Amazon.com Widgets

Freda

Joined: Aug. 15, 2012

No bio


Most recent posts by Freda:     (See all of them)


No posts yet


Latest comments by Freda:     (See all of them)


Re: What would Newman say about the Synod?

Nov. 22 at 5:54pm | see this comment in context

Part 2 of comment:

As a convert, I am deeply disappointed in what is going on.  I had depended on Church teaching authority for an understanding of doctrine -- and I also depended upon the magisterium when teaching others.  When in doubt, I have turned to the writings of the Saints, Newman and DVH, etc.  

Right now, I think I speak for most reacent converts (including all those hapless Anglican communities) when I say that I wonder about my own "faith" in the "Church"-at least as represented by its current teaching authority --these bishops and Cardinals -- and yes, all in authority who have deliberately created this confusion.!  I feel like a child of divorcing parents.  The bishops are ignoring the terrible harm they are doing to the faith and understanding of us little ones -- all of us and our students, all who have hoped in the Church .  I do think it is time to calm down and make up -- stop accusing one another and start focusing on the sheep.

Re: What would Newman say about the Synod?

Nov. 22 at 5:42pm | see this comment in context

Katie,  (Part 1 of comment).  Thank you for your responses -- and for your patient tone.  In reference to conservative cricisms, you say,

"The problem with this kind of attitude and talk has nothing to do with commitment to dogma.  It has rather to do with a profound lack of faith in the Church and the way truth (in the sense of its practical application in the here and now) is worked out through dialog and debate. "The collision of mind with mind," as Newman put it.

I have not yet seen the comments,o (but I did read your article in paper copy and I was quite impressed telling all my friends -- "why, I know her!")

But even when I read the comments, I doubt that I will be in a position to know what is a genuine attempt to work out the truth and what is just a "lack of faith in the Church"  

Re: What would Newman say about the Synod?

Nov. 20 at 8:48pm | see this comment in context

Part 2 of very long comment:

s it Cardinal Burke that you are pointing to in your comments?  Isn't it "licit" for a Cardinal -- indeed even for a layperson -- to debate a doctrinal position at odds with others in the magisterium, and even the Pope?   I have read and reread the Catechism chapters on teaching authority and papal infallibility and I do not see how Cardinals' academic debates in the context of a conclave, can be considered somehow "unfaithful" to the Pope or the Church. 

My own elementary understanding of the Church's catechism concerning the Sixth Commandment (I taught it for 10 years at the fourth grade level) tends to agree with Cardinal Burke's view, but I am aware that there are many "liberal" Catholics who think such views are passe and simplistic.  One liberal Catholic is the pastor of a church in Massachusetts where I was disinvited from teaching eighth graders as a guest lecturer on the Ten Commandments this year because I was planning to teach the Sixth Commandment in accordance with the written catechism for Children that age (i.e., chastity, and wait until marriage, and only traditional marriage).  The children were preparing for confession in advance of eventual confirmation.   Yet, I was instructed to either avoid all mention of the Sixth Commandment or to warn parents in advance that the Sixth Commandment would be taught and allow the parents to opt out their children, because such "traditional" views are now considered "controversial;" gay marriage is here to stay;--  and, I was told, the Pope's view is that at the parish level, we must not be "obsessed" with such issues.  With this encounter in mind, I would have immediately understood, Jules, if you had expressed irritation with self-described "liberal" supporters of the Pope.  My own opinion is that this one Pastor and others dealing with children who are daily inculcated with "diversity" training in public schools, have, by their withdrawal of Church teaching on the subject, done great harm to scores of young people who have been thus misinstructed (my opinion) on the catechism.

 Since the only "conservative" view on the issue among theologians that I know of is Cardinal Burke's view --your irritation at "conservatives" is a great surprise to me.  Surely Cardinal Burke is defending the Church's teaching as it has existed for more than 2,000 years.  Is that really so bad -- even if it seems to irritate the Pope -- or "liberal supporters" of the Pope?   

So, I have the impression that you may be referring to people and comments that I have not heard -- or perhaps have not paid much attention to because their comments were over my head.  And here you seem to be trying not to name names.  Still, if you can, please explain -- at least on a level that this poor fourth grade volunteer catechist can understand.  Kindest regards - I know that I can be a pain.  Freda

Freda

Re: What would Newman say about the Synod?

Nov. 20 at 8:47pm | see this comment in context

Dear Jules,  I am going to put this comment into several frames because it is way over the "word limit".  

Part 1:  I've re-read your responses several times and I'm afraid I still don't understand your point.  Perhaps this is because I don't know what and who you are talking about when you speak of the "conservative" critics of the Pope.  In terms of Church doctrine (truly my only current interest)  the only names I know are Cardinal Burke on the "conservative" side  and Cardinal Kaspar on the "liberal" side.  Cardinal Burke seems to be of the opinion that to allow divorced and remarried persons to receive communion while they are living in adulturous relationships would be an abrupt reversal of doctrine, and, in Newman's terms, not be a "development" but a corruption of doctrine.  Cardinal Burke also argues that condoning same sex relationships and other sexual alliances outside of traditional marriage would also be a corruption of doctrine.  Admittedly, I base my understanding of Cardinal Burke's poisition on an interview he gave to Raymond Arroyo on EWTN.  I have not read his book (though I plan to do so).  I did not hear him criticize the Pope.  

Re: What would Newman say about the Synod?

Nov. 17 at 11:23pm | see this comment in context

Ju;es. I'm going to re-read your comment a few times because on first read, I do not understand it as answering the question I asked.  Perhaps I should dig out the particular paragraphs that I found disturbing -- although you may know them better than I do.  The most disturbing paragraphs in the first draft were those concerning the possible allowance of communion to divorced and remarried people while they remain in adulturous relationships and the paragraphs giving some sort of condonation to homosexual unions and unmarried heterosexuals "living together." I gather that one or another of these paragraphs was withdrawn from the final draft but at least one was reinstated at the direction of the Pope.  The issues remain on the table.  Can't we use Newman's method to determine whether these positions taken in the interim draft represent a corruption of doctrine? 

Stay informed

Latest comments

  • Re: What would Newman say about the Synod?
  • By: Disciplined_Idea
  • Re: What would Newman say about the Synod?
  • By: Katie van Schaijik
  • Re: What would Newman say about the Synod?
  • By: Disciplined_Idea
  • Re: What would Newman say about the Synod?
  • By: Katie van Schaijik
  • Re: What would Newman say about the Synod?
  • By: Disciplined_Idea
  • Re: What would Newman say about the Synod?
  • By: Katie van Schaijik
  • Re: The problem with "consenting adults"
  • By: Disciplined_Idea
  • Re: Cutting ties
  • By: Disciplined_Idea
  • Re: What would Newman say about the Synod?
  • By: Disciplined_Idea
  • Re: Cutting ties
  • By: Disciplined_Idea

Latest active posts

Reading circles

Lectures