Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free
A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for discussion related to learning about the faith (Catechetics), defense of the Faith (Apologetics), the Liturgy and canon law, motivated by a desire to grow closer to Christ or to bring someone else closer.

Saint Augustine of Hippo is considered on of the greatest Christian thinkers of all time and the Doctor of the Church.
Learn More: Saint Augustine

01/22/2013 new
(Quote) Chelsea-743484 said: In Latin/Western terms, more likely those who profess to be Catholic, yet are not, are heretics or sc...
(Quote) Chelsea-743484 said:



In Latin/Western terms, more likely those who profess to be Catholic, yet are not, are heretics or schismatics than apostates.

--hide--


De facto if not de jure
01/23/2013 new

(Quote) John-220051 said: In other words, Catholics by and large have become apostate?
(Quote) John-220051 said:

In other words, Catholics by and large have become apostate?
--hide--

That is not what I said or implied.

The key word is ignorance. And being ignorant does not make someone an apostate.

01/23/2013 new
(Quote) Paul-866591 said: That is not what I said or implied. The key word is ignorance. And ...
(Quote) Paul-866591 said:



That is not what I said or implied.



The key word is ignorance. And being ignorant does not make someone an apostate.

--hide--


Ignorance? I am not quite sure. Speaking for my own generation, I see nothing wrong with the CCD instruction my classmates and I received. We were taught about the Eucharist, etc. That still did not keep many, if not most, of them from abandoning the church once they left high school. The others who remainded care nothing about what the church teaches.

The once who left married into Protestant families.

Now, back to the topic at hand: isn't the Roman Missal supposed to be the instruction manual for Mass?
01/23/2013 new
(Quote) Paul-302787 said: Ignorance? I am not quite sure. Speaking for my own generation, I see nothing wrong with the CCD instructio...
(Quote) Paul-302787 said:

Ignorance? I am not quite sure. Speaking for my own generation, I see nothing wrong with the CCD instruction my classmates and I received. We were taught about the Eucharist, etc. That still did not keep many, if not most, of them from abandoning the church once they left high school. The others who remainded care nothing about what the church teaches.



The once who left married into Protestant families.



Now, back to the topic at hand: isn't the Roman Missal supposed to be the instruction manual for Mass?
--hide--


The General Instruction in the front of the Roman Missal is the instruction; however, I would venture a guess that few, if any lay people have read it, since it covers what and how the priest is supposed to celebrate the Mass. "Say the black, do the red". And even if lay people did read it, would they understand (apart from the few who've studied liturgy in college or grad school) what it meant?

The document that is being developed is a public issuance meant to clearly define what is appropriate and not, to bypass the typical limp-wristed clerical claims of "pastoral needs" for the people to know what is right or not. Just as the Holy Father bypassed the bishops in the issuance of Summorum Pontificum and made it clear that priests needed no permission from the bishops to celebrate the Extraordinary Form, this new document will be (should be) directed to the laity to enable them to properly gauge how faithful their priests are to carrying out the directives of the IGMR.

John's Eastern Rite membership notwithstanding, this is an issue for the Latin rite; as offended as the Eastern Rites are to Latin interference in their celebrations, we should be careful not to allow the same in reverse, since our own issues should not be influenced inadvisedly by practices not germaine to our own traditions.
01/23/2013 new
(Quote) Bryan-7889 said: The General Instruction in the front of the Roman Missal is the instruction; however, I would venture a gues...
(Quote) Bryan-7889 said:

The General Instruction in the front of the Roman Missal is the instruction; however, I would venture a guess that few, if any lay people have read it, since it covers what and how the priest is supposed to celebrate the Mass. "Say the black, do the red". And even if lay people did read it, would they understand (apart from the few who've studied liturgy in college or grad school) what it meant?



The document that is being developed is a public issuance meant to clearly define what is appropriate and not, to bypass the typical limp-wristed clerical claims of "pastoral needs" for the people to know what is right or not. Just as the Holy Father bypassed the bishops in the issuance of Summorum Pontificum and made it clear that priests needed no permission from the bishops to celebrate the Extraordinary Form, this new document will be (should be) directed to the laity to enable them to properly gauge how faithful their priests are to carrying out the directives of the IGMR.



John's Eastern Rite membership notwithstanding, this is an issue for the Latin rite; as offended as the Eastern Rites are to Latin interference in their celebrations, we should be careful not to allow the same in reverse, since our own issues should not be influenced inadvisedly by practices not germaine to our own traditions.
--hide--




Speaking as a Latin Catholic, I am very pleased that there are Eastern Catholics like John who care that the faith of the Church is transmitted properly in both the East and the West and that God is worshipped reverently in both halves of the Church. For while there are different expressions of the Holy Faith, the content thereof is the same.

And often they know more about what true Latin worship should be like than we ourselves. I say let him speak up.
01/23/2013 new
Sorry, that wasn't meant to be bolded.
01/23/2013 new
(Quote) Paul-866591 said: That is not what I said or implied. The key word is ignorance. And being ignorant...
(Quote) Paul-866591 said:



That is not what I said or implied.



The key word is ignorance. And being ignorant does not make someone an apostate.

--hide--


It's a culture of apostasy.
01/24/2013 new

(Quote) John-220051 said: It's a culture of apostasy.
(Quote) John-220051 said:

It's a culture of apostasy.
--hide--

Yoiur use of the word apostasy is unnecessarily harsh as well as wrong.

To be an apostate requires 2 things. First you must know what you are rejecting and you must do so with an act of the will.

Since far too many Catholics do not have a proper grasp of the facts of the Faith but belive what little then do know, they ahve rejected nothing they know. Most Catholics have not willfully rejected the faith.

So, by definitioin, they are not and cannot be apostates.

They are literally just like a sincere Protestant. You can't call them a heretic because they did not reject anything orthodox. In fact they believe what they believe sincerely, but they did not create the heresies they happen to believe. The heretics were Luther, Henry VIII, Calvin, etc.

It is even stretching the meaning of the word to apply it to a "culture" inside the Church as if it the prevailing culture.

01/24/2013 new

(Quote) Paul-866591 said: Yoiur use of the word apostasy is unnecessarily harsh as well as wrong. To be an a...
(Quote) Paul-866591 said:

Yoiur use of the word apostasy is unnecessarily harsh as well as wrong.

To be an apostate requires 2 things. First you must know what you are rejecting and you must do so with an act of the will.

Since far too many Catholics do not have a proper grasp of the facts of the Faith but belive what little then do know, they ahve rejected nothing they know. Most Catholics have not willfully rejected the faith.

So, by definitioin, they are not and cannot be apostates.

They are literally just like a sincere Protestant. You can't call them a heretic because they did not reject anything orthodox. In fact they believe what they believe sincerely, but they did not create the heresies they happen to believe. The heretics were Luther, Henry VIII, Calvin, etc.

It is even stretching the meaning of the word to apply it to a "culture" inside the Church as if it the prevailing culture.

--hide--

Heresy demands obstinacy in rejection or doubt of articles of divine and Catholic faith (after Baptism, of course). If a protestant rejects or doubts an article of divine and Catholic faith in an obstinate fashion, and he's validly baptized, he's an heretic. :) (Can. 751) I know many people who profess to be Catholic as well, who reject with the utmost obstinacy articles of divine and Catholic faith.

Apostasy demands a total repudiation of the Christian faith. (Can. 751)

Schism demands a refusal submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him. (Can. 751)

An individual can be materially an heretic, apostate or schismatic without knowing that he is. He may not be culpable for the specific grave sin committed by becoming such (though there would be a mortal sin for failure to act as a moral agent), and he would certainly still be responsible for what he does know, and his continuance on in either crass, supine, or affected ignorance would not excuse him from the full force of Canonical penalty which is excommunication, latae sententiae. (Can. 1325, 1364)

And...to split a hair...Henry VIII was considered a schismatic, not an heretic.

01/24/2013 new
(Quote) Paul-866591 said: Yoiur use of the word apostasy is unnecessarily harsh as well as wrong. To be an ...
(Quote) Paul-866591 said:



Yoiur use of the word apostasy is unnecessarily harsh as well as wrong.



To be an apostate requires 2 things. First you must know what you are rejecting and you must do so with an act of the will.



Since far too many Catholics do not have a proper grasp of the facts of the Faith but belive what little then do know, they ahve rejected nothing they know. Most Catholics have not willfully rejected the faith.



So, by definitioin, they are not and cannot be apostates.



They are literally just like a sincere Protestant. You can't call them a heretic because they did not reject anything orthodox. In fact they believe what they believe sincerely, but they did not create the heresies they happen to believe. The heretics were Luther, Henry VIII, Calvin, etc.



It is even stretching the meaning of the word to apply it to a "culture" inside the Church as if it the prevailing culture.



--hide--


It would seem that you are focusing on Church law rather than spiritual fact.
Posts 11 - 20 of 23