When Catholic Bias becomes toxic

[Quiddity]

A good thing to reflect on.

"We are all biased in some ways. I am biased toward the state of Texas but against the government of China. I will argue for the merits of coffee, queso, bourbon, and Jesus. But I dislike beets, cheap yard equipment, and fire ants. It is natural to have a bias for some things and against others. Still, as Christian disciples we are called to something better than just living with our bias. We are called to submit it to our Lord and allow him to sift through it to see where we are right and where we are wrong in our bias. Even further, Catholic leaders are held to a higher standard (rightfully so) and should also help those that are struggling themselves with their bias.

The question we need to answer is - when does a bias turn unhealthy for a Catholic disciple? This is what we explore in this post."

When Catholic Bias Becomes Unhealthy

 

[pearl]

Even further, Catholic leaders are held to a higher standard (rightfully so) and should also help those that are struggling themselves with their bias.

All Christians are held by the 'standards' set by Jesus as found in the Gospels. In the past it was Catholic teaching that upheld biases. Granted the Church has moved towards correcting many of these but there are areas where a perceived 'bias' may be unchanging or difficult to change if it seemingly contradicts Tradition.

The question we need to answer is - when does a bias turn unhealthy for a Catholic disciple? This is what we explore in this post."

When it prevents one from fully practicing, in mind and heart, what the authority of the Church teaches. When our biases have such a hold on us they prevent us from not only hearing the Church, but also from being of one mind and heart in the communal celebration of the Eucharist.

 

[metis]

This is a Catholic DIR.

To the OP, I gotta go but will respond tomorrow.

 

[exchemist]

A good thing to reflect on.

"We are all biased in some ways. I am biased toward the state of Texas but against the government of China. I will argue for the merits of coffee, queso, bourbon, and Jesus. But I dislike beets, cheap yard equipment, and fire ants. It is natural to have a bias for some things and against others. Still, as Christian disciples we are called to something better than just living with our bias. We are called to submit it to our Lord and allow him to sift through it to see where we are right and where we are wrong in our bias. Even further, Catholic leaders are held to a higher standard (rightfully so) and should also help those that are struggling themselves with their bias.

The question we need to answer is - when does a bias turn unhealthy for a Catholic disciple? This is what we explore in this post."

When Catholic Bias Becomes Unhealthy

Hmm. Something for Cardinal Vincent Nichols to reflect on, perhaps.

 

[Quiddity]

All Christians are held by the 'standards' set by Jesus as found in the Gospels. In the past it was Catholic teaching that upheld biases. Granted the Church has moved towards correcting many of these but there are areas where a perceived 'bias' may be unchanging or difficult to change if it seemingly contradicts Tradition.

Of course. The precipitating events in the 19th century with the Industrial Revolution, the rise of science, etc. (you could go back further to the Reformation it's spawn the enlightenment) led to a world the Church didn't exactly know how to talk to. It certainly tried with various encyclicals, but the world was moving fast and the issues growing.

The starkest response is Vatican 2. But it's certainly not alone.

But in order to pin point it, we should start with the difference in approach and this article touches on where they bump heads.

The old approach was more direct and less ambiguous. And yes, even seen as bias.

When it prevents one from fully practicing, in mind and heart, what the authority of the Church teaches. When our biases have such a hold on us they prevent us from not only hearing the Church, but also from being of one mind and heart in the communal celebration of the Eucharist.

Certainly. What is not clear in the article but is a connecting issue of what is going on in the Church is that the clergy themselves are being asked for clarity about important doctrinal issues.

 

[Quiddity]

This is a Catholic DIR.

To the OP, I gotta go but will respond tomorrow.

Looking forward to it.

 

[Quiddity]

Hmm. Something for Cardinal Vincent Nichols to reflect on, perhaps.

Part of the point is that we all have it, whether we are Catholic or not.

 

[exchemist]

Part of the point is that we all have it, whether we are Catholic or not.

Oh I don't disagree. But right now we need to take a look at our own organisation, it seems to me. One of the dangers is loyalty to the group or tribe, in place of an independent moral compass.

 

[Quiddity]

Oh I don't disagree. But right now we need to take a look at our own organization, it seems to me. One of the dangers is loyalty to the group or tribe, in place of an independent moral compass.

It depends on what you mean by group or tribe. Right now (at least in the US), the independent and separatists are claiming to be the freethinkers and object hard at the establishment.

 

[exchemist]

It depends on what you mean by group or tribe. Right now (at least in the US), the independent and separatists are claiming to be the freethinkers and object hard at the establishment.

I mean that we, as members of the Catholic Church, which is a group or tribe to which we belong, may have a tendency to defend it to the extent of trying to excuse its failings. Hence my remark about Nichols.

 

[Quiddity]

I mean that we, as members of the Catholic Church, which is a group or tribe to which we belong, may have a tendency to defend it to the extent of trying to excuse its failings. Hence my remark about Nichols.

That is certainly a thing but what is in vogue is actually quite the opposite. Unless you are knee-deep in Catholic watering holes, you are likely to not be aware. They make outside criticisms look like flowers and cupcakes in comparison.

 

[pearl]

That is certainly a thing but what is in vogue is actually quite the opposite. Unless you are knee-deep in Catholic watering holes, you are likely to not be aware. They make outside criticisms look like flowers and cupcakes in comparison.

Could you be a little more specific?

 

[exchemist]

That is certainly a thing but what is in vogue is actually quite the opposite. Unless you are knee-deep in Catholic watering holes, you are likely to not be aware. They make outside criticisms look like flowers and cupcakes in comparison.

What are you alluding to?

 

[Quiddity]

@exchemist @pcarl - Within Catholicism, a spectrum, similar to a political spectrum exists; which I'm sure both of you are aware of. Within the more traditionalist minded Catholics (those who attend older forms of liturgies like in Latin or Eastern variations) there exist resistance groups that are extremely vocal about not just every sin of the Church but also challenge her authority. Although a minority, it wouldn't be an exaggeration to say they fill up most of the bandwidth in catholic echo chambers.

 

[metis]

The question we need to answer is - when does a bias turn unhealthy for a Catholic disciple? This is what we explore in this post."

When Catholic Bias Becomes Unhealthy

Sorry for the delay.

With the link, I agree with it, especially since it doesn't posit an either/or dichotomy, plus it states that we do have some right of personal discernment. IOW, the Church is not the Gestapo.

I like how it also establishes our need to be calm, pray and introspect, and then to make decisions based on morality, thus not based on hatred, fear, etc.

Sorry, but I gotta go again-- I'm not trying to avoid you!

 

[Quiddity]

Sorry for the delay.

With the link, I agree with it, especially since it doesn't posit an either/or dichotomy, plus it states that we do have some right of personal discernment. IOW, the Church is not the Gestapo.

I like how it also establishes our need to be calm, pray and introspect, and then to make decisions based on morality, thus not based on hatred, fear, etc.

Sorry, but I gotta go again-- I'm not trying to avoid you!

I obviously agree with the article but do sympathize with those Catholics that may struggle with this. It's not a complete struggle with everything contained therein, it has to do with how people process information. So for example, those people that don't deal well with abstracts (whether because it's a learning disorder, anxiety, or any number of things) may find it difficult to leave them to their own faculties. For them, you may need to make things rather black/white and clear.

 

[exchemist]

@exchemist @pcarl - Within Catholicism, a spectrum, similar to a political spectrum exists; which I'm sure both of you are aware of. Within the more traditionalist minded Catholics (those who attend older forms of liturgies like in Latin or Eastern variations) there exist resistance groups that are extremely vocal about not just every sin of the Church but also challenge her authority. Although a minority, it wouldn't be an exaggeration to say they fill up most of the bandwidth in catholic echo chambers.

Ah I see what you mean.

I'm not sure they do that really, though maybe it's different in the US. But I think one problem in the Catholic Church is its tendency to lay down the law when it doesn't need to. Why abolish the old Tridentine mass, for instance? There was no theological reason. It could have remained optional, for the oldies. This sort of frog-marching of the faithful into a future they may not wish for does not help people to love the church, especially when one realises that many people go to mass all their lives because it symbolises continuity in a baffling and changing world.

But I agree that those wackos in the US who set themselves up as rival authorities to criticise the pope are a nuisance.

 

[Quiddity]

Ah I see what you mean.

I'm not sure they do that really, though maybe it's different in the US. But I think one problem in the Catholic Church is its tendency to lay down the law when it doesn't need to. Why abolish the old Tridentine mass, for instance? There was no theological reason. It could have remained optional, for the oldies. This sort of frog-marching of the faithful into a future they may not wish for does not help people to love the church, especially when one realises that many people go to mass all their lives because it symbolises continuity in a baffling and changing world.

But I agree that those wackos in the US who set themselves up as rival authorities to criticise the pope are a nuisance.

That was most definitely a mistake. There is no reason one couldn't continue to allow it and still proceed with the vernacular.

 

[metis]

I obviously agree with the article but do sympathize with those Catholics that may struggle with this.

As do I, especially as theology is an area with very few "gimmees". The Catechism, for example, provides information as to what the near two thousand year old Church thinks is correct, but realistically we shouldn't believe that it has batted 1000.

It's not a complete struggle with everything contained therein, it has to do with how people process information. So for example, those people that don't deal well with abstracts (whether because it's a learning disorder, anxiety, or any number of things) may find it difficult to leave them to their own faculties. For them, you may need to make things rather black/white and clear.

To a point, that may be, but I don't think that's the best approach. Instead, I prefer the "We think it's..." approach that is best, especially since it's the most honest and realistic one, imo.

 

[pearl]

@exchemist @pcarl - Within Catholicism, a spectrum, similar to a political spectrum exists; which I'm sure both of you are aware of. Within the more traditionalist minded Catholics (those who attend older forms of liturgies like in Latin or Eastern variations) there exist resistance groups that are extremely vocal about not just every sin of the Church but also challenge her authority. Although a minority, it wouldn't be an exaggeration to say they fill up most of the bandwidth in catholic echo chambers.

What amazes me are those who are selective towards the authority of the Church and do not confess the legitimate, equal and valid authority of Church Councils, and mistakenly believe that what they may hold dear, has always been the teaching of the Church ie the so-called 'Tridentine' Mass, when in reality there is no such thing as a Tridentine liturgy as the Council of Trent did not "make" liturgy and those who cling to the Tridentine missal have a faulty view of the historical facts.
As for celebrating Mass in Latin. the Roman Catholic Church has not outlawed the Latin Mass. The Novus Ordo Missae, promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1969 to take effect the next year, has been celebrated in Latin as well as in many other languages. During Masses in St. Peter’s Basilica or Square, the pope usually prays the Eucharistic Prayer in Latin.
The problem is not the language but the fact that a few Catholics have denied the validity of the 1969 Novus Ordo Missae and Pope Paul VI’s authority to promulgate its use. They claim that only the 1570 revision made after the Council of Trent is valid.

The issue here is not the language in which the Eucharist is celebrated (Jesus used Aramaic) but rather whether the worshipers are in communion with the whole Church, which permits a variety of languages, or only with people who regard Latin alone as the acceptable language for Mass.

Another bias, one of privilege, as to salvation, we continue to have 'Feeneyites' in our diocese.