• Images
  • Text
  • Find a Couple + Registry
GO
Catholic Weddings

:: docta ::

Hey there! Didn't want to drag that other post on forever. Care for some well-intentioned discussion? I always try to learn more of opinions that challenge mine because I find it helps me to grow.

Quoting you:
" We respect your conservative views yet you continue to try to force your views on us more progressive Catholics.  It is weakening the Church." 

I guess my thought on this is that if there are many that believe, accept and follow what has been held as the true Catholic belief for thousands of years, and some have decided they no longer believe these (due to changing social behaviors, etc) teachings to be true and want to change them....why should the Church as I believe it to be need to change for you? I could say that I believe that your views and changing the Church's teachings to accommodate them would weaken the consistency of the teachings. I'm truly not meaning this to come off snarky, so hopefully it isn't coming off that way. What are your thoughts?

One other quote:
"Yes, there is still only one Roman Catholic Church, but we are headed away from that becaue of several extremely conservative forces in power. "

Can you elaborate? I'm not sure I understand what you're referring to.
«1

Re: :: docta ::

  • doctabroccolidoctabroccoli member
    1000 Comments
    edited December 2011
    Hey -
    So the general gist of what I've been trying to say is that Catholics in the U.S. seem to be split in half over interpretation of doctrine excluding the basic beliefs as outlined in the Creeds.  You have conservative Catholics who take doctrine and follow it, as they see it, word for word.  You have more progressive Catholics who have trouble identifying with some of the older doctrine but still follow the basic beliefs of the faith as outlined in the Creeds.  We currently have very conservative leadership in Rome.  In the recent past (for example, JPII), the leadership was more moderate, and there seemed to be much less separation between members of the Church.  So, at this point, because of the conservative leadership in place, there are a lot of Catholics who feel that the Church is trying to impose doctrine that doesn't mesh well with modern society.  Another big part of it is that, also as a result of more conservative leadership, the Church has been sticking out its neck more into politics, but more progressive Catholics continue to believe of separation of Church and State.

    It's a very complicated issue that's difficult to summarize on a message board.  But I get very frustrated when exceedingly indoctrinated Catholics refuse to acknowledge the fact that there is strife in the Church.
    BabyFruit Ticker
    Waiting to meet the baby broccoli on 5/5/2013!
  • agapecarrieagapecarrie member
    Knottie Warrior 1000 Comments 100 Love Its Combo Breaker
    edited December 2011
    The "separation of church and state" is not a teaching of the church, its a misunderstood idea that people think was in the constitution.

    I will follow God's laws over the government anyway.

    What I've said before already, is that the creed is much broader theologically that reaches into the more detailed doctrine. They are all webbed together. This isn't "interpretation" this is that we believe that the Holy SPirit is preventing the church from teaching error (Matthew 16), You can't have one without the other, because theologically it doesn't make sense. The belief about birth control is very intimately connected to the belief inthe Eucharist...if one believes in one, the only thing that makese sense is belief in the other. This is explained in theology of the body very well.



  • Calypso1977Calypso1977 member
    Knottie Warrior 2500 Comments 25 Love Its First Answer
    edited December 2011
    But I get very frustrated when exceedingly indoctrinated Catholics refuse to acknowledge the fact that there is strife in the Church.

    i consider myself pretty indoctrinated, but i agree that there is defintiely a divide in the church, although ive witnessed many members returning  to some of the older ways, particularly the latin mass.  our latin mass is PACKED on sundays and i know several priests who incorporate parts of the latin into the novus ordo.  this is all in the northeast, a predominantly liberal area.

    however, i dont feel taht the church should change to accomodate the majority.  i think that if people want more flexibility or freedom to support various political or social issues that the church doesnt (ivf, abortion, gay marriage, marriage for clergy, etc.) then they should find a church that fits them rather than expecting the catholic church to change to fit them.
  • doctabroccolidoctabroccoli member
    1000 Comments
    edited December 2011
    In Response to Re: :: docta :::
    [QUOTE]The "separation of church and state" is not a teaching of the church, its a misunderstood idea that people think was in the constitution. I will follow God's laws over the government anyway. What I've said before already, is that the creed is much broader theologically that reaches into the more detailed doctrine. They are all webbed together. This isn't "interpretation" this is that we believe that the Holy SPirit is preventing the church from teaching error (Matthew 16), You can't have one without the other, because theologically it doesn't make sense. The belief about birth control is very intimately connected to the belief inthe Eucharist...if one believes in one, the only thing that makese sense is belief in the other. This is explained in theology of the body very well.
    Posted by agapecarrie[/QUOTE]

    Right, but the other doctrine is often an interpretation of things said in the Bible.  It's not like God came down and carved the Theology of the Body into stone.  No.  It was based on interpretation of the Bible as well as ancient Church teachings.
    BabyFruit Ticker
    Waiting to meet the baby broccoli on 5/5/2013!
  • agapecarrieagapecarrie member
    Knottie Warrior 1000 Comments 100 Love Its Combo Breaker
    edited December 2011
    In Response to Re: :: docta :::
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: :: docta :: : Right, but the other doctrine is often an interpretation of things said in the Bible.  It's not like God came down and carved the Theology of the Body into stone.  No.  It was based on interpretation of the Bible as well as ancient Church teachings.
    Posted by doctabroccoli[/QUOTE]


    You are missing the point. TOB is an explanation of church teaching. By a pope...who is prevented from teaching error. If you actually read it, you will see that it IS God's design of the human person, so in essence, he did "carve it" .

    This isn't "other doctrine" it is intricately weaved into the creed.

    George Wiegel, the pope's biographer states that TOB will help develop every major theme of the creed. TOB explains confession, it explains Eucharist and how its intimately related to marriage. It explains the priesthood.. assumption of Mary, and so on, and how they are all interconnected, to even what you call detailed doctrine.
  • doctabroccolidoctabroccoli member
    1000 Comments
    edited December 2011
    We're going to have to agree to disagree for now (which I knew that's how this would end anyway), because I have a lot of actual work I have to do.  But, do me a favor if you feel so inclined - open your eyes to the division in the Church.  I'm not saying you change your ways or I change my ways.  Just acknowledge the fact that there is division.
    BabyFruit Ticker
    Waiting to meet the baby broccoli on 5/5/2013!
  • agapecarrieagapecarrie member
    Knottie Warrior 1000 Comments 100 Love Its Combo Breaker
    edited December 2011
    In Response to Re: :: docta :::
    [QUOTE]We're going to have to agree to disagree for now (which I knew that's how this would end anyway), because I have a lot of actual work I have to do.  But, do me a favor if you feel so inclined - open your eyes to the division in the Church.  I'm not saying you change your ways or I change my ways.  Just acknowledge the fact that there is division.
    Posted by doctabroccoli[/QUOTE]


    I've already talked about the "division" Its by people who believe in Catholic teaching, and those that dissent. There's no medium when it comes to doctrine. It's either true or it isn't. People that pick and choose what they want to believe and leave others are failing to see that the teaching they do believe in does not make sense without the "other" that they are leaving.  I'm offering TOB has a helpful way to learn about how connected it is.
    If one wants to dissent, fine...but actually learn what you are really dissenting from . As I said before, I use to disagree with some things, then I studied up and learned that I did not know much about it.
  • Riss91Riss91 member
    Eighth Anniversary 1000 Comments 25 Love Its Name Dropper
    edited December 2011
    In Response to Re: :: docta :::
    [QUOTE]  So, at this point, because of the conservative leadership in place, there are a lot of Catholics who feel that the Church is trying to impose doctrine that doesn't mesh well with modern society. 
    Posted by doctabroccoli[/QUOTE]

    I definitely agree there is dissention within the Church most likely due to the differences you described. Where I have trouble is that I (personally) believe modern society expectations should not dictate or affect any changes to my beliefs. So, why should those that feel the Church should change and adapt to what is more acceptable in today's society "win out" over those that want to preserve what the Church was, say 100 years ago? Know what I mean?
  • Riss91Riss91 member
    Eighth Anniversary 1000 Comments 25 Love Its Name Dropper
    edited December 2011
    And I didn't intend this to be a 3-on-1 attack or anything, and if you can't respond until later, that's fine with me :-)
  • edited December 2011
    Posts are always a dead horse by the time I get to them, but I'll make my comments anyway.  First is that TOB is an excellent example of just how not-moderate JPII was.  He confirmed over and over again the same things that Pope Benedict is confirming right now: the sanctity of life, the evil of birth control, and the intense relationship between how we worship and what we believe. Many "progressive" Catholics imagine a huge break between John Paul II's and Benedict XVI's pontificates.  But, Ratzinger was a close and trusted advisor of John Paul II.  In so many ways he is continuing the  agenda of JPII.  Specifically? The new translation of the english liturgy was started by JPII; it's not some pet of Benedict's to "turn back the clock" or some silly nonsense.

    If you feel that the leadership in the Church does not respect the seperation netween Church and state, what you are probably feeling is the call to Catholic's to form and live up to our Catholic identity.  It's really a call to live our faith.  Yes, that means to be so grounded in Church teaching that that teaching has a presence in the public square.  How can we really say that we live our faith if it didn't?  Again, Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI realize the relationship between how we worship and what we believe.  Benedict is working to strengthen our presence in the public square by strengthening our Catholic identity. 

    I don't think any American Catholic is unaware that some of their fellow parishioners live their faith thoroughly and others of their fellow parishioners are "cafeteria Catholics."  And by the way, a "cafeteria Catholic" is a nice way of saying "heretic."  A heretic is "a professed believer who maintains religious opinions contrary to those accepted by his or her church or rejects doctrines prescribed by that church," accodidng to the first listed definition on dictionary.com
     So, there's my acknowledgement of the division.
  • agapecarrieagapecarrie member
    Knottie Warrior 1000 Comments 100 Love Its Combo Breaker
    edited December 2011
    add on about Benedict. He said that he won't be coming out with a lot of new stuff, like JPII. He was just going to develop and expand the understanding of what JPII did. (cause that's going to take a long time itself)!
  • Calypso1977Calypso1977 member
    Knottie Warrior 2500 Comments 25 Love Its First Answer
    edited December 2011
    IMO (and this applies across the board, not just to catholicism) "separation of church and state" was NEVER meant to remove all references to God in our government.  The concept meant that government could not dictate to the people what religion they had to follow or that they even had to follow a religion at all.  its been grossly misused/misinterpreted.
  • Riss91Riss91 member
    Eighth Anniversary 1000 Comments 25 Love Its Name Dropper
    edited December 2011
    In Response to Re: :: docta :::
    [QUOTE]IMO (and this applies across the board, not just to catholicism) "separation of church and state" was NEVER meant to remove all references to God in our government.  The concept meant that government could not dictate to the people what religion they had to follow or that they even had to follow a religion at all.  its been grossly misused/misinterpreted.
    Posted by Calypso1977[/QUOTE]

    YES TIMES INFINITY! It's frustrating how many people misunderstand that!
  • edited December 2011
    I am not going to be able to eloquently state this, on a message board, but I am going to try my best.

    Basically, I'm with docta on this.  I attend Catholic church, grew up in a Catholic church, and am getting married in a Catholic church.  However, many of the issues I have with the doctrine are not things that come from the bible; they are things that have been interpreted over the years.  It is those interpretations that I often disagree with and would like to see modernized.

    What I have a hard time with on this board in particular is the impression I get, especially from agapecarrie, that for some reason because I have thoughtfully and moreally considered my faith and come to a different conclusion than she has or than official church doctrine has, that I somehow don't count as Catholic.  Or that because my church is very liberal, that we are somehow not celebrating Christ correctly.  Gwendolyncare calling people like me heretics and using the offensive term "cafeteria Catholic" does not make me feel welcome either.

    So overall, I guess my main issue with the divide that docta speaks of in the church (and on this board) is that I am made to feel "less-than"  and excluded by those who are more conservative than me, where I believe we should make the church as inclusive as possible.
  • Riss91Riss91 member
    Eighth Anniversary 1000 Comments 25 Love Its Name Dropper
    edited December 2011
    Meg - I often feel stigmatized by the general public because I don't agree with what "modern society" deams acceptable. It's not easy, and I understand your pain.

    It is very difficult to have completely opposiing standpoints on very big issues and be "forced" under one umbrella. So, just as you feel there is a way to interpreting something the way you see it, others feel their interpretation is more correct. We have to allow that everyone is entitled to believe what they believe. But, it does become very personal when someone that identifies themselves as Catholic acts and behaves in a way that another would think is completely against the Church. We want to defend our faith - as we see it.

    Some believe there are grey areas and others simply do not. Not sure what can truly be done about it.

    It is really difficult to have a loving tone in your discussion when you feel something you believe so strongly in is being desecrated. And that's from both sides of the equation.
  • edited December 2011
    Riss, you are so kind in this discussion!  I'll admit to getting frustrated and allowing that to show too much. 

    Meg, could you tell me why you want to be a part of a group that espouses absolutes when you believe in reletivism?  No hate or judgement or harshness in this question.  Just sincerity.  There are many organizations that have the beautiful buildings and the elaborate ritual of Catholicism, but that don't ask its members to believe and follow the same thing.  Sincerely, why continue in the Catholic Church when you don't believe her teachings to be True?
  • edited December 2011
    In Response to Re: :: docta :::

    Riss, I appreciate the respectful reply, and especially appreciate noting that you sometimes feel stigmatized by modern society.  I occasionally do for my fatih, but not often, so I appreciate being reminded that being stigmatized for any reason, especially one as important as religion, is difficult.  I am going to elaborate on my feelings here, but please don't take them as me being upset - I truly find this to be an interesting discussion.

    [QUOTE] It is really difficult to have a loving tone in your discussion when you feel something you believe so strongly in is being desecrated. And that's from both sides of the equation.
    Posted by Riss91[/QUOTE]

    I guess this is where my main disappointment is.  I thoughtfully considered my faith and came to one conclusion, but I can honestly say that I do not believe the church is desecrated by others have reached different conclusions.  I assume that all are acting with integrity and true to what their moral conscience and understanding of God leads them to; that people believe that I desecrate the church is very disappointing and hurtful.
  • edited December 2011
    In Response to Re: :: docta :::
    [QUOTE]Riss, you are so kind in this discussion!  I'll admit to getting frustrated and allowing that to show too much.  Meg, could you tell me why you want to be a part of a group that espouses absolutes when you believe in reletivism?  No hate or judgement or harshness in this question.  Just sincerity.  There are many organizations that have the beautiful buildings and the elaborate ritual of Catholicism, but that don't ask its members to believe and follow the same thing.  Sincerely, why continue in the Catholic Church when you don't believe her teachings to be True?
    Posted by gwendolynclare[/QUOTE]

    This is a hard one to explain, but a valid question.  First, I do find that I believe what I consider to be the foundations of the faith.  I also worship in a Catholic manner in a Catholic church, and it is what I find meaningful to me, for a variety of reasons.

    Additionally, the (Catholic) church I attend seems to espouse a lot of what you refer to as reletivism, so it has led me to feel welcome in a community and solid in my identification as Catholic.  As an (admittedly isolated and specific) example, in our NFP session of our pre-marital preparation, NFP was introduced to us as what the church teaches, and the reasons for that were well-communicated.  However, it was couched within a discussion that the church always calls on us to learn the church teaching, but then follow our own moral conscience.

    Perhaps my chruch is off-base, but I cannot believe it is the only one.  And it is a large parish, so there must be many Catholics who feel as I do, or they would not attend such a parish.  The idea that there is no variation of beliefs in the Catholic church seems to me to be untrue, and I, along with (it seems) docta, get frustrated when it is suggested that my particular variant of beliefs is not "Catholic enough."
  • edited December 2011
    Yes, I'm aware that entire parishes - probably even entire diocese - don't authentically practice the faith.  And it baffles me.  But then, knowing that you (and your parish) don't conform to the beliefs of the Church, you can hardly be upset with me for making you feel uncomfortable, even if many others who profess Catholicism don't make you uncomfortable.  I should really apologize.  I'm really saying to you what I don't (yet) have the courage to say to my brother, who worships in a Church that doesn't have kneelers or a tabernacle in the sanctuary, and who jokes about getting snipped since he already has four children.  Mind if I count you towards practice and no hard feelings, Meg?
  • Riss91Riss91 member
    Eighth Anniversary 1000 Comments 25 Love Its Name Dropper
    edited December 2011
    In Response to Re: :: docta :::
    [QUOTE]I I guess this is where my main disappointment is.  I thoughtfully considered my faith and came to one conclusion, but I can honestly say that I do not believe the church is desecrated by others have reached different conclusions.  I assume that all are acting with integrity and true to what their moral conscience and understanding of God leads them to; that people believe that I desecrate the church is very disappointing and hurtful.
    Posted by Meg1036[/QUOTE]

    Hoping you realize I wasn't directing that at "you" personally, but as a whole. I think there are ways to discuss and debate in a positive, thoughtful and considerate ways. And certain topics that really do not need to escalate. But there are some "bigger" issues where I can see having opposing beliefs can turn into the feeling of desecration. And perhaps desecration is a strong way of putting it.

    I will give you a small example. I don't believe anyone but a priest should be giving out communion. I feel that the eucharist is the most holy thing in the world and to have "everyday" people handling it, is a desecration of it - to me. Now, I personally try to explain my arguments in a firm but friendly way - but some topics escalate really quickly (ie, BCP/abortion) because there is a lot of passion behind it.
  • agapecarrieagapecarrie member
    Knottie Warrior 1000 Comments 100 Love Its Combo Breaker
    edited December 2011
    In Response to Re: :: docta :::
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: :: docta :: : Riss, I appreciate the respectful reply, and especially appreciate noting that you sometimes feel stigmatized by modern society.  I occasionally do for my fatih, but not often, so I appreciate being reminded that being stigmatized for any reason, especially one as important as religion, is difficult.  I am going to elaborate on my feelings here, but please don't take them as me being upset - I truly find this to be an interesting discussion. I guess this is where my main disappointment is.  I thoughtfully considered my faith and came to one conclusion, but I can honestly say that I do not believe the church is desecrated by others have reached different conclusions.  I assume that all are acting with integrity and true to what their moral conscience and understanding of God leads them to; that people believe that I desecrate the church is very disappointing and hurtful.
    Posted by Meg1036[/QUOTE]

    We are called to form our conscience along with the teachings of the church. If we make up our own versions of right and wrong, we do what Eve did... try to become like god...That was the introduction of relativism. God would never lead someone into beliefs that are against the church that he founded. It is scripture that the church is the pillar and foundation of truth. In Matthew 16, CHrist gave the keys to peter and said "upon this rock I will build my church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven". So if you disagree with doctrine, you believe that  the gates of hell DID indeed prevail against the church...that satan is deceiving, the church is teaching error, and that the Holy SPirit didn't have the power to prevent that from happening. That is what I find disrespectful and hurtful. I  don't remember ever using the term desecration except when someone was going to vow before GOd in church to sacrament and admitted they would be lying.

    I keep trying to explain this...when you trully study these issues more in depth,you see that they are all interconnected. You can't have one without the other, because it makes no logical sense.  I've talked to so many people who say they have given the issue consideration, but it turns out, all they did was listen to popular opinion and join them. I'm not saying you did that, but have you read TOB? Have you first approached the subject from a stand point that if the church teaches it, it must be right, so I have to find and discover where I'm not making the connection....or is it instead...I already believe the church is wrong, what do the people around me think? well, that's that. 

    The answers are there. and they are more beautiful than you could ever imagine. and life giving. And freeing!  It was so freeing to discover that I didn't have to be my own pope, and follow the church of "agapecarrie".
  • Riss91Riss91 member
    Eighth Anniversary 1000 Comments 25 Love Its Name Dropper
    edited December 2011
    Well, yes - the more you research and study - the stronger you will be in your faith. And I agree that all the dots do connect and it just seems so plain as day.

    But not everyone is there. And the world around us offers many obstacles towards finding and learning the truth.

    Less than 10 years ago, I was a completely different "Catholic" that spouted the same thoughts of the church keeping up with the times. Luckily, I had an amazing, kind, warm, intelligent, knowlegable boyfriend that I could fling my "criticisms" of the Church at - and he would explain WHY the beliefs exist. Where did the originate? How does one link to the next?

    I was really fortunate to have someone like that. I truly believe that if my questions (however aggressive they might have been) were met with equal aggression and insistence, I would have immediately lost interest in learning. I would have been turned off and continued down that path.

    I really appreciate being able to share, exchange ideas and possibly learn and grow here and I'm thankful for the ladies in this thread for being mild-mannered and polite.
  • lisa89760lisa89760 member
    Fourth Anniversary 500 Comments
    edited December 2011
    In Response to Re: :: docta :::
    [QUOTE]Yes, I'm aware that entire parishes - probably even entire diocese - don't authentically practice the faith.  And it baffles me.  But then, knowing that you (and your parish) don't conform to the beliefs of the Church, you can hardly be upset with me for making you feel uncomfortable, even if many others who profess Catholicism don't make you uncomfortable.  I should really apologize.  I'm really saying to you what I don't (yet) have the courage to say to my brother, who worships in a Church that doesn't have kneelers or a tabernacle in the sanctuary, and who jokes about getting snipped since he already has four children.  Mind if I count you towards practice and no hard feelings, Meg?
    Posted by gwendolynclare[/QUOTE]

    I'm gonna step in here and ask a few questions because I'm a little confused.  My church doesn't have kneelers...but it still recognized as Catholic church so if kneelers were such a huge thing that the Catholic Church absolutely needed than why wouldn't they all have them?  I don't mean to focus on just the kneelers but if certain things not being done or being done would make a mass "less catholic" than how are church's permitted to do them?

    I guess I never understood there were such HUGE differences in churches.  I've been to quite a few churches in the metro detroit area and I've never felt out of place. 

    I guess I'm in the belief that people are free to worship the way they want.  And the most important thing is that people are living the christian/catholic beliefs and are good people.  I don't feel any less catholic than anyone else because my church doesn't have kneelers. 
    August 2011 sig challenge: Honeymoon!! (We bought a boat!!)
    Photobucket
  • edited December 2011
    In Response to Re: :: docta :::
    [QUOTE]Yes, I'm aware that entire parishes - probably even entire diocese - don't authentically practice the faith.  And it baffles me.  But then, knowing that you (and your parish) don't conform to the beliefs of the Church, you can hardly be upset with me for making you feel uncomfortable, even if many others who profess Catholicism don't make you uncomfortable.  I should really apologize.  I'm really saying to you what I don't (yet) have the courage to say to my brother, who worships in a Church that doesn't have kneelers or a tabernacle in the sanctuary, and who jokes about getting snipped since he already has four children.  Mind if I count you towards practice and no hard feelings, Meg?
    Posted by gwendolynclare[/QUOTE]

    No hard feelings.  I understand where you are coming from, and am glad to see that I have mostly gotten the same consideration here.

    Now, like docta before me, I need to return to my actual work.
  • agapecarrieagapecarrie member
    Knottie Warrior 1000 Comments 100 Love Its Combo Breaker
    edited December 2011
    In Response to Re: :: docta :::
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: :: docta :: : I'm gonna step in here and ask a few questions because I'm a little confused.  My church doesn't have kneelers...but it still recognized as Catholic church so if kneelers were such a huge thing that the Catholic Church absolutely needed than why wouldn't they all have them?  I don't mean to focus on just the kneelers but if certain things not being done or being done would make a mass "less catholic" than how are church's permitted to do them? I guess I never understood there were such HUGE differences in churches.  I've been to quite a few churches in the metro detroit area and I've never felt out of place.  I guess I'm in the belief that people are free to worship the way they want.  And the most important thing is that people are living the christian/catholic beliefs and are good people.  I don't feel any less catholic than anyone else because my church doesn't have kneelers. 
    Posted by lisa89760[/QUOTE]

    They really don't have permission. But I want to address something different first.

    There is a difference between doctrine and discipline. Doctrine are the truths and teachings of the faith. (Trinity, One Baptism, Eucharist, and from there moral beliefs-- Charity, abortion, b/c, etc). Discipline is the practice of those...canon law, rubrics of the mass, communal penance (Friday Lent rule).  Disciplines can be different, and evolve--- such as the ordinary form of the mass, and the different rites and Eastern churches within the scope of being under the Pope.
    This is where the messiness of the discipline and practice comes in. While the church is doctrinally the same, and in essence, the celebration of the mass is the central part of our faith, where everything comes from, the way that it is practiced is changeable.  However, the mass itself within rites are supposed to be mostly the same-- the small differences can be music, homilies, optional prayers, etc. But most of the mass has theological meaning behind even some of the smallest detail, such as the postures..including kneeling.

    During times of more drastic and quick change, carrying it out can get really messy, and lots of people fall short in teaching "why"s. It leaves people confused, and thinking that if some things can change, so can others...such as, if the language can change, so can the posture. This however is incorrect.

    AFter any council, the church goes through a rough adjustment period. What's happening now is  that things are getting reigned in. While some churches are choosing to disobey, some are complying. Some have made more permananent choices such as the structure of their church that can't really do a lot to comply in that regard.  Lots of little issues that shouldn't be happening are not taken issue with because there are bigger fish to fry... (pun intended). and that part is true.
  • Riss91Riss91 member
    Eighth Anniversary 1000 Comments 25 Love Its Name Dropper
    edited December 2011
    In Response to Re: :: docta :::
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: :: docta :: : I'm gonna step in here and ask a few questions because I'm a little confused.  My church doesn't have kneelers...but it still recognized as Catholic church so if kneelers were such a huge thing that the Catholic Church absolutely needed than why wouldn't they all have them?  I don't mean to focus on just the kneelers but if certain things not being done or being done would make a mass "less catholic" than how are church's permitted to do them? I guess I never understood there were such HUGE differences in churches.  I've been to quite a few churches in the metro detroit area and I've never felt out of place.  I guess I'm in the belief that people are free to worship the way they want.  And the most important thing is that people are living the christian/catholic beliefs and are good people.  I don't feel any less catholic than anyone else because my church doesn't have kneelers. 
    Posted by lisa89760[/QUOTE]

    Unfortunately, mass can vary greatly from church to church. Certain things may not make a big difference, but others can give the wrong impression to the congregation.

    I've never been to a church without kneelers, but I suppose the problem with that would be that you don't actually kneel to pray? Perhaps you stand instead? That might not be a horrendous issue, but kneeling while praying is pretty basic. Are your prayers any less because of it? Not necessarily - as long as you are focused and reverent. You're not any LESS Catholic for it, that's for sure.

    I think one problem is that one minor difference can snowball into bigger issues and it's important to uphold the proper traditions and practices.  Yes, everyone ca worship the way they want - but in some ways it can actually change the intention or the focus, so you lose some of the true faith.
  • lisa89760lisa89760 member
    Fourth Anniversary 500 Comments
    edited December 2011
    In Response to Re: :: docta :::
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: :: docta :: : Unfortunately, mass can vary greatly from church to church. Certain things may not make a big difference, but others can give the wrong impression to the congregation. I've never been to a church without kneelers, but I suppose the problem with that would be that you don't actually kneel to pray? Perhaps you stand instead? That might not be a horrendous issue, but kneeling while praying is pretty basic. Are your prayers any less because of it? Not necessarily - as long as you are focused and reverent. You're not any LESS Catholic for it, that's for sure. I think one problem is that one minor difference can snowball into bigger issues and it's important to uphold the proper traditions and practices.  Yes, everyone ca worship the way they want - but in some ways it can actually change the intention or the focus, so you lose some of the true faith.
    Posted by Riss91[/QUOTE]

    I agree with this.  When I was younger I used to tell my mom that we learned about a saint (St thomas I believe, but I forget now!! that's bad) that would worship outside so that's where I wanted to worship (aka just play outside).  Obviously this is a dramatic example as I was like 8 when I used to say that...but still I understand that some people can change the intention of the worship.

    Thanks for answering my questions!! The kneeler thing was always a different thing...I've noticed in newer churches like the one I'm getting married in.  I'll also be the first to admit that I not a very "traditional" catholic.  I've never been to a latin mass, but I was raised in the church since I was born and I am glad that I am marrying someone that is the same faith as me! 
    August 2011 sig challenge: Honeymoon!! (We bought a boat!!)
    Photobucket
  • edited December 2011
    In Response to Re: :: docta :::
    [QUOTE] but I suppose the problem with that would be that you don't actually kneel to pray? Perhaps you stand instead? That might not be a horrendous issue, but kneeling while praying is pretty basic. [/QUOTE]

    About the kneelers - most who feel strongly about them, feel strongly that the congregation should kneel during consecration ... because it's sacred and intense and profound.  We stand for the gospel and we stand for the creed.  We stand then (in part) to show the importance of the gospel and the creed.  But this is the consecration and it's kind of a bigger deal than the gospel or creed (which are a bigger deal than the other readings or the homily, etc, during which we sit) and so we kneel to show our reverence for this big, profound, important thing.

    Certainly one could kneel without kneelers, and I've definitely done it before at churches that didn't have them, but, imo, for a Catholic church to not have kneelers sends a message about the level of importance they place on transubstantiation.  And it's a hard teaching.  So if it's not that important, why believe it?  This whole mess is further compounded by pew studies that show that high percentages of practising Catholics don't believe it.  The Eucharist is doctrinal, like agape said, and the kneelers in church are not doctrinal.  But everything has consequences, and I shudder thinking that fewer people who identify as Catholic believe in the Real Presence because a few decades ago, when their church was built, someone thought it would be (what word can I use here? fun? cool? pc? something) to leave the kneelers out.
  • Calypso1977Calypso1977 member
    Knottie Warrior 2500 Comments 25 Love Its First Answer
    edited December 2011
    kneeling is another huge difference between the latin and the novus ordo.  you spend a significantly larger amount of time kneeling in the latin.
  • agapecarrieagapecarrie member
    Knottie Warrior 1000 Comments 100 Love Its Combo Breaker
    edited December 2011
    interesting side note...the USA has an indult to kneel more than the general prescribed norm. I could be totally wrong about where it is, but I think its after the memorial acclamation...
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards