New Forum! For Okie Trads and Beyond

Started by christulsa, September 16, 2017, 11:18:27 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

MundaCorMeum

Ches, that childhood limits and boundaries analogy is excellent!  I hope you don't mind if I "steal" for explaining why rules are important, and certain exceptions allowed, to my own children and friends =)

Mono no aware

#76
Quote from: Non Nobis on September 21, 2017, 11:22:28 PM
Quote from: Quaremerepulisti on September 21, 2017, 02:09:25 PM
It doesn't entail a contradiction that the Catholic Mass could be similar to a Protestant liturgy, because being similar in appearance to some extent does not entail being the same in reality.  Whether the magnitude of the similarity measure is "acceptable" is a subjective judgment and will differ between individuals.

People need to decide if the similarity is acceptable enough for them to take their children to a Novus Ordo Mass.  The similarity needs to be considered closely by them, and others they rely on.  Just because the judgement of each individual is subjective doesn't mean acceptability is irrelevant.  If some large percent of good, intelligent people you know make the subjective judgment that a Mass is too protestant, that should be taken into account when making your own prudent (although subjective) judgement. 

If the protestant-like features are studied objectively and found (subjectively) unacceptable to many men who have studied them well; and many have come to (subjectively) believe the same thing, then I think it important at some point to consider whether the changes in the Mass were really "a good thing" for the Church.

If I may, Non Nobis, I think I can anticipate QMR's response here, because I once put an objection similar to yours to him.  His answer is actually a good one, and true to the "perfect epistemology" to which he cleaves.  If we push our objection back from us as individuals and into a broader group of "good and intelligent people," then QMR will be fast to remind us that this an Orthodox epistemology: they, too, could say, "well, look, we had our bishops, our experts, and our theologians study this stuff, and they all agreed that Rome went too far."  QMR is unfortunately right that a subjective judgement is a subjective judgement, whether it is the judgement of an individual or a collective of learned people.

Which is why I have come to see this as a dreadful Catch-22; a double bind.  On one hand, QMR is right: dissent from Rome is fundamentally subjective, no matter how smart we may be or how many people agree with us.  On the other hand, if dissent is thus impossible, then Catholics are religious automatons, indistinguishable from cult members.  QMR has admitted to me that hypothetically, even if everyone else in the Catholic Church deserted, he would still stay his epistemological course, until he and Francis were the very last two Catholics left on earth.  And then when Francis died, I guess he would elect himself pope.  And Quare me repulisti would certainly be a good papal motto for him: "why do I go about in sadness while the enemy afflicts me?"  All of which I suppose would be interesting if it were a piece of Borgesian short fiction, but as a real-life solution, it's kind of insane.  Or at the very least, irrational.


Quaremerepulisti

Quote from: Pon de Replay on September 21, 2017, 03:21:14 PM
But with this we are back to the same problem: if what is "acceptable," in terms of how far the Church can go off the rails, is a subjective judgment (and who are we laypersons to criticize Holy Mother Church?) then we once again arrive back at the irrational position of having to accept whatever the Church dispenses, however novel or contradictory or rupturous it may seem: quite literally, anything goes.  There is nothing that could come from the Church that we would not be forced to rationalize as a "richer and deeper understanding," even when it plainly negates what was originally taught. 

OK, but carefully consider the implications of this.  It's perhaps worse than you think.

It is true that the Church being in reality what she claims to be (that is, a Divinely-founded intrinsic means of salvation) entails that one must accept whatever the Church dispenses, no matter how novel or contradictory or rupturous, or anything else for that matter, it may seem to him.   (For if it were bad in reality, and not just seemingly so, it could not have been dispensed by a Divinely-founded intrinsic means of salvation.)

If this is an irrational position, then either:

1) It is irrational to hold that the Church could ever dispense anything that ever seems novel or contradictory or rupturous or anything else to anyone.  (E.g. the hypothetical consequent is actually impossible in reality and irrational to hold)

Or

2) It is irrational to hold that the Church is in reality what she claims to be.  (E.g. the antecedent is false and irrational to hold).

Now if 1) is the case, not only is the Catholic Church not the true Church, but no such Church exists anywhere.  Every single Christian denomination has done something which seems wrong in some way to someone.

And if 2) is the case, again, not only is the Catholic Church not the true Church (for what is irrational to hold cannot be the reality), but the exact same argument applies to every other Christian denomination just as for 1), and therefore no such Church exists anywhere.

So if every Church is a false Church, then either Jesus was wrong when He said, You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail, which would be absolute disproof of His Divinity (since if He is Divine He cannot be wrong about anything), or else He was misquoted in the Gospel, which is absolute disproof of its Divine inspiration (since what is Divinely inspired cannot be wrong); but not only that, it strips the Gospels of even human credibility, if they can be wrong on such a fundamental point. Why believe them when they say Jesus walked on water, miraculously healed the sick, raised Lazarus from the dead, etc., if they can't even accurately represent what He said? Whence Christianity with no Church and no Gospels?  Belief in even mere Christianity would then be irrational, and atheists and agnostics are correct.  Thus, as I've said before and will say again, for one who actually believes Vatican II and the NOM are evil, the rational thing to do is not to become traditionalist, but to give up on Christianity altogether.

Look, it seems to me completely at variance with what we know from science and genetics to hold that the human race is descended from only two individuals (or even the eight Flood survivors, for which there is independent genetic lineage from only five, due to the relationships between them).  (Although I think, perhaps, somewhere along the line humans may have mated with non-human hominids.)  Traditionalists just simply bury their heads in the sand with regard to these sorts of issues, comfort themselves with ersatz "refutations" that don't even come anywhere close to the actual data and issues, or just say (usually rather mockingly) how stupid and evil scientists are.  But this is special pleading, you should see.  Why is their demand that I accept Church teaching of monogenism, despite the evidence (and I have formal training in science and, frankly, know much more about it than they) absolutely valid and binding, but my demand that they accept Church teaching of Vatican II not valid?  I don't know everything, so I simply say that reconciliation of the teaching of the Church and scientific evidence is possible, and will become clearer at some point in the future.


QuoteYou are correct in pointing to geocentrism and usury as earlier examples.  The question remains: does this problem come down to choosing between whether A.) the Church has at some point in her history defected, or B.) Vatican II and the Novus Ordo Missae are acceptable as the teachings and public liturgy of the Catholic Church (and that any future changes, however far afield, will be likewise legitimate)?  You can appreciate that the rational answer does not seem to be B.

But the question is not what the rational seems to be, but what it actually is.  It must be rigorously proven, and not just assumed, that Vatican II and the NOM are evil or intrinsically harmful.  No one has succeeded as of yet in that endeavor.


Mono no aware

#78
Quote from: Quaremerepulisti on September 22, 2017, 09:09:47 AMThus, as I've said before and will say again, for one who actually believes Vatican II and the NOM are evil, the rational thing to do is not to become traditionalist, but to give up on Christianity altogether.

I agree with this, QMR, and I have carefully considered the implications.  To be completely honest, the only "certitude of faith" I have left is in the first words of the creed: "I believe in one God."  I believe this due to having had mystical experiences—although a type of mystical experience rather dissimilar to your own, apparently, as mine contained no obvious signifiers directing me to a particular revealed religion.  However, I must remain uncertain of the rest of the creed because, as you well say, there is no room in faith for doubt and, further, every church that proclaims the creed is "a Christian denomination that has done something which seems wrong in some way to someone." 

So I have to conclude, in retrospect, that I must've become a traditional Catholic not by grace, but by preference: rather than knowing it to be true, I wanted it to be true, because I loved it from an aesthetic and cultural and theological perspective, and by disavowing modernist Rome, it allowed me to fashion a cozy cocoon of my own little personalized antiquarian religion.  But all of this had an epistemological paucity.  And now I am confronted with agnosticism (again).  Is your solution, then, that I pray to be given certitude of the faith by grace?  This would be a faith, let us be reminded, in which my will and assent could be bent in any conceivable irrational direction in obedience to whatever gets dispensed by Rome in the future—however distasteful, Protestant, immoral, or heterodox I might personally find it. 

Is that what I should pray for?  I ask this in all seriousness.  I am hesitant to pray for that.  Try to see this as someone who is not standing in your shoes: from a rational perspective, I would almost just as soon become a Muslim as I would an automaton apologist for the Novus Ordo.  They both seem completely loony.  Maybe the most rational thing to do is to refrain from praying, because I used to sometimes have a certain sense of solace and consolation in prayer, and it's possible that praying could trigger a series of chemical misfirings in my brain that somehow convinces me of the same thing you are convinced of (that Vatican II and the NOM are from heaven; "truth is whatever we say it is"), and I would end up going around saying, "it all may seem crazy, my friend, but by the grace of God I believe it."  I would be no different from a Muslim saying the same thing.  It would be like praying to be given the same assurances as the disheveled wild-eyed transient on the street muttering about the aliens has.


Quaremerepulisti

Quote from: Pon de Replay on September 22, 2017, 10:08:23 AM
So I have to conclude, in retrospect, that I must've become a traditional Catholic not by grace, but by preference: rather than knowing it to be true, I wanted it to be true, because I loved it from an aesthetic and cultural and theological perspective, and by disavowing modernist Rome, it allowed me to fashion a cozy cocoon of my own little personalized antiquarian religion.  But all of this had an epistemological paucity.  And now I am confronted with agnosticism (again). 

Yes.  It is necessary not only to have an answer to the question "What is truth in religious matters?" but "How do you arrive at knowledge of the truth in religious matters?" that doesn't involve arguing in a circle.  This is where the ball got dropped.  It's in fact quite unavailing to argue in effect that we know truth because the true Church teaches it, and we know what the true Church is because it teaches the truth, and anyone who denies this is ipso facto evil.

And I will say I appreciate your honesty.  I have noticed a certain personality type is very strongly attracted to traditionalism - and not all facets of that type are admirable.  Narrow-minded, rigid, and unimaginative thinkers love traditionalism because all this can hide itself underneath the pretense of defense of orthodoxy (or of Thomism etc.).  Authoritarian types love it too - because they love the fact that God is telling people what to do and other are also telling people what to do - not in the valid sense that He is commanding out of Love, but simply because people are being told what to do.




QuoteIs your solution, then, that I pray to be given certitude of the faith by grace? 

Yes, as you know.  I'll put it to you like this.  Either certitude of faith is possible, or it is not possible.

If it is not possible, faith doesn't exist in reality and all organized religions are mere human creations constructed from human beliefs and desires.  (In fact, I will say this: some disputes about faith and religion are really more about basic in-group vs. out-group conflicts than anything else.  But I digress.)

If it is possible, it is not possible to arrive at it any other way except via God telling it, directly, to you.  This of course will generate the knee-jerk response of "Modernism!!!" but it is true.  God's individual revelation to an individual (in whatever way He deems fit) is a necessary precondition for faith, if "faith" is defined in the Catholic way as believing something on the authority of God revealing.  Because the motive for belief (of anything) must be the first link in the epistemological chain, not somewhere down the line.  Now it's true in Catholicism that God doesn't reveal all the articles of faith directly, but only indirectly, insofar as He reveals the Church is the infallible teacher of them.


QuoteThis would be a faith, let us be reminded, in which my will and assent could be bent in any conceivable irrational direction in the future in obedience to whatever was dispensed by Rome—however distasteful, Protestant, immoral, or heterodox I might personally find it. 

Is that what I should pray for?  I ask this in all seriousness.  I am hesitant to pray for that.  Try to see this as someone who is not standing in your shoes: from a rational perspective, I would almost just as soon become a Muslim as I would an automaton apologist for the Novus Ordo.  They both seem completely loony. 

Yes, and so does the idea of the Incarnation to a non-Christian.  But how about praying for knowledge of the truth?  Why fear the truth?

PerEvangelicaDicta

PDR, be assured of my prayers for your discernment.  From my observation, you have the ruby slippers  :P, but the Holy Ghost will enlighten your intellect.
Pardon me if I come across patronizing in providing this link - it's "God's Will 101" - and maybe a bit simplistic for one as well catechized as you - but it addresses many of the issues in this discussion.

Trustful Surrender to Divine Providence - https://www.olrl.org/snt_docs/trustful/
(many thanks to Stubborn)

If I pray to be given certitude of the faith by grace, will He give this to me?

a few excerpts:
QuoteIt is a strange fact that though Christ repeatedly and solemnly promised to answer our prayers, most Christians are continually complaining that He does not do so. We cannot account for this by saying that the reason is because of the kind of things we ask for, since He included everything in His promise -- All things whatsoever you shall ask.  Nor can we attribute it to the unworthiness of those who ask, for His promise extended to everybody without exception -- Whoever asks shall receive.  Why is it then that so many prayers remain unanswered? Can it be that as most people are never satisfied, they make such excessive and impatient demands on God that they tire and annoy Him by their importunity? The case is just the opposite. The only reason why we obtain so little from God is because we ask for so little and we are not insistent enough.

Christ promised on behalf of His Father that He would give us everything, even the very smallest things. But He laid down an order to be observed in all that we ask, and if we do not obey this rule we are unlikely to obtain anything. He tells us in St. Matthew:  Seek first the kingdom of God and his justice and all these things shall be given to you besides.

Continued
QuoteWe do not ask enough

It is clear then that we do not receive anything because we do not ask enough. God could not give us little, He could not restrict His liberality to small things without doing us grave harm. Do not misunderstand me. I am not saying that we offend God if we ask for temporal benefits or to be freed from misfortune. Obviously prayers of this kind can rightly be addressed to Him by making the condition that they are not contrary to His glory or our eternal salvation. But as it is hardly likely that it would redound to His glory for Him to answer them, or to our advantage to have them answered if our wishes end there, it must be repeated that as long as we are content with little we run the risk of obtaining nothing.

Let me show you a good way to ask for happiness even in this world. It is a way that will oblige God to listen to you. Say to him earnestly:  Either give me so much money that my heart will be satisfied, or inspire me with such contempt for it that I no longer want it.

Either free me from poverty, or make it so pleasant for me that I would not exchange it for all the wealth in the world. Either take away my suffering, or -- which would be to your greater glory -- change it into delight for me, and instead of causing me affliction, let it become a source of joy. You can take away the burden of my cross, or you can leave it with me without my feeling its weight. You can extinguish the fire that burns me, or you can let it burn in such a way that it refreshes me as it did the three youths in the fiery furnace. I ask you for either one thing or the other. What does it matter in what way I am happy? If I am happy through the possession of worldly goods, it is you I have to thank. If I am happy when deprived of them, it gives you greater glory and my thanks are all the greater.

This is the kind of prayer worthy of being offered to God by a true Christian. When you pray in this way, do you know what the effect of your prayers will be? First, you will be satisfied whatever happens; and what else do those who most desire this world's goods want except to be satisfied? Secondly, you will not only obtain without fail one of the two things you have asked for but, as a rule, you will obtain both of them. God will give you the enjoyment of wealth, and so that you may possess it without the danger of becoming attached to it, He will inspire you at the same time with contempt for it. He will put an end to your sufferings and even more He will leave you with a desire for them which will give you all the merit of patience without having to suffer. In a word He will make you happy here and now, and lest your happiness should do you harm, He will let you know and feel the emptiness of it. Can one ask for anything better? But if such a great blessing is well worth being asked for, remember that still more is it worth being asked for with insistence. For the reason why we obtain little is not only because we ask for little but still more because, whether we ask a little or we ask a lot, we do not ask often enough.

Perseverance in Prayer

If you want all your prayers to be answered without fail and oblige God to meet all your wishes, the first thing is never to stop praying. Those who get tired after praying for a time are lacking in either humility or confidence, and so do not deserve to be heard. You would think that they expected their requests to be obeyed at once as if they were orders. Surely we know that God resists the proud and shows His favors to the humble. Won't our pride allow us to ask more than once for the same thing? It shows very little trust in God's goodness to give up so soon and take a delay for an absolute refusal.
They shall not be confounded in the evil time; and in the days of famine they shall be filled
Psalms 36:19

PerEvangelicaDicta

QuoteI have noticed a certain personality type is very strongly attracted to traditionalism

This prompted me to consider why we moved from the Novus Ordo to more traditional practice of the faith, and I had an epiphany.

I was raised in the N.O. by EWTN type parents and never had a lapse of faith.  Where I lived, there wasn't a whiff of a TLM anywhere, so I was blissfully unaware.  The Novus Ordo was the culture.
From young adult forward, I was involved in the parish (choir, lector, scripture study, etc), searching for an intangible element, thinking if I was close to the priest I would find it.  I started studying theology, and even audited courses for (N.O.) deacons. One course had to do with "high and low  Christology", and it was clear I was wholly "high Christology". I won't bore you with details.

Fast forward, years later, living in another state, and my dear recently converted spouse found a TLM.  It greatly appealed to him, since he came from Eastern Catholic background.  And now I realize it appealed to me due to the ultra reverence, that intangible element I searched for over the years.  The "high Christology" draw, and focus on the Divine. 
They shall not be confounded in the evil time; and in the days of famine they shall be filled
Psalms 36:19

Mono no aware

#82
Quote from: Quaremerepulisti on September 22, 2017, 12:38:42 PM
QuoteThis would be a faith, let us be reminded, in which my will and assent could be bent in any conceivable irrational direction in the future in obedience to whatever was dispensed by Rome—however distasteful, Protestant, immoral, or heterodox I might personally find it. 

Is that what I should pray for?  I ask this in all seriousness.  I am hesitant to pray for that.  Try to see this as someone who is not standing in your shoes: from a rational perspective, I would almost just as soon become a Muslim as I would an automaton apologist for the Novus Ordo.  They both seem completely loony. 

Yes, and so does the idea of the Incarnation to a non-Christian.  But how about praying for knowledge of the truth?  Why fear the truth?

I don't fear the truth.  What I fear is, believing something to be true when it isn't.  What I am afraid of is that a revelation telling me that the NOM is legitimate, Vatican II taught orthodoxy, and that Catholics must have a cultish obedience to "truth is whatever we say it is" would render me essentially indistinguishable from someone who receives important dispatches from the ether about Elvis, aliens, the CIA, and the Illuminati.  I fear giving myself a spiritual lobotomy.  You are epistemologically pure in contending that only a direct revelation from God can give anyone certainty, but the problem is that the direct revelations seem to be scattershot as to which religion they divinely condone.  A Muslim, a Mormon, and a Raëlian could all make the same claim as you do, of being given the absolute and certain truth.  Rationally, a person might consider that these conflicting claims of certitude have resulted in wars and persecutions.  David Hume once said something to the effect that the errors of religion were dangerous, while the errors of philosophy were only ridiculous.  He was probably onto something.  There was likely never a militant movement that beheaded people for refusing to believe in the truths of Plato.  But then again, I guess he didn't anticipate Marx.

You are correct that traditional Catholicism has an appeal to certain personality types, but not all of them mesh.  What I have always found beautiful about Christianity is its emphasis on the holiness of detachment: in deliberately setting one's self apart from worldly endeavors and asinine behaviors—to "be not conformed to this world."  In this way Christianity is not only a civilizing influence, but provides a firm foundation for mysticism.  As someone of an authoritarian mindset myself, I appreciate the strict "thou shalt nots" that quash vanity and shackle the passions, and tame the wild human primate.  Some of these aspects are also found in certain forms of Buddhism, so I guess that's why these are the two religions that have always had the most appeal for me.  At their best they are both religions of a certain quietude, delicacy, minimalism, and solemn dignity.  Admittedly this does not make them true; only beautiful.  But that's why I don't recoil from the Incarnation as an absurdity in the same way an atheist does; there are spiritual fruits to the doctrine.  "God became man so that man might become like God."

Many other traditional Catholics, though, bristle against any so-called "rigorism," and they would rather party on and enjoy life while intellectually holding the faith and following a modicum of rules (with abundant loopholes).  So I do wonder if there's any truth to the theory that mostly maniacs and grouches are drawn to it (for me, I wish there were more latter-day St. Clements and St. Jeromes).  Traditional Catholicism seems to draw from so many personality types that it's hard to say it attracts any particular one in abundance.



Matto

#83
Quote from: Pon de Replay on September 22, 2017, 02:14:17 PMSo I do wonder if there's any truth that only maniacs and grouches are drawn to it (for me, I wish there were more latter-day St. Clements and St. Jeromes).
I have been told that the people drawn to the Latin Mass are all either Czech or schizophrenic, but I would say rather there are saints schizophrenics and the presumptuous.
I Love Watching Butterflies . . ..

Chestertonian

Quote from: PerEvangelicaDicta on September 22, 2017, 01:37:20 PM
PDR, be assured of my prayers for your discernment.  From my observation, you have the ruby slippers  :P, but the Holy Ghost will enlighten your intellect.
Pardon me if I come across patronizing in providing this link - it's "God's Will 101" - and maybe a bit simplistic for one as well catechized as you - but it addresses many of the issues in this discussion.

Trustful Surrender to Divine Providence - https://www.olrl.org/snt_docs/trustful/
(many thanks to Stubborn)

If I pray to be given certitude of the faith by grace, will He give this to me?

a few excerpts:
QuoteIt is a strange fact that though Christ repeatedly and solemnly promised to answer our prayers, most Christians are continually complaining that He does not do so. We cannot account for this by saying that the reason is because of the kind of things we ask for, since He included everything in His promise -- All things whatsoever you shall ask.  Nor can we attribute it to the unworthiness of those who ask, for His promise extended to everybody without exception -- Whoever asks shall receive.  Why is it then that so many prayers remain unanswered? Can it be that as most people are never satisfied, they make such excessive and impatient demands on God that they tire and annoy Him by their importunity? The case is just the opposite. The only reason why we obtain so little from God is because we ask for so little and we are not insistent enough.

Christ promised on behalf of His Father that He would give us everything, even the very smallest things. But He laid down an order to be observed in all that we ask, and if we do not obey this rule we are unlikely to obtain anything. He tells us in St. Matthew:  Seek first the kingdom of God and his justice and all these things shall be given to you besides.

Continued
QuoteWe do not ask enough

It is clear then that we do not receive anything because we do not ask enough. God could not give us little, He could not restrict His liberality to small things without doing us grave harm. Do not misunderstand me. I am not saying that we offend God if we ask for temporal benefits or to be freed from misfortune. Obviously prayers of this kind can rightly be addressed to Him by making the condition that they are not contrary to His glory or our eternal salvation. But as it is hardly likely that it would redound to His glory for Him to answer them, or to our advantage to have them answered if our wishes end there, it must be repeated that as long as we are content with little we run the risk of obtaining nothing.

Let me show you a good way to ask for happiness even in this world. It is a way that will oblige God to listen to you. Say to him earnestly:  Either give me so much money that my heart will be satisfied, or inspire me with such contempt for it that I no longer want it.

Either free me from poverty, or make it so pleasant for me that I would not exchange it for all the wealth in the world. Either take away my suffering, or -- which would be to your greater glory -- change it into delight for me, and instead of causing me affliction, let it become a source of joy. You can take away the burden of my cross, or you can leave it with me without my feeling its weight. You can extinguish the fire that burns me, or you can let it burn in such a way that it refreshes me as it did the three youths in the fiery furnace. I ask you for either one thing or the other. What does it matter in what way I am happy? If I am happy through the possession of worldly goods, it is you I have to thank. If I am happy when deprived of them, it gives you greater glory and my thanks are all the greater.

This is the kind of prayer worthy of being offered to God by a true Christian. When you pray in this way, do you know what the effect of your prayers will be? First, you will be satisfied whatever happens; and what else do those who most desire this world's goods want except to be satisfied? Secondly, you will not only obtain without fail one of the two things you have asked for but, as a rule, you will obtain both of them. God will give you the enjoyment of wealth, and so that you may possess it without the danger of becoming attached to it, He will inspire you at the same time with contempt for it. He will put an end to your sufferings and even more He will leave you with a desire for them which will give you all the merit of patience without having to suffer. In a word He will make you happy here and now, and lest your happiness should do you harm, He will let you know and feel the emptiness of it. Can one ask for anything better? But if such a great blessing is well worth being asked for, remember that still more is it worth being asked for with insistence. For the reason why we obtain little is not only because we ask for little but still more because, whether we ask a little or we ask a lot, we do not ask often enough.

Perseverance in Prayer

If you want all your prayers to be answered without fail and oblige God to meet all your wishes, the first thing is never to stop praying. Those who get tired after praying for a time are lacking in either humility or confidence, and so do not deserve to be heard. You would think that they expected their requests to be obeyed at once as if they were orders. Surely we know that God resists the proud and shows His favors to the humble. Won't our pride allow us to ask more than once for the same thing? It shows very little trust in God's goodness to give up so soon and take a delay for an absolute refusal.

what's that quote about the definition of insanity is doing something over and over again and expecting a different result?  from reading about "obliging God" to grant our "wishes"  I have a hard time seeing how it doesn't lend itself to a "health and wealth" gospel mentality where if you're sick/suffering/broke it must be because you're not asking for enough, not asking for it humbly enough, or not asking with enough faith.  Either way it must be because you're failing at prayer....as if God is just up in heaven waiting to end our poverty/restore physical health/eliminate mental suffering if only we asked 38,934 times instead of 38,933 times

Our Lord said, "If you then being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children: how much more will your Father who is in heaven, give good things to them that ask him?"

there are a lot of times when my son asks for some cheap piece of crap made in china and we say no because I'm not interested in spending good money on something that I know is going to be broken and worthless within 2 hours of opening the package.  I know that what he asks for will give him instant gratification but won't add any value to his life beyond it.  sometimes children have a difficult time accepting reality and so the ask for the same thing over and over again.  this is especially common with littler children but older children can nudge and nag as well.  but if you're consistent about what you allow and don't allow, they eventually come to accept that no, I cannot have a sleepover, not at John's house or Matthews house or anyone's house.... you hear "no" enough times and you stop asking because you realize it's not going to happen. 

I also have difficulty wrapping my mind around the idea of God giving us contempt for the good he chooses not to give us.  If what we are asking for is truly a good, such as enough money to get by, or physical health, or mental health, etc...  Say you're going through fertility problems and you are praying for the gift of a son/daughter, and God says "no" and He doesn't give you a child...  you wouldn't ask God to fill you with contempt for a child, no?  Wouldn't contempt for children be contrary to the nature of marriage?   Or what if you are asking God for something like physical health or mental health?  It's normal and natural to want to have the necessary mental and physical health in order to fulfil the duties of your state in life, so why would we want to have contempt for it?
"I am not much of a Crusader, that is for sure, but at least I am not a Mohamedist!"

mikemac

Chestertonian when I first read that post by PerEvangelicaDicta I thought of you.  Saint Monica prayed for 17 years for the conversion of her son, Saint Augustine of Hippo.
Like John Vennari (RIP) said "Why not just do it?  What would it hurt?"
Consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary (PETITION)
https://lifepetitions.com/petition/consecrate-russia-to-the-immaculate-heart-of-mary-petition

"We would be mistaken to think that Fatima's prophetic mission is complete." Benedict XVI May 13, 2010

"Tell people that God gives graces through the Immaculate Heart of Mary.  Tell them also to pray to the Immaculate Heart of Mary for peace, since God has entrusted it to Her." Saint Jacinta Marto

The real nature of hope is "despair, overcome."
Source

Non Nobis

#86
It has always rather annoyed me that such important discussions as these (Pon/QMR & Chestertonian etc. discussions) get buried in strange places like "General Information / New Forum! for Okie Trads..."

I hope to get back to this later...
[Matthew 8:26]  And Jesus saith to them: Why are you fearful, O ye of little faith? Then rising up he commanded the winds, and the sea, and there came a great calm.

[Job  38:1-5]  Then the Lord answered Job out of a whirlwind, and said: [2] Who is this that wrappeth up sentences in unskillful words? [3] Gird up thy loins like a man: I will ask thee, and answer thou me. [4] Where wast thou when I laid up the foundations of the earth? tell me if thou hast understanding. [5] Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

Jesus, Mary, I love Thee! Save souls!

Kaesekopf

Quote from: Non Nobis on September 23, 2017, 11:12:16 PM
It has always rather annoyed me that such important discussions as these (Pon/QMR & Chestertonian etc. discussions) get buried in strange places like "General Information / New Forum! for Okie Trads..."

I hope to get back to this later...

At least we can like posts here now...
Wie dein Sonntag, so dein Sterbetag.

I am not altogether on anybody's side, because nobody is altogether on my side.  ~Treebeard, LOTR

Jesus son of David, have mercy on me.

Gardener

Quote from: Chestertonian on September 22, 2017, 03:00:06 PM

what's that quote about the definition of insanity is doing something over and over again and expecting a different result?  from reading about "obliging God" to grant our "wishes"  I have a hard time seeing how it doesn't lend itself to a "health and wealth" gospel mentality where if you're sick/suffering/broke it must be because you're not asking for enough, not asking for it humbly enough, or not asking with enough faith.  Either way it must be because you're failing at prayer....as if God is just up in heaven waiting to end our poverty/restore physical health/eliminate mental suffering if only we asked 38,934 times instead of 38,933 times

Our Lord said, "If you then being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children: how much more will your Father who is in heaven, give good things to them that ask him?"

there are a lot of times when my son asks for some cheap piece of crap made in china and we say no because I'm not interested in spending good money on something that I know is going to be broken and worthless within 2 hours of opening the package.  I know that what he asks for will give him instant gratification but won't add any value to his life beyond it.  sometimes children have a difficult time accepting reality and so the ask for the same thing over and over again.  this is especially common with littler children but older children can nudge and nag as well.  but if you're consistent about what you allow and don't allow, they eventually come to accept that no, I cannot have a sleepover, not at John's house or Matthews house or anyone's house.... you hear "no" enough times and you stop asking because you realize it's not going to happen. 

I also have difficulty wrapping my mind around the idea of God giving us contempt for the good he chooses not to give us.  If what we are asking for is truly a good, such as enough money to get by, or physical health, or mental health, etc...  Say you're going through fertility problems and you are praying for the gift of a son/daughter, and God says "no" and He doesn't give you a child...  you wouldn't ask God to fill you with contempt for a child, no?  Wouldn't contempt for children be contrary to the nature of marriage?   Or what if you are asking God for something like physical health or mental health?  It's normal and natural to want to have the necessary mental and physical health in order to fulfil the duties of your state in life, so why would we want to have contempt for it?

It's not that trustful surrender to Divine Providence gives us contempt for the good (objective) He chooses not to give us, but that it gives us a contempt for that thing in our own context (subjective). Anything objectively good remains objectively good, but it might not be good for us. God knows us better than we know ourselves. He knows what's coming up because all is present to Him.

For example, I am waiting on word about a job. I really want that job. From an objective perspective, it would be an amazing step up and provide a wide range of ability to touch many varied technologies, topologies, etc. I've prayed I get it. But I've also prayed that if it would lead me away from Christ in some way, that I not only don't get it, but that I would even lose my current job if that too is negatively affecting my relationship with Christ and growth in the Faith.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not some spiritual Ferdinand the Bull, sitting in the field of prayer and sniffing flowers. I. Want. That. Job!

But I know as a Father how I sometimes have to deny my oldest son an objective good for his own good.

So if I don't get the job, I know something better is coming -- maybe not by the world's standards -- and that allows me to look down upon those things to which I once looked up. Not that I think those things are bad, but for me they are poison.

I remember once I was swimming in a lake back home. I had not been in the lake *too* long. Dad called out for me to come ashore. Of course, I balked. He said again to come out of the water. I balked. He said again, and added that after I heard what he had to say, if I wanted to go back in I could. So I swam in. He had me turn around and look out. There was a bull gator about 100 yards from where I was swmiming, making his way towards us in a zig zag pattern. Dad had been watching him watch me. He did not tell me why in that moment, fearing I would freak out and splash in fear, causing the gator to sense the fear in his primordial way and rush in rather than stalking his prey. Fearful splashing is a dinner bell to the walnut sized brain of a gator. "Do you want to keep swimming?" Nope, I'm good!

In that moment, I had utter contempt for setting even a toe in the water. Swimming is good. The lake is good. Even the gator, in its natural way, is good. All together, just awful.

That's what the contempt for good things should be. Not contempt for the good, but for how that good might not be good for us in the moment or even all of this life. God knows what we do not, and we must trust this is true.
"If anyone does not wish to have Mary Immaculate for his Mother, he will not have Christ for his Brother." - St. Maximilian Kolbe

Chestertonian

Quote from: mikemac on September 23, 2017, 02:33:15 PM
Chestertonian when I first read that post by PerEvangelicaDicta I thought of you.  Saint Monica prayed for 17 years for the conversion of her son, Saint Augustine of Hippo.

sure.  and that was God's plan.  For her.  I think many of us know someone (or perhaps a few people) who have experienced real miracles due to the power of prayer.  In the gospels we read that this is something God does so that He will be glorified through these works.  But I've also known many other people who prayed for a child and were never able to have one, and now they're both 50 years old.  Should they still keep praying, or should they be praying for someone else?  Should they imagine that maybe God wants to bless them like Abraham and Sarah, or St. Elizabeth, or should they accept that God allowed them to be infertile and focus on blessing God in ways other than raising children. 

it all boils down to what God wants to do.  it is a bit of a paradox....the widow perseveres in prayer and after many years of fervent praying, her request is granted.  That has the appearance of changing God's mind.  But God never changes.  I have done a lot of those 54 rosary novenas.  my wife nd i started them before we got married and life has just gotten worse and worse as the years go by.  Eventually you stop asking God to change things and then instead to change your disposition and give you peace and joy in suffering, and that hasn't happened either. 

you have the verse "Delight in the Lord, and He will give you the desires of your heart."  it sure sounds nice, doesn't it.  It's easy to delight in the Lord when He gives you his protection and a sense of His love and presence.  It's difficult to delight in Him when He meters out blow after blow, first giving you a black eye and then a kick in the stomach and then a few cracked ribs.  i haven't been able to get all through "abandonment to divine providence" it sure seems like some people find it to be a consoling book but i can't read stuff like this without getting these depressive thoughts that God positively wants bad things to happen to us and enjoys watching me suffer.  I remember once in boy scouts sometimes a spider would crawl into our tent.  We each had our own ways for dealing with the spider.  Some scouts didn't mind the spiders--they said, "Spiders are my friends because they eat wasps and mosquitoes."  Some of us beat the spider with a shoe, or a broom, Some of us tried trapping it under a cup and sliding a piece of paper underneath, trapping the spider and releasing it outside the tent.  And then there was that one crazy kid, who took the spider by the leg and pulled off each leg individually.  I always made sure to stay away from that guy.  so it's difficult not to imagine God as that kid from boy scout camp and I'm the daddy long legs.  It is difficult to delight in God when it seems like He is just watching you from above watching you struggle and delighting in your grief.
"I am not much of a Crusader, that is for sure, but at least I am not a Mohamedist!"