Skip to comments.Church faces serious moral problems, according to Rome director of Human Life International
Posted on 08/22/2003 5:31:18 PM PDT by Land of the Irish
WEST ALLIS The connection between radical changes in the liturgy and widespread disobedience to the churchs teaching on contraception is the most serious moral problem in the church today, according to Fr. Ignacio Barreiro.
Fr. Barreiro, director of the Rome office of Human Life International, spoke to over 50 people on The Mass of All Times at St. Mary Help of Christians Church on Aug. 2. Prior to the lecture, Fr. Barreiro celebrated a Tridentine, or Latin, Mass for the group. The gathering was sponsored by the St. Gregory the Great chapter of Catholics United for the Faith.
The Mass had had an unchangeable nature for generations, said Fr. Barreiro in an interview with the Catholic Herald. In the 1960s, there were drastic changes in the liturgy and people wrongly expected that the church would change on many other issues. The church did not. On certain issues, you know, it is improbable the church will change.
The papal commission that Pope Paul VI put together to study the contraception issue issued a non-binding report in favor of ending the churchs ban. The report was leaked to the media, and so it was somewhat of a shock when Pope Paul VI upheld the ban.
Because European Catholics, in particular, have continued to use contraception, Europe is in a demographic winter, Fr. Barreiro said. There are not enough children to replace those dying.
In Italy, the population has decreased 20 percent, Fr. Barreiro said. Nobodys going to pay your pension or push your wheelchair if you dont have children.
The Rome office of Human Life International helps to establish a link with pro-life Vatican offices such as the Pontifical Council for the Family and the Pontifical Academy for Life. It also provides scholarships for four priests from South America and Africa to work on doctorates in bioethics. Those students will then be able to teach in seminaries and universities, as well as serve as advisers to Catholic hospitals.
Bioethical questions will become more important in the future to the development of life science, said Fr. Barreiro. People will have to decide if things are morally possible or not. For example, one of the students is completing a dissertation on the moral possibility of women adopting frozen embryos, which live for only 10 years.
The office has a library of over 4,000 volumes on bioethics. Priests must know reasons as well as teachings, Fr. Barreiro said. Thats the whole point of theology, to show reasons for our belief. We are not asking something absurd, but for the good of man.
In his Aug. 2 lecture, Fr. Barreiro emphasized that the new Mass, or novus ordo, promulgated by Pope Paul VI, is perfectly valid and that those who still choose the Tridentine, or Latin Mass, are not promoting division within the church.
These are complementary differences that enrich the church, he said. We are all marching together. Liturgy opens the window to heaven if said in accordance with the rubrics.
Fr. Barreiro noted one difference that novus ordo followers often mention the fact that in the Tridentine rite, the priests back is to the congregation.
If the mayor of Milwaukee wants to see the governor of Wisconsin, he will talk to the governor face to face and his delegation will be behind him. He will not give his back to the governor and talk to the delegation. We localize God in the east (and establish) the relationship between God and the rising sun, which is a symbol of the risen Christ.
Ping for brilliant analysis of the connections between the liturgical chaos and the moral chaos.
The N.O. has the same pinnacle as the Latin Mass: The Holy Eucharist! It is simply erroneous to say there is NOTHING enriching about the Novus Ordo!
All pinnacles have different heights.
The Tridentine Mass is the equivalent of Mount Everest:
The Closest Thing to Heaven.
|...AND PROTECTS HIS CHURCH FROM TEACHING ERROR IN FAITH AND MORALS|
|Infallibility is the protection given by the Holy Spirit to the pope so that he will never teach error in matters of faith and morals. The First Vatican Council, which defined papal infallibility in 1870, was acting in response to a challenge to the doctrine which has always been true and was accepted and practiced from the earliest times. The evidence for papal infallibility comes from three sources: Scripture, history and logic.
First, Scripture clearly shows that Christ intended a special role for Peter in the establishment of the Church, and special divine protection for Peter in the exercise of his authority. This is evidenced in passages such as: "Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church and the powers of hell will not prevail against it...to you I give the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven and whatever you bind on earth is bound in heaven; whatever you loose on earth is loosed in heaven." (Matthew 16:17-19); "Do you love me, Peter... Feed my sheep." (John 21:15-17); and "I have prayed for you, Peter, that your faith may not fail. You in turn must confirm your brethren." (Luke 22:31-32)
Second, history shows that from the earliest times the bishops of Rome acted as if they had special authority in succession from St. Peter, and the rest of the Church accepted their authority as if they knew it was genuine. Thus Pope Clement wrote to settle a problem in the Church of Corinth before the end of the 1st century. The Church Fathers, too, repeatedly attest to the authority of the Roman See. And the Popes always had the decisive word at general councils, as when the Fathers of the Council of Chalcedon in 451 A.D. accepted the Papal definition of the two natures of Christ and said, "Peter has spoken through Leo."
Third, logic tells us that since Peter had a special commission and special powers from Christ, these powers must be essential to the Church. If these special and essential powers were to pass out of existence, it would be proof that Christ was no longer with His Church and that the "powers of Hell" had indeed prevailed. Since Christ knew that Peter would not live until the end of time, he must have intended that the successors to Peter have these powers.
Since the successors of Peter have the same authority, which comes ultimately from Christ, to bind and loose, they have the authority to bind the faithful in matters pertaining to salvation that is, in faith or morals. If a Pope could bind the faithful to error, it would be a clear triumph of the powers of Hell, because the entire Church would be bound to follow the error under Christ's own authority. Therefore, the logic of the situation demands that Peter's power of confirming the brethren must be an infallible power.
Vatican I clarified what was at that time a confusing issue, but did so by way of stating clearly what Christ's teaching was, not by way of adding anything new. Vatican I therefore carefully enumerated the conditions under which the Pope is in fact infallible the same conditions which logic demands, which Scripture suggests, and which tradition shows us in action down through the centuries.
When the Pope (1) intends to teach (2) by virtue of his supreme authority (3) on a matter of faith and morals (4) to the whole Church, he is protected by the Holy Spirit from error. His teaching act is therefore called "infallible" and the teaching which he articulates is termed "irreformable" which means it can never be changed because it is certainly true.
Jeffrey A. Mirus holds a Ph.D. in History of Theology
I don't necessarily buy into that.
The church needs to address why couples no longer want to have large families, and I do not believe it has anything to do with changes in the mass.
I pay no mind to EWTN; it's a sorry excuse for Catholicism. You've got Fr. Serba telling Jews there's no need to convert to Catholicism. And then there's Fr. Popcak recommending that sons record their sisters' and mothers' fertility cycles.
Sure it does. It's called a loss of faith. That is what the church needs to address.
That's too bad. Guess you'll miss the upcoming interviews Raymond Arroyo has planned with Cardinal Ratzinger (9/5) and Senator Rick Santorum (9/12).
Then too there are the new programs lined up for this Fall, including:
GET A LIFE IN CHRIST (SAP) (30:00)
Augustine the Spiritual Guide
In this labor of love, Fr. Benedict Groeschel introduces the viewer to his teacher of over 50 years - St. Augustine. This preeminent Father of the Church left over five million published words- ranging from history and philosophy to scriptural commentary and mystical writings. Fr. Benedict is your guide in this 3-part series on St. Augustine's works as he invites you to climb the heights of the Augustinian Alps with him.
A TWENTIETH CENTURY TESTIMONY BY MALCOLM MUGGERIDGE (60:00)
This engaging encounter with a controversial journalist exposes the twentieth century's idolatries, ideologies, and pretenses, and why they crumble after an encounter with Christ. This documentary follows Muggeridge - who embraced Catholicism in his eightieth year - to his English country estate, Madame Tussaud's Wax Museum where he is immortalized, and to the Holy Land.
CATHOLICISM: THE HEART OF HISTORY:
The history of civilization as we know it is intimately linked with the history of the Catholic Church. The Church's history is a gripping and enthralling tale of courage, heroic achievement, sanctity amidst humanity, faithfulness amidst the corruption of this world and the building of the civilization of God in a hostile world, from the humblest of beginnings. It is a heritage of which every Catholic can be rightly proud because it is second to none.
There is not a syllable in the rubrics of the New Mass or in any Vatican document from Vatican II on that mandates turning the priest around to face the people. This is simply a liturgical abuse that few priests have the courage to resist, because there are few people in the pews who could ever be brought to comprehend why it should be resisted.
Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever.
Need I say more?
Are we not all called to the Eucharist?
When we see the transubstantiation(sp?) take place during the Mass, are we not given to awe at the presence of the Body and Blood of Jesus?
No matter what order of Mass we tend to choose, we are blessed to be a part of something miraculous.
God has provided us with the freedom to choose, and his blessings are abundant to all who partake. It is those blessings that allow us to become better men and women who can serve God, and share in the apostolic to our friends and neighbors.
What I don't understand or agree with is the separation in the Church and the accusations of the NO which is a valid Mass whether they like it or not. I don't understand why they think that Jesus would want them to separate themselves from the main body of the Church to protect their own faith.
Where I think they are arrogant is that they'd rather separate, disparage other Catholics, believe in thier own intelligence rather than follow the path of Jesus who persevered to the end of His earthly life trying to make God's Kingdom known and promised to never abandon the Church that He had established.
If they want to separate because they truly find their spirituality in the Tridentine Mass then so be it. And if I see that the fruits of their decision is overwhelming and I want to start attending Tridentine Masses then so be it. But to trash the pope and trash anything to do with the NO Mass is just senseless and silly. Constructive criticism might be okay working within to correct error and promote faith would be even better.
I've said it before, the Church is not perfect. There are abuses but God is omnipotent and if Jesus died for us to save us then He loved us enough even though He knew our weaknesses. He gave us a Church to guide us and He gives Himself to us in the Eucharist. God is omnipotent. He can overcome man's obstinacy, man's pride and man's error. He is the protector of the faith and He has said that He would not let the gates of hell prevail over His Church. I think that losing faith in the Catholic Church is almost like losing faith in Jesus.
I also think that if you think that the Catholic Church of the past is the only solution then you think that the Holy Spirit is misleading the Church. Just as I don't sit myself in judgement of Jews, Protestant, or athiests I don't judge the Church as a body, God can handle that without me.
Nope, I'm into Catholicism, not a "New, World Church".
and I do not believe it has anything to do with changes in the mass.
Are you sure of that? Clearly it has something to do with changes in the Faith. People are no longer living their lives based on Faith and reliance on divine providence. Instead they are living a consumer lifestyle which may or may not include attending church on Sunday morning. Of all the changes to the Faith, all of which certainly are significant, isn't the change to the Mass the biggest one of all?
I don't believe that's the case. Fr. Marx was teaching NFP before Humanae Vitae, and before he founded HLI. But at that time there was still the concept of "grave reasons," it wasn't promoted as a lifestyle.
There was an ineter-regnum when Fr. Marx was forcibly committed to house arrest at his Benedictine order, and HLI was taken over by some liberals. These traitors temporarily agreed to withdraw the severe criticisms that Fr. Marx had made of the bishops' sex ed programs.
But after a year or two, there was a counter-coup, the liberals were thrown out, true followers of Fr. Marx were installed in all the key positions, and the first major statement by the new administration was that they were withdrawing HLI's temporary disclaimer of their opposition to sex ed programs.
Yes, but it's just my opinion. Just because the form and/or structure of the mass changed should have nothing to do with basic moral teachings which are timeless. Most people can grasp that.
People are no longer living their lives based on Faith and reliance on divine providence.
Why should they? They see that priests and the hierarchy have all their earthly needs tended to by the people and contributions to the church and that it has gone on for centuries. Ordinary people feel more of a dependence on God despite the current culture.
Of all the changes to the Faith, all of which certainly are significant, isn't the change to the Mass the biggest one of all?
The change may be significant, but I maintain that people are more prone to think for themselves and not accept everything blindly as they were formerly prone to do. I believe that it is due to ordinary catholics getting educated which was not an option for a large number of them until this past century.
Some of it is probably due more to their mingling with the evil protestants in society and the fact that if the church had its way, all means of contraception would be outlawed or suppressed.
I personally believe that they (laity) would rather strike a balance between a more meaningful existence for their families in this life rather than placing all their hopes on the next one.
If the church would address the real problem about how people are supposed to support a family of eight, ten or more children in our modern society in a more practical way rather than blandly telling them to rely on providence when they don't have to themselves, people still would probably want to limit their families, but things would be more honest that way.
People in first-world countries are starting to think for themselves and take charge of that part of their lives they can control. That is the root of the problem.
First time I have EVER heard that the Opies and the Charos are the same.
Have you checked with either group?