Posted on 08/06/2002 5:10:58 PM PDT by nickcarraway
We can only keep praying that it happens.
It actually does NOT surprise me that an SSPXer would seek to defend Tim McVeigh.
Your point being?
If I was not clear on this point before, let me be now: I do not believe in Jansenist or Calvinist theology.
However, I believe that in a world which has lost its sense of sin, Catholics need to develop a stronger sense of their own unworthiness and sinful nature, and the need for repentance. And that's precisely what we aren't getting in a lot of our Churches. Certainly it's what I never got out of the Novus Ordo parishes I attended. In that sense I do admire the Jansenists.
And as for 'gaining the attention and admiration of Calvinists', I fail to see why this is necessarily bad if this leads them to find in the Catholic Church what they're missing in their own.
Your point being?
Real "traditionalists" don't
It is always a questionable exercise to decide to what extent others have a sense of sin. Be that as it may, a preceived or imagined deficency will not be corrected by heresy.
Wouldn't it be much better to cite the writings of this Pope and his own example (Confession twice weekly) as a right response?
Your point being?
Real "traditionalists" don't
It is always a questionable exercise to decide to what extent others have a sense of sin. Be that as it may, a preceived or imagined deficency will not be corrected by heresy.
Wouldn't it be much better to cite the writings of this Pope and his own example (Confession twice weekly) as a right response?
Dear Ultima Ratio,
You have missed out on some of our heated debates on this issue. I am posting a link to the USCCB web site which provides the proper norms for church architecture and liturgical music. It may surprise you to learn that "kneelers" are NOT OUT and Tabernacles are to retain a place of prominence. What has happened though, is that certain bishops have "interpreted" these norms to suit their personal taste. I am also posting a 2nd link to the web site of a very disgruntled catholic who travels around the country, videotaping Fr. Dr. Vosko, the "wreckovator" of cathedrals. Both are worth the visit:
We can only keep praying that it happens.
Did I read this correctly, CG?
I would say that 'Jansenist' is more often the club to beat CT's over the head with. The word stirs up negative associations with the pre-Vatican II Church: excessive scrupulosity,pietism, and legalism; fixations on sin and damnation to the exclusion of God's mercy and forgiveness; a narrow triumphalism; black-habited nuns thwacking children's knuckles with rulers, etc. etc.
The word 'Calvinist' doesn't cause Catholics' blood to boil in the same way.
Say ONE mildly complimentary word about the Jansenists as people, and no matter how much your condemn their theology, you will be cast out with the lepers.
Indeed!
Honestly...yes and no.
The Calvinists (in our opinion) hate Roman Catholicism (but not Roman Catholics themselves, usually ;-), and much of their ammo lately has been gleened from schismatic "Catholic" websites, such as the Assissi event, reading the Koran, etc.
I think it is simply a matter of pointing out the odd bedfellows that schismatic Catholics are keeping in their condemnation of all things in the post-conciliar Church. The fact that schismatics and the worst of the anti-Catholic Calvinists use the same rhetoric and debate tactics is worth exmining, that's all.
We have a Catholic Caucus here, an emerging schismatic Traditionalist Catholic Caucus, and a well established Anti-Catholic Caucus and Calvinist Caucus (which occasionally intersects quite accurately with the Anti-Catholic Caucus.)
The fact that the Catholic Caucus finds itself defending the RCC against not only the Calvinist Caucus and wider less cohesive Anti-Catholic Caucus but also the emerging schismatic Traditionalist Catholic Caucus is quite troubling to us. The fact that all three are using the same talking points is simply a fact that is being pointed out here.
I have attempted a small clarification of matters regarding schismatic and non-schismatic Catholics, but the posts on this thread go far beyond my meager attempt and far beyond my ability to even make a reasoned response, so I'm staying out of it.
I might be tempted by some of the points of the schismatic Catholics if it were not for the fact that they are so interchangable with the anti-Catholic rhetoric of the anti-Catholic Caucus and Calvinist Caucus posts here (especially as I dismiss out of hand any Calvinist argument, as any sane Catholic must.)
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.