Tuesday, April 10, 2018

MY COMMENTS ON THE LOSS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH BEING CATHOLIC AFTER VATICAN II SEEMS TO BE CONFIRMED IN THE POPE'S NEW EXHORTATION: JUST CALL IT MY CLAIRVOYANCE, NO?


The Church was more catholic prior to Vatican II meaning she was truly a dragnet getting the majority of Catholics to Mass each Sunday and Holy Day of Obligation. The good, bad, hot, tepid and cold came to Mass if not for the love of God then for the fear of hell.

At the personal judgement things would be sorted out by God to determine where the immortal soul would experience eternity.

What motivates the 5% to 30% of Catholics who regularly go to Mass and most receiving Holy Communion regardless of the non use of the Sacrament of Penance?

Also if we truly believe God acts apart from our participation, why hasn't Pope Francis called for the much less Pelagiasm of the Church of the East who not only baptize infants, but Confirm them as give them their First Holy Communion all at once?

23 comments:

Anonymous said...

What is it going to take for the bishops to rise up and demand that Francis either uphold Catholic teaching or resign or be declared a heretic and deposed. The nasty and judgmental language he uses in this latest bit of propaganda is nauseating. Somebody needs to publicly call him out and do something.

Anonymous said...

Pelagiasm? You and you sycophantic Crewe of heresy hunters are inventing new ones now? Oh, for the helicon days of yesteryear goneby....!

TJM said...

Anonymous Kavanaugh at 7:36

Ah, the eau de Kavanaugh reeking of its malodorous aroma in the morning!

Marc said...

If I were to wager a guess as to what Francis means when he throws around words like "neo-Pelagian," I suspect he is getting at the idea of one always looking inward in the sense that one is solely focused on the self. He seems to see this manifested in an attachment to particular forms, which he seems to believe people are attached to for selfish motivations when those forms are rooted in the past.

So his suggestion is that this inward-looking attachment needs to change so that one is more focused on others and on societal and global improvement. I surmise he thinks that people are saved through the superabundant mercy of God regardless of their activities, but that the mercy that they are experiencing should become manifest in pursuing certain political causes, which he characterizes as moral issues.

The critique of his thought is straightforward: He is assuming that people who are attached to older forms are so attached because of selfishness or inwardness. Perhaps some of them are actually "afraid" of moving forward, as he suggests. On the other hand, their motivations might just be legitimate, which is a possibility that I have not seen him engage.

He also suggests that progression is a good in itself -- an Hegelian idea that he tends to use in the framework of a Marxist reading of history. His conception in this regard tends to indicate why he is unable to see legitimate reasons for people to cling to prior forms.

His conception of history is even less problematic than his conception of salvation, though, because the latter seems to be completely lacking. As far as I can tell, he has not explained why people should be concerned about political issues as moral questions. Assuredly, caring about the plight of others is significant in the sense that it moves one out of insularity and into compassion, as Christ desires. But there is an absence of discussion of mission in the sense of serving others by bringing them to Christ and His Church: the actual moral of the story of the Good Samaritan is lost as the inn is merely an inn instead of a representation of the Church, with her healing Sacraments.

Even so, Francis clearly wants people to experience inclusion within the Church (however he defines that term). But it seems again that he does not desire people to feel inclusion for the purpose of gaining absolution and undertaking penance. Instead, he wants them to be part of the community simply as such. I presume he would suggest that, as part of the community, people are better able to further his goal of engaging society and helping others.

But again there seems to be little emphasis on why one would do so since Francis, as far as I can tell, rarely if ever discusses eternal consequences, focusing almost exclusively on material, temporal problems and their attendant political solutions. If it is true that he denies the possibility of eternal punishment in hell, his lack of fervor for discussing such things makes much more sense. But then one is confronted with this devil, whom Francis speaks of regularly. I take Francis at his word that the devil, for him, is not a myth or a rhetorical device. But I would suggest that he seems to see the devil as a representation of both personal and societal ills, which have the same ultimate root in selfishness -- whether personal or societal (as in certain economic systems, which Francis has denigrated).

Anonymous said...

Crewe Member #2 has spoken. Cheers!

Marc said...

You have to love the internet: one can provide an attempt at thoughtful analysis and engagement with ideas, and then some anonymous fool can respond with a meaningless jibe, waltzing away as if some actual point has been made thereby. It truly is like yelling into a gutter and expecting the slime to become sentient sometimes.

Anonymous said...

I don' think "fear of Hell" is an especially useful concept for getting people to church these days---reminds me of the street preachers outside college football games or other sporting events holding up signs and warning of Hell if you did not accept "Him." You used to see similar antics outside the Masters---til Augusta National bought up a lot of land for parking and the preacher disappeared. Protestants usually have not emphasized mandatory Sunday attendance because it smacks of "works", that I can go to heaven if I would just go to church every Sunday, no exceptions. But instead, maybe emphasize the positive aspects of weekly church---letting go of burdens there, looking for hope in this life and the next, even benefits such as lower divorce rate among frequent churchgoers.

Anonymous said...



Pelagius taught that human beings have a natural capacity to reject evil and seek God, that Christ's admonition, "Be ye perfect," presupposes this capacity, and that grace is the natural ability given by God to seek and to serve God. Pelagius rejected the doctrine of original sin; he taught that children are born innocent of the sin of Adam. Baptism, accordingly, ceased to be interpreted as a regenerative sacrament. Pelagius challenged the very function of the church, claiming that the law as well as the gospel can lead one to heaven and that pagans had been able to enter heaven by virtue of their moral actions before the coming of Christ. The church fought Pelagianism from the time that Celestius was denied ordination in 411. In 415, Augustine warned St. Jerome in Palestine that Pelagius was propagating a dangerous heresy there, and Jerome acted to prevent its spread in the East. Pelagianism was condemned by East and West at the Council of Ephesus (431). A compromise doctrine, Semi-Pelagianism, became popular in the 5th and 6th cent. in France, Britain, and Ireland. Semi-Pelagians taught that although grace was necessary for salvation, men could, apart from grace, desire the gift of salvation, and that they could, of themselves, freely accept and persevere in grace. Semi-Pelagians also rejected the Augustinian doctrine of predestination and held that God willed the salvation of all men equally. At the instance of St. Caesarius of Arles, Semi-Pelagianism was condemned at the Council of Orange (529). By the end of the 6th cent., Pelagianism disappeared as an organized heresy, but the questions of free will, predestination, and grace raised by Pelagianism have been the subject of theological controversy ever since.

Victor said...

The latest Gallop stats show the Catholic Church in USA is heading for extinction, even proportionately having less attendance than Protestants. It is the Hispanic influx that has kept the Catholic Church alive in USA, but with Mr Trump tightening up on that, it is goodbye Catholic Church, especially since so many Hispanics are leaving the Church either for Evangelical Protestantism or the nones.

http://news.gallup.com/poll/232226/church-attendance-among-catholics-resumes-downward-slide.aspx?g_source=link_NEWSV9&g_medium=TOPIC&g_campaign=item_&g_content=Catholics%27%2520Church%2520Attendance%2520Resumes%2520Downward%2520Slide

It is too bad that samples were not taken in 1962,3 and 4, when the liturgical changes were started and anticipated. In any case, from 1966 onwards, it has been the downfall, the Church's teaching and liturgy becoming more meaningless for everyone. It is even so much worse in Europe.

Instead of trying to make the Church into another social services organisation, maybe the Pope should call for a Council to finally address Modernism in the Church, which has been the cause of this decline because of its destruction of Catholic culture.

ByzRC said...

Pope Francis will hopefully focus his energies on getting his own house in order leaving the East alone. The Roman Church has done more than enough for the East which is still finding its way back to its traditional roots (with decidedly more success than the Latin Church I might add).

ByzRC said...

Amen, Victor! However, I suspect that pride as well as the worship of progressivism will prevent that from happening - at least during our respective lifespans.

Carol H. said...

Marc, thank you for posting your analysis on the situation; I always enjoy reading them.

Praying for Easter Blessings for you and your family.

TJM said...

Victor,

Good point about the tightening up of immigration by Trump. That explains why many Catholic bishops are pro illegal alien and anti-taxpayer. If they think the illegals are going to fill up the pews and the coffers, they are truly delusional. A more constructive approach would be to tell the Dems to stop aborting their children!

John Nolan said...

Anonymous @ 7:36 is having a dig at those whose posts are littered with misspellings and typographical errors. I found his comment quite amusing, given that a helicon is a brass instrument resembling a sousaphone and Crewe is an important railway junction in Cheshire, England!

For some reason, irony doesn't seem to work on the internet.

Marc said...

Thank you, Carol. I hope all is well with you!

rcg said...

I thought the word “Crewe” was an appropriation of the creole “Krewe” (creux?; creaux?) which is a group of associates that can be called together for some task. I am familiar with it from Mardis Gras in New Orleans where the krewes are precinct teams that competitively build parade teams of dancers and fantastic figures sort of like a drunken version of the Chinese Lion Dancers.

I also confess here to sloppy typing on this web site. They tell us not to text and drive and I have found that to be especially true on my motorcycle. Makes typing s frustrating experience.

I am skeptical of the relationship of illegal immigrants to Catholic attendance. The attendance has gone down by more than the total estimated illegal population and they are not all Catholic.

Gene said...

One of my classmates in theology grad school was arguing with the professor. He finally pushed the prof by asking in a snotty manner, "So, just how would you define Pelagianism?" The professor replied, "The idea that man can do anything worth a damn."
I like definitions that get right to the point. LOL!

Gene said...

I miss those helicon days, as well. They were a cymbal of piece and gave us a measure of harmony...a time when oboes rode in train cars and sax was between one man and one woman, and violas bloomed in country church yards. I have no symphony for how the march of time has horned in and caused such a cleft in our lives. We are really in a piccolo because time is always fiddling with our composer.

TJM said...

Gene,

This Democrat legislator sounds like she was trained in her faith by Kavanaugh or a Kavanuagh clone:

During the course of the debate, [catholic] Rep. Isela Blanc (pro-abortion representative from Tempe) misquoted Pope Francis stating that the pope was now in favor of contraception, sterilization and abortion. She further said that the Catholic Church has evolved on the issue and is no longer even using the rhythm method.

Rep. Grantham swiftly got up and stated that as a Catholic, he didn’t appreciate the mis-characterization of Pope Francis. He then read the entire interaction that Pope Francis had, and in the proper context. He further went on to boldly state that the act of abortion IS evil and that the Catholic Church has not softened its stance at all.

The Democratic Party supports intrinsic evil, ergo its supporters are culpable, and most egregiously, clerics

rcg said...

TJM, Gene can’t respond right now. He is busy trumpeting his neo-Percussionism.

Carol H. said...

Gene and RCG, thanks for making me laugh out loud!

Easter Blessings to you and your families!

Gene said...

RCG, Actually, I've been syncopated for several days. I need to refrain from sweets and castanet for some seafood. Maybe only eat things like orange schubert and cello for a while. Maybe read a little Andante...

rcg said...

Gene, all of that is a good approach but is best for maintenance. To get back on track you will need to consume a glass of clarinette each night before bed and give up sax for a month.