|
Post by ratioetfides on Apr 1, 2021 4:07:28 GMT
Confession/counseling sessions do seem to be problematic at times. Some priests or parishes do a good job routing these to times outside of those normally scheduled. Consistently turning away expecting penitents may be an occasion for the local ordinary to permit conditional/general absolution for those to be turned away. This would suffice until such penitents can make an auricular confession. I agree with you more than not, but on another forum (don't recall if it was CAF or somewhere else), others made the very good observation that this could somehow dilute the sacrament, that some people might even try to get to the back of the line, so they could be absolved without confessing. That's kind of a jaundiced view, but at the same time, what might begin as a benign practice could turn into people never truly "turning loose" of a besetting sin, because they might reason, "well, I'm absolved, that's all I have to worry about", or more charitably, "I'll get here early next time", and that "early next time" never happens. It probably wouldn't be a good practice to get started, though there could be isolated exceptions.
I know the early 21st century is very much a long-winded, expressive, "talk a long time so I'll feel better" era in history, but people need to be guided back to the concept of "unless it's something really besetting or worrying, in which case you really need to make a private appointment, 'be bold, be brief, and be gone' ".
Fear of sacramental dilution seems a worthy consideration. Should The Church withhold Her mercy on the grounds a few/some may abuse such a practice. Should the general absolution of Fr Corby have been withheld because some of those present may not, in the end, have actually made an auricular confession had they not died? Perhaps more interestingly, did such absolution have any effect upon those outside his jurisdiction? The case of a turned away penitent dying in a car crash upon leaving comes to mind. Must one be consoled by the idea ‘perfect contrition’ was achieved in lieu of auricular confession? The penitent did their best to present themselves for such a confession. ‘Be bold, be brief, be gone’ is an EXCELLENT slogan for confession; perhaps plaques or placards cans be made!
|
|
|
Post by stjosephprayforus on Apr 1, 2021 6:09:41 GMT
homeschooldad In my opinion, Rome does us a bit of a disservice with how confessions are offered. We have so much more to gain by modeling our confessions on how the Eastern Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches typically do it. I don't mean kneeling before an Icon of Christ with the priest standing next to you with his stole over your head. That aspect isn't essential. But in the East, you don't go into the confessional (or before the iconostasis) and shoot out all your sins as quickly as possible, get assigned penance, get absolved, and then rush out so the next person can come in. Absolution is not so transactional. It has meaning. You get the counseling needed (of course this depends on the priest, but this is the typical or common experience) and then your confessor (who is typically your spiritual father) will then amend your prayer rule if needed. For example, if you are confessing habitual sins regularly, your confessor might modify your prayer rule to incorporate stricter fasting or additional prayers, or specific prayers, etc. You never add or detract from your daily prayer rule. Even when burning with zeal to pray longer or sacrifice more, you don't do a thing out of obedience to your confessor and your prayer rule. The confessor then monitors your progress via confession (though I imagine it's not exclusively through confession that progress is ascertained) and you just make tiny incremental steps of progress in the spiritual life. It is a time tested method for making saints and it's the primary way the East operates. I can't help but feel like we have lost the sense of this. There are western priests who do this (minus the prayer rule), but they are pretty rare in my personal experience. I've only encountered two. One was SSPX, the other a Dominican Friar who was TLM only. I know Rome views confession as a "getting right with God" sort of mentality. We offended God with our sins and must appease His justice by confessing them in all humility and contrition (for our own salvation to boot). The East tends to emphasize sin as a sickness that needs healing. Confession is about healing, not about appeasing God's justice. I don't know. I can't help but feel our Roman Church sometimes gets a little too juridical/heavy handed with its rules and strict observance of how things are to be done. Sometimes I feel like our Church observes the letter of the law at the expense of the spirit of the law.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Apr 1, 2021 13:47:23 GMT
I agree with you more than not, but on another forum (don't recall if it was CAF or somewhere else), others made the very good observation that this could somehow dilute the sacrament, that some people might even try to get to the back of the line, so they could be absolved without confessing. That's kind of a jaundiced view, but at the same time, what might begin as a benign practice could turn into people never truly "turning loose" of a besetting sin, because they might reason, "well, I'm absolved, that's all I have to worry about", or more charitably, "I'll get here early next time", and that "early next time" never happens. It probably wouldn't be a good practice to get started, though there could be isolated exceptions.
I know the early 21st century is very much a long-winded, expressive, "talk a long time so I'll feel better" era in history, but people need to be guided back to the concept of "unless it's something really besetting or worrying, in which case you really need to make a private appointment, 'be bold, be brief, and be gone' ".
Fear of sacramental dilution seems a worthy consideration. Should The Church withhold Her mercy on the grounds a few/some may abuse such a practice. Should the general absolution of Fr Corby have been withheld because some of those present may not, in the end, have actually made an auricular confession had they not died? Perhaps more interestingly, did such absolution have any effect upon those outside his jurisdiction? The case of a turned away penitent dying in a car crash upon leaving comes to mind. Must one be consoled by the idea ‘perfect contrition’ was achieved in lieu of auricular confession? The penitent did their best to present themselves for such a confession. ‘Be bold, be brief, be gone’ is an EXCELLENT slogan for confession; perhaps plaques or placards cans be made! I had to search on Google for the Father Corby reference, I'd heard the story before, but it got lost in the mental recesses of six decades of living, seeing, hearing, and reading. It's a compelling story. Here is a good reference:
Again, I agree more than not, but there could still be the problems I cited, and there's a world of difference between men going into battle, and a handful of penitents who couldn't have their confessions heard because someone in front of them had to go into the confessional and recite the history of the world. BBBB&BG is a good maxim for those who make routine confessions of devotion and may never commit a mortal sin in their entire lives --- the old comment about hearing nuns' confessions as "like being stoned to death with popcorn" --- but especially in today's world, there are massive numbers of people who need to make good confessions, and confessions that can't be over in five minutes. For those people, I would go with the Orthodox approach (more about this below). I don't want to plumb the depths of predestination or, as the Protestants say, "blessed assurance", but I would be unpleasantly surprised to think that people who go to Mass 2-3x per week (or more), go to confession every other week or even once a month (I was told by one FSSP confessor that if you are serious about your faith, you will go at least once a month, good advice to follow, though I fall short of that), say the rosary daily, wear the scapular, and offer their daily duty to God, couldn't get their "popcorn" confessions over with in 2-3 minutes. But some people need more, and I would like to see that allowed for as well, just please, not within that hour on Saturday afternoon when possibly a score of two of people are waiting.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Apr 1, 2021 15:03:38 GMT
homeschooldad In my opinion, Rome does us a bit of a disservice with how confessions are offered. We have so much more to gain by modeling our confessions on how the Eastern Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches typically do it. I don't mean kneeling before an Icon of Christ with the priest standing next to you with his stole over your head. That aspect isn't essential. But in the East, you don't go into the confessional (or before the iconostasis) and shoot out all your sins as quickly as possible, get assigned penance, get absolved, and then rush out so the next person can come in. Absolution is not so transactional. It has meaning. You get the counseling needed (of course this depends on the priest, but this is the typical or common experience) and then your confessor (who is typically your spiritual father) will then amend your prayer rule if needed. For example, if you are confessing habitual sins regularly, your confessor might modify your prayer rule to incorporate stricter fasting or additional prayers, or specific prayers, etc. You never add or detract from your daily prayer rule. Even when burning with zeal to pray longer or sacrifice more, you don't do a thing out of obedience to your confessor and your prayer rule. The confessor then monitors your progress via confession (though I imagine it's not exclusively through confession that progress is ascertained) and you just make tiny incremental steps of progress in the spiritual life. It is a time tested method for making saints and it's the primary way the East operates. I can't help but feel like we have lost the sense of this. There are western priests who do this (minus the prayer rule), but they are pretty rare in my personal experience. I've only encountered two. One was SSPX, the other a Dominican Friar who was TLM only. I know Rome views confession as a "getting right with God" sort of mentality. We offended God with our sins and must appease His justice by confessing them in all humility and contrition (for our own salvation to boot). The East tends to emphasize sin as a sickness that needs healing. Confession is about healing, not about appeasing God's justice. I don't know. I can't help but feel our Roman Church sometimes gets a little too juridical/heavy handed with its rules and strict observance of how things are to be done. Sometimes I feel like our Church observes the letter of the law at the expense of the spirit of the law. Both emphases are important, but I will admit, I do like the Orthodox way that you describe. There is, as I'm sure you know, a rich tradition in the Roman Church of having a "spiritual director", though in practice, few Catholics have one. It would be enormously helpful, to have someone, outside of yourself, to take a good look at your spiritual life, and see what you need, rather than leaving it all up to one's internal forum. The human capacity to rationalize one's actions and beliefs is immense, almost unlimited.
I know this approach is "spiritually labor-intensive", today's harried, overworked priests could never even scratch the surface of the needs of all their parishioners, and I don't have an easy answer for that. Back on CAF I discussed the medieval ideal (sorry, I don't have a source) of one-third of the faithful marrying and having families, one-third remaining single in the lay state, and one-third being priests or religious. Needless to say, the entire structure of society, and the entire economy, would have to be "re-thought from the ground up" to transplant that idea into even an idealized Catholic monarchy or commonwealth of free men. It would mean, in essence, two-thirds of society, and those non-priestly religious, many of whom would presumably "work" in those fields proper to religious life, such as farming, crafts, husbandry, food preparation, teaching, and so on, providing for the temporal needs of the priests, realizing that the spiritual benefit to be gained is well worth giving of one's temporal substance to free these men up to minister to, and spiritually direct, the rest of us. (I am aware that one's spiritual director need not be a priest, nonetheless, if a priest is going to know his flock at this granular level, and absolve them accordingly, he will indeed to wear "spiritual director" as one of his many hats.)
Imagine a Catholic world where one out of every six, or ten, or even twenty or thirty people, is a priest! Now that would be almost heaven on earth.
|
|
|
Post by stjosephprayforus on Apr 1, 2021 16:54:11 GMT
homeschooldad True enough. Unfortunately, in our times, Catholicism is dying. It won't die, as we have our Lord's assurance. But the Church is shrinking and losing moral and cultural relevance. Of the thousands of priests, finding truly orthodox ones are truly rare. If you are blessed to have a good priest, fight to keep him at your parish beyond the 7 years. The constant rotation of priests is such an obstacle for parishes. You get a priest who spends 7 years setting up a solid parish and leading whatever programs, then he gets switched out with an older burned out priest from the 60s who would rather do all the happy clappy stuff and railroad all the progress the parish made up to that point. Priestly appointments should, ideally, be for life (barring a "need" to switch them out somewhere else).
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Apr 1, 2021 20:42:36 GMT
homeschooldad True enough. Unfortunately, in our times, Catholicism is dying. It won't die, as we have our Lord's assurance. But the Church is shrinking and losing moral and cultural relevance. Of the thousands of priests, finding truly orthodox ones are truly rare. If you are blessed to have a good priest, fight to keep him at your parish beyond the 7 years. The constant rotation of priests is such an obstacle for parishes. You get a priest who spends 7 years setting up a solid parish and leading whatever programs, then he gets switched out with an older burned out priest from the 60s who would rather do all the happy clappy stuff and railroad all the progress the parish made up to that point. Priestly appointments should, ideally, be for life (barring a "need" to switch them out somewhere else). Yes, but what about the parishes that get stuck with a "happy clappy" priest for life? Moving or changing parishes isn't always an option. In fact, I have a pet theory that liberal priests in rural or isolated areas are actually kind of happy to have a "captive audience", to make at least one parish over to their liking. Another pet theory of mine, closely related to this, is that liberal priests flourish in areas with few Catholics, where more often than not, one spouse is either not Catholic, or a recent convert, and there is a lack of diverse voices that could inform the parishioners towards orthodoxy. When you have a very liturgically conservative, or a fortiori, a diocesan TLM parish in a community or metropolitan area, it's harder for "reformers" to get by with as much shenanigans, as they have people right in their midst, able to call foul on it all, and who have an alternative. And they can inform others of these alternatives. Liberal priests don't like mouthy, "iron-rod" orthodox Catholics in their midst. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt, spilled paint on it, had to get another one.
I hear what you say about the decline of Catholicism, but I'm not one to think in terms of negatives. That's one luxury I do not, and cannot, allow myself. Once you believe that anything is possible... then things become possible. Back in the darkest days of the 1970s and 1980s, who would ever have thought that magisterially faithful, orthodox Catholics would have a way to communicate instantly with fellow believers from the whole world, and that we would be nearing a situation where there is a Traditional Latin Mass available in the majority of large cities and metro areas in the United States? It seemed like everything was over. Articles such as "The Plight of the Papist Priest" were beyond depressing. Of course the liberals and dissenters wish we were still all in our little rabbit hutches, clinging to our weekly issues of The Wanderer and writing those endless "letters to the bishop", influencing no one beyond a small circle of like-minded people who were frequently seen as the "kooks" of the parish.
|
|
|
Post by stjosephprayforus on Apr 1, 2021 23:17:58 GMT
homeschooldad I understand why so many are drawn to the TLM over the average experience of the novus ordo. If you find a TLM only parish that isn't full of toxic ultramontanists, then you're in a good spot lol. The few TLM places I've experienced were largely toxic for different reasons. I credit traditional Catholicism with my descent out of practicing the faith. Having just recently come back to the Church, I think my time in Rome is likely nearing an end. I will almost certainly become an Eastern Catholic, if not Eastern Orthodox. I really don't know where I will find peace. But so far, it hasn't been in Rome :-(
|
|
|
Post by ratioetfides on Apr 2, 2021 0:53:38 GMT
Is there a quick test to evaluate if a cleric is ‘truly orthodox?’ Ie...What are the essential characteristics a cleric must have to be ‘truly orthodox?’
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Apr 2, 2021 1:23:52 GMT
homeschooldad I understand why so many are drawn to the TLM over the average experience of the novus ordo. If you find a TLM only parish that isn't full of toxic ultramontanists, then you're in a good spot lol. The few TLM places I've experienced were largely toxic for different reasons. I credit traditional Catholicism with my descent out of practicing the faith. Having just recently come back to the Church, I think my time in Rome is likely nearing an end. I will almost certainly become an Eastern Catholic, if not Eastern Orthodox. I really don't know where I will find peace. But so far, it hasn't been in Rome :-( I shall remain in union with the Roman Pontiff if I am the last person on earth left doing so.
I do not judge you for contemplating a move to Eastern Orthodoxy --- I'll leave the "judging" this evening to Pigmeat (see my avatar) --- but I could never recommend that anyone either break union with the papacy, or fail to come into it. Even though, in retrospect, "uniatism" wasn't the best idea and is not something that would be repeated, Eastern Catholicism retains that union. Eastern Christian spirituality is largely a foreign concept to me, just too far removed from my mindset and temperament, though I do respect it.
I have not found TLM parishes and chapels to be characterized by "toxic ultramontanism", but I have had my issues with their arch-conservative approach to life in general --- and not just religion. The TLM group with which I am loosely affiliated, is scathingly critical of the wise measures taken by our public health authorities (masks, vaccine, "social distancing", etc.), and I am quite at odds with them, but I keep my thoughts to myself --- not that I really interact with them anyway, I am presently impeded from assisting at Holy Mass not only because I haven't been vaccinated yet (my first dose is scheduled for next week, Pfizer), but even if I were vaccinated, I cannot leave my disabled parents long enough, or be far away long enough, to go to Mass. It's a sad truth that I will only be free to go to Mass once again when my father has reposed --- I provide 24/7 care on demand, and thankfully we live in the same neighborhood (think Everybody Loves Raymond, the Southern-fried version ). Your prayers for him and my family will be much appreciated, and I shall pray for Our Divine Lord to bless you in return.
I even found myself needled by an elderly chapel attendee for refreshing myself with a Diet Coke after Mass --- aspartame, you know, bad news, a typical complaint of alternative-health adherents. That particular chapel (which has since gone sedevacantist) was top-heavy with people who had extreme social and political ideas. But that's where the "toxicity" came from, not ultramontanism.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Apr 2, 2021 1:34:33 GMT
Is there a quick test to evaluate if a cleric is ‘truly orthodox?’ Ie...What are the essential characteristics a cleric must have to be ‘truly orthodox?’ The "quick test" is adherence to all of the teachings of the magisterium of the Church.
The most problematical dissident position in the past 50 years has been calling into question, denying, or at least never mentioning, the Church's teaching on birth regulation as expounded in Humanae vitae. If a priest leaves his flock with the impression that this is acceptable, or worse yet, tells people in counseling (and, God forbid, the confessional!) ,that contraception is permissible (usually under the rubric of "your conscience"), then he's not trustworthy. Not only is contraception a mortal sin, but it has destroyed vast swaths of the society of the world, bringing many populations below replacement level. (Those populations that are more generous towards the idea of having more children will eventually dominate society anyway --- something about "the meek inheriting the earth", eh?) Catholic schools used to be a low-cost alternative for every Catholic student who wished to go, but now, with low birthrates, many of them have had to become would-be "elite" academies with sky-high tuition and appealing to non-Catholic families to keep from having to close down. In the meantime, Catholics of more modest means find themselves "shut out" of Catholic education, and having to go to the public schools. Not everyone can homeschool.
|
|
|
Post by AgnusDei on Apr 3, 2021 13:03:08 GMT
This is one of those situations where I see Pharisees at work. (Not you homeschooldad) The original rule was “do not boil a kid goat in it’s mother’s milk.” (As pagans did) Reasonable enough I suppose. (Personally I agree, it just seems wrong) Man took it further to “not mix meat and dairy.” I fail to see how placing a slice of cheese on a hamburger is equated to that other practice. Yes, the meat is bovine. And the cheese made from bovine milk. (Usually) I don’t agree with the additional blanket regulation being necessary. Dominus vobiscum
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Apr 3, 2021 15:30:06 GMT
This is one of those situations where I see Pharisees at work. (Not you homeschooldad) The original rule was “do not boil a kid goat in it’s mother’s milk.” (As pagans did) Reasonable enough I suppose. (Personally I agree, it just seems wrong) Man took it further to “not mix meat and dairy.” I fail to see how placing a slice of cheese on a hamburger is equated to that other practice. Yes, the meat is bovine. And the cheese made from bovine milk. (Usually) I don’t agree with the additional blanket regulation being necessary. Dominus vobiscum That is just the way the rabbis, Torah and Talmud scholars, and others, interpreted the passage about boiling a kid in its mother's milk. Our risen Lord Christ freed us from these restrictions.
For practical reasons, the rule against mixing milchig and fleischig extends to poultry (who do not give milk --- the mother pelican vulns herself, giving her blood to the chicks to drink, which echoes the Passion of Christ and is even on the state seal of that blessed Catholic state of Louisiana), because the same utensils are used for mammals and poultry, and so that Jewish faithful will not grow accustomed to consuming meat (i.e., poultry) with milk products.
Aside from it being a case of "because God said so, and we must obey Him", kosher dietary laws are to some extent related to cleanliness (the way a hog nourishes itself is not the most appetizing thought in the world, and they digest food very quickly, which isn't too appetizing to contemplate either) and wholesomeness (pork is not all that healthy for you, delicious though it is), as well as a belief that meat should not be taken from predatory animals. As I understand it, it is seen as more gentle and humane, to take meat from animals that live pastorally, such as cattle and chicken, and to slaughter them as painlessly and efficiently as it is possible to do such a thing. The notion of it being intrinsically cruel to use the mother's milk to boil the kid ties right into this "kinder and gentler" concept of obtaining nutrition from meat.
As a side thought, Temple Grandin (who is not Jewish) has done some amazing work in making animal husbandry less traumatic for the livestock --- she has taken her autism and made it into a gift both for mankind and for the animals who give their lives for our food, in that she is able to see the process from the point of view of the cattle. (This reminds me of a conversation I had with my son about the notion of some --- not us --- that "veterinarians are not real doctors". Well, considered from the point of view of the animals, they most certainly are.)
|
|