tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post5921265367750944414..comments2024-03-28T20:30:10.681-04:00Comments on southern orders: IS THE CORONAVIRUS AN ACT OF GOD ON THE FUTURE OF THE ORDINARY FORM OF THE MASS?Fr. Allan J. McDonaldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16986575955114152639noreply@blogger.comBlogger66125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-91717435570330671942020-05-15T09:12:10.186-04:002020-05-15T09:12:10.186-04:00DJR:
Either my advice is sound or it isn't. P...DJR:<br /><br />Either my advice is sound or it isn't. Please rebut my argument, don't try to make this about me.Fr Martin Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01375628123126091747noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-2143026011197343582020-05-15T00:20:44.151-04:002020-05-15T00:20:44.151-04:00Fr Martin Fox said... "Is it not far better t...Fr Martin Fox said... <i>"Is it not far better to focus our analysis on what is observable and measurable, which is their words, actions and the consequences thereof? So: you can say that Father So-and-so or Politician So-and-so are wrong in endorsing X (and explain why); but it is idle and perhaps even presumptuous to say that these people have evil intentions. That you cannot know."</i><br /><br />Father, it would be nice if you, or one of the other clergy members here, would weigh in with these sentiments the next time you see a typical post regarding the evil intentions of "right wing bloggers."DJRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18028761850444888285noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-22452935300424741612020-05-14T11:03:58.429-04:002020-05-14T11:03:58.429-04:00RCG:
I can't really know Theodore McCarrick&#...RCG:<br /><br />I can't really know Theodore McCarrick's inner life and motivations, but it seems far more probable to me that, going back to the beginning of his vocation to the priesthood, and through his career, he was not 100% devoted to sin. Somewhere, somehow, he lost his way; and I can imagine (as can you) the sort of justifications or rationalizations he made for the predations and so forth; but everything about his life as a priest and bishop was not predation. He offered Mass, he heard confessions, he baptized and so forth, and it seems <i>probable</i> to me that lots of good aspirations remained in him all along the way. <br /><br />That is why I have no problem supposing that he still had good intentions, mixed with bad. That's how corruption works, at least, I think that's almost certainly how it works almost all the time. The people who do bad, even very bad things, are seldom (I speak in a non metaphysical sense) bad "all the way through." If they were, you would not have all the astonishment and confusion when the evil deeds of people are unveiled. If someone were bad all the way through, the reaction would be, "no surprise there," not: "I can't believe it!"<br /><br />And it ought to be clear that none of this is a defense or justification of McCarrick's (or anyone elses) evil acts, nor am I arguing for any particular leniency toward him or others; I'm simply talking about the mystery of evil as it works inside a human being.Fr Martin Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01375628123126091747noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-92089637967968339632020-05-14T10:52:02.822-04:002020-05-14T10:52:02.822-04:00DJR:
Your argument is not with me, but with St. T...DJR:<br /><br />Your argument is not with me, but with St. Thomas Aquinas. Let me quote from an article on this subject, for which I will provide the link below:<br /><br /><i>Second, it appears that Aquinas is mistaken when he says that the ends for the sake of which we act are good. Clearly, many things we pursue in life are not good. Aquinas does not deny this. He agrees that cognitive errors and excessive passion can distort our moral views and, in turn, incline us to choose the wrong things. <b>Aquinas’s point, however, is that our actions are done for the sake of what we believe (rightly or wrongly) to be good.</b> Whether the ends we pursue are in fact good is a separate question—one to which we will return below.</i><br /><br />(https://www.iep.utm.edu/aq-moral/)<br /><br />This was the point I was making: that people we disagree with may indeed be doing things that are wrong, but -- as stated above -- they "are done for the sake of what we believe (rightly or wrongly) to be good." And yes, as far as you or I know, that applies to people such as "Mao, Stalin, Lenin and Pol Pot."<br /><br />Can you demonstrate that when these people did the terrible things they did, they believed their acts to be <i>evil</i> and chose them for that reason? I have not spent much time investigating the reasoning and rationale these people offered for their actions; but what little I know is that they always justified them as serving some good.<br /><br />To cite a far more common example, those who support legal abortion. What we all generally encounter is that people are supporting legal abortion not because they knowingly choose what they believe to be <i>evil,</i> but because they pursue some good (i.e., the welfare of the mother or the perceived benefit to society) over other goods (such as the life of the child). Their ordering of comparative goods is wrong; but it is not, as I said all along, a deliberate and knowing choice of evil <i>as such.</i><br /><br />Even if St. Thomas Aquinas proves to be wrong in saying that we never choose evil <i>as such</i> (but what we mistakenly see as good), what really is gained by focusing our attention and rhetoric on the <i>motives</i> and inner processes of other people? Who but God can really know those inner motives? <br /><br />Is it not far better to focus our analysis on what is observable and measurable, which is their words, actions and the consequences thereof? So: you can say that Father So-and-so or Politician So-and-so are wrong in endorsing X (and explain why); but it is idle and perhaps even presumptuous to say that these people have evil <i>intentions</i>. That you cannot know.Fr Martin Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01375628123126091747noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-51906899539255308882020-05-14T02:35:17.002-04:002020-05-14T02:35:17.002-04:00Fr. Martin Fox said..."My point is, feel free...Fr. Martin Fox said...<i>"My point is, feel free to lambaste people's wrong ideas and policies and behaviors, but there's no real point in trying to characterize their own inner intentions and purposes."</i><br /><br />With respect, Father, would you apply said sentiments to people such as Mao, Stalin, Lenin, and Pol Pot?<br /><br />What about "By their fruits you will know them"?DJRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18028761850444888285noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-28404861441472796862020-05-13T17:09:16.095-04:002020-05-13T17:09:16.095-04:00@Fr Fox; It’s funny but I had a similar counselIng...@Fr Fox; It’s funny but I had a similar counselIng session with someone in Washington some years ago. I was not an elected official and the compromises were not easily seen as illegal of immoral by themselves. But they built a great weight that could not be resisted. The question comes down to our own nerve and the vanity of our commitment. Do I starve the enemy knowing that he will inflict the greatest suffering on those most dependent on him for help even within his own circle? Do I make the choice, knowing it will starve the Innocents in the enemy’s camp in some strange bid for my own salvation? I do not believe that Mr McCarrick was wanting what is best for the Church unless he never gave any thought to the progress of his own projects. If he was not given in to evil then he was given to insanity. In either case he deserves my pity and prayers as well as removal of his wealth and reputation. If he sees the resulting dearth of comfort as suffering then he sees it through the same lens as he views his deeds. Those who, like the song says, let him go so long out of kindness, have earned my enmity, contempt, and perhaps someday, my wrath. rcghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661998350597126663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-14634967839137018942020-05-13T16:16:15.821-04:002020-05-13T16:16:15.821-04:00"...but there's no real point in trying t..."...but there's no real point in trying to characterize their own inner intentions and purposes."<br /><br />I think there is. And I think these can be known.<br /><br />Motivations are not always pure. They can be purified, but don't always start out that way.<br /><br />Some here claim their they, not those given the authority to teach in the name of the Church, to wit, bishops, can decide as individuals what is and what is not part of the deposit of faith.<br /><br />What motivates such muddle-headed thinking? Lack of understanding of the Church's teaching on who has and who has not the authority? A desire for power? Simple arrogance? Poor formation during catechesis? Fear? A desire to be different in the hope that this difference will be noticed and praised? The unfulfillable hope of resurrecting a Church from the 1500's in the 2000's? Anger?<br /><br />We can speculate and we can, at times, uncover the intentions and purposes that drive others' behavior and policies. And this can be helpful in responding.<br /><br />Whatever the cause, we know that the claim regarding authority is unfounded and un-Catholic. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-22871799032892766342020-05-13T13:12:52.876-04:002020-05-13T13:12:52.876-04:00DJR, Vatican Zero:
A wise friend of mine, who wor...DJR, Vatican Zero:<br /><br />A wise friend of mine, who works in politics, taught me something many years ago. Namely, that your political opponents, however wrong they are, however bad their ideas are, nevertheless usually (not always) are seeking what they believe is good policy.<br /><br />My friend would be amused to be put in the same category as St. Thomas Aquinas, but in his way, the angelic doctor made the same point: even when we sin, we still desire a good thing: we either desire a good that we are not entitled to, or we desire too much of it, or desire it in the wrong way. <br /><br />As abhorrent as former Cardinal McCarrick's behavior appears to have been, even he was most likely seeking what he perceived to be the good of the Church or the nation, at least <i>some</i> of the time.<br /><br />Did you ever see the movie, <i>Mr. Smith Goes to Washington?</i> The corrupt senator is explaining to the newer, idealistic senator (played by Jimmy Stewart) how he came to be involved with graft. He says something like, yes, early on, I made the same compromise I'm asking you to make now; but I did it so that I'd be in a position to make a hundred good decisions for our country and our state.<br /><br />My point is, feel free to lambaste people's wrong ideas and policies and behaviors, but there's no real point in trying to characterize their own inner intentions and purposes.Fr Martin Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01375628123126091747noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-77997086063318875272020-05-12T20:41:32.277-04:002020-05-12T20:41:32.277-04:00DJR...
I guess I should have qualified my comment...DJR...<br /><br />I guess I should have qualified my comment by adding, "...unless we have strong evidence otherwise."<br /><br />In the case of the people you mentioned...well, enough said.Vatican Zeronoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-87472941946881557082020-05-12T15:26:24.795-04:002020-05-12T15:26:24.795-04:00Vatican Zero said... "We have to try to belie...Vatican Zero said... <i>"We have to try to believe that each side embraces what they truly believe is best for the Church..."</i><br /><br />Why should anyone believe that people like now-Mr. McCarrick or Archbishop Weakland or Bishop Bransfield or Bishop Ryan or Archbishop Hunthausen or Cardinal Bernardin or Bishop Ferrario or Cardinal Mahony or Bishop Trautman or Cardinal Danneels, or priests like James Martin, Richard Vosko, Edward Schillebeeckx, Hans Kung, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, ad infinitum, embrace/d what they truly believe/d is best for the Church?<br /><br />In fact, it's the opposite. No one should believe such a thing.DJRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18028761850444888285noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-21259264614655306402020-05-12T13:55:34.535-04:002020-05-12T13:55:34.535-04:00Father Fox,
I respect you because you are Catholi...Father Fox,<br /><br />I respect you because you are Catholic and display commonsense, which all priests do not.<br /><br />This is what torqued me off:<br /><br />" Fr. Michael J. Kavanaugh said...<br />Fr. Martin Fox -<br /><br />What you choose to believe is up to you."<br /><br />You are fair more generous than I would be with a petulant comment like that coming from a brother priest.<br /><br /><br /> TJMnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-85104017878759796972020-05-12T12:04:37.457-04:002020-05-12T12:04:37.457-04:00I agree, Father Fox and, for the record, I stated ...I agree, Father Fox and, for the record, I stated earlier in this thread that I respect Fr. Kavanaugh's position as a priest because it bothers me too to see people denigrate his priesthood or refer to him as any less than a priest.<br /><br />However, courtesy and respect are a two way street. Fr. Kavanaugh might find that the good people who comment on this blog might take a kinder turn towards him if he would stick to the discussion instead of making personal remarks or assuming to read the minds of those who disagree with him.<br /><br />During the last presidential election, there was incredible hostility from both sides as Clinton supporters derided Trump supporters as "monsters" and "deplorables" and Trump supporters denounced Clinton supporters as "socialists" or "unpatriotic" or what have you. The disagreements should be about issues and sometimes those disagreements can get pointed and heated. However, getting personal is only destructive. What works best for me is to assume that everyone who voted, regardless of who they voted for, did so because they sincerely believed they were doing what was best for their country.<br /><br />Can't we, as Catholics, do the same? There has been a "civil war" brewing in the Church for decades and it isn't going to be resolved by either side getting personal or presuming to know the inner motives of their opponents. We have to try to believe that each side embraces what they truly believe is best for the Church and restrict our arguments to the issues at hand.Vatican Zeronoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-12094267205990178302020-05-12T12:04:31.801-04:002020-05-12T12:04:31.801-04:00In the Catholic Church, people don't get to de...In the Catholic Church, people don't get to decide not to listen to their bishop because they think their bishop is a heretic or wrong about something.<br /><br />At the time of the Arian heresy, people were allowed to depose their bishops for heresy. Rome took away people's right to do that. Now Rome requires that you do as the pope and the bishop that he appoints say.<br />Marchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13510317669833026685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-54637334385235543082020-05-12T11:26:09.255-04:002020-05-12T11:26:09.255-04:00Father Kavanaugh (whom I have never met) and I see...Father Kavanaugh (whom I have never met) and I seem to disagree on some matters, solely based on our interactions here. That said, I have tried to be charitable and courteous toward him, and I think he has done the same.<br /><br />There is a glaring disconnect when people seek to vindicate the Catholic Faith on particulars, such as the proper celebration of Holy Mass, or the proper way to distribute, or receive, the Eucharist -- but then, in doing so, manifest a gross lack of charity and respect for others.<br /><br />It is particularly notable when people mock the priesthood of Father Kavanaugh with scare quotes or simply decline to refer to him as a priest -- from all appearances, this is because they disagree with his comments here. A priest you disagree with is still a priest, and whatever respect you believe is due to a priest and his priesthood, is due regardless of his views.<br /><br />After all, if someone is wrong, should not your goal be to convince and persuade that person to change? And does rude and insulting behavior really seem the way to go? <br /><br />Candidly, rude and insulting behavior happens far more because we get aggravated and overreact. It's very human, yet a pause is always called for. And stop and think about the fact that when we are not in physical proximity, <i>and</i> we have the shield of anonymity provided by the Internet, these conditions tend to bring out the worst in people. People say things to and about each other online that they would hardly ever say to each other in person.<br /><br />Charity, brothers and sisters. You do not honor the Lord by defending him with a lack of charity.Fr Martin Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01375628123126091747noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-40412774273626220242020-05-12T11:04:00.873-04:002020-05-12T11:04:00.873-04:00Marc,
What if the heirarchy is infested with no-n...Marc,<br /><br />What if the heirarchy is infested with no-nothings, which currently seems to be the case? Sorry, no sale. Ever hear of the Arian heresy? A majority of bishops were on the side of heresyTJMnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-36429492531163221982020-05-12T09:25:58.824-04:002020-05-12T09:25:58.824-04:00TJM,
That "dying, bitter, old guard" s...TJM, <br /><br />That "dying, bitter, old guard" seems to be finding just enough disciples to perpetuate their ecclesial vice grip. Just look at what was just appointed as coadjutor of the Diocese of Peoria. You know, Peoria, that anomaly among midwestern dioceses that used to have such a solid reputation? And he's young.<br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-83027024466241755162020-05-12T08:52:02.921-04:002020-05-12T08:52:02.921-04:00Fr. Kavanaugh rightly notes that it is the hierarc...Fr. Kavanaugh rightly notes that it is the hierarchy who teach. So whatever differences exist between the modern and historical (is that a better term, Father?) Church, it is the hierarchy at any point in time to set out the teachings. It is not the duty of the individual to do anything other than profess the faith as delivered to them. <br /><br />There is a tension between the historical church and the current church - that is evident to anyone with eyes. What Fr. Kavanaugh is saying is that the hierarchy resolves that tension. And according to Catholic teaching and history, he’s right about that. <br /><br />I think that, if people don’t accept this aspect of Catholic teaching, they should probably either reconcile their minds to it or search out a different religion that teaches something more in line with what they believe. Marchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13510317669833026685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-88012452623657275302020-05-12T07:27:37.325-04:002020-05-12T07:27:37.325-04:00Vatican Zero,
"Father" Kavanaugh is the...Vatican Zero,<br /><br />"Father" Kavanaugh is the poster boy for the dying, bitter old guard. Remember Einstein's definition of insanity?TJMnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-67354500756748942722020-05-11T21:23:26.707-04:002020-05-11T21:23:26.707-04:00The problem is, many in the Catholic hierarchy don...The problem is, many in the Catholic hierarchy don't believe what the Catholic hierarchy has ALWAYS believed until the great rupture took place after Vatican II. God is the same yesterday today and forever. Bishops and priests should reflect that consistency and continuity, but should any of us hope for such stability now, we are told that WE have a problem, we are out of touch or we have some immature need for certitude.<br /><br />Marc, you are quite right, Fr. Kavanaugh does appear to be emblematic of what the "modern" Catholic Church believes. However, your second sentence about "traditionalists" misses the point because you forgot to mention that they do not share the same beliefs as the "modern" Catholic hierarchy.<br /><br />The Church should not be "modern" or "traditionalist". It should be CATHOLIC. Guess which group moved first?ANONnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-88514279633362129822020-05-11T20:54:19.323-04:002020-05-11T20:54:19.323-04:00Father Kavanaugh,
With all due respect, HOW D...Father Kavanaugh,<br /><br /> With all due respect, HOW DARE YOU ATTEMPT TO READ MY MIND AND PRESUME WHAT MY MOTIVES ARE OR ATTEMPT TO DISCERN SOME "PERSONAL NARRATIVE" that suits my own personal "biases". You don't know me and you don't know a bloody thing about me.<br /><br /> This began as a discussion of practices. You admitted that Communion in the hand was a novelty. Enough said.<br /><br /> If you want more credibility it would serve you well to stick to the argument and save your soothsaying and pop-psychology attempts for your personal life.<br /><br /> What nerve. And a PRIEST at that.Vatican Zeronoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-69539124835848418322020-05-11T18:09:10.968-04:002020-05-11T18:09:10.968-04:00Marc - What I believe and teach is what the Church...Marc - What I believe and teach is what the Church believes and teaches. There is no "modern" Church in opposition in matters of faith to an "traditionalist" Church.<br /><br />You hold the position that the "modern" Church has abandoned, in some respects, the faith of the Church. You argue that there are aspects of the faith that, once believed and taught, have been sets aside or replaced by belief and faith that is incompatible with what went before.<br /><br />The problem is that many traditionalist Catholics believe they are the authentic teachers of the Faith, which is wholly non-Traditional belief.Fr. Michael J. Kavanaughnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-87171939048751991502020-05-11T17:05:35.705-04:002020-05-11T17:05:35.705-04:00Fr. Kavanaugh makes a pretty compelling point, act...Fr. Kavanaugh makes a pretty compelling point, actually. One can't seriously argue that Fr. Kavanaugh is out of step with the Catholic hierarchy and the faith. In fact, he is emblematic of precisely what the modern Catholic church believes, whether traditionalists like it or not.<br /><br />The problem is that many traditionalist Catholic simply do not share the same beliefs as the Catholic hierarchy.Marchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13510317669833026685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-31938159948344793622020-05-11T15:36:45.711-04:002020-05-11T15:36:45.711-04:00V Zero -
There was a time when every practice in ...V Zero -<br /><br />There was a time when every practice in the liturgy was "not a long standing practice." So your assertion "that Communion in the Hand was not a longstanding practice" is absolutely true and absolutely moot. The notion that any practice introduced into the liturgy - any addition, any deletion, any change whatsoever - must be one of "long-standing practice" is self-contradictory. Something novel is, by definition, not of long standing practice.<br /><br />You have read and you believe that the introduction of communion in the hand or girl altar servers or the sign of peace shared among the members of the congregation or some other liturgical practice you don't like is part of a nefarious plot conjured up, overseen, and implemented by men of evil intentions. In your mind they might have been Masons or Communists or members of the Illuminati or some other group. But your wild imaginings don't make it so.<br /><br />You and others have concluded that these things are intended to destroy the Church, to drive people away, to reform the Church into just another branch of Protestantism. You have chosen to believe these things because it serves your personal narrative; to wit, that you are right, that you are wiser than those who share the burden of authority in the Church, and that you are truly Catholic, and those who disagree with you are wrong, foolish, and not truly Catholic.<br /><br />You and anyone else who feels this way is perfectly free to do so. And I am perfectly free to disagree. <br /><br />The dignity of my priesthood, the dignity of any member of the priesthood of the Baptized or the Ordained, comes from the author of that priesthood, not from your approval.<br /><br />John Nolan, I know personally one person here - Fr. McDonald. Fr. Michael J. Kavanaughnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-35718631930322637282020-05-11T15:26:37.692-04:002020-05-11T15:26:37.692-04:00What do we call a priest?
FATHER.
If a father ...What do we call a priest? <br /><br />FATHER.<br /><br />If a father cannot mildly slap the hand of his children without the crybaby patrol screaming "child abuse" something is seriously wrong.<br /><br />Then again, we've known for some time that something is seriously wrong.ANONnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-38604844298303875882020-05-11T15:10:02.513-04:002020-05-11T15:10:02.513-04:00Anonymous Kavanaugh,
This old Italian priest was ...Anonymous Kavanaugh,<br /><br />This old Italian priest was the most popular priest in the parish, generally a kind soul. But unlike many priests today, he had the upmost respect for the Blessed Sacrament and was vigilant against profanation. At the time this woman did this, it was a profane act. TJMnoreply@blogger.com