No Expectation to Follow Pre-VII Traditions
#21
(12-09-2020, 09:43 PM)Paul Wrote:
(12-09-2020, 05:35 PM)Pandora Wrote: The essence of this discussion is not are we actually bound, but what benefits have we reaped from being loosed?  Christmas isn’t a holly, jolly, hedonistic free-for-all, or at least it shouldn’t be for people who actually, literally believe that Christ was born for us.

Where these discussions often end up is people treating what's currently optional as mandatory, and lesser Catholics because they must not be real trads.

Eating meat is hardly a holly, jolly, hedonistic free-for-all.

I don’t hide the fact that I’m not a trad, so it doesn’t bother me if I’m thrust in the “no real trad” category.  I think Pandora’s zeal is great and to be admired.  I surely don’t hold it against her.
Reply
#22
(12-10-2020, 02:22 AM)yablabo Wrote: I don’t hide the fact that I’m not a trad, so it doesn’t bother me if I’m thrust in the “no real trad” category.  I think Pandora’s zeal is great and to be admired.  I surely don’t hold it against her.

There is nothing to hide, because the definition of "trad," if one exists, depends on what era and location one considers to harbor the most traditional form of Catholicism.  Some of these traditions can be traced back to some countries a few decades or perhaps a couple centuries back.  But going back further in time or to non-European countries would provide a perhaps much different picture of they types of traditions that were followed.
Reply
#23
I'm getting really tired of all of these "big T", "little t" distinctions.  As if we should be so careless to chuck away any and all traditions just because "muh, not dogma."  Having no traditions means that instead of following the practices handed down (you know like keeping the faith handed down, preserving the land handed down) you are instead left to your own devices. 

Anyone not having a problem with the lack of preservation over "little t" things should not be upset when the Vatican pulls its goofy ass shit with the Nativity scene and puts its stupid face diapers all over it, or calls for Wymyn DeeConnns.

And mark my words...I will not be surprised if those heretical fools slap a face diaper on the baby Jesus.
Reply
#24
(12-09-2020, 10:18 PM)LionHippo Wrote: That's one thing I didn't understand much as a kid, because in the Midwest fish and seafood was much more expensive than meat.  So it made no sense to me how eating something more expensive was a sacrifice.

I would say the sacrifice of the extra cash has merit. Money aside, who wouldn't rather be eating meat than fish?

(12-10-2020, 02:19 AM)yablabo Wrote: The entirety of Advent is penitential.  The season remains such for as long as it remains on the church calendar.  It is simply now primarily up to the consciences of the laity how they will conduct that penance.

But the problem is without rules, without concrete direction at minimum, most perform no penance; and their consciences are so malformed that they have no idea the implications of the harm of not doing penance.
Reply
#25
(12-10-2020, 08:51 AM)austenbosten Wrote: I'm getting really tired of all of these "big T", "little t" distinctions.  As if we should be so careless to chuck away any and all traditions just because "muh, not dogma."  Having no traditions means that instead of following the practices handed down (you know like keeping the faith handed down, preserving the land handed down) you are instead left to your own devices.

And you're chucking away the power of the Pope to bind and loose. Fast on Christmas Eve all you want. I think it should be required again. But it's not, just like we're no longer required to give up eggs and cheese and milk and even meat for all of Lent, and haven't been in centuries. The problem isn't wanting to preserve these things; it's accusing others of being bad, sinful Catholics for not following what isn't required.


(12-10-2020, 08:51 AM)austenbosten Wrote: Anyone not having a problem with the lack of preservation over "little t" things should not be upset when the Vatican pulls its goofy ass shit with the Nativity scene and puts its stupid face diapers all over it, or calls for Wymyn DeeConnns.


Women deacons are impossible.
Reply
#26
(12-10-2020, 10:44 AM)NSMSSS Wrote: But the problem is without rules, without concrete direction at minimum, most perform no penance; and their consciences are so malformed that they have no idea the implications of the harm of not doing penance.

Which is exactly what we've seen over the past 60 years. The rules existed for exactly that reason, and the reformers either had far too optimistic a view of man, or knew and intended these practices to die out.
Reply
#27
(12-09-2020, 09:43 PM)Paul Wrote:
(12-09-2020, 05:35 PM)Pandora Wrote: The essence of this discussion is not are we actually bound, but what benefits have we reaped from being loosed?  Christmas isn’t a holly, jolly, hedonistic free-for-all, or at least it shouldn’t be for people who actually, literally believe that Christ was born for us.

Where these discussions often end up is people treating what's currently optional as mandatory, and lesser Catholics because they must not be real trads.

Eating meat is hardly a holly, jolly, hedonistic free-for-all.

The only issue is that, that was not the point being made.  No one, or at least not I, is sitting in judgment of Catholics fulfilling what is currently required.  What’s required is required, no more and no less.  We might use the analogy that a “C” student and an “A+” student both still pass their class.  There’s no extra-credit for accomplishing the same task with more effort.  One could posit the latter student has a better understanding of the class and how to apply the material, which I would say is the argument some of us are making.

Also, there wasn’t a claim that meat eating on Christmas Eve is a terrible evil perpetrated by scoundrels, but rather that in the post-VII world we’ve lost the aspects of preparation for and anticipation of the birth of our Lord in current times.  It’s not unusual to have holiday (use intentional) parties with all types of debauchery going on.  It’s four weeks of bad behavior while everyone turns a blind eye.  We should be yearning for Him to come, not for a fifth cosmo and 20 minutes in a back room.

I could be wrong, but I’ve observed in my life that people are often touchy about things they don’t want to practice but know they should.  I’m thinking of times women have been accused of being misogynists because they wear chapel veils, or men being admonished for having large families.  Do the others disagree because they are truly against it?  Or in some little corner of their brain, do they know these are things they should strive to do?  I’m truly not calling anyone to mind here, just in person experiences I’ve had in NO communities where tradition was thrown out the window with extreme prejudice.
Reply
#28
(12-10-2020, 02:00 PM)Pandora Wrote: I could be wrong, but I’ve observed in my life that people are often touchy about things they don’t want to practice but know they should.  I’m thinking of times women have been accused of being misogynists because they wear chapel veils, or men being admonished for having large families.  Do the others disagree because they are truly against it?  Or in some little corner of their brain, do they know these are things they should strive to do?

People get touchy about those who do better than themselves.

People also don't want to accept the reality that there will be different degrees of the Beatific Vision, and while all who achieve it will be perfectly happy and perfectly happy for everyone else who has it, there are those who will enjoy a higher degree of happiness for all eternity because of how much they loved God in this life.

Some of that comes down to the amount of grace God gave you, but a part of it also comes from how much you did to love Him; and honouring Him with that non-obligatory fasting is one way you can do that.
Reply
#29
(12-10-2020, 08:51 AM)austenbosten Wrote: I'm getting really tired of all of these "big T", "little t" distinctions.  As if we should be so careless to chuck away any and all traditions just because "muh, not dogma."  Having no traditions means that instead of following the practices handed down (you know like keeping the faith handed down, preserving the land handed down) you are instead left to your own devices. 

Anyone not having a problem with the lack of preservation over "little t" things should not be upset when the Vatican pulls its goofy ass shit with the Nativity scene and puts its stupid face diapers all over it, or calls for Wymyn DeeConnns.

And mark my words...I will not be surprised if those heretical fools slap a face diaper on the baby Jesus.

No one is knocking local customs in this thread.  People are simply saying that a group who keeps a local custom is not necessarily better than another which does not keep that local custom or which has a different local custom.

You can easily contrast the difference in universal importance between local customs (i.e., traditions handed down in families or within communities), church law, and sacred scripture and tradition.  My family’s local customs will not bind you, yet we’re all bound to church law and sacred scripture and tradition.  I’m bound to the local customs of my family, until they’re shown to be evil; you’re not bound to these at all.
Reply
#30
(12-10-2020, 12:56 PM)Paul Wrote:
(12-10-2020, 08:51 AM)austenbosten Wrote: I'm getting really tired of all of these "big T", "little t" distinctions.  As if we should be so careless to chuck away any and all traditions just because "muh, not dogma."  Having no traditions means that instead of following the practices handed down (you know like keeping the faith handed down, preserving the land handed down) you are instead left to your own devices.

And you're chucking away the power of the Pope to bind and loose. Fast on Christmas Eve all you want. I think it should be required again. But it's not, just like we're no longer required to give up eggs and cheese and milk and even meat for all of Lent, and haven't been in centuries. The problem isn't wanting to preserve these things; it's accusing others of being bad, sinful Catholics for not following what isn't required.

I'm not chucking away anything.  I'm simply criticizing this defense of Pope Paul VI chucking 2000 years of tradition overnight to create a "new Pentecost" that based on the hollowing of the Church is more like a holocaust.


(12-10-2020, 12:56 PM)Paul Wrote:
(12-10-2020, 08:51 AM)austenbosten Wrote: Anyone not having a problem with the lack of preservation over "little t" things should not be upset when the Vatican pulls its goofy ass shit with the Nativity scene and puts its stupid face diapers all over it, or calls for Wymyn DeeConnns.


Women deacons are impossible.

Just wait. With Francis and his "God of surprises," anything is possible.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)