tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post2249812128355374353..comments2024-03-28T20:30:10.681-04:00Comments on southern orders: CATHOLICISM'S 1970'S, ANYTHING GOOD ABOUT IT?Fr. Allan J. McDonaldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16986575955114152639noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-49119733465227467612015-08-02T20:17:05.586-04:002015-08-02T20:17:05.586-04:00Rcg:
I do have a minor quibble. I suppose I would...Rcg:<br /><br />I do have a minor quibble. I suppose I would fall within the description of “highly educated” but attempts were definitely made during my education to train me in woodworking and metalworking. The problem was not lack of will on the part of the educators; the problem was my ineptitude. When I used a chisel the wood broke; when I used a lathe I don’t recall what happened (probably because the results were so traumatic). I fared no better in Art classes, achieving the singular distinction of coming dead last in the final exam. One phrase that strikes fear and trembling into my heart when purchasing any consumer item is “some assembly required.” The irony is that my paternal grandfather was a master carpenter. Apparently the gene did not get passed down (my father was little better than I was; in fact, he was so bad at woodworking that, in his words, they “put him in charge of dispensing the glue” as the only task for which he was suited). So, for some of us, there is nothing “faux” about the complexity at all. I greatly admire those who have the practical talents that I lack and console myself with the thoughts that we are interdependent and that there are many gifts but One Spirit (I cannot sing either). =)<br /><br />Anonymous 2noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-61301034734545256522015-08-02T09:43:12.156-04:002015-08-02T09:43:12.156-04:00Education is relative. Just watch any "highly...Education is relative. Just watch any "highly educated" person try to repair something, anything, these days. They have been trained not to even try due faux complexity. rcghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09131930849106490711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-31275760228533217872015-08-01T09:55:30.865-04:002015-08-01T09:55:30.865-04:00I'm just glad that I managed to survive high s...I'm just glad that I managed to survive high school in the 1970's! (1972-1976) Fr. Michael J. Kavanaughnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-71656973701469177732015-08-01T07:56:27.148-04:002015-08-01T07:56:27.148-04:00This reminds me of the "Personal Jesus" ...This reminds me of the "Personal Jesus" popular among Protestants. rcghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09131930849106490711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-16475664596268881952015-07-31T17:44:54.669-04:002015-07-31T17:44:54.669-04:00Greek,
https://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/POPSL...Greek,<br /><br />https://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/POPSLAVE.HTMRood Screenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09816036539243214384noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-81477185834116423962015-07-31T17:43:59.987-04:002015-07-31T17:43:59.987-04:00"My overwhelming impression of the [C]hurch i..."My overwhelming impression of the [C]hurch in which I grew up was instability." This seems to be a very accurate impression.<br /><br />"The Roman Catholic tradition does not need to be afraid of history." If she's speaking of the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church, then this is certainly a lesson we learned long ago. In fact, the Roman liturgical tradition is filled with lessons learned over many centuries, and the catechetical tradition changed considerably over the 100 years preceding the 1970's. It is good to identify genuine progress in the Seventies era, but it is bad to claim that the Seventies was the first or second decade of the century to embrace the demands of history.<br /><br />I'm just glad Three's Company is off the air. Rood Screenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09816036539243214384noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-28692863869417879752015-07-31T16:28:52.320-04:002015-07-31T16:28:52.320-04:00Didn't Paul III ban slavery?Didn't Paul III ban slavery?The Greeknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-51415761087889195162015-07-31T14:05:03.450-04:002015-07-31T14:05:03.450-04:00I'd also take issue with her claims that the C...I'd also take issue with her claims that the Church approved slavery for centuries and centuries only to come into the light thanks to Wilberforce' and the Protestant Abolitionists. Or that the Church condemned Usury only to be educated by the modern economists.<br /><br />Not so. Glaringly not so. <br /><br />The Church recognized slavery, like prostitution, was (and still is) a universal phenomenon that is very hard to stamp out. So we evangelized both slave and owner. But to the degree the Church could it eliminated slavery in law and culture.<br /><br />Whole religious orders were founded to ransom slaves and other captives and debt slaves. The 14th century missionaries continually fought against Crown and culture on behalf of individuals and peoples being threatened with slavery. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14036a.htm<br /><br />As for usury, it's still immoral. It's immoral to charge exorbitant rates of interest or rip people off based on their need (i.e. jacking up costs on fuel or water during a disaster). http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15235c.htm <br /><br />But it's not immoral to lend at interest for productive pursuits (crops, shipping, etc.) since the point of the loan is to generate profits from which a borrower can pay the lender a share or a 'rental' fee. But to lend for the sake of non-productive consumption....that's immoral because the borrower can't pay it back and so almost always slips into debt slavery.<br /><br />The implication of many progressives is that insofar as they CLAIM the Church 'changed' moral doctrine after the secular culture changed, so too, the Church will change again in sexual morality now that the high grounds of society have been subverted and seized by the sexual hedons. Not so. Jusadbellumnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-37409737228332799812015-07-31T09:42:25.860-04:002015-07-31T09:42:25.860-04:00I agree with one part of her assessment about the ...I agree with one part of her assessment about the post-Vatican II church: we are reactionary, not proactive. The secular culture declares the surburbs to be the ideal...and we, the Catholic population uncritically accepted the premise. The secular world declares a sexual revolution and we, the Catholic church (clergy and laity) generally accepted the premise that this revolution was a) scientific b) inevitable wave of the future against which resistance is impossible and c) harmless, fun, carefree, "love" and not harmful, destructive, focused on egotism and lust which dehumanizes us, destroys trust in marriages, families and communities.<br /><br />So other than Pope JP2's "Love and Responsibility" written in Soviet dominated Poland, what other voice was raised to take on the philosophical bedrock dogmas of the Western world's sexual revolution? Where were the great Catholic prelates and philosophers standing athwart "history' and deflecting it? We RE-ACT, not ACT.<br /><br />Ditto with our loss of healthcare and education and care for the elderly....the secular state and pop culture decrees that these crucial areas of human life ought to be taken over by the secular state (local, state and federal) and we by and large acquiesce or collaborate in this take-over by either accepting federal funding or by getting out of the area entirely to focus on "social work" or some other fringe area of concern.<br /><br />Where did our Legion of Decency go? It vanished. <br />Where did our solidities and devotions go? They were torn down with the wreckovations - people told to stop the devotions, rosary, etc. "get with the times"<br /><br />As an aside, can anyone tell me what exactly "the times" mean besides "other peoples' opinion"? Who the hell cares what secularist or bad Catholics happen to think about anything? Ought I care what ISIS or Chinese Communists or Post-Christian Western Europeans happen to think about something? Care enough to censor myself or jettison my religious or moral habits? Since when did any of these fellow human beings care terribly much about our opinions?<br /><br />It's one thing to recognize that evil men exist and create structures of sin against which we ought to take precautions. But entirely another to self-censor or surrender to the spirit of the age merely because it's the popular (and often artificially created via scientific propaganda) fad of the day.<br /><br />We have the truth (by the grace and mercy of God) so why don't we sit down and seriously map out what it would take to convert the top 1% of society and what it would take to convert the bottom 20%? What needs to happen to convert Hollywood and create a Catholic culture of life that overthrows the post-Christian sexual and materialist revolution's culture of death?<br /><br />We must take the initiative and not either capitulate to some Hegelian-Marxist "inevitable wave of the future" or slink off to some Randian Galt's Gulch to ride out the socialist collapse of civilization from some bunker. <br /><br />Nothing is inevitable but death, judgment, heaven or hell. Jusadbellumnoreply@blogger.com