Catholic Exchange - Group: General Forums

saintstephen on Translating the Mass

Sat, 21 Nov 2009 19:15:02 -0600

ormom2 said:

OK, I did find the quote in Reconciliatio et Paenitentia.

as for your statement:
Here is the letter from Pope John Paul II which incorporated my letter of concern into a teaching document which I will quote in part that which he used define the loss of the sense of sin according to psychology:

I will leave the question of whether this is truth or wishful thinking unanswered. I’m too tired to pursue it.

Dear Ormom2, Using Spock’s logic, there are only two ways to ascertain whether the Pope’s encyclical incorporates my recommendations to him is by first the witness of Pope John Paul II whom is deceased or second by simply accepting my own testimony of realization that when I received the answer from JPII that he received my advice and acted on it, that meant that he had in fact incorporated into Reconciliatio et Paenitentia, especially the part that I quoted to you was almost word for word what I had written to him regarding the denial of personal sin as psychoanalysis of personal trauma relating to wrongdoing. However part of what I wrote also addressed the error of the use of psychology in identifying sin which was corrected by JPII in Misericordia Dei which stated that only the Church can identify sin according to Scripture so in fact both encyclicals contained portions of my letter through incorporation and convergence of thought in writing. No matter when you are refreshed from your exhaustive day nor how refreshed you feel in elation, you will have to rely on either method of determination to prove my trustworthiness. My own realization of what took place between myself and JPII is sufficient for me and my satisfaction with the encyclical as it even exceeded my expectations. How you view the situation from your personal feelings toward me which obviously are tainted with doubt actually bears no weight on the truth of the matter. For your sake what really matters is that you fully understand both encyclicals and take them to heart especially regarding the Sacrament of Reconciliation and your burning desire to ascertain the validity of NFP and the wrongness of using birth controls which amount to abortive efforts against human life in the womb. I wish you well and will continue to pray for your intentions as much and as often as I think of you which tonight will be a great deal as I have 4 hours of Adoration of Christ scheduled and will use that time before the Blessed Sacrament of Christ to make my appeal to Him for your complete trust and understanding, not of me, but of Christ, His Father and His Holy Spirit toward the sanctification of your womb, heart, mind, soul, your entire being also that all of your previous reception of each Sacrament you received in truth converge all at once upon your soul in Divine Revelation as light of Christ and extend light to every darkness you have ever experienced to make it blossom as a sweet and fragrant flower for all Eternity. I ask this in Jesus Holy Name. Amen

ormom2 on Translating the Mass

Sat, 21 Nov 2009 18:13:20 -0600

OK, I did find the quote in Reconciliatio et Paenitentia. as for your statement: Here is the letter from Pope John Paul II which incorporated my letter of concern into a teaching document which I will quote in part that which he used define the loss of the sense of sin according to psychology: I will leave the question of whether this is truth or wishful thinking unanswered. I'm too tired to pursue it.

saintstephen on Translating the Mass

Sat, 21 Nov 2009 16:58:35 -0600

ormom2 said:

saintstephen,
You did not answer my question posed to you today at 1:27 pm.

… tell me if I am going to find the following quote of JPII (from your post of Nov 20 @ 11:31 am) in Reconciliatio et Paenitentia or are you going to direct me to yet another document after that?

A yes or no answer is all I am asking for.

Dear Ormom2, Yes to the first part of your two part question and no to the second part.

ormom2 on Translating the Mass

Sat, 21 Nov 2009 15:41:17 -0600

saintstephen, You did not answer my question posed to you today at 1:27 pm. ... tell me if I am going to find the following quote of JPII (from your post of Nov 20 @ 11:31 am) in Reconciliatio et Paenitentia or are you going to direct me to yet another document after that? A yes or no answer is all I am asking for.

saintstephen on Defender of the Bond

Sat, 21 Nov 2009 15:06:33 -0600

noelfitz said:

SS,
you seem to be saying that the Church gives divorces. I wonder. Annulment is a statement that there was no marriage, it does bot break a bond.

Noel, I apologize if I gave you that impression. When a parishioner desires to start the process of marriage study for the possible annulment, a civil divorce “must meaning required to” have already happened. The Church will not proceed with a marriage study unless the decree of divorce is presented to the parish Priest. The Priest then writes the official request to the Diocese Tribunal for marriage study then signs the request and mails it. In the meantime, the spouse who is requesting the marriage study is given witness forms to be completed by any person having first hand experience with the marriage of the two, then those forms go to the Tribunal also. Next the Tribunal Assessor will send a letter to the other spouse giving him or her two weeks to respond whether he or she will participate willingly and if not then the Tribunal will proceed without him or her. The case is then assigned a file number and the process of gathering evidence and holding trial takes about a year. When the Tribunal reaches it’s judgment, the other spouse is asked if he wants the Tribunal to send the judgment to the second court for concurrence or does the other spouse want to request the decision be sent to the Roman Rota? Once the second court of instance makes it’s judgment, the case is then closed and the decision of the courts are filed and copies sent to both spouses [or if Annuled, then the ex-spouses]. The decision of the Tribunal court for Annulment grants that the marriage is officially been recognized by the Church as defective from the beginning and the couple are free to marry whom they please in the Sacrament of Matrimony although usually both are required to first obtain council of the Church appointed Councils before requesting any Priest to prepare them for a new marriage. With an Annulment the Sacramental bond of the marriage is determined as non existent and so there never was a Sacramental bond. Any physical bond which occurred is considered in the same manner the Church considers the physical bond of any other religion or non religious. The birth of children are not denied by the Church, they are the fact of a physical bond even though the Church does not consider their parents in a Sacramental bond of Marriage. I think you may be confusing a physical bond with a Sacramental bond. Do you know what is the difference? A physical bond is not considered Sacred unless bonded within a Sacramental bond with Christ. Any other physical bond can even be considered sinful especially sexual before marriage in the Catholic faith, homosexual and sex with prostitutes. Physical bonds within other religions are considered natural bonds. These are explained here: Catechism of the Catholic Church PART TWO THE CELEBRATION OF THE CHRISTIAN MYSTERY SECTION TWO THE SEVEN SACRAMENTS OF THE CHURCH CHAPTER THREE THE SACRAMENTS AT THE SERVICE OF COMMUNION ARTICLE 7 THE SACRAMENT OF MATRIMONY

saintstephen on Translating the Mass

Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:42:05 -0600

ormom2 said:FYI, my websearch skills are quite good. But it’s pretty hard to find the document you are apparently referencing NOW when you didn’t give me the name or date the first time. I am not a mind-reader.

Dear Ormom2, I am glad you are able to find the document. No need to be defensive, I did not accuse you of being a liar, remember, you asked me if I was even though you gave me absolutely no reason for imagining such utter nonsense. The documents I gave you both address directly your original concerns and posts regarding the Sacrament of Reconciliation including identification of sin in light of Church teaching. I already gave you verifiable proofs of the sinfulness of contraceptives as abortive of the development of a human embryo who becomes a baby infant in the womb. As I have already directed you to a Priest for further discernment with NFP, I believe this is your only option as a Catholic if you are concerned at all with the value and dignity of human life and the sanctity of the Sacrament of Marriage especially in the bond of sexuality. If I can help you in any other way, prior to discernment with a Catholic Priest, I will respond without judgment to any dialog you wish [although you must know I do have responsibility to identify what is sinful without accusing you of culpability for any sin]. Thank you for questioning me as I continue to pray for your intentions.

ormom2 on Translating the Mass

Sat, 21 Nov 2009 13:27:06 -0600

OK saintstephen. I'll play. But first tell me if I am going to find the following quote of JPII (from your post of Nov 20 @ 11:31 am) in Reconciliatio et Paenitentia or are you going to direct me to yet another document after that? quote: [Here is the letter from Pope John Paul II which incorporated my letter of concern into a teaching document which I will quote in part that which he used define the loss of the sense of sin according to psychology:] “Another reason for the disappearance of the sense of sin in contemporary society is to be found in the errors made in evaluating certain findings of the human sciences. Thus on the basis of certain affirmations of psychology, concern to avoid creating feelings of guilt or to place limits on freedom leads to a refusal ever to admit any shortcoming. Through an undue extrapolation of the criteria of the science of sociology, it finally happens-as I have already said-that all failings are blamed upon society, and the individual is declared innocent of them. Again, a certain cultural anthropology so emphasizes the undeniable environmental and historical conditioning and influences which act upon man, that it reduces his responsibility to the point of not acknowledging his ability to perform truly human acts and therefore his ability to sin.” The entire text can be read here: http://www.vatican.va/holy_fat…..ia end quote. saintstephen also said just above: As I previously mentioned I am not aware of your agility with web search so I thought you would see this on your own cognizance. If you have any difficulty finding the text let me know again. end quote. FYI, my websearch skills are quite good. But it's pretty hard to find the document you are apparently referencing NOW when you didn't give me the name or date the first time. I am not a mind-reader.

noelfitz on Defender of the Bond

Sat, 21 Nov 2009 11:14:32 -0600

SS, you seem to be saying that the Church gives divorces. I wonder. Annulment is a statement that there was no marriage, it does bot break a bond.

saintstephen on Caritas in Veritate

Sat, 21 Nov 2009 10:03:00 -0600

Michael said:

And yet your statement does nothing to blunt my point…only prove it.

In Christ,
Michael

Michael, The only point you make is the period you put at the end of your sentences. What I am saying is that in a comparative study of you, Obama and any other candidate for Presidency, I believe Obama will achieve a more favorable outcome for our nation than any other contender, not because of his own merit, rather because of certain events with are in the process of changing the course of our nation away from war and bank usery and abortion. There is current initial signs of these changes already developing slowly toward an ultimate withdrawal which was not achievable with anyone other than Obama due to his effect on the national debates on the welfare of the USA. While you are still fuming about the results of the election, I am envisioning what will become of America after all the changes are passed into law and implemented. This has nothing to do with what Obama stands for, rather it has everything to do with what America is sick and tired of and wants a new direction and will get there regardless of how we are led and by whom.

saintstephen on Defender of the Bond

Sat, 21 Nov 2009 08:58:28 -0600

noelfitz said:

SS,
the bond of marriage is not broken by having an affair. A marriage is for life, till death us do part, for richer for poorer. The bond remains as long as both partners are alive.

Also in confession the priest does not forgive sins, God does. “Who can forgive sins but God alone?”.

So you see I half agree with you.

Noel, You are only partially right in saying a bond of marriage is not broken by having an affair. What breaks the bond is the refusal of the wronged spouse to grant forgiveness also the result of Church Canon proceedings in view of the “affair” should the wronged spouse per-sue court proceedings with her parish Priest. What happens when a spouse has sexual intercourse with a lover outside the bond of marriage is that they “break” the part about “till death do us part” and create a new agreement “till an affair with a secret lover do us part”Any Priest can discern the petition to the Church to begin a marriage study for annulment. Apparently you are not connecting the dots to the OT historical record of King David’s adultery with Bethsheba the wife of Uriah and how his Kingdom fell thereafter and his own son tried to kill David and David’s wife was fuming mad and David’s son Solomon afterward had 900-some wives and concubines, all the result of David’s “affair” with Bethsheba whom he married after he sent Uriah to die in war and he was killed. Of course David repented yet God’s final judgment was that David would lose everything. Read here the Tribunal or the Roman Rota: The Rota’s main function is that of a third-instance appellate tribunal, ordinarily reviewing decisions of lower courts if the initial court (first instance) and the first appellate court (second instance) do not agree on the outcome of a case;[8] however, any party to an initial decision before a court of the Latin Church (and also some Eastern Churches) has the right to file a second-instance appeal directly to the Rota.[9] Dominating its case load are petitions seeking the issuance of a decree of nullity, although it has jurisdiction to hear any other type of judicial and non-administrative case in any area of canon law. In certain instances, the Rota has exclusive original jurisdiction, such as any contentious case in which a bishop of the Latin Church is a defendant.[10] If the case can still be appealed after a Rotal decision, the appeal goes to a different turnus, or panel, of the Rota.[citation needed] Q. How could a marriage qualify for an annulment? A. If any of the following conditions existed at the time of the wedding, it is possible that a marriage would qualify for an annulment: * If the marriage ceremony was not legally acceptable to the Catholic Church (this affects only Catholics and Orthodox Christians) * If either spouse was not free to marry * If either spouse was not adequately prepared to understand, accept and fulfill God’s plan for married life as the Catholic Church teaches it * If either spouse did not intend, from the beginning of marriage, to accept God’s plan for married life as taught by the Catholic Church (examples would be the refusal to have children, or to be faithful, or to marry for life.) There are several reasons for divorce and anullment although one reason may be infidelity as is written here in the Gospels: “It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife must give her a bill of divorce.’ But I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) causes her to commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery. The Gospels * Matthew Chapter 5 The process of Annulment in the Tribunal or the Roman Rota both dissolve the marriage according to the Scripture [unless the marriage is unlawful] so your interpretation of marriage is lacking the fullness of Church teaching. I already have met Catholic who have divorced and were granted Annulment from a spouse who was unfaithful by engaging another lover in the act of sexual intercourse which the Church does view as a complete and permanent betrayal of the marital vows if unrepented and Absolved. Insofar as the Confessional is concerned the Priest acts in the person of Christ and I can prove to you that there is in fact a disparity between one Priest to the next in regard to what is and what is not forgiven. We are struggling with this very issue in my parish right now where our parish Priest avoids the Confessional and worse rejects penitents from the Confessional in dialog. Of course, God forgives our sins through Christ although any Priest can impede that forgiveness by refusing to remain himself in contrition and Confession. I don’t know if you are aware of this Noel, Priests must go to Confession also and when they don’t, the resultant effect on an entire parish is evident in the disappearance of the Sacrament of Confession which is happening in the USA on such a large scale that Pope John Paul II wrote an entire encyclical on the subject, investigated Seminaries all over the USA and demanded that Catholic education must be Catholic and further exhorted US Catholic Churches to pledge their allegiance to the Latin Church in Rome which is now happening in many US parishes usually at Confirmation. Our situation here is turning around but slowly and sporadically, we have a long way to go in order to remain in full communion with the Catholic Church under this Pontificate. We have been forced to resolve our problem with Sacramental Confession by going to other parishes offering that Sacrament. We do realize that one of the early Pope decided the issue of a Priest in mortal sin and how he still validly consecrates the Eucharist although his personal sin does make his reception of Holy Communion a personal Sacrilege of the Body and Blood of Christ. The Sacrilege of the Priest also affects his ministry of the Sacrament of Confession and impedes it by his personal sin either venial or mortal according to Church Doctrine and the Catechism and the Canon of the Church. As you have acknowledged yourself in the past we are a Church comprised of sinners and unfortunately those comprising the sinners can and are in fact sometimes Priests and even Bishops [Bishop Lefabre who was excommunicated along with others].

noelfitz on Caritas in Veritate

Sat, 21 Nov 2009 08:22:42 -0600

Michael, your posts are solid and based on a very sound basis in Catholicism. I essentially agree with everything you write. But our religion is nuanced and sometime for brevity one makes a statement that does not do justice to the full truth. Here in Ireland there is one party., the Labo(u)r party, which is essentially anti-Catholic. I will not support it. However the problem is there may be a coalition between it and another party which is not so anti-Catholic. Does a vote for this second party bring us closer to anti-Catholics in government? Alternatively are we forced to vote for the shower that caused the collapse of our country? Politics is interesting.

noelfitz on Defender of the Bond

Sat, 21 Nov 2009 08:14:39 -0600

SS, the bond of marriage is not broken by having an affair. A marriage is for life, till death us do part, for richer for poorer. The bond remains as long as both partners are alive. Also in confession the priest does not forgive sins, God does. "Who can forgive sins but God alone?". So you see I half agree with you.

saintstephen on Translating the Mass

Sat, 21 Nov 2009 06:50:14 -0600

ormom2 said:
I read Misericordia Dei and it does not contain the above text nor does it say anything about psychology or a loss of a “sense of sin”.

You wouldn’t be trying to misdirect me would you?

Dear Ormom2, Of course I am not misdirecting you. I am directing you to the proper source. The encyclical you read is only part one of two parts. The essence of Misericordia Dei explains that identification of sin can only be revealed in light of Church, part two is the exhortation which compliments this Sacrament of Reconciliation explaining the limits and faults of man-made science of psychology pertaining to sin and essentially denying that personal sin exists. All you need to do is follow the references as Misericordia Dei leads to Reconciliatio et Paenitentia So, simply go again to http://www.papalencyclicals.ne…../index.htm then choose Reconciliatio et Paenitentia to complete the entire text on Reconciliation and Penance. As I previously mentioned I am not aware of your agility with web search so I thought you would see this on your own cognizance. If you have any difficulty finding the text let me know again. If you search the footnotes of inter-relating documents usually you will find that one encyclical leads to another although they remain separate encyclicals so that each aspect of Church Doctrine is kept in it’s proper perspective with titles and filings. If you look at the footnotes in Misericordia Dei at #17)Cf. Can. 988, § 2: John Paul II, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia (2 December 1984), 32: AAS 77 (1985) 267; Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1458. This is one of the reasons I referred you to a Priest for further discussion of your concern as knowledge of Church Doctrine requires years of study for which Priests attend Seminary in order to obtain the necessary skills and education in resolving ignorance or misunderstandings of Catholic faith. We already have acute examples of this in very highly educated Catholic who totally misquote the Church through ignorance of Doctrine. Go to some of Noel Fitz posts to read his references also and you will find that he recognizes also that Church Doctrine is currently magnificent as well as most of the threads in this forum also indicate this same realization. The reason for this forum is to help point to Church teaching regarding the faith and the average Catholic is usually not up to the task of walking their way through all the Doctrinal filings of the Church from it's inception with Christ, Peter and the Apostles. Your parish Priest is ultimately responsible for helping parishoners to understanding Church teaching in light of the multitude of issues that face the Church today. We are living in the 21st century nearly 2000 years after the formation of the Church and much has happened since Saint Peter took office as 1st Pope and much error has needed refutation and exhortation so that is why the papal encyclicals address all of these concerns definitively and comprehensively. The most easy way to an answer is usually to ask a Priest as researching these questions on your own is cumbersome unless you are highly skilled at following the path of documentation which forms the whole of the Roman Catholic Church.

greendesign on A Prayer of Thanks

Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:29:49 -0600

I want to take this opportunity to thank God for all the blessings He has been giving me and my family. He never really cease to care for us and give us His unconditional love.

ormom2 on Translating the Mass

Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:44:01 -0600

saintstephen said: Here is the letter from Pope John Paul II which incorporated my letter of concern into a teaching document which I will quote in part that which he used define the loss of the sense of sin according to psychology: “Another reason for the disappearance of the sense of sin in contemporary society is to be found in the errors made in evaluating certain findings of the human sciences. Thus on the basis of certain affirmations of psychology, concern to avoid creating feelings of guilt or to place limits on freedom leads to a refusal ever to admit any shortcoming. Through an undue extrapolation of the criteria of the science of sociology, it finally happens-as I have already said-that all failings are blamed upon society, and the individual is declared innocent of them. Again, a certain cultural anthropology so emphasizes the undeniable environmental and historical conditioning and influences which act upon man, that it reduces his responsibility to the point of not acknowledging his ability to perform truly human acts and therefore his ability to sin.” end quote. I read Misericordia Dei and it does not contain the above text nor does it say anything about psychology or a loss of a "sense of sin". You wouldn't be trying to misdirect me would you?