Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit!
You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language.
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Back To The Future
Topic Started: Friday, 27. August 2010, 17:12 (918 Views)
CARLO
Member Avatar

Quite honestly I find some of the references to old men in Rome and the apparent burdens of our theology and tradition fairly offensive. One could be forgiven for thinking that those who write in this way might be happier in some independent non-conformist chapel where they could elect their minister and where liturgy simply consisted of a long sermon and some hymn singing! Or perhaps liturgy is of little importance to these people? After all it's all about being nice to people isn't it and sharing the odd meal? The rest is foreign mumbo jumbo isn't it?

And all this in the year of Cardinal Newman's beatification !!

Give me strength!

De profundis
Out of the depths


CARLO

Edited by CARLO, Sunday, 29. August 2010, 14:03.
Judica me Deus
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

The Scribes and Pharisees were offended when Jesus accused them of replacing the law by their human customs. They set out to silence him.

Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

CARLO
Sunday, 29. August 2010, 14:02
Quite honestly I find some of the references to old men in Rome and the apparent burdens of our theology and tradition fairly offensive.
Carlo, have a read of some of the claptrap on the Baptism thread and tell me that that sort of nonsense brings people to Christ.

It also seems to me that those who complain most about modern aspects of the Church are the same ones who seem most reluctant for the clock to be wound back to the start.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Derekap
Member Avatar

"It also seems to me that those who complain most about modern aspects of the Church are the same ones who seem most reluctant for the clock to be wound back to the start."

They want to wind the clock back to the 1950s only, forgetting that they were different from 50 years previously.
Derekap
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Derekap
Member Avatar

Carlo, no one in this discussion has complained about attending Holy Mass or any liturgical service!
Derekap
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
CARLO
Sunday, 29. August 2010, 14:02
Quite honestly I find some of the references to old men in Rome and the apparent burdens of our theology and tradition fairly offensive. One could be forgiven for thinking that those who write in this way might be happier in some independent non-conformist chapel where they could elect their minister and where liturgy simply consisted of a long sermon and some hymn singing! Or perhaps liturgy is of little importance to these people? After all it's all about being nice to people isn't it and sharing the odd meal? The rest is foreign mumbo jumbo isn't it?

And all this in the year of Cardinal Newman's beatification !!

Give me strength!

De profundis
Out of the depths


CARLO

The liturgies in common use until I was in my twenties do not appeal to me, I prefer the New Rite, but I recognise that both are valid, and non-conformist worship is a group of people at prayer, no consecration, no reception of the Body and Blood of Christ. Liturgy IS important to me.

We Catholics who are unable, due to family responsibilities, or not having several churches within reasonable distance, to pick and choose our liturgies, seek opportunities to have some means of gathering with other Catholics, mid week, for prayer and social interaction. That does not mean we would prefer non-conformist worship.

Awfully sorry old chap if you find my attitude offensive.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
CARLO
Sunday, 29. August 2010, 14:02
Quite honestly I find some of the references to old men in Rome and the apparent burdens of our theology and tradition fairly offensive. One could be forgiven for thinking that those who write in this way might be happier in some independent non-conformist chapel where they could elect their minister and where liturgy simply consisted of a long sermon and some hymn singing!
It would indeed be helpful if we had some say in who ministers to us. Father A may be ideal in one parish, a disaster in another.

As for old men in Rome, there is an imbalance. Older people benefit from experience, ideally they have learned from good moves and from mistakes in the past. Younger men can bring a breath of fresh air. Some bishops hang on after they have lost their health, got past their prime. There comes a time when a person must admit to himself that he is no longer up to shouldering grave responsibility. The stage of life at which that happens varies from person to person.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Peter

I find it perfectly understandable and reasonable for someone to want the security of what they have known all their live in terms of worship because for them it is right! I also think that it is important to be open to new forms of liturgy which encourages newer generations to come face to face with the reality of our faith. Personally, I like the current rite that we use although the odd word grates a bit with me, like substituting Blessed for Happy!

I would also like to see the introduction of the occasional "worship" hymn introduced into Mass and for me this is a departure as I was previously not that keen. Although in my opinion I find some of the lyrics rather banal, the essence of the music is really quite good and if it brings younger people in, all the better. To me this is not dumbing down but re-invigorating the message of our Faith for those who are yet to hear it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Whether we have modern or traditional hymns, Tridentine or Novus Ordo Rite has little or no impact upon what it is widely believed that Pope Benedict’s future vision for the Church is a return, not to where the Church was just prior to Vatican II but closer to what where she was in the very earliest days of the Church?

The difference between then and now is the way in which Catholics are in their communal relationships and the practical aspects of hierarchical clergy.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
tomais

Oh NO-! I have just posted on a site to do with Bishops and their cadburt- self-selection box y-ness ness whilst writing the word-LUTERAN!
WEll they seem to do not too badly.
By the By I have info on Newman and Sir Walter Scott !
Any takers
Tom
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Anne-Marie
Sunday, 29. August 2010, 10:28
Clare
Sunday, 29. August 2010, 09:56
Gerard
Sunday, 29. August 2010, 08:37
And when spirituality is recognised it is Marian rather than Christian.
Marian is Christian, and Christian is Marian.
Specifically Catholic, rather than Christian, Clare.
Catholic is Christian.

Heresy is not Christian. Christ did not establish heretical "churches". They may call themselves Christian, but St Paul called them anathema (accursed) (Galatians).

*Sighs, because she just knows people are going to go on about how nice and good a lot of Protestants are, and they put us to shame, etc, which is what always happens when she writes objectively about anything*
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Derekap
Sunday, 29. August 2010, 17:45
"It also seems to me that those who complain most about modern aspects of the Church are the same ones who seem most reluctant for the clock to be wound back to the start."

They want to wind the clock back to the 1950s only, forgetting that they were different from 50 years previously.
It's funny how people who think you can't wind the clock back a little way, think you can wind it back a long way.
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
The early Church was not an ecumenical love-fest!

I'd like to see a return to the Church condemning error, as happened in the early Church, and the subsequent 1600 years, until about 1965.

None of this "what unites us is more important than what divides us" nonsense with the Fathers, or with any of the Popes, until recent years.
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OsullivanB

Clare
Monday, 30. August 2010, 09:54
The early Church was not an ecumenical love-fest!

I'd like to see a return to the Church condemning error, as happened in the early Church, and the subsequent 1600 years, until about 1965.

None of this "what unites us is more important than what divides us" nonsense with the Fathers, or with any of the Popes, until recent years.
You seem to imply that the Church started in about 365 AD. Is your omission of the first three hundred or so years deliberate.? If so, I find your resasoning difficult to to understand. If not, I find your post difficult to understand.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
OsullivanB
Monday, 30. August 2010, 11:06
Clare
Monday, 30. August 2010, 09:54
The early Church was not an ecumenical love-fest!

I'd like to see a return to the Church condemning error, as happened in the early Church, and the subsequent 1600 years, until about 1965.

None of this "what unites us is more important than what divides us" nonsense with the Fathers, or with any of the Popes, until recent years.
You seem to imply that the Church started in about 365 AD. Is your omission of the first three hundred or so years deliberate.? If so, I find your resasoning difficult to to understand. If not, I find your post difficult to understand.
St Irenaeus was earlier, and wrote against the heresies, didn't he?
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Archived Discussions · Next Topic »
Add Reply