Some neo-Catholics are the Catholic version of Protestant Fundamentalists.
#21
(04-29-2014, 03:05 PM)J Michael Wrote: Well, StrictCatholicGirl , you beat me to it with your question, "What is a neo Catholic"?  "Neo" means "new".  Catholic, is, well....Catholic :).  When is someone a new Catholic and when are they not?  I was baptized/chrismated/communed 13 years ago.  Does that make me one of those odious ( :eyeroll: ) "neo-Catholics"?  Or is it that I just do not put the word "traditional" before Catholic when I refer to myself?  C'mon, folks......!

The number of gross generalizations in the OP was pretty astounding, really.  One could, without too much effort and with a little tweaking here and there, turn most of that post around and make the same claims about so-called "trads", or whatever.

Don't get me wrong (well, I guess you can if you want  :grin: ), I'm not saying there isn't plenty wrong in the Church.  But, when was there not plenty wrong in the Church, since about 100A.D. or thereabouts?  Sometimes, yes, just sometimes, it can be really useful and maybe even spiritually beneficial to accentuate the positive and stop bitching and moaning about all the negative (or that which is perceived to be negative).

Just my paltry 2-cents' worth... :) :)

J. Michael, I know you were talking to SCG, but I "gotta" jump in here and say pretty much what I said above:  a "neo-Catholic" is Catholic who truly does want to be a good Catholic, who doesn't have a rebellious spirit, but who doesn't understand the errors in the post-conciliar presentation of Catholic teaching outlined on the Traditional Catholicism 101 page, and who doesn't understand (or who does understand but doesn't care about) the problems with the changes in the Sacramental rites. See the link in my sig line :)

I agree that there've always been problems in the Church. She's got a human element to Her that pretty much makes that par for the course. But She's never -- not even during the Arian crisis -- undergone anything like what She's going through now (see http://www.fisheaters.com/johnxxiii.html -- and, especially, check out the stats at the bottom of that page). What's going on now has been in the making since the so-called "Enlightenment," and we've been warned against it for a few hundred years now, esp. with Pascendi Dominici Gregis. Seriously, we've got big heap trouble. Just think about how much things have changed in just the last 50 years -- 50 years out of the 2,000 year History of Holy Mother Church.




Reply
#22
(04-29-2014, 04:24 PM)Vox Clamantis Wrote:
(04-29-2014, 03:05 PM)J Michael Wrote: Well, StrictCatholicGirl , you beat me to it with your question, "What is a neo Catholic"?  "Neo" means "new".  Catholic, is, well....Catholic :).  When is someone a new Catholic and when are they not?  I was baptized/chrismated/communed 13 years ago.  Does that make me one of those odious ( :eyeroll: ) "neo-Catholics"?  Or is it that I just do not put the word "traditional" before Catholic when I refer to myself?  C'mon, folks......!

The number of gross generalizations in the OP was pretty astounding, really.  One could, without too much effort and with a little tweaking here and there, turn most of that post around and make the same claims about so-called "trads", or whatever.

Don't get me wrong (well, I guess you can if you want  :grin: ), I'm not saying there isn't plenty wrong in the Church.  But, when was there not plenty wrong in the Church, since about 100A.D. or thereabouts?  Sometimes, yes, just sometimes, it can be really useful and maybe even spiritually beneficial to accentuate the positive and stop bitching and moaning about all the negative (or that which is perceived to be negative).

Just my paltry 2-cents' worth... :) :)

J. Michael, I know you were talking to SCG, but I "gotta" jump in here and say pretty much what I said above:  a "neo-Catholic" is Catholic who truly does want to be a good Catholic, who doesn't have a rebellious spirit, but who doesn't understand the errors in the post-conciliar presentation of Catholic teaching outlined on the Traditional Catholicism 101 page, and who doesn't understand (or who does understand but doesn't care about) the problems with the changes in the Sacramental rites. See the link in my sig line :)

I agree that there've always been problems in the Church. She's got a human element to Her that pretty much makes that par for the course. But She's never -- not even during the Arian crisis -- undergone anything like what She's going through now (see http://www.fisheaters.com/johnxxiii.html -- and, especially, check out the stats at the bottom of that page). What's going on now has been in the making since the so-called "Enlightenment," and we've been warned against it for a few hundred years now, esp. with Pascendi Dominici Gregis. Seriously, we've got big heap trouble. Just think about how much things have changed in just the last 50 years -- 50 years out of the 2,000 year History of Holy Mother Church.

There's no question that much has changed in the Church in the last 50 years, and that we're in a "world of hurt" (pun intended, thank you  :grin: ).  Heck, much has changed in the whole world in the last 50 years, and the Church, made up of fallen humans, can't remain immune to it--would that it could!  But, if one believes that what happens in life is either God's will or permitted by Him to happen, well then...

When one has a boil, it usually gets inflamed and swollen and sore before it bursts and finally heals.  Perhaps we are approaching, if not already in, that inflammation stage, that point where things feel horrible before they begin to get better.  I don't know, cuz i aint no prophet  :grin: (though I know someone who claimed to be just that---eeeek!)!  What I do know, though, (well, at least I'm pretty sure of, anyway) is that the Church is still THE Church, that despite the bickering and pettiness and disagreements it is still ONE and HOLY and CATHOLIC and APOSTOLIC, and that no matter the trouble and strife we currently experience, "...the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."  If I didn't believe that, there'd be little point in my continuing to be a Catholic of ANY variety, let alone one who tries to follow the faith faithfully. 

It's been said by many that prayer is our most powerful weapon--so, let's pray more and bitch and moan and judge unto condemnation others who disagree with us.... less!
Reply
#23
(04-29-2014, 04:53 PM)J Michael Wrote: There's no question that much has changed in the Church in the last 50 years, and that we're in a "world of hurt" (pun intended, thank you  :grin: ).  Heck, much has changed in the whole world in the last 50 years, and the Church, made up of fallen humans, can't remain immune to it--would that it could!   But, if one believes that what happens in life is either God's will or permitted by Him to happen, well then...

When one has a boil, it usually gets inflamed and swollen and sore before it bursts and finally heals.  Perhaps we are approaching, if not already in, that inflammation stage, that point where things feel horrible before they begin to get better.  I don't know, cuz i aint no prophet  :grin: (though I know someone who claimed to be just that---eeeek!)!  What I do know, though, (well, at least I'm pretty sure of, anyway) is that the Church is still THE Church, that despite the bickering and pettiness and disagreements it is still ONE and HOLY and CATHOLIC and APOSTOLIC, and that no matter the trouble and strife we currently experience, "...the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."  If I didn't believe that, there'd be little point in my continuing to be a Catholic of ANY variety, let alone one who tries to follow the faith faithfully. 

It's been said by many that prayer is our most powerful weapon--so, let's pray more and bitch and moan and judge unto condemnation others who disagree with us.... less!

I hope we're headed toward the healing stage; time will tell on that one!  But as to "to happen, [and so,] well then...." -- God passively allows all sorts of bad things, but His allowing them doesn't make them less bad, anything less than something to try to correct, KWIM? God allows Just Wars to happen, too, but the soldiers on the "Just side" still have go grab their rifles and go.

Me, I'm not a sedevacantist (neither are most people here), so I obviously believe the Church is One, True, Holy, and Apostolic and that the gates of Hell will never prevail -- which doesn't mean the Evil One won't be trying to prevail nonetheless, and when he makes his attempts, we have to fight him.

As to the boil analogy: if we have a nasty old boil, aside from waiting for it to burst so it can finally heal, other options, depending on the boil, might include, say keeping the area clean, lancing, or antibiotics. If God's passive Will has allowed what we're enduring (and that is true on its face), that means we were screwing up in the first place, so what we need to to do now is to not screw up, worship Him in a manner befitting Him, spreading the true teachings of His Church, etc.

I definitely agree that we should be praying more than bitching -- but also understand that folks need to kvetch once in a while. When you're, in essence, getting crapped on and, more importantly, are watching the human element of the Church -- the font of Western civilization -- imploding all around you, people have to talk about it, and that's fine.  It's a good thing to get things off one's chest, to talk and know you're not alone with your frustrations, and so forth. But as to "judging unto condemnation" no Catholic has the right to judge another Catholic's soul, let alone "unto condemnation." That sort of talk won't fly here on this forum (assuming I see it. I'm the only Mod right now, so things get by me. Alas!)  If trads aren't approaching others with this sort of attitude in mind, we're lost:  http://www.fisheaters.com/conversionoftheheart.html

 
Reply
#24
(04-28-2014, 11:16 PM)Vox Clamantis Wrote:
(04-28-2014, 10:37 PM)Catholic-Booklady Wrote: A lot of people don't understand what distributism is; some confuse it with Marxism; which ironically it is the opposite.

Vox, I was not aware that Fish Eaters was help in low esteem by these sites.    

Oh yes, very much so. They make it really, really hard for me to get links, they scare people away from this place, the diss the entire website because someone (someone else, someone other than me, who runs this place) says something on the forum they don't like (and, quite possibly, that I don't like!) -- though, of course, people at CAF can say all sorts of ridiculous, anti-Catholic things but that doesn't make the Catholic Answers apostolate any less wondrous in any of the neo-cons' eyes!

I'd say that they hate the TLM, but I've come to think that what the real, deep down, bottom line problem that will ultimately divide the human element of the Church further, in the end (and I mean that phrase literally), in a "when push comes to shove" way and the Noahide Laws are instituted, is the matter of Jewish-Catholic relations. I'm not afraid to talk about what's in the Talmud, about AIPAC, etc., and even though I do so without a whiff of racism (I loathe racism!), it's not OK. It's simply "not OK" to speak the Truth about Jewish-Catholic History, the post-Temple Jewish religion, the Noahide Laws, etc. Anyone who dares do so is cut off like a gangrenous limb. So, here I am.
Good grief.  I didn't know they were so vindictive.
Reply
#25
(04-29-2014, 04:53 PM)J Michael Wrote: There's no question that much has changed in the Church in the last 50 years, and that we're in a "world of hurt" (pun intended, thank you  :grin: ).  Heck, much has changed in the whole world in the last 50 years, and the Church, made up of fallen humans, can't remain immune to it--would that it could!   But, if one believes that what happens in life is either God's will or permitted by Him to happen, well then...

But I believe the Church should NOT be changing with the world. That's why it's the rock, that's why the official language of the Church is Latin, a dead language. If the language is dead it won't be adapted and changing with the times. One really needs to ask themselves are Biblical truths absolute or relative. If Truths are absolute then they don't need to be adapted to the world. If Truths are relative then it doesn't matter.

Now you also mentioned God's will, excellent. In the Old Testament there is story after story about people being disobedient to God's will and God giving people over to their desires. I would say the Church is mirroring the 12 tribes of Israel just before the tribes split and the Temple was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar.
Reply
#26
(04-29-2014, 03:05 PM)J Michael Wrote: Well, StrictCatholicGirl , you beat me to it with your question, "What is a neo Catholic"?  "Neo" means "new".  Catholic, is, well....Catholic :).  When is someone a new Catholic and when are they not?  I was baptized/chrismated/communed 13 years ago.  Does that make me one of those odious ( :eyeroll: ) "neo-Catholics"?  Or is it that I just do not put the word "traditional" before Catholic when I refer to myself?  C'mon, folks......!

The number of gross generalizations in the OP was pretty astounding, really.  One could, without too much effort and with a little tweaking here and there, turn most of that post around and make the same claims about so-called "trads", or whatever.

Don't get me wrong (well, I guess you can if you want  :grin: ), I'm not saying there isn't plenty wrong in the Church.  But, when was there not plenty wrong in the Church, since about 100A.D. or thereabouts?  Sometimes, yes, just sometimes, it can be really useful and maybe even spiritually beneficial to accentuate the positive and stop bitching and moaning about all the negative (or that which is perceived to be negative).

Just my paltry 2-cents' worth... :) :)

I know where you are coming from. And I even mention in the original post my consciousness of the gross generalizations I was presenting. The sad reality is, these persons do exist, and they are often very vitriolic. I was accused by somebody of 'leading souls away from the Church', 'of attacking the Church', of 'possibly being a Freemason' (lol, usually it's Trads who are obsessed with masonry), and of heresy and schism. He then said he felt I complained too much! He intimated he didn't just believe in the pseudo-infallible nature of the CCC, but also believed this extended to the Vatican website! Seriously! It was him who prompted me to write this original post.
Reply
#27
(04-30-2014, 06:10 AM)CaptCrunch73 Wrote:
(04-29-2014, 04:53 PM)J Michael Wrote: There's no question that much has changed in the Church in the last 50 years, and that we're in a "world of hurt" (pun intended, thank you  :grin: ).  Heck, much has changed in the whole world in the last 50 years, and the Church, made up of fallen humans, can't remain immune to it--would that it could!   But, if one believes that what happens in life is either God's will or permitted by Him to happen, well then...

But I believe the Church should NOT be changing with the world. That's why it's the rock, that's why the official language of the Church is Latin, a dead language. If the language is dead it won't be adapted and changing with the times. One really needs to ask themselves are Biblical truths absolute or relative. If Truths are absolute then they don't need to be adapted to the world. If Truths are relative then it doesn't matter.

Now you also mentioned God's will, excellent. In the Old Testament there is story after story about people being disobedient to God's will and God giving people over to their desires. I would say the Church is mirroring the 12 tribes of Israel just before the tribes split and the Temple was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar.

I hope I didn't infer or imply that I believe that the Church *should* be changing with the world, or that Truth is relative!  If I did, I was wrong to do so and certainly didn't mean to.

Your analogy of the 12 tribes, etc. is not at all a bad one.  How accurate it is, only time will tell.
Reply
#28
(04-30-2014, 08:57 AM)Miles Immaculatae Wrote:
(04-29-2014, 03:05 PM)J Michael Wrote: Well, StrictCatholicGirl , you beat me to it with your question, "What is a neo Catholic"?  "Neo" means "new".  Catholic, is, well....Catholic :).  When is someone a new Catholic and when are they not?  I was baptized/chrismated/communed 13 years ago.  Does that make me one of those odious ( :eyeroll: ) "neo-Catholics"?  Or is it that I just do not put the word "traditional" before Catholic when I refer to myself?  C'mon, folks......!

The number of gross generalizations in the OP was pretty astounding, really.  One could, without too much effort and with a little tweaking here and there, turn most of that post around and make the same claims about so-called "trads", or whatever.

Don't get me wrong (well, I guess you can if you want  :grin: ), I'm not saying there isn't plenty wrong in the Church.  But, when was there not plenty wrong in the Church, since about 100A.D. or thereabouts?  Sometimes, yes, just sometimes, it can be really useful and maybe even spiritually beneficial to accentuate the positive and stop bitching and moaning about all the negative (or that which is perceived to be negative).

Just my paltry 2-cents' worth... :) :)

I know where you are coming from. And I even mention in the original post my consciousness of the gross generalizations I was presenting. The sad reality is, these persons do exist, and they are often very vitriolic. I was accused by somebody of 'leading souls away from the Church', 'of attacking the Church', of 'possibly being a Freemason' (lol, usually it's Trads who are obsessed with masonry), and of heresy and schism. He then said he felt I complained too much! He intimated he didn't just believe in the pseudo-infallible nature of the CCC, but also believed this extended to the Vatican website! Seriously! It was him who prompted me to write this original post.

I must have missed the part in your OP where you mention your "...consciousness of the gross generalizations...".  Sorry 'bout that!  But it does tend to highlight the fact that the generalizations themselves may have overshadowed your admission of your awareness of them.  Oh well....

Unfortunately, there are vindictive and vitriolic people in every group, in every walk of life, on virtually every side of every issue.  One can choose to argue with them, thus, in a sense, validating them, or one can offer it up, pray for them and a softening of their heart, and.....move on.  Given who and what I am, unfortunately, all too often I choose the first course, and it's rarely a good thing....
Reply
#29
(04-29-2014, 05:56 PM)Vox Clamantis Wrote:
(04-29-2014, 04:53 PM)J Michael Wrote: There's no question that much has changed in the Church in the last 50 years, and that we're in a "world of hurt" (pun intended, thank you  :grin: ).  Heck, much has changed in the whole world in the last 50 years, and the Church, made up of fallen humans, can't remain immune to it--would that it could!   But, if one believes that what happens in life is either God's will or permitted by Him to happen, well then...

When one has a boil, it usually gets inflamed and swollen and sore before it bursts and finally heals.  Perhaps we are approaching, if not already in, that inflammation stage, that point where things feel horrible before they begin to get better.  I don't know, cuz i aint no prophet  :grin: (though I know someone who claimed to be just that---eeeek!)!  What I do know, though, (well, at least I'm pretty sure of, anyway) is that the Church is still THE Church, that despite the bickering and pettiness and disagreements it is still ONE and HOLY and CATHOLIC and APOSTOLIC, and that no matter the trouble and strife we currently experience, "...the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."  If I didn't believe that, there'd be little point in my continuing to be a Catholic of ANY variety, let alone one who tries to follow the faith faithfully. 

It's been said by many that prayer is our most powerful weapon--so, let's pray more and bitch and moan and judge unto condemnation others who disagree with us.... less!

I hope we're headed toward the healing stage; time will tell on that one!  But as to "to happen, [and so,] well then...." -- God passively allows all sorts of bad things, but His allowing them doesn't make them less bad, anything less than something to try to correct, KWIM? God allows Just Wars to happen, too, but the soldiers on the "Just side" still have go grab their rifles and go.

Me, I'm not a sedevacantist (neither are most people here), so I obviously believe the Church is One, True, Holy, and Apostolic and that the gates of Hell will never prevail -- which doesn't mean the Evil One won't be trying to prevail nonetheless, and when he makes his attempts, we have to fight him.

As to the boil analogy: if we have a nasty old boil, aside from waiting for it to burst so it can finally heal, other options, depending on the boil, might include, say keeping the area clean, lancing, or antibiotics. If God's passive Will has allowed what we're enduring (and that is true on its face), that means we were screwing up in the first place, so what we need to to do now is to not screw up, worship Him in a manner befitting Him, spreading the true teachings of His Church, etc.

I definitely agree that we should be praying more than bitching -- but also understand that folks need to kvetch once in a while. When you're, in essence, getting crapped on and, more importantly, are watching the human element of the Church -- the font of Western civilization -- imploding all around you, people have to talk about it, and that's fine.  It's a good thing to get things off one's chest, to talk and know you're not alone with your frustrations, and so forth. But as to "judging unto condemnation" no Catholic has the right to judge another Catholic's soul, let alone "unto condemnation." That sort of talk won't fly here on this forum (assuming I see it. I'm the only Mod right now, so things get by me. Alas!)  If trads aren't approaching others with this sort of attitude in mind, we're lost:  http://www.fisheaters.com/conversionoftheheart.html

 

There's little to argue with in your reply, Vox, and it would only be nit-picking on my part to argue with that which might be arguable in it...so I won't  :) :).  But...if you ever need a good nit-picker, I's yer man!!!  :grin:
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)