±«Óătv

Interesting that a boys only club seems keen to campaign against sexism. Has it any views on women priests?

Newlach;

Of course the Catholic Church has views on women priests, in the same way that she has views on mermaids, or fire-breathing dragons. They don't exist. Blessed Teresa of Calcutta pointed out that Mary would have made a better priest than any of them, but she was content to be "the handmaid of the Lord".

Crowd of old has been liberal priests continuing their efforts to protestantize the Catholic Church - yesterday's men. The new translation is coming in and there is nothing they can do to stop it.

Yes time marches on and people with it. I can see a time when the Catholic Church will be so gloriously out of touch the only people visiting will be Chinese tourists snapping pictures.Will be like a cross between a Museum and a Disney theme park with set times of day (mass) to *watch the spectacle*

Exactly mmcamleyc. As a young person looking on, as a faithful Catholic and as somebody with a great insight into human psychology and the Catholic faith, this is very sad to look on at. These are indeed yesterday's men who thought Vatican II was the revolution in the Church which inaugurated a new, liberal Catholic Church where practically anything goes. Their project has failed, and now they are upset. And completely blind to the writing on the wall. It's understandable.

I have adopted a slogan of my own (bear with me):

''Let us listen to what the Spirit is saying to the Church: The Church is young, and the young want to be Church with Pope Benedict.''

Ryan: The Catholic Church is showing green shoots of renewal, but it is with orthodoxy, not liberalism. The new movements and religious orders with vocations are all faithful and devoted to Our Lord. Meanwhile, the voices of dissent and protest grow ever more tired and weary.

Yes an orthodoxy which- like an impressionable kid in a class seeking power- copies the badly behaved kid. An orthodoxy that panders to the same Millgram experiment obey-authority-without-questioning-it that ultimately leads to the extremism we see in other faiths and regimes.

Catholicism may very well wish to put child abuse behind it & strive to emulate the macho image of Islam. Such a noble furrow for Catholicism to plough. Such pride to enter the new Millenium with a Spiritual leader whose dearth of experience & desensitization to the extremes of the past century led to the rehabilitation of holocaust denier & the exaltaltion of male chauvinism and cultish separateness that mark this change in missal. Let us follow Orthodox Catholism & encompass the *high* points of our last century that will stand humanity in such good stead for the future... :s

Your Neo Orthodoxy will lead to nothing greater than Catholicism being a paranoid, reactive shadow of its former self in Europe. Very clear in its ferocity perhaps, but treated like a media toy to bring out occassionally to expose in the harsh light of public judgement

The Catholic Church will manifest its own downfall - is already doing so. Of course there will be the extremists that support going backwards to orthodoxy, authoritarian, paternalistic ways - but anybody with half a heart and any understanding of Christ can see through all that. It has lost credibility and will continue to do so with actions such as these.

"Meanwhile, the voices of dissent and protest grow ever more tired and weary."

This is the case. And it's quite sad, in some respects. People are giving up trying to change the Church. What does that say about the Church, that they no longer think it worth reforming?

Catholicism, and Christianity in general, is losing its liberals and moderates to disenfranchisement. What will be left when they're gone? I can tell you this much - it's not going to be pretty.

You know, I find some of the comments above odd, but it may reflect the different conditions in Ireland.In the U.S., I know many Catholics who look forward to the long overdue correction of the wording of the prayers & responses in the Mass.
The present translations from the Latin to Spanish are much more accurate from the little I can understand. In the current Latin/English translation, whole phrases have been lost in the process.
I agree with what one poster states, that younger Catholics tend to be more orthodox.That's what I see in America, too. The orthodox religious orders,like the Nashville Dominicans, are the ones that are growing in the States.And the more orthodox Catholic families tend to be the ones more open to welcoming more children.Hence more young orthodox Catholics in the future.
I think it's healthy to have pendulum swings from time to time.It helps keep us in balance.And at this point I think we can keep the good things from Vatican II & at the same time make an effort to regain the beauty & mystery of the Mass both in word & music.I'm personally waiting for a long overdue revisal of the hymnbooks.We could take a few cues from the beautiful music heard in Anglican churches.

This morning I heard about a "modern" development in the Catholic Church. Nuns in the Philippines are a dying breed apparently, and to try and boost numbers nuns there have formed a dance group and are touring the country. They hope to make potential recruits think that life as a nun can be fun. Their show includes some music by Abba.

MMC and Gubbiowolf (???)

Did you ever hear that story about the wisdom of Solomon where two women claimed that they were the mother of a baby?

Solomon decided to have the baby cut in half and a portion given to each woman. The woman who was not the real mother agreed. The real mother couldnt countenance such a thing so she begged Solomon to let the baby live and give it to the imposter.

Your comments above remind me of one of the women. You rejoice in the fracture of our Church. You have absolutely no love, care or concern for the Catholic Church, nor for the people in it.

Mscracker, I can't see how changing the missal to convey a more sexist or elitist tone can be a good thing- even if that is a more direct translation of the Latin-the pendulum analogy to me looks more like one step forward, two steps back. Though I agree with you on the hymnbook side of things

@Ryan:
Well, it's nice to at least find common music ground. :)
I guess I'm missing the elistist or sexist issues because I'm more concerned with authenticity of translation, not tone.

romejellybean said...

''Your comments above remind me of one of the women. You rejoice in the fracture of our Church. You have absolutely no love, care or concern for the Catholic Church, nor for the people in it.''

You don't know me. I do not rejoice in the disunity in the Church. You should not judge my soul state. That is what you have done, and that is the judgement which is forbidden by God.

Additionally, Christ had some harsh words for false teachers and the lukewarm. If you read the New Testament. Was He being unloving and careless too?

Gubbio who is your soul mate? Mccamley? Your soul seems to think liberals are the enemy. Your soul thinks that those who stand up for victims of abuse instead of covering up that abuse are wrong? You feel it is better to stand up for the Institution of the Catholic Church and heirachal structure rather than the faith & love in your heart. You're allegiance is to a human power structure,not Christ or God.If you want pomp & theatre- go to La Scala.You agree with Theopane?.. when he says "Blessed Teresa of Calcutta pointed out that Mary would have made a better priest than any of them, but she was content to be "the handmaid of the Lord".

So competency is not the requisite quality unless combined with certain anatomical plumbing? If a human is competent and able for the job then that human should get it- if that is their calling- regardless of whether they are a Woman, or Irish, or Black or Hispanic or whatever barriers humanity have put in place throughout history to maintain an elitest status quo

@GubbioWolf:
I haven't looked at this site for a long enough time to make an accurate observation, but I tend to see harsher wording more often from those who lean left of center-or however one wishes to describe less orthodox Chritians-than their opposite counterparts.
On other sites I do see more anger from both sides to be truthful.There are some firebreathing conservatives out there as well.

As regards the new translation, this is a fun post I put together. It should help lighten the mood as regards the new translation:

[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]

Enjoy!!!

There is nothing elitist about having a correct translation which other languages have had for forty years. If you compare the Irish translation of the Mass you can see how much better it is.

And what has reforming the translation of the Mass got to do with child abuse? Every time liberals have no argument to make they simply shout "child abuse" or the Pope's a closet Nazi. Is that what passes for reasoned argument? Most of the people writing here know nothing about the Mass in general and the translation issue in particulur. They just think it's a convenient bandwagon to jump on.

Oh well so you can't see my little link. Thanks ±«Óătv for deleting my link. My licence fee is well worth it. NOT.

Ryan, with all the due respect, what on earth are you talking about? Good William posted about the new translation and you bring abuse into it? I never mentioned abuse. I also find it offensive that you think I care nothing for victims of abuse. But what has abuse got to do with a new translation? (Don't answer that. You probably have your own thoughts about that and I am not particularly interested in them.)

mccamleyc,

I would encourage you to use this new translation. The easier it is for people to see the sexism, selfishness and pomposity in the church and how unconnected to peoples lives the better. Making yourselves remote and irrelevant is a good thing. Good luck with it.

Dave, where in the new translation is there 'sexism, selfishness and pomposity''? I don't actually believe that you have sat down and studied the new texts. It is available on the site of the USCCB if you want to preview it.

If you have studied it, perhaps you could share with the rest of the class where exactly the sexism is to be found. I'm all ears.

You talk of being a faithful Catholic- yet your faith is defined by the accuracy of Latin text and your allegiance to an institution and heirachy that brings shame to Christianity through the abuse of its flock & the way it covered it up and dismissed it. Your reply is to say "dissent and protest grow ever more tired and weary" Rather than confront the problems caused by the Catholic Church your reaction is to return to an Orthodoxy so it can never be questioned. The accuracy of a translation from Latin is of interest in a purely historical way to me, but not as a way of bringing the Catholic Church forward as if it heralds some pristene , authenticity it somehow lacked before. It doesn't. Your arrogance shows that quite amply

Well said Dave. Rather than the heirachy approaching a dialogue in any open way & addressing their problems,they make it quite clear in this oblique way with the language change that they have no intention of repenting or adapting to the reality many people now face when they see the Catholic Church.The only way to ever make an institution like this recognise all the suffering its caused is by hitting it financially

This isnt just about changing a few harmless words. As the following article outlines, it is a move towards a more exclusive, elitist church.

Ryan

This isnt about "the hierarchy" forcing this on the ordinary people. This is about Ratzinger and one other Cardinal - who doesnt even speak English!!!!! forcing this upon the people - and a hierarchy who are too spineless to challenge them.

mscracker

If you think harsher words emanate from those who are left of centre in the Church, you are not looking or listening very well.

Those on the left tend to be more immersed in scripture and in Christ's teaching, more inclined to allow differences of opinion etc.. Those on the right tend to be all about church teaching, and so convinced of their 'catholicism' that they are intolerant of any view differing from their own. You only need to look at the amount of times MCC on here has demanded that I leave the church and anyone else who disagrees with him for that matter.

Gubbiowolf

There are constant references in the liturgy to MAN when what is intended is MEN and WOMEN. That's sexist. Start using them ears please!

GubbioWolf,

I have no interest in debating semantics with you, the fact is that it is being perceived as sexist, selfish and pompous along with archaic and several other things. What you and your masters want it to be is neither here nor there it is how it is received and the consequences which will answer the charges not me, but I have to say that if your way of communicating is indicative of the direction your church is taking then I agree with Ryan and RJB about where your church will end up. I will shed no tears.

romejellybean: The current translation features references to man and men too... If we don't hear them, it is because our priests edit the texts, despite being forbidden from doing so.

The existing creed says ''For us men and for our salvation...''

The priests in my parish drop the 'men'. It gets me every time. They are so enamoured by the feminsits. Sad.

The Latin word homines is a generic term referring to both men and women, in contrast to the Latin word, vir, for a man—a male hominus, so to speak—and the word, femina, for a woman. So when English translates homines as “men” it means both males and females.

So, the current translation is also 'sexist' but you wouldn't know it because the majority of priests are disobedient and change the words.

William, may I ask why you deleted my link to my own blog, and then allowed romejellybean to post his link to the heretical NCR? Answers please! The link was not broken and you know it!

"So, the current translation is also 'sexist' but you wouldn't know it because the majority of priests are disobedient and change the words."

This genuinely made me grin, so thanks for that.

Basically, your objection is that people are adapting the text to suit the context of the present day.

I find this astonishing, because it suggests that the correct context for us to live by (in order to match the origin of the text) is that of 385 AD.

If you want to undo two millenia of human progress, then go right ahead and try. We'll see how far that gets you.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

As an addendum, the attempt to genuinely use "heretical" as an adjective will sustain that grin for weeks.

Gubbiowolf

It wasnt William who deleted your link. It was God.

Second time lucky: my little fun with the new translation and the ladybird alternative:



(It's only fair since you allowed romejellybean to post his link.)

I am starting to think that some people want to go back to everything in Latin, or maybe go to Hebrew, anything to stop people interpreting and thinking for themselves.

Gubbio No. 28

What age are you? I am a 48 year old priest and when I am saying Mass I will change the words when I feel it necessary or useful. Disobedience is what 5 year olds do with parents and chocolate buscuits. Grow up.

Your posts on here do serve a purpose though. Along with MCC's, they show clearly the kind of Church you would return us to.

Sorry, my friend, Vatican II happened. Its here and millions of us live by it whether or not you or your friends agree.

Btw, my sides remain intact after reading your web page.

The idea that inclusive language is necessarily an effect of feminism doesn't stand up from a linguistic point of view. That may be true when referring to God as 'she', but not when using modern generic forms.

There is absolutely no need at all to use the word 'men', when referring to 'people', since we have a perfectly good word that causes no confusion at all: I've just mentioned it - people!

The nature of language is such that it changes naturally (which is not a scandalous development, or a corruption of language), but, forsooth, thou mayest not wit this!!

In the dear world of Protestantism (whatever that is supposed to mean) we have our KJV-only friends, who seem to forget that in the KJV God is sometimes, it seems, an inanimate object, since the relative pronoun frequently used to refer to God is 'which' and not 'who'! Here's an example: Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ... 2 Corinthians 2:14.

Of course, this is because language has changed. Are we therefore to conclude that the relative pronoun 'who' is unholy? How ridiculous. In fact, why use 1611 English when we could go further back to the time of Wycliffe?

All this stuff is just pure subjectivism, and has nothing to do with the Word of God. It's personal taste - even prejudice - and nothing more. Actually it's wilful obscurantism.

Some languages actually don't distinguish between the male and female personal pronouns. I am familiar with one African language (Lugisu from E. Uganda) which simply uses the word 'niye' to refer to 'he' and 'she'. To suggest that the use of this inclusive pronoun is due to the influence of feminism would be laughable. Some ethnic groups just don't get so hung up about the distinction between male and female from a linguistic point of view. I think some of us could do to learn a few lessons from such cultures.

Romejellybean:

I am 29 years old, male. Found my faith at university because a Jehovah's Witness inspired me to learn about my own Catholic faith, mainly on the Catholic Answers website, because nobody thought to teach me the faith when I was growing up. I was a bit ticked off to be honest, because the Catholic-lite I'd bed fed on growing up was pathetic and ineffective. One gets the feeling that one was denied one's birthright. But we move on.

I could be wrong (and if so I apologise in advance), romanjellybean, but I think you probably have an erroneous view of Vatican II. I expect you think Vatican II heralded a new, liberal Catholic Church where practically anything goes (and practically anything did go). But really, Vatican II was not about that at all. If we look at what Pope John XXIII said in his opening address of Vatican II, which is available online:

''The Council’s Principal Duty:

The Defense And Advancement Of Truth

The major interest of the Ecumenical Council is this: that the sacred heritage of Christian truth be safeguarded and expounded with greater efficacy.''

It was unfortunate that Vat II coincided with the heady days of free love and cheap marijuana, but such is life.

As regards liturgical abuses, you have the following to consider:

''[59.] The reprobated practice by which Priests, Deacons or the faithful here and there alter or vary at will the texts of the Sacred Liturgy that they are charged to pronounce, must cease. For in doing thus, they render the celebration of the Sacred Liturgy unstable, and not infrequently distort the authentic meaning of the Liturgy.''
-- Redemptionis Sacramentum, On certain matters to be observed or to be avoided regarding the Most Holy Eucharist

That document has the force of law in the Church, so if you are not in compliance with it, and you were my priest, I would be approaching you twice personally, and then I would report you to the bishop. If that didn't prove fruitful, I'd have no hesitation to report you to Rome.

All my friends think as I do and we are the future of the Church. We are young, strong, and faithful. We are Church. we look forward to an authentic implementation of Vatican II, and finally the dust is settling on the dissent and the heady madness and liturgical mayhem. The sun is setting on the demonic 'spirit of Vatican II'. It's time for the real Vatican II to stand up. The reform and renewal has begun and nothing can stop it.

If anyone on here wants gay sex or women priests, then the Anglican Communion is available. But these things won't be introduced to the Roman Catholic Church. Behind the rebellion against the new translation is a deeper rebellion against the Catholic Church in its faith and morals.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

In short, what we are seeing now, from Hans Kung to the ACP, is the desperate buzzing of dying bees.

"That document has the force of law in the Church, so if you are not in compliance with it, and you were my priest, I would be approaching you twice personally, and then I would report you to the bishop. If that didn't prove fruitful, I'd have no hesitation to report you to Rome.

All my friends think as I do and we are the future of the Church. We are young, strong, and faithful. We are Church. we look forward to an authentic implementation of Vatican II."

At the risk of invoking Godwin's law, it seems like there's a very apt and useful parallel to the view you've just outlined.

The irony is Gubbio,you're renewed interest in Catholism might be coming in the last Act- maybe this is why you feel slightly *denied* as you put it in post 38. The buzzing of dying bees...

Ryan, the Catholic Church has stood for 2000 years. The Church teaches the truth about Jesus Christ. The Church offers the only hope of salvation and offers peace and joy on earth to all who follow the Lord. It is the timeless Catholic faith, as summarised in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, that appeals to me. Long after Hans Kung, Fr. Brian Darcy, Fr. Brendan Hoban et al have gone to their reward, the Catholic Church will still be here, still leading souls to Christ.

As I said before, the new communities are springing up and they are the ones with vocations, such as the FSSP, the Insitute of Christ the King, and so on, and if we look at the youth movements, C&L, Youth 2000 etc... we see they are young and orthodox. They are the future of the Church. Liberal Catholicism is a dead duck and has nothing to offer and has no future. That some people are unable to see that is sad.

David Quinn has the ACP and their like well summed up:

GubbioWolf,

..the Catholic Church has stood for 2000 years.

That is a matter of opinion. Eastern Orthodox would view you as the heretical splitters from the 'great schism' of 1054.

but what's a 1000 years eh.

I found your line "All my friends think as I do" You should really contemplate that phrase.

Many have a zest and passion for what interests them. Your approach however may lead to a *them and us* view in the context of the wider society to which you belong. Catholicism will hold no more sway in society at large here or elsewhere in W.Europe than any other fragment of Christianity. It will be just one small piece alongside Methodists, Anglicans, Evangelicals etc. The orthodoxy you speak of won't resonate with popular culture. Perhaps it will come to exemplify a certain type of person- the aesthete, those who perhaps hold more import in religious ritual and ettiquette and all the decadent pomp & ceremony that goes with it.Catholicism as the museum piece, dead & sterile. I rather prefer RJB's approach.If Catholicism is meant to survive then that approach is its only lifeline. Relevant -not obscure & abstract

Dead and sterile is what liberal 'Catholicism' is. It has nothing to show for itself. Liberal 'Catholics' contracept and abort themselves out of existence at about the same rate as the rest of society. What I am interested in is what Pope Benedict has termed a 'creative minority'. This is the smaller, purer Church will will be the light of the world and the salt of the earth. There is nothing dead or sterile about that. Young orthodox Catholic families have lots of children. They are rich in vocations to the priesthood and the religious life. Ireland is somewhat behind America in this regard. There, you will find much more dynamic Catholic orthodoxy. We've had nearly 50 years of liberal 'Catholicism' and what have we to show for it? It's time to return to the true and the authentic Catholic faith.

There is a 'them and us' - those who do not yet know Christ, and those who are called to bring Christ into the world. We've not been doing that very well for a long time, but things are changing. You can be part of the renewal or you can hang on to the old dead horse of failed liberal 'Catholicism, the choice is yours. The point is, we must be the creative minority who shine the light of Christ into the world, ever more darkened by sin and death, a world that is hungry for God, even as they deny it. This isn't about a museum piece, it is about being everything God has called us to be, and it is this living, exciting, dynamic and orthodox Catholicism which has captured the youth. You may laugh, but this is the truth and if you visit any of the youth Catholic events, you will find this to be the case.

Ask RJB how many young people are at his Masses, and compare that with the young people, particularly young men, who are increasingly drawn to the EF Latin Mass. What we've been doing for the last few decades simply hasn't worked. It's time to return to the faith in its fullness. The Catholic-lite didn't work. It tried to be relevant and it failed miserably.

The Church that tries to be popular with the world has already failed. What we must do is present the real truth, the real Jesus to the world so that the world can reject or embrace Him. That is the mission of the Church.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Well I'm totally at a loss here - I've read through the house rules and I can find nothing. I think they're just picking on me and you, RJB cos we're so good at this stuff.

GubbioWolf (@ 46) -

"What we must do is present the real truth, the real Jesus to the world..."

Did the real Jesus speak in the contemporary vernacular language of His day or not? I see no evidence that the 'real' Jesus has to be communicated to the world, or worshipped by the faithful, in an archaic foreign language or even in an archaic vernacular language. And why do you think the Old Testament was translated into Greek (the Septuagint or LXX) for the benefit of Hellenistic Jews, rather than insist that they make do with the Hebrew? And the Apostle Paul was happy to quote directly from the LXX. Biblical proof that comprehension was (and is) more important than a sentimental respect for a particular language.

I don't know how you expect people to respond to the faith when their linguistic comprehension is not respected. (Well, I do actually, but perhaps you can work it out for yourself).

All this linguistic obscurantism has absolutely nothing to do with the real Jesus. But, hey, I'm only one of those 'Bible' Christians, so I guess my views don't count in your world!

"So likewise you, except you utter by the tongue plain speech, how shall it be known what is said? For you shall be speaking into the air." 1 Corinthians 14:9 (Douay).

Gubbio

"A smaller more purer church..." Godwin's law (again.)

Yep, right wing reactionary, indoctrinated groups are doing well these days. Just take a look at Maciel's Legionnaires of Christ. Packed to the rafters..... with what, though?

Your reading of John XXIII and Vatican II is somewhat slanted, but then I fully realise you are only working from the information you have been fed. (By who, I wonder, Opus Dei?)

Vatican II opened up the Scriptures to Catholics across the world for the first time and allowed us to catch up with what our Protestant brothers and sisters had for decades.

Scripture, ye know, that thing that you never refer to because you are all about dogma, church teaching, church history. Try listening to Christ for a change.

Truth is, you cant refer to Christ because his teaching would condemn attitudes like yours (and MCC's.)

"The most vicious are the self righteous. And there's none so vicious as the religiously self righteous", someone once said. Go ahead and report your priests, have them condemned. The Pharisees are alive and well.

26. At 11:18pm on 07 Feb 2011, romejellybeen wrote:
Ryan

This isnt about "the hierarchy" forcing this on the ordinary people. This is about Ratzinger and one other Cardinal - who doesnt even speak English!!!!! forcing this upon the people - and a hierarchy who are too spineless to challenge them.

mscracker

If you think harsher words emanate from those who are left of centre in the Church, you are not looking or listening very well.

Those on the left tend to be more immersed in scripture and in Christ's teaching, more inclined to allow differences of opinion etc.. Those on the right tend to be all about church teaching, and so convinced of their 'catholicism' that they are intolerant of any view differing from their own. You only need to look at the amount of times MCC on here has demanded that I leave the church and anyone else who disagrees with him for that matter.
***
Dear RJB:
I think I do read & listen carefully, but I've indicated that I haven't followed this site for any great length of time.
I often see contentious words from both camps-conservative & liberal- on other sites but not so much from conservatives here.Perhaps after reading posts in these blogs for a longer span of time I'll change my opinion.
So far in this particular blog I fail to see much charity or mention of prayer for those who differ in their views.As Christians we can disagree in charity.

Gubbio - # 38

"If anyone on here wants gay sex or women priests, then the Anglican Communion is available".

I haven't actually noticed a proposal from the Liturgical Advisory Committee to introduce a Rite for Gay Orgies; nonetheless that section of the Anglican communion to which I belong is very happy indeed with the ministries of women priests and, soon, women bishops; it welcomes whole-heartedly those who self-identify as gay and who, naturally, practice gay sex. I look forward to the day when the church in these islands consecrates an openly sexually-active gay bishop - after all both my church and yours have had plenty of closeted ones down the years and they often on the far right of the theological spectrum.

mscracker

Try National Catholic Reporter. Pick any thread and read the comments. You'll find quite a few poisonous puff adders there, 90% from the right.

Well said Parrhasios. There are many in the population here where religion only makes a light imprint in their lives & they don't respond well to the hypocrisy they see in places like the Catholic Church-they just switch off.For anything to change and for a larger base of Christianity to flourish, those who flock to religion first need to examine why they are there and be more honest with who they are. If the rest of society see their places of worship full of mini tyrants,anal-retentive types who are covering up their percieved flaws in a veil of hypocrisy they aren't going to engage. As Parrhasios says , "plenty of closeted ones down the years and they often on the far right of the theological spectrum." It's that obvious.

53. At 6:04pm on 08 Feb 2011, romejellybeen wrote:
mscracker

Try National Catholic Reporter. Pick any thread and read the comments. You'll find quite a few poisonous puff adders there, 90% from the right.

****
I will & thank you for the suggestion.
My past experience has been in reading the forums on Catholic Answers.Both camps seem to feel free to throw verbal barbs.Some of the weirdest personal attacks have come from the far right & generally concern women's dress or lack of modesty.While I'm persuaded of many of their concerns, the general tone gets a bit off balance.
All said, I don't think personal remarks that detract from other posters do much to further charity or fellowship.And I say that in general. It's something I need to be mindful of, too.

mscracker

Would you please stop responding with reasoned, bland, christian, controlled, temperate posts. It kills the thread stone dead.

Some barbed, vitriolic, irritating slagging normally assures a reply and a continuation of the discussion/argument.

@romejellybean:
I did look at the National Catholic Reporter-at least if it's the same one as the link shown in this blog.What I saw tended to be pretty unorthodox & at least one article, re. the Phoenix,AZ hospital where an abortion was performed, very disturbing.I saw not one comment supporting the Phoenix bishop's actions.
I personally prefer the Tridentine Mass & have sung in the Latin Schola.I also prefer Gregorian chant & the Douay Rheims Bible.However, those are just preferences among the many options, Rites,languages, & ways we have to worship.Catholic means "universal."
Catholics do not, though, have optional teachings on abortion.And we are a Church of hierarchy.
In the NCR as in some of the posts in this blog I detect a distrust of authority and rather than emanating from a mature Faith, I suspect some Catholics may not have left the rebellion of adolescence far behind.And I'm not directing this at any particular person,age group, or locale.Even though some of the issues carrying over from the 60's & '70's have kind of played out in parts of America I can see from the NCR & the protests re. the change of the missal wording that the Church is still dealing with distrust-or resentment- of authority.Just my thoughts.And maybe some dime-store psychology. :)

Gubbio: you talk about bringing Christ in to the world......to my understanding Christ is the love of God in embodiment .....so Jesus embodied the Christ. So to my understanding if you are endeavouring to bring Christ into the world you would need to do likewise and start loving your fellow brother in humanity - be they Christian, Hindu, Muslim, atheist etc. It's just that from your posts I do not get any sense/feeling/ seeing/hearing that you do in fact love your neighbour - unless he has the same views as you? Perhaps you could widen your arms a little and embrace a few more human beings on your journey to bring Christ into the world?? Just a thought....

Eunice, Gubio believes the Catholic Church "..offers the *only* hope of salvation..". Can't see him embracing his fellow human outside of the faith as an equal before God anytime soon( btw that's God's decision- not a Church's or a humans right to say who is and who isn't excluded from salvation)

mscracker , re the Missal. There is no religious authority in my view-there is a Holy Book and a persons right to read and interpret that. The Pope is very fond of these oblique,abstract utterances. I can understand that on first inspection- to someone who is content with the current leadership- it seems innocuous. Yet it can also be interpreted as a passive aggressive maneuver that shows Ratzinger has no interest in engaging with the aspirations and expectations of the modern world. The translation isn't even accurate if *homines*= men & women plural. Homines/humans.Why reinforce a stereotype and exclude half the population when the Latin doesn't even say that.

Ryan: well to my understanding God does not exclude anyone from salvation - and the Catholic church is certainly not the *only* hope of salvation - far from it! For me, salvation is an inside job - not done through any church on earth or any person other than oneself by coming to know that one is a Son of God - just like Jesus and by making choices in accordance with the full understanding of that. But its too late to go into that now!

I agree Eunice

mscracker

That's better.

I think you'll find that the hospital in Phoenix didnt perform an abortion - according to the Catholic moral theologians involved. An operation to save the life of the mother was performed. Had it not been done, the mother and foetus would have died. (According to moral theology, the foetus was in fact already considered dead.)

The Bishop actually got the woman's condition wrong and acted through ignorance. You will notice the deafening silence emanating from Rome on the subject. They are embarrassed by this man. You also seem to assume that people on the left of the Church want to go around killing babies, another nonsense peddled by conservative catholics. The truth is, conservative catholics use the issue of abortion to hide behind, to show how 'catholic' they are, because they come up so woefully short in other moral areas.

I agree about the Universal Church. Each to their own and all that. So why is this Mass being imposed, against the will of millions and against the will of Vatican II Council?

"The rebellion of adolescence?" You are kidding, aren't you? The people of God not only have the right to make their voices heard, they have the duty to do so. Can you name me one Pope, Cardinal, Archbishop or Bishop who brought to light the sexual abuse of children by priests?...... I'm waiting....... Nope. Not one!

God bless the people of God and long may they continue to challenge this corrupt crowd of clericalist cowards.

Gubbiowolf

"Ask RJB how many people are at his Masses.."

Glad to oblige. I have two churches. The Saturday vigil is in a very small church and we normally have about fifty people at that one. Sunday morning is in a much bigger church and normally has up to 400 in attendance. (We have 135 children presently doing catechism classes.) What was your point?

Strangely enough, right next door is an SSPX Church. They regularly attract as many as 20 people! That kinda drives a double-decker bus through your argument, doesnt it?

I note from the rest of your post above that it is filled with references to "salt of the earth and light of the world", which just happened to be the gospel passage from last Sunday's Mass.

It is obvious that you are quoting the sermon you heard on Sunday, and quoting very corruptly at that. Whoever you were listening to has taken that gospel, twisted it mightily, and used it to justify and legitimize the pernicious views of which ever little sect you belong to. It certainly isnt the Catholic Church.

Its also hilarious to hear a 29 year old wax so eloquently and so wrongly on the last 50 years of the Catholic Church. I can understand why a 70 year old might feel disgruntled at being moved from his comfort zone, but to hear someone who, by his own admission, only recently took an interest in the Church, bang on about it so obsessively and so arrogantly, well, makes me think there is a 'want' somewhere in there.

Dear RJB:
You would be correct in that I have not read all the details re. what happened in the Phoenix hospital.I have only glanced at the article in the NCR & scanned through the comments.My previous knowledge of the events was based on a short news item or two and some discussion with one of my children who works for the local diocese.
If I recall the circumstances correctly, the mother suffered from the same complications my daughter experienced during her delivery.But, I'll go back & try to read up more on that.
No, I'm not kidding about adolescent rebellion & resentment against authority coming into play re some folks attitudes towards the Church hierarchy.I may be completely wrong in my view, but I wasn't in jest.Just making a guess based on observations in the American Church over the last 40 years or so.And being a mom & grandma & having worked in a Catholic school gives one some insight on human nature.
I also think-and again maybe incorrectly,but not in jest-that there are individuals who have been deeply hurt by those in authority & who can never separate the offending individual from the source of authority.And it's kind of understandable.

Mscracker- re the School thing- A well behaved kid with a strong set of morals and a sense of self confidence has a very different notion of authority. The teacher is less the enforcer and more the gentle guide who facilitates learning.This is the ideal scenario. Unfortunately, you aren't always blessed with good a teacher. Some teachers act as an inpediment to learning and the pupils either turn their backs on the teacher and disconnect from learning, or they work quietly off their own initiative. I think a parallel can be drawn between that scenario and religion. Btw, I know teaching is hard, both my parents are teachers!

We are all human & and we all make mistakes. Sometimes those mistakes aren't confronted out of fear and they retreat from it. Alot of people feel that about the Catholic Church. Rather than meeting the challenges of the modern world and its expectations of equality, democracy and transparancy, its leadership has turned it's back ( unsurprisingly )in search of some sort of solace in the past when Catholicism had real authority in everyday life. Ratzinger has had to go back along time, The halycon days were pre-reformation. Many of Christian faith who weren't Catholic moved to America to have this freedom from Papal authority/opression/forced beliefs. Catholicism, therefore isn't reflected as clearly in modern American life as it is in Ireland (north & south) It is just one of many denominations. In Ireland it's fall from grace has been more vivid precisely because it was more integrated & reflected in daily life. They abused the trust and authority society had submitted to them and have lost a great deal of the sway they once had. The only people to blame are those who abused their positions of trust and the rest of the Catholic Church are paying for that only because they haven't shown the same empathy for the abused as they have the abusers.They've protected members of their own rather than see the flock as being an equal. It's the Catholic Church who through this practice of separation between how it treats its congregation as opposed to members of its clergy thats caused a rift here.
Add to that the education system perpetuates the social divide between Christians in Northern Ireland with the staunchest supporters of that being the Catholic Church. Since Ratzinger took his position, he's opposed a UN Declaration on the decriminalization of homosexuality, yet has supported a holocaust denier back into the Church.When the Missal change is seen in context and doesn't even offer the parity between the sexes that the Latin version does it all adds up to Catholicism being an Institution many moderate Catholics cannot relate to. This is perhaps why such fundamentalism like Opus Dei has grown through the space many moderates have left.

Ryan

What an excellent post!

Dear Ryan:
Thank you for your thoughts.I do realize each part of the world provides different experiences.
I think we see things from another perspective in the part of America I live in.Catholics hereabouts came seeking refuge from anti-Catholic persecution or predjudice.Many perished in the journey.They deeply cherish their Faith & realize that though the Church was founded by Christ, it is filled with imperfect people-some clergy, some laity.We are all part of the Church but we each have different vocations within it.
As a very imperfect member of the laity, I believe the clergy are held to a higher standard & rightly so.And as you say, Catholics in America are just one of many denominations.Statistically I've read that erring U.S. Protestant ministers outnumber erring U.S.Catholic priests simply because there are more of them per capita.
But thankyou for your post re the North of Ireland.It helps me better understand what I read in these blogs.

yes Ryan - I agree (again!) :-)

The following is a quote from Ratzinger's book, 'Theological Highlights of Vatican II' (yep, I couldn't believe it either!) in which he welcomes the changes to the Mass brought about by Vatican II and complains bitterly about the state of Mass up to Vatican II.

"The fate of the liturgy in the West was now in the hands of a strictly centralized and purely bureaucratic authority. (after the Council of Trent.) The authority completely lacked historical perspective; it viewed the liturgy solely in terms of ceremonial rubrics, treating it as a kind of problem of proper court etiquette for sacred matters.

This resulted in the complete archaizing of the liturgy, which now passed from the stage of living history, became embalmed in the status quo, and was ultimately doomed to internal decay. The liturgy became a fixed, rigid and firmly encrusted system; the more out of touch with genuine piety, the more attention was paid to prescribed forms."

Obviously a road to Damascus type falling off horse and head injury happened somewhere along the line. Or maybe he simply discovered the merits of purple, red and then white hats and that supporting an "embalmed liturgy' was fairly conducive to acquiring one.