
07/08/2003 9:49:48 PM PDT
by
lainde
To: Maximilian
The "indignant relative" had the only useful words in this essay.
To: ultima ratio
"My impression of the article was negative for the most part."
Odd, that's not what I would have expected.
As a fat guy myself, the result of 25 or so years of undetected chronic illness, I rather resented the fellow's presumption that Father (what's his last name?)'s obesity had to reflect overindulgence and the lack of discipline.
But considering that he was speaking to others of like mind rather than attempting to persuade liberals, I thought his attitude added an element of amusement.
19
posted on
07/08/2003 10:14:46 PM PDT
by
dsc
To: Maximilian
I know by personal experience that citing canon law and liturgical law and obscure saints just turns me off. Especially when the one who is telling you all this lives a miserable and unhappy life. She finds no joy just duty and suffering. She doesn't rejoice in the work of the Lord but practically obsesses in her own forced "works" to get to heaven. She doesn't do her duty joyfully but because she must. I look at her and see a fundamentalist who thinks God is essentially a meany who has no idea that the creatures He created are weak and unworthy. I see a person who is trying to make herself perfect for God rather than letting God perfect her. I see a person who sees religion as a duty and a task that must be performed perfectly or God will condemn her rather than a glorious gift of love. I feel sorry for her and cringe insede everytime she quotes another saint to prove to me that she is the one who knows it all and I'd be saved if only I listened to her and did what she said.
Sorry, another rant.
20
posted on
07/08/2003 10:51:24 PM PDT
by
tiki
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson