You're welcome.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Bernie Sanders Praises Pope Francis at Length
- Thread starter Fish and Bread
- Start date
wintersolstice
Member
Ouch! That's pretty harsh.
I don't see why you feel required to be the Catholicism police, either.
Tom
Fish and Bread
Member
You talk about "baby boomer nonsense", but millennials are the group that support marriage equality at the highest rate. Tradition is nice when it comes to liturgy, I love a good high-mass, but when it comes to theology, doctrines have to grow and evolve with the times. I actually think that was one of Jesus' great lessons, he challenged a static old legalistic interpretation of Judiasm and brought it further along. He was more inclusive, reaching out to lepers and Samaritans rejected by society. When Martha and Mary had him in their home and one sat at his feet to learn theology, traditionally a male thing, instead of helping in the kitchen and the woman in the kitchen challenged her, Jesus took the side of the would-be theology student.
Where it used to be that punishments were harsher than the crimes, God in the Old Testament reformed it and said, essentially, "Let's limit it to an eye for an eye". Then Jesus came along and said, essentially "If someone strikes us on the cheek, let's turn our faces around and let them strike the other cheek instead of striking back.". Jesus was moving the ball forward towards a more loving future.
Now, there is one vision of Church that says, "Let's try to follow what Jesus did to the letter and not evolve", which to me misses the point. I understand where they are coming from, but that's not for me. I don't want to be limited to where morality and society were at 2000 years ago anymore than Jesus wanted to be limited to where they were at 2000 years before he walked the earth.
Then there is this other more dynamic vision that says "Let's look at the direction Jesus was moving and take it further by continuing to move in that direction.". We should have a lesbian female Pope by now, really. We should be ahead of and not behind society on this kind of stuff. That's closer to where I'm at.
Last edited:
No, but I'm a Sanders fan.
I'm one of the rare Catholics that acknowledges that the US is a secular government and won't be basing policy off of religious doctrine, so placing abortion or gay marriage at the top of my voting priorities is not a thing.I honestly don't see why people hate on Pope Benedict. He's an eminent theologian and firmly holds to the teachings of the Church. He owned up time and time again to the sins committed by the Church, and made great strides in interreligious dialogue with Muslims, Orthodox and other religious groups.
While I personally want the Mass to still be in the vernacular, I do think we should go back to the old Latin Mass (albeit translated), with proper antiphons and hymns instead of using modern Protestant "praise-and-worship" songs that are more often than not more recent than my mother, and not fitting for a solemn service where Heaven meets earth and where we come face-to-face with God Himself. I have literally been in Masses where we sang Chris Tomlin songs for hymns. Chris Tomlin songs!
Fish and Bread
Member
I agree with Columbus. This sub-forum gets very little traffic. Let's invite everyone in instead of trying to kick people out. I mean, and I say this with no intent of offering any disrespect, Saint Frankenstein is pretty much going to be talking to himself in here if he successfully kicks out all the non-Catholics and the progressive Catholics and such.
So, my question for Frankenstein is, do you want to just be here talking to yourself? Or do you want to have a discussion group? A forum is pretty boring when no one posts on it. I say let anyone with an interest post. This place was pretty much a ghost town. Folks have come in and livened it up, and you're trying to chase them out. If you want to go post to a place that only allows ultra-traditional conservative Catholics to post, there are plenty of those on the Internet already.
It is true that Christianity was originally far ahead of the Greco-Roman world in terms of woman's rights. I do wonder whether Catholicism's stance on gay marriage and the male clergy is in fact a doctrine, or whether it can change. However, until such time as the Holy Spirit guides us to declare otherwise, I will follow what the Church teaches and trust the Holy Spirit and the Apostolic Tradition.
kepha31
Active Member
That could mean over the past 2 years, more Catholics favor the Latin Mass than 10% previously. I admit to speculation but such things are hard to quantify, if not impossible. What I observe after participating in several parishes across the country is a greater devotion to the Eucharist. Even though my brain has a lot of trouble with Latin, The Traditional Mass has a very rich and uplifting ambiance.
North America is the only place in the world were communion received in the hand is not an issue. Actually, it's my preference. But it wouldn't surprise me that this will change when the Pope comes to America next year, as communion in the hand was the result of post-Vatican II liberals, it was never openly endorsed by the Church. If the Church says no more of that, fine by me.
The Catholics you know who are in favor of "further liberation" can't list previous liberations outside of the media sewage.
Fish and Bread
Member
John-Paul II visited America at least twice and didn't ban communion in the hand going forward either time. Wasn't Benedict XVI here for a visit, too? If those two more conservative Popes didn't ban the practice, I doubt Francis will. I don't know what they did at their actual masses they celebrated while they were here, but clearly the practice of communion in the hand continued in general at most parishes across the nation. Also, a Papal visit probably isn't the best time to implement something super-unpopular like banning the way most people choose to receive communion nationwide. You wait until you're back across the Atlantic if you're going to pull something like that.
I don't think Francis is so much concerned with how people receive as that they do.And, actually, though communion in the hand was a post Vatican II reform after centuries of communion on the tongue only in the west, there were ancient Sees that practiced communion in the hand also. In the 4th century, St. Cyril of Jerusalem wrote "In approaching therefore, come not with your wrists extended, or your fingers spread; but make your left hand a throne for the right, as for that which is to receive a King. And having hollowed your palm, receive the Body of Christ, saying over it, Amen.". Actually, that's the reverse of the way the nuns taught me my hands should go as a child (They said right under left), but I spent a few years as an Episcopalian later, and everyone in my home parish received exactly in the manner St. Cyril described- I'm not sure if they knew where it came from or where just following a tradition, but clearly someone at some point knew.
kepha31
Active Member
From what I understand about Popes, none of them administer communion in the hand, but I could be wrong. Like I said, it isn't an issue. In order to escape the slippery slope of liberalism, the Church in reaction to outside pressure, will lean to conservatism. That's my guess.John-Paul II visited America at least twice and didn't ban communion in the hand going forward either time. Wasn't Benedict XVI here for a visit, too? If those two more conservative Popes didn't ban the practice, I doubt Francis will. I don't know what they did at their actual masses they celebrated while they were here, but clearly the practice of communion in the hand continued in general at most parishes across the nation. Also, a Papal visit probably isn't the best time to implement something super-unpopular like banning the way most people choose to receive communion nationwide. You wait until you're back across the Atlantic if you're going to pull something like that.
Communion in the hand is not a problem for me. If it does get banned it would be for the purpose of instilling greater respect, as well as to make it harder to have it stolen by Satanists.
Thanks for that quote from St. Cyril.
I honestly do not see why you can't get over your obsession with me. I told you to stop talking to me. Stop following me around. If you don't, I'm going to start reporting you again because you've done this before. You have a problem and you need to leave me the hell alone.
You have said yourself that you're an atheist. Your religion field on your profile says "none". You're not a Catholic and you only want to pretend to be one so you can worm your way into conversations.
Last edited:
That's the forum rules. If you have a problem with that, you can take it up with the staff. This isn't a free for all area. It's also not a place for arguing and debate.
You can come in here and spew heretical progressive bull**** if you want. I don't care, although I think that is very sad and very annoying. "Lesbian pope", how disgusting and shameful.
Last edited:
Wow, just stating the facts about a person in plain language is harsh? Well, I guess, but you should take that up with them and not me.
I have a very basic, although growing grasp of it. I really got to start spending more time with it.
But it's not really just about the Latin, it's about continuity with tradition. The feeling that we are participating in something bigger and more enduring than ourselves. Sure Latin is only a language, we don't "need" Latin, but it's all those little things that add up to create that sense of awe that takes us beyond the banality of the secular world. Actually listen to some chant (Gregorian, Old Roman, Byzantine, whatever) look at the old cathedrals and the religious art of the Renaissance and Baroque periods. If you start to see what I see then perhaps you'll understand why I, and many younger Catholics are disillusioned with the parody that was hoisted upon us during the seventies.
There is a growing discontentment among a growing amount of Catholics because we have been robbed of the continuity with tradition. We traded Latin and Chant, for felt banners and Kumbaya. Why? To suit the tastes of certain ideological groups seeking to re-form everything in "their" image.
They did it all in the name of cultural "relevance". What we have now is a product that no one who craves any depth can take seriously. And people are leaving in droves, because the typical guitar Mass in some heartless utilitarian building really doesn't offer anything at all captivating.
The culmination of nearly two-thousand years of Latin liturgical development does. It's tradition that defines the various rites that trace back to the earliest Christian communities. The Tridentine Mass was not something that developed overnight, it is a product of gradual development over centuries. It's a typical liberal strawman that "conservatives" want to block any and all change. What we are angry about is not potentially called for changes such as the availability of the vernacular, but a wholesale rejection of our tradition for an on the spot contrivance.
I don't mean to be harsh, but it seems you're just looking to disagree because your point is infantile. Whatever you think is up for "reasoned scrutiny" it's certainly not tambourines and tank-tops at Church.
Last edited by a moderator:
leibowde84
Veteran Member
Why is my point infantile?
I talk of tradition and depth and what it means to be a part of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic tradition of the Church and the sheer nonsense we've dealt with for the past five decades. And you give me lazy relativism about "inherent value".
I reject this view, no matter how much the establishment seeks to convince the world of it. Bach is better than Kesha, the Nightwatch is better than My Bed, Salve Regina is better than anything that can be found in a contemporary "praise and worship" hymnal, Notre dame is better than l'Église sainte-Bernadette du Banlay. (Seriously look up that monstrosity) Beauty is objective, and the traditional liturgies of apostolic Christianity capture more of it than the Novus Ordo guitar mass.
Last edited by a moderator:
Catholicism is a Faith that is based on Tradition. We have Sacred Tradition, Apostolic Tradition, the Traditions of centuries of Saints, Popes, Doctors of the Church, theologians, etc. That is our Faith. Without Tradition, we have nothing at all. It is not for us to decide to throw it all away due to the wishy-washy personal tastes of the secular world. We're not supposed to emulate it, anyway. We're supposed to change the world, not have the world change us.
Calling having your children attend a Tridentine Mass "cruel and unusual punishment" is laughable and ridiculous hyperbole.
Sure it's an opinion, but that's not the question. The question is whether or not all opinions are equal. Let's be frank, they just aren't.
You inadvertently answer your first question. Why isn't it fair to compare them? Because all the relativism aside you know one captures something far more transcendent. And that transcendent, in the context of art is beauty. Sure, there's subjective tastes, you may prefer Mozart; the lie I speak of is the idea that the transcendent is merely a subjective opinion. Otherwise you'd not have called my comparison unfair, because who's to say that the person who thinks Kesha is the most sublime artist to ever to sing is wrong? This is the mentality that justifies My Bed and **** Christ.
People are so precious these days, sitting through a substantive Mass is cruel. But sitting though ten renditions of a sappy "sing a new song to the Lord" isn't. And no, I never said I wanted the new forms utterly abolished. People who want quick and easy can still have it. But we don't want it foisted upon all of us like it has been for decades.
Last edited by a moderator:
Isn't that the point to Laudato Si?
Given everything, wouldn't that make Sanders a stand out in the current crop of presidential candidates?
Tom