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
Crossing the Threshold
Topic Started: Tuesday, 15. November 2011, 02:57 (1,273 Views)
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
pat
Tuesday, 22. November 2011, 17:48
The Legion of Mary is already going out and knocking on doors in many parishes. They have many years experience of doing this. It's almost as if the hierarchy have never heard of the Legion, or are not aware of what they do. I and my fellow Legionaries would have been happy to give some input into this initiative.
That is pretty shocking Pat. You and fellow members have experience in this field, you have learned the best way to approach people. In your daily lives you meet people who still call themselves Catholic but never attend. You are the most likely people to understand the variety of reasons for non attendance.

In a nutshell:

Legion of Mary learned by experience.
The management team studied the theory.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

James
Monday, 21. November 2011, 22:43
John Sweeney
Thursday, 17. November 2011, 11:55
In Catholicism, I think we have a basic problem here in the West in addition to this and one which is far more off-putting than the crime of sexual abuse which I think most lapsed Catholics recognise as an aberration by individuals albeit a disturbingly wide-spread and vile one. The major problem is our approach to artificial birth control. The Church has a contradiction--I would say a lie--at the heart of its doctrine. The central Church teaching is clear and very much anti. In practice, this is ignored by the people and by the vast majority of the clergy. Such contradiction at the heart of such a vital policy puts off the lapsed and potential new recruits.

John
Also, I wonder haw many of these people and families are living in "sin" which the Church cannot reconcile itself with at the end of the day.
So why bother these folk think !!.
Many may be divorced and have other families ,although the divorce is not recognised by the Church.
They will still label themselves "Catholic"
So why be hypocritical and try and get people in that situation to go to Mass when the Church knows it will not allow them to receive Communion in their state.?
It is like salt in a wound to offer them "a market" which cannot be delivered surely.

Artifiicial birth control, as mentioned by John, is not far behind,

Perhaps the people not going are less hypocritical.
Why pretend something is happening when it is not in essence - more bums on pews to no purpose or communion.?

Or, am I b eing too cynical ?


No James, you are not being too cynical.

The institutional church presents a harsh and unloving face to many! Perhaps to most? Some good articles in this weeks Tablet were along these lines.

Gerry
Edited by Gerard, Tuesday, 22. November 2011, 19:58.
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

Mairtin
Tuesday, 22. November 2011, 12:25
I think this initiative is doomed to failure because it is still based in the outdated hierarchical thinking that people have to come back to the Church when the reality is that the Church has to come back to the people.
I tried to say that in post #4 Mairtin, butyou put it so much better.

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
 
Gerard

Penfold
Tuesday, 22. November 2011, 00:10
how to encourage all to come aboard and become missionaries? Ideas that will suggest an answer to that question would be most welcome.

This, for me, is the crux.
My idea is to tell the people in the pews that they are missionaries!

That should not be much of an idea but, actually, I dont think its been tried yet. At least not in living memory.

The pewfodder are inculturated into considering themselves "sheep not pastors" "laity not clergy" "sinners not saints" "followers not leaders" "listeners not preachers". If they are knowlegable they might rise to considering themselves disciples. I cannot ever remember a sermon telling the pewfodder they were priests, prophets, kings, and apostles. That they are missionaries with a job description - to preach the Good News, heal the sick, cast out demons, and baptise people in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

(In constrast to this the Evangelicals and Pentecostals do know thier job descriptions)

Gerry
Edited by Gerard, Tuesday, 22. November 2011, 20:19.
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

I am very much in favour of your general stance on this topic Gerry but I have to say that I have been told many times in homilies in recent years that we are all missionaries. Granted to the best of my recollection this stopped short of telling us we were to heal the sick and cast out demons but certainly we were told that the Church's mission depended on us not actively giving mute witness by the goodness of our lives but by actively preaching the good news.

On casting out devils I tend to regard this as like scoring first against Barcelona--it only serves to annoy them

John
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

Glad to hear it John.

Quote:
 
On casting out devils I tend to regard this as like scoring first against Barcelona--it only serves to annoy them


I tend to think they are about as annoyed as they can get already. They already know the final score.

Gerry
Edited by Gerard, Tuesday, 22. November 2011, 20:37.
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OsullivanB

John Sweeney
 
On casting out devils I tend to regard this as like scoring first against Barcelona--it only serves to annoy them
Apt parallel - in each case possession is of the essence.
"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
 
Penfold
Member Avatar

Mairtin
Tuesday, 22. November 2011, 18:55
Penfold
Tuesday, 22. November 2011, 16:36
You think you know the churches answer and freely give that opinion to others who do not know and who, because they trust you, assume that the answer you have given comes from the church. You may have aquired some of this "Knowlege" by the same meathod, a friend or relative told you this or that. Such is the way that so many myths and legends grow, people think they know, they make assumptions and form judgments but they never actually check whether their home spun words of wisdom actually apply in a particular case.
I don't know where you are coming from with that response, Penfold, I may argue certain parts of Church teaching but I don't think I have ever presented teachings inaccurately, feel free to point out where I have. In the few areas of Church teaching where I do strongly disagree - contraception being a prime example - I have studied the subject in depth for precisely that reason, to make sure that my disagreement is not based on my own misunderstanding.

By way, I agree that every one of the responses you have given above - except, to an extent, the one on contraception* - is a correct statement of Church teaching, my point is that I don't think those answers are going to give much inspiration to people in those positions.

(* The reason I would quibble with your answer on contraception is that although I agree 100% with your interpertation and that of your professor in regard to the primacy of conscience, that interpretation is not accepted universally within the Church; many (most?)commentators, for example, would regard Veritatis Splendor as placing contraception on the list of intrinsic evils which cannot be justified in any circumstances.)
I am coming from your own post Post #22 and you have demonstrated your opinion that you "Know church teaching" by seeking to correct the answer I have given in mine. The church teaching on HV is not as you profess and as for my position on the judgment of others that has nothing to do with turning a blind eye to church teaching as you imply it is acting in accordance with the teaching of the church.
As for my professor he was a fine moral theologian and instead of living in a rarefied college environment he actually worked in a parish on the North Side of Dublin were issues such as birth control, single parents, unmarried couples and many other practice moral problems were very real and immediate. He taught the actual teaching of the church not his own interpretation of that teaching. As for your knowledge of HV that is something you have extensively tried to convince me of on another thread and I have no intention of rehearsing the argument.
You stated that you know what the church's answer would be, well you don’t and you do not, I on the other hand have faculties to give such teaching and yet I would not presume to give a definitive answer on any of the cases you outlined without finding the actual facts and circumstances. Moral issues are not black and white and the fallacy that they are is what drives many away because relatives, friends and well-meaning parishioners all tell them what they "Think" the church will say if they ask, admittedly there are some lazy priests who can't be bothered to do what is required of them but in most cases if a person asks the right person they will get the correct answer and it may be that that answer will surprise them for in many cases their situation is not as hopeless as popular opinion would have them believe.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

Quote:
 
Moral issues are not black and white and the fallacy that they are is what drives many away


I quite agree with this. However, this black and whiteness is not confined to uneducated parishoners. It was ingrained in catholic culture for years (hundreds?) before V2. In those days you needed to be really highly educated to get any flavour of the degrees of greyness. I caught the tail end of this and the black and white approach came from priests and teachers as well as parents and parishoners. This black and whiteness is still with us. I bridled at post #16 because I saw it there (sorry Rose). It is not just lazy priests, Penfold, its still part of the culture.

One of the revolutionary aspects of V2 was the bold statement of the primacy of concience. Agreed it was always there in the teaching somewhere but very few knew it - including priests. V2 also got rid of the practice of saying which sins were mortal and which venial, but very very few are aware of this change. I think I can rely on subsequent posters to confirm that assertion (that few are aware). We were a black and white church with lists of rules to be obeyed and most infringements seemed to condemn you to Hell. It will take a long time and much effort to change that culture - and, unfortunately, it seems to me that half the church is determined to go backwards not forwards.

Gerry
Edited by Gerard, Tuesday, 22. November 2011, 21:55.
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

Mairtin
Tuesday, 22. November 2011, 12:25
the encyclical became the Rubicon where the laity and ordinary priests in the Church decided en masse for the first time ever that the ruminations of the Vatican in general and the Curia in particular are not that terribly important to their everyday lives and can simply be ignored.
Not the first time ever Mairtin. It has been more common through history than you realise. two examples come to mind - Newman said that it was the laity who preserved the doctrine of the divinity of Jesus when the hierarchy didn't. And it was the laity who brought in regular confession of sins as we know it when the hierarchy was telling them that they must not do this.

Gerry
Edited by Gerard, Tuesday, 22. November 2011, 21:44.
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Penfold
Member Avatar

Gerard
Tuesday, 22. November 2011, 21:30
Quote:
 
Moral issues are not black and white and the fallacy that they are is what drives many away


I quite agree with this.
No argument from me on this Gerry however Vat II was nearly 50 years ago and the majority of priests have been trained since then so it is laxity on the part of the clergy that the rich treasures have not been fully opened and shared in the parishes around the world.
The popular perception is what I am arguing with and highlighting that it is with such dismissive statements as
Quote:
 
"I know what the Church's answers are"
that trigger my displeasure for it is such statements which ensure that we remain in the quagmire and the myths and legends of the old black and white world continues to stifle true growth.


I am all for encouraging parishioners to be missionaries. What people in the pews can do, is share their joy, what does being a Christian mean to them, what is it about the Catholic Church that they like that causes them, for all its faults, to remain as members of the congregation. It is never one simple answer that each of us will give but each of us has an answer that is unique and born of our own experiance. It is these experiaances of life that deacons can often incorporate into a sermon that brings a particular Gospel to life rather than a stoggy theological exergisis of the text.
Crossing the threshold is a mission for us all.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

But it is more than popular perception Penfold. I seem to remember Cardinals saying that condoms should not be used to prevent the spread of AIDS. I never understood how they could say so but they did. This seemed to be the line taken by the Vatican. They never corrected media reporting that this was the teaching. Pope JPII was silent on the matter - for 30 years - as the epidemic raged. In your own post above you say "even pope Benedict has admitted..." Your choice of words "even" and "admitted" show that this was an unusal pronouncement. I think it was unusual only in that it contradicted the messages being sent out from the Vatican for the previous 30 years. And I think he was pretty much overruling the curia at that point.

I dont put this example forward for any reason other than to illustrate that even now, we have this strange black and whiteness, coming from as high as the Vatican which raises a rule far beyond its limits.

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
 
OsullivanB

Don't ask - don't tell?
"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
 
Penfold
Member Avatar

Gerard
Tuesday, 22. November 2011, 22:31
I dont put this example forward for any reason other than to illustrate that even now, we have this strange black and whiteness, coming from as high as the Vatican which raises a rule far beyond its limits.

Gerry

A fair point and you are correct in regard to my choice of words regarding Pope Benedict’s remarks on the use of condoms. However I would not like this thread to be bogged down in a discussion on condoms or HV, there is a thread for that discussion.

I admit I am baffled by your comment that the Vatican raises rules beyond its limits, what does that mean?
What are the limits on the Popes authority? again perhaps questions for another thread or two but to be honest I am not paticularly up to engaging it yet another circular debate.
I have said my peice on what crossing the threashold means to me so I shall leave you to argue among yourselves. I am off on retreat next week so perhaps I shall find the enlightenment needed to understand a few things better.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Penfold
Member Avatar

OsullivanB
Tuesday, 22. November 2011, 22:54
Don't ask - don't tell?
If asked I'll tell
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Catholic Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply