Conservative Catholics clueless?

The Tridintine Mass was…gorgeous. Agree it reflected the mystery of the Mass in the Liturgy, especially Latin - a most majestic sounding and mysterious language.
The respect for the Eucharistic Presence was…enormous. I do wonder about the depth of this devotion Reen…it was certainly ‘observable phenomena’ and those I was most in awe of left attending Sunday and weekday Masses with the mass exodus post Vatican2. I often wonder about that.
The “sense of the sacred” was…palpable. This is true as I experienced it too and I dont think our new liturgies have in the main contributed to the ‘sense of the palpable sacred’ where our Tridentine Masses etc. did - intrinsic to the actual liturgy. Now and then usually at Easter something in the liturgy will make it to palpable…but brief and passing, or thus is my own experience. And all the political correctness in our current Liturgy I think as a facilitator to devotion falls flat on its boring, unpoetic and unartistic face! I have to choose between concentrating on political correctness in the responses in The Mass, or to forget such and hear Tsk! Tsk! all around me almost as I say ‘mankind’ and everyone else says ‘personkind’ and such matters. I did decide to be kind and go with the flow and concentrate on the political side of the Parish…gosh!:mad:
As I understand Liturgy, by its very nature it should strive to raise our minds and heart to God and to aspects of our Faith.
Not a piece of “felt” to be seen. [no “banners.”] :slight_smile:

People took no food, after midnight, when receiving the Eucharist.The threat o’erhanging one if one didn’t was Hell!
“Meatless” Friday’s were mandatory. Threat of Hell again. Personally I find optional penance on Fridays far more meaningful for as soon as it dawns on me that it is indeed a Friday my next thought is “What penance today?”…not “whiting or garfish tonight?”…
Statues were covered with
purple cloth, during Lent, and were uncovered…on Easter Morning.This was abeautiful custom and meaningful to me. There was a real sadness in the air with everything covered in purple and then a sense of impending joy with the uncovered religious items Easter Morning.

The faith seemed more part of the “fabric” of life [no pun intended.]
Back in those days, I think the threats kept us in line more or less. Nowadays personal options can really enrich the fabric of our lives and we can integrate meaningful to our lives ‘rituals’ and ‘customs’. Rather than having under threat to adopt onto our lives the instructions of Church regulations well more or less. My take!

Still, there were many realities that needed to be…addressed.
[The sole, salutary change - that would have made the
greatest positive difference, IMHO - would have been the
removal of the Baltimore Catechism, as a teaching tool.]Never met the offender Reen…and methinks I dont want to.

I do not know, what people now “think”…about the Mass,
the Church…or what their individual “experience” of same
is, at this point in time. To me it is more personally meaningful since it arises out of me, not forced onto me. But I do think the Liturgy needs some artistic and creative work insighting the real meaning of Liturgy and no more worries about politcal correctness which instantly kills off artistry and creativity to my mind.

I only know my own thoughts and experience.

Perhaps I would have remained a Catholic, had it not been
for the…Baltimore Catechism. Then ditch it Reen!:smiley:

As you can see I overcame my fear and ventured again into this thread. Thank you for your kindness to me in leaving my head on:whacky: …hence dignity intact!!!:smiley:

Regards Reen…and Peace!

[quote=AlanFromWichita]I
Other “oldsters” I’ve talked to tell similar stories. They talk as if they were abused, but in a strange way loved it because that was the kind of relationship everybody had of the church. It almost sounds superstitious “step on a crack break your mother’s back” where any suffering at the hands of religious was evidently a badge of honor…
[/quote]

well I grew up in Catholic school in the 50s and neither I nor anyone I know tells such stories. some of them are urban legends, some of them are genuine recollections amplified by retelling, and some may have happened, but none is an accurate characterization of the universal experience of Catholics of that era.

[quote=asquared]well I grew up in Catholic school in the 50s and neither I nor anyone I know tells such stories. some of them are urban legends, some of them are genuine recollections amplified by retelling, and some may have happened, but none is an accurate characterization of the universal experience of Catholics of that era.
[/quote]

Although I can only speak of my experience here in South Australia as a child growing up inthe 50’s and in the Catholic school system educated by nuns with priests frequent visitors to home and school…it was a badge of honour to be physically ‘cuffed under the ear’ or slightly worse (nothing serious in my experience) simply because they were authority and exceedingly strict authority…one was most brave to defy them consciously. I did once unconsciously, got ‘cuffed’ and was the school heroine for a day…the next day back to my old seat as it were!..unnoticed again…unheralded…to my chagrin!..and still unable to figure out what I had done to earn the ‘cuff’ to this day I dont know!

Ahhh childhood!:smiley:
Peace…Barb:)

Even we little boys knew that; we didn’t know what the hell we were protecting but if anybody said “Catholics were bad” we’d beat them up.

Hi Alan…I recall my first and only fight which I won. Someone told me at school that the school bully was going to go to The Church after school and sing “the Pub with No Beer” in front of the altar…sure enough he was there, and I beat him up mercifully after dragging him out of The Church…so much for loving the ‘enemy’ and to forgive 70 times 7!!!
But then there was my uncle who had divorced and remarried outside of The Church, the nun who taught me told me I should refuse to talk to him until he repented, left his wife, confessed his sin and returned to The Church. Those were the days of my confusions, since I was reading at home and ponderingThe Gospels and alight with the love and compassion, forgivenss of Jesus. I just couldn’t make sense at times of what I was being taught…it all clarified in later years and especially with Vatican2. But at times I had to make what I experienced as a very risky choice between The Gospel and what the nuns were telling me was the truth. In very many ways reflection tells me that the most happiest years of my life were also the very most confusing!

As long as The Church is a human institution I think it will to some degree or other somewhere or other fall short of its own aspirations and ideals…until The Lord returns…too often something sounds great on paper, but the practise lacks! No reason to chuck out the theory on paper necessarily! That is why it was wonderful that Vatican2 was a pastoral council.

Send regards…Peace…Barb
It is a good point made by Asquared however, that a person’s or persons’ experience being similar or the same, can still not speak for the Universal Church as the common experience of all.

The stories I have told are from people I know very well, personally. They are NOT some “urban legends” I got off the Internet.

These are stories that have shaped the people that have shaped MY life and I don’t much appreciate being told I am not hearing them right.

I am sooo not impressed by the fact that people used to do this or that or act this way or that, because like the pharisees it matters much less what is on the outside as what is on the inside.

To be told that priests abusing altar boys is “whenever was everything perfect???” I am actually amazed at this whole line of response.

GOOD GOD! Do some of you people have a clue on how to listen to what’s being told to you by nearly eye-witnesses? How on earth can you presume to lecture me or anyone else on what Christ said 2000 years ago if you simply inject your own doubts right in the middle of my accurate observations.

My dad was the most honest man I know of, and the first person who tells me that I think that only because he was MY dad gets the prize for being the first to tell me I might as well be a total vegetable with no brain at all.

I’m sorry but if everything was sunshine and roses a few decades ago, then we wouldn’t have the messes we have today. If everything was sunshine and roses before that, we wouldn’t have had the Reformation. If it was before that, we would not have needed Christ.

In the day of Christ, all were fervent about their devotions so what does that prove? They were probably just as anal-retentive, if not more, about washing the outside of their cups as they were about fasting after midnight. That IMO is not a beautiful thing, but a beautiful cover on a horrid heart. That is not to say things weren’t beautiful for some people and I appreciate hearing positive stories. Don’t tell me I’m exaggerating, though, as I am understating so poorly you don’t even want to see the floodgates of what I actually know about the Church. My goal is to use what I know as discretely as possible to effect whatever change I can in the name of God, but we have to get out of the mentality that everyone and everything that speaks against the mainstream must be killed. Oh yeah, that’s why Christ died, and I feel like that why I’m getting slaughtered here – because I am telling truth that others don’t want to hear.

Again, tell a wonderful story and I’ll enjoy it. Don’t tell me my stories are unimportant or irrelevant or you have just killed Christ one more time.

Alan

Sunshine and roses - they were then - and they are still God’s gift to all of us. Memories and perceptions are the stuff of life - all the while we are making memories and remembering others Our Lord is holding us in His Hand as He is outside of “time”. Thanks be to God!

So far in all the discussions of what happened back “then” - I say to myself “hey, I never thought thus and so or heard all that” and then remember according to me - the way it was. One observation I have come up with is that my memories go back farther than anybody else that refers to theirs when they were growing up and experiencing ups and downs. Whoa! I never put my age out there because I was already over 30 when the saying was: "never trust anyone over 30!"
That bothered me. Then I figured it out! Trust God! He is Ageless!

Our Catholic Faith in our Holy Roman Catholic Church is for us from Our Lord so any faults that become memories belong to us.
If those of yesterday made some bad memories for those of today, what’s new? For us time goes on and our task is to protect, love, serve as we make memories for others!

Anybody else out there that grew up during the 40s? Now we are talking about some memories! Everything I have learned in life I learned in the Faith brought to me by the Church.

Catholic yes! Clueless NO!

You are right. The memories belong to us, so what do we do with them?

We can select which ones we give credibility to, in order to try to paint a particular picture.

We can accept that we have always inherited the sins from the past ever since Adam, and resign ourselves to the idea that we are going to do the same thing to our children so let’s buck up and be happy.

We can accept that we have always inherited the sins from the past ever since Adam, and make a firm decision that we will use everything we know from the past to change the future to be more inline with what we are supposed to do. Thus we cannot simply say, “our parents did it to us, so it is inevitable we will do the same.” We can say, “we now have 2000 years of evidence of how human nature behaves, SINCE the time of Christ, and we are for the first generation ever globally connected on an individual basis for instant communications. Let’s put these stories together and WRITE a story for our own children that doesn’t presuppose that we are helpless over continuing to do evil.”

Anybody else out there that grew up during the 40s? Now we are talking about some memories! Everything I have learned in life I learned in the Faith brought to me by the Church.

Catholic yes! Clueless NO!

Thank you for your response. As I read it, your post does not show cluelessness, but simply a slant toward trying to see the beauty of things. I am encouraged by your positive story, but clearly there are many other good stories out there.

My comments in the last section are not directed toward you, as much as I kind of “borrowed” your words for my own use as a springboard to action. :whistle:

Alan

Two weeks ago one church I play for 4 pm Saturday Mass just reopened after an incredible remodeling job where they restored the Church very faithfully to a 1909 photograph. It was already beautiful but now it is awesome. Anyway, I can see how much physical beauty even played into it, with the statues and ornate paintings, etc. Clearly our modern building may have their merits, but there is no replacing the experience of a church like this.

I am going to see if I can take a photograph of my Saturday “office” and maybe in the next few days share some really intense beauty here to counter some of my more negative comments. :slight_smile:

Alan

Moral issues are always terribly complex, said Chesterton — for someone without principles.

I think that about sums it up.

God Bless,
RyanL

Anybody that doesn’t agree with the liberal agenda is out of touch. Just ask any liberal.

[quote=Donald45]I’d be interested in some thoughtful responses to this statement by author Michael Cuneo, in his book The Smoke of Satan:

“Living as they do in an insular, 1950s-style Catholicism largely of their own making, conservatives in general seem almost willfully out of touch with the complex political and cultural dynamics of the contemporary church” (p. 57).

Let me know what you think. Does Cuneo’s comment contain some truth?

God bless,
Don
[/quote]

Any one who is insular by definition is out of touch with complexities and dynamics of whatever they are insular from. If these complexities and dynamics are good, then its probably a bad thing. If they are bad, then its probably a good thing.

[quote=RyanL]Moral issues are always terribly complex, said Chesterton — for someone without principles.

I think that about sums it up.

God Bless,
RyanL

[/quote]

That sounds like a good place to start on moral principles. What about political and cultural issues? Do you think that the changes in communication technology, and perhaps the increased mobility of people to mix into various cultures, have caused any challenges for the Church – either in certain localities or across the board?

Alan

[quote=tom.wineman]Anybody that doesn’t agree with the liberal agenda is out of touch. Just ask any liberal.
[/quote]

Yes, and not to mention they are also bigoted! :thumbsup:

Alan

[quote=AlanFromWichita]The stories I have told are from people I know very well, personally. They are NOT some “urban legends” I got off the Internet.

These are stories that have shaped the people that have shaped MY life and I don’t much appreciate being told I am not hearing them right.

I am sooo not impressed by the fact that people used to do this or that or act this way or that, because like the pharisees it matters much less what is on the outside as what is on the inside.

To be told that priests abusing altar boys is “whenever was everything perfect???” I am actually amazed at this whole line of response.

GOOD GOD! Do some of you people have a clue on how to listen to what’s being told to you by nearly eye-witnesses? How on earth can you presume to lecture me or anyone else on what Christ said 2000 years ago if you simply inject your own doubts right in the middle of my accurate observations.

My dad was the most honest man I know of, and the first person who tells me that I think that only because he was MY dad gets the prize for being the first to tell me I might as well be a total vegetable with no brain at all.

I’m sorry but if everything was sunshine and roses a few decades ago, then we wouldn’t have the messes we have today. If everything was sunshine and roses before that, we wouldn’t have had the Reformation. If it was before that, we would not have needed Christ.

In the day of Christ, all were fervent about their devotions so what does that prove? They were probably just as anal-retentive, if not more, about washing the outside of their cups as they were about fasting after midnight. That IMO is not a beautiful thing, but a beautiful cover on a horrid heart. That is not to say things weren’t beautiful for some people and I appreciate hearing positive stories. Don’t tell me I’m exaggerating, though, as I am understating so poorly you don’t even want to see the floodgates of what I actually know about the Church. My goal is to use what I know as discretely as possible to effect whatever change I can in the name of God, but we have to get out of the mentality that everyone and everything that speaks against the mainstream must be killed. Oh yeah, that’s why Christ died, and I feel like that why I’m getting slaughtered here – because I am telling truth that others don’t want to hear.

Again, tell a wonderful story and I’ll enjoy it. Don’t tell me my stories are unimportant or irrelevant or you have just killed Christ one more time.

Alan
[/quote]

i wasn’t raised Catholic, so i don’t have any stories…

the only one i can relate is from someone i also know
personally and very, very well… she was told she was
the ‘spawn of the devil’, because she ‘pretended’ she
couldn’t write with her right hand… yep, she’s a lefty…

she only attended Catholic school 2 years, and her
parents took her out…

as for me, i must agree with an earlier poster… if the
church hadn’t changed after VII, i’d never have converted…

and, there are some teachings of the church i don’t
agree with, but i do submit…

:slight_smile:

quote: BarbaraTherese

As you can see I overcame my fear and ventured again into this thread. Thank you for your kindness to me in leaving my head on:whacky: …hence dignity intact!!!:smiley:

One does one’s best…to be thoughtful, of others…heh heh.

reen

quote: asquared

well I grew up in Catholic school in the 50s and neither I nor anyone I know tells such stories. some of them are urban legends, some of them are genuine recollections amplified by retelling, and some may have happened, but none is an accurate characterization of the universal experience of Catholics of that era.

I don’t believe that anyone is claiming that it was a "universal"
experience…elsewise the Church would now be bereft of
the elder Boomer population. :tiphat:

The fact that this was not your experience does not* invalidate*
the experience of those - for whom this was a reality.

And I view the following as interesting :

quote: asquared

…some of them are urban legends, some of them are genuine recollections amplified by retelling, and some may have happened…

That is, of course, true, in a limited sense - and characteristic
of many phenomena in life. “Some may have happened*…*”] ? [emphasis mine]

I stress, once again: the fact that this was not your experience…
does not invalidate the experience of others, for whom this was a…reality.

I choose -wisely, I think - not to recount my specific "recollections."
Yet the emotional and spiritual pain, that accompany these recollections,
does not, I find, diminish - to any appreciable extent - with the passage
of the years.

Best wishes,

reen12

[quote=reen12]quote: MichaelTDoyle

Why not both/and - rather than either/or ?

Orthodox in theology, sophisticated intellectually.

Benedict XVI is considered one of the leading intellects in Europe.

John Paul II was a brilliant philosopher.

I don’t see the dichotomy.

Best,

reen12
[/quote]

The dichotomy is that much of the “intellectualism” is a rather thin veneer to justify opposition to clearly established teachings of the Church on sexuality and gender roles. Teaching that is explicit and beautiful gets put through a “tsk tsk” grinder that we’re not up with the times because we do not allow women priests or support condoms or I don’t like abortion but women should have the right to choose to stab their unborn child in its head.

It’s not okay to disagree with these teachings no matter how many syllables you use.

In additiion, is it true that many have made shipwrecks of their faith by attending “catholic” colleges that do not teach the faith but an intellectual reprise?

There is a real dichotomy here, but not between faith and reason. The dichotomy is between following the cross or following the world.

[quote=Axion]It is 99% rubbish. In the main it is the same old liberal argument that originated 80 years ago, and has proved to be disastrous.

The idea being that the church should “catch up to” or “become more relevant to”, the modern world. In other words, the Church should change and adapt its basic teachings and practices to follow those of the secular world in order to be more acceptable.

Of course every time this has been tried, it has led to massive decline in the Church. Why? Because making the Church less visible through not standing out, makes the Church invisible and irrelevant. By being firm on what we believe and what we will tolerate, by sticking to true teachings, however unpopular with liberals, by fasting, clergy wearing clerical dress, by celebrating feasts and processions, by encouraging rosary, benediction and eucharistic adoration, we are a witness to the world and each other. The church remains a strong anchor in a shifting sea.

Abandon this, and blow with every tide and not only are we no longer a witness to others (look at the liberal protestant denominations). But Catholics within the Church lose their bearing. So many people have been confused by blurry relativism that they lose faith in what the Church really believes. Witness the decline in vocations, and the number of Catholics who cannot defend what the Church teaches, because they haven’t been properly taught.

We ought to be in touch with God and the eternal teachings of the Church, not with every new fad.
[/quote]

Liberalism is a Sin

Liberalism is the root of heresy, the tree of evil in whose branches all the harpies of infidelity find ample shelter; it is today the evil of all evils. (Ch. 4). “The theater, literature, public and private morals are all saturated with obscenity and impurity. The result is inevitable; a corrupt generation necessarily begets a revolutionary generation. Liberalism is the program of naturalism. Free-thought begets free morals, or immorality. Restraint is thrown off and a free rein given to the passions. Whoever thinks what he pleases will do what he pleases. Liberalism in the intellectual order is license in the moral order. Disorder in the intellect begets disorder in the heart, and vice-versa. Thus does Liberalism propagate immorality, and immorality Liberalism.” (Ch. 26).

Liberalism “is, therefore, the radical and universal denial of all divine truth and Christian dogma, the primal type of all heresy, and the supreme rebellion against the authority of God and His Church. As with Lucifer, its maxim is, ‘I will not serve.’” (Ch. 3).

“Liberalism, whether in the doctrinal or practical order, is a sin. In the doctrinal order, it is heresy, and consequently a mortal sin against faith. In the practical order, it is a sin against the commandments of God and of the Church, for it virtually transgresses all commandments. To be more precise: in the doctrinal order, Liberalism strikes at the very foundations of faith; it is heresy radical and universal, because within it are comprehended all heresies. In the practical order it is a radical and universal infraction of the divine law, since it sanctions and authorizes all infractions of that law.” (Ch. 3).

more…

quote: MichaelTDoyle

It’s not okay to disagree with these teachings no matter how many syllables you use.

I fail to understand your reply, with reference to my own post,

part of which, follows:

quote: reen12

Why not both/and - rather than either/or ?

Orthodox in theology, sophisticated intellectually. [emphasis mine.]

Benedict XVI is considered one of the leading intellects in Europe.

John Paul II was a brilliant philosopher.

I don’t see the dichotomy.

If one uses the word “intellectuals” - to depict what I would
term soi-disant “intellectuals” i.e. “self-said” or “self-
proclaimed”] - then I can understand your position.


My endeavor has been to convey that:

  • intellectual “sophistication” is not, of* necessity*, a…fault.

And I look to John Paul II and Benedict XVI as shining
examples of same -------> orthodox, in theology + sophisticated,
intellectually.

Best, :tiphat:

reen12

Amen, reen12!

Decades ago I was told my “problem” with the Church was I was trying to think about it too much and figure it out. I should just accept her lame non-Catholic Christian blather as fact and then I’d be as happy and bright-eyed (read that “devoid of depth”) as she was. This was the woman to whom I was engaged for a time, while I was on haitus from Catholic Church.

Well guess what? 30 years later I can honestly say that I have “figured it out” to the degree I need to, in order to finally establish my faith in the Catholic Church.

I thank God I didn’t marry that woman; the Holy Spirit prevented it and gave me a wonderful Catholic wife and six charming kids.

I am so happy and so thankful now that I was enlightened enough not to fall for the “God says turn your brain off and listen to me” line. Worked with Adam and Eve, and I’m sooo glad I saw it for what it was worth.

Alan

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.