tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6312447.post4379960296572261486..comments2024-03-28T16:16:51.062-04:00Comments on Musings of a Pertinacious Papist: Are they Catholics?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6312447.post-49581776406330361152011-06-02T13:33:47.154-04:002011-06-02T13:33:47.154-04:00Anonymous,
I think there's an additional diff...Anonymous,<br /><br />I think there's an additional difference between my examples and those you offer besides the difference of being at opposite ends of the "spectrum," as you suggest. There's a difference of familiarity vs. oblivion with respect to the content of Catholic history and tradition. This doesn't justify errors (such as sedevacantism) at the extreme "right," as you put it. But it does show the need for a couple of further distinctions. Let's try "formal" and "material" criteria:<br /><br />The formal criteria of what counts as Catholic is easy enough to specify, of course, as "Franciscan" demonstrates in his comment. The material criteria, which are not necessarily correlated with the formal (e.g., baptized infants are Catholics even if they don't actually know anything), are much more difficult to specify. Avery Cardinal Dulles once pointed out that a Catholic convert from Evangelicalism could conceivably be a Catholic in good standing without embracing any of the Marian devotions, like the Rosary, as long as he didn't reject the Church's Marian teachings. But there's only so far that line can be pushed before serious questions begin to arise. In other words, how uncatechized and uninvolved in Catholic traditions can a person be and still be meaningfully called Catholic.<br /> <br />A sedevacantist by definition does not fulfill a key formal condition of being a Catholic, even though his material practice, knowledge and familiarity with Catholic tradition may be "more Catholic than the Pope," as you put it. An uncatechized Catholic without the least knowledge or commitment to understanding Catholic traditions and practices, let alone allowing them to make any demands on his life, may meet the formal conditions of being Catholic, while being materially unable to offer a minimally credible definition of what it even means to be Catholic.Pertinacious Papisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03213911570586726075noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6312447.post-15313202908672573492011-06-02T13:22:28.013-04:002011-06-02T13:22:28.013-04:00Good post, although I think you are missing a few ...Good post, although I think you are missing a few characters ...<br /><br /><b>Tom</b>, describing himself as among the "John Paul II' generation, attends a middle-sized Catholic parish in the city, which reverently celebrates a Novus Ordo Mass -- with decent music and even Latin and chant on occasion (none of the Marty Haugen tripe!). He serves as a lector, his wife heads the RCC (this one actually using the Catechism as a curriculum). While Tom has attended the Tridentine Mass at the invitation of some more traditionally-minded friends, his personal preference and "comfort level" remains with the Novus Ordo, and likewise feels a commitment to supporting his local parish community.<br /><br />Question: Is Tom Catholic?<br /><br /><b>Bill</b> ... was received into a contemporary Catholic parish and schooled with the bare minimum of catechesis. Rejecting what he perceived as the lukewarmness of his fellow parishioners, he now takes refuge in the Tridentine Mass and nurtures himself on a perpetual diet of TAN publishing. Lately his literary diet has extended well past what you might call "traditionally Catholic" literature to indulge in the fringe right -- he now questions the very legitimacy and identity of the post-Vatican II Church and willfully entertains sedevacantism, denouncing John Paul II and his successor as anti-popes and minions of the Jewish-Masonic conspiracy for global domination.<br /><br />Question: Is Bill Catholic?<br /><br />Granted I don't depict the character as well, but you and I both have encountered folks of this nature. And, just as Kierkegaard castigated Luther for elevating himself to the position of a Pope, I've seen a number of anti-conciliar Catholics argue themselves right out of communion with Rome. Just to point out that, while your own characters are found on one spectrum (that of the uncatechized and not-very-well-schooled), the danger remains of losing one's Catholic identity on the other end of the spectrum as well.<br /><br />I'm actually witnessing this happen to somebody in Catholic blogland right now -- "more Catholic than the Pope" -- and it's disappointing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6312447.post-63578475228446144182011-06-02T13:12:53.996-04:002011-06-02T13:12:53.996-04:00Hymer,
You misunderstand Dr. Ed Peter's meani...Hymer,<br /><br />You misunderstand Dr. Ed Peter's meaning (or mine in relating his opinion).<br /><br />Peters isn't suggesting that the chief problem with the 1 hour fast is that people receive Communion too soon after having consumed food. Rather, it's that people receive Communion in a state of mortal sin for other quite common and often embarrassing reasons because they would be embarrassed to give public evidence of their transgressions by refraining from receiving.<br /><br />Peters therefore suggests that lengthening the fasting period to at least three hours would give individuals in that condition the "cover" they need to refrain from receiving, because people would have more innocuous reasons for abstaining from Communion, like having inadvertently broken the three-hour fast.Pertinacious Papisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03213911570586726075noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6312447.post-56028868387199471252011-06-01T12:04:45.981-04:002011-06-01T12:04:45.981-04:00"As a result, we probably have all sorts of C..."As a result, we probably have all sorts of Catholics receiving Communion in a state of mortal sin, because they're embarrassed about abstaining" <br /><br />I kind of doubt it. Communion typically occurs at 45 minutes into the mass. Unless folks are eating in their cars on the way to church, nearly everyone has fasted the required one hourHmyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10432703407675843645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6312447.post-89109339202494464832011-05-31T20:18:47.933-04:002011-05-31T20:18:47.933-04:00The person named "Helen" complained abou...The person named "Helen" complained about the Latin language making the liturgy inaccessible. <br /><br />In an adjacent post on Martin Mosebach, there was this succinct response to precisely that question, raised by Die Welt:<br /><br /><i><b>Die Welt</b>: How can the Roman liturgy in the “usus antiquior“ be offered today “to all the faithful“ if only a fraction of the faithful understand Latin?<br /><br /><b>Martin Mosebach</b>: At all times only a few Catholics have been able to follow the Latin Mass word for word. Europe looks back on well over a thousand years of glorious Catholic culture without the people being able to understand Latin. They understand something more important: that in the rite the Parousia – the mystic presence – of the Lord takes place. Without this understanding, a person has understood nothing of the Mass, even if he thinks he understands every word. Moreover, for a long time there have been wonderful bilingual missals with which we can pray the mass with the priest. But it is indeed correct: the Old Rite requires a certain effort, a readiness to learn.</i>Georgenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6312447.post-79278843438539601612011-05-31T20:12:18.308-04:002011-05-31T20:12:18.308-04:00"What's important is to make the Gospel a..."What's important is to make the Gospel accessible ..."<br /><br />I worry about this word "accessible." I don't deny it may have legitimate meanings. But I worry that far too often it means something like "dumbing down" the faith, translating it into some philistine medium that denatures it. It has the scent about it of Madison Avenue advertising consultants. But the faith doesn't strike me as something that is essentially marketable by such means. If anything, it was "marketed" by martyrdom and sacrifice and holding fast to the apostolic traditions.Georgenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6312447.post-83716032430839157502011-05-31T09:25:51.949-04:002011-05-31T09:25:51.949-04:00Tim,
Thanks for the good words. I also appreciat...Tim,<br /><br />Thanks for the good words. I also appreciate your view of the restoration of the Friday abstinence in England and Wales. <br /><br />In a similar vein, Ed Peters recently suggested to me an interesting rationale for lengthening the fast before Mass from one to at least three hours. The problem with the one-hour fast, he says, is that it's so short that it essentially forces a public declaration of conscience to abstain from Communion. As a result, we probably have all sorts of Catholics receiving Communion in a state of mortal sin, because they're embarrassed about abstaining. <br /><br />If the fast were lengthened by only two more hours, says Peters, it would probably go a long way towards resolving some of this untidiness by offering non-Communicants an 'out': "Oh, he probably just forgot the time and took his breakfast too late."<br /><br />The only exception Peters offers is for weekday Masses, for which he proposes retaining the 1-hour fast, for obvious reasons.Pertinacious Papisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03213911570586726075noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6312447.post-73354855259250192182011-05-30T22:09:38.638-04:002011-05-30T22:09:38.638-04:00Comments archived from Michael Liccioni's Face...<a href="http://pertinaciouspages.blogspot.com/2011/05/comments-from-are-they-catholics.html" rel="nofollow">Comments archived from Michael Liccioni's Facebook page</a>Site Managerhttp://pblosser.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6312447.post-16826131798002409232011-05-30T21:33:34.010-04:002011-05-30T21:33:34.010-04:00An Episcopalian professor recently attended the fi...An Episcopalian professor recently attended the first Mass of a Catholic seminarian who formerly had been his student at his university. The professor observed that the Mass seemed closer to a "Baptist" service than anything resembling his own Episcopalian liturgy.<br /><br />The same professor has a son majoring in church history at the same university. He is thoroughly conversant with details of the liturgical year, the Book of Common Prayer, the Latin Breviary, etc. The son's college room mate is a lapsed Catholic as indifferent as he is ignorant of these sorts of questions of church tradition. The professor likes to make a point of asking: "So which is the more Catholic, my Episcopalian son or his lapsed Catholic room mate?"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6312447.post-23888748763014350642011-05-30T13:42:06.894-04:002011-05-30T13:42:06.894-04:00Funny my journey into Catholicism was looking for ...Funny my journey into Catholicism was looking for the Tridentine Mass although I wouldn't have been able to put that name to it in 1978. To me so many of the Catholic liturgies I have attended over the past 33 years seem more Protestant than Catholic. Why is that?Ruthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13785096381671967529noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6312447.post-90147553628746995662011-05-30T12:27:51.035-04:002011-05-30T12:27:51.035-04:00CCC 1277: Baptism is birth into the new life in Ch...CCC 1277: Baptism is birth into the new life in Christ. In accordance with the Lord's will, it is necessary for salvation, as is the Church herself, which we enter by Baptism.<br /><br />CCC 308 Although Confirmation is sometimes called the "sacrament of Christian maturity," we must not confuse adult faith with the adult age of natural growth, nor forget that the baptismal grace is a grace of free, unmerited election and does not need "ratification" to become effective. St. Thomas reminds us of this:<br /><br />"Age of body does not determine age of soul. Even in childhood man can attain spiritual maturity: as the book of Wisdom says: "For old age is not honored for length of time, or measured by number of years. "Many children, through the strength of the Holy Spirit they have received, have bravely fought for Christ even to the shedding of their blood."<br /><br /><br />Was their Baptism valid? Was their Confirmation valid? <br /><br />If yes, then the answer is, "yes, they're Catholics."<br /><br />Are they well-formed Catholics? Are they in full communion with Holy Mother Church? Apparently, no and no.Franciscannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6312447.post-59056612413303005362011-05-30T11:27:59.368-04:002011-05-30T11:27:59.368-04:00It would be, perhaps, facile to make the statement...It would be, perhaps, facile to make the statement that all of us are at different stages of our journey of faith (though I loathe how overused that imagery is), but I do think the point that you're getting to is spot on. <br /><br />A combination of poor catechesis, the absence of liturgical and ecclesiastical discipline, and the erosion of the markers of our Catholic cultural identity has led to large numbers of Catholics with little or no Catholic sensibility. <br /><br />There is a parochialism to the Church in many areas - with Catholics identifying themselves more with their particular parish than with the larger Body of Christ. "I go to the parish with the contemporary choir," "I go to the parish with the Latin Mass." While diversity, per se, is not a bad thing, there is often little that diverse groups of Catholics can point to and say, "We have this in common."<br /><br />Strengthening catechesis is important, to be sure, but it is only a part of the picture. I laud the recent decision of the Bishops of England and Wales to restore the practice of Friday abstinence - and wish our Bishops would do the same. That cultural demarcation is clear, unifying, and meaningful. Restoring the Holy Days to their proper place in Catholic life would be another step. Identifying places of pilgrimmage and public processions would be others.<br /><br />A restoration of ecclesiastical and liturgical discipline is a third piece of the puzzle. Bishops are reluctant to discipline wayward clergy or parishes that practice liturgical experimentation for a number of reasons. They must be aware that the tactic of non-confrontation has not been at all effective, and start manfully and publicly addressing these situations. Enforcing the norms of liturgical law, rigorously examining religious education and RCIA programs, reintroducing the formerly-common examination of priests every year or every five years, and clipping the wings of those who fail the exams.Tim Fergusonnoreply@blogger.com