At the General Audience this week, Francis resumed his “catechesis on Mass” by addressing the question: Why go to Mass on Sundays?
We’ve all met them; self-identified Catholics who, at best, show up for Mass on Christmas and Easter in order to participate, even if only begrudgingly, in what is ultimately little more than a time-honored family tradition started by a long since deceased relative well before the Council opened the windows of the Church to the world.
From bitter experience, I can tell you that these people invade Novus Ordo parishes in droves for Midnight Mass on Christmas morning, which back in my “conservative” adolescence meant that I – a “regular” don’t you know – had to arrive by 11:30 pm in order to avert the risk of losing my seat (about three-quarters of the way back and to the right) to one of those C&E infiltrators.
Once Mass began, I could spot them a mile away – many if not most part of a multi-generational contingent of chatterboxes in ugly Christmas sweaters that give every appearance of having been exchanged and unwrapped just hours prior at the annual family reunion otherwise known as “Christmas Eve.”
Hey, don’t get me wrong, I’m not bashing these poor people. I actually feel sorry for them.
For the most part, I see them as victims of the “New Springtime;” people who have no blessed idea what the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass truly is much less why it’s important to assist therein.
And guess what?
As his ongoing “catechesis” makes plain, neither does the Heretic-in-Chief.
As a matter of fact, during this week’s Audience he managed to provide C&E Catholics with all of the excuses they need for continuing to blow off their Holy Day obligation; family functions notwithstanding.
You can read his Protestant masterclass for yourself if you’d like (the full version of which is available on the Holy See website only in Italian), but here is his ultimate answer to the question Why go to Mass on Sundays?
We Christians go to Mass on Sundays to meet the Risen Lord, or better to let ourselves be met by Him, listen to his word, nourish us at his table, and thus to become Church, that is, his mystical living Body in the world.
Let’s stop here for a moment. Yes, you read that correctly, “to become Church” (e così diventare Chiesa) – a phrase taken straight out of the Militant Liberal handbook (quite unlike anything found in the lexicon of the Church Militant).
And let us not overlook this beauty; “nourish us at his table” (nutrirci alla sua mensa).
Altars, you see, are for Sacrifice. Tables? Not so much.
Francis went on to describe what is lost when one fails to belly up to the “table” in order to “become Church,” saying:
Without Christ we are condemned to be dominated by the fatigue of everyday life, with its worries, and by the fear of tomorrow. The Sunday meeting with the Lord gives us the strength to live today with trust and courage and to move forward with hope. This is why we Christians go to meet the Lord on Sunday, in the Eucharistic celebration … We Christians need to participate in Sunday Mass because only with the grace of Jesus, with his living presence in us and among us, can we put into practice his commandment, and thus be his credible witnesses.
This guy is a cruel joke in a bad costume, and the laugh is on those who delude themselves into imagining that he has even one Catholic bone in his body or any portion of his backside on the Chair of St. Peter; much less the whole thing.
Bottom line: To Francis, Mass is nothing more than a glorified retreat; an opportunity to recharge one’s social justice batteries for the week ahead.
Granted, that’s pretty much all that the Novus Ordo Missae has to say for itself, but if that’s why we go to Mass on Sundays, then the C&E Catholic has every good reason to sleep in.
Indeed Louie, I too pity the poor souls who go to mass once at Christmas and again at Easter. Many have grown up in New-Church and could barely be more ignorant about the faith. They have been un-nutured by those in authority and the result shows. They have been robbed blind and seem to love it. God have mercy. Francis says mass is to nourish us at His table. Spoken as a master of New Church. From a protestant perspective, no problem bro! From a neo-Catholic perspective, Francis is upholding tradition. Please God, rescue us soon.
Like I have said before. Bergolio is doing his best to tell the whole world (including the R&R camp) that he is no longer Catholic. We should believe him.
There are many akaCatholics who wish they could be C&E Catholics, but they have no where to go in the N.O. wasteland.
What is the Mass? St. Alphonsus of Liguori writes:
“The same action is performed in the Mass as was accomplished on Calvary, except that there the blood of Jesus Christ was really shed, while on the altar it is shed mystically; but in the Mass the merits of the Passion of Jesus are applied to each one in particular. To hear Mass, therefore, with great fruit, we must pay attention to the ends for which it was instituted, namely; 1. To honor God. 2. To thank him for his benefits. 3 To satisfy for our sins. 4. To obtain graces.”
Why go to Mass? St. Alphonsus writes:
“When we attend Mass we give more honor to God than all the angels and saints in heaven can give him, because theirs is the honor of creatures; but in the Mass we offer to God Jesus Christ, who gives him an infinite honor.
“Holy Communion is called heavenly bread, because as common bread preserves the life of the body, so Communion preserves the life of the soul: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of Man . . . you shall not have life in you. On the other hand, to those who often eat this bread eternal life is promised: If any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever. Therefore the Council of Trent calls Holy Communion “the medicine which delivers us from venial sins and preserves us from mortal ones.” You should, then, resolve to go to Communion at least once a week, being determined not to give it up for anything in the world; as there is no affair of greater importance than that of your eternal salvation. Indeed, the longer you remain in the world, the greater need you have of assistance, because your temptations are greater.
“There is no means more efficacious in freeing us from our sins, and in enabling us to advance in the love of God, than Holy Communion. Why is it, then, that some souls find themselves always in the same tepidity, and committing the same faults, notwithstanding the many Communions they make? This happens through the want of a proper disposition and preparation. Two things are requisite for this preparation. The first is to disengage our heart from all affections which are an impediment to the divine love. The second is to have a great desire to love God. And this, says St. Francis de Sales, should be our chief intention when we communicate, namely, to increase in divine love. Out of love alone, says the saint, ought our God to be received, who out of love alone gives himself to us.”
(Quotes from “A CHRISTIAN’S RULE OF LIFE” by St. Alphonsus Liguori.)
A manger of darkness (in the Vatican)
Subverting the Devotion to Our Lady of Guadalupe
Catholic men, when are you going to walk onto St Peter’s Square and remove all homo-erotic imagery (the naked man and the star and anything else that should not be there) from the scene of Our Lord’s Nativity?
But the homo erotic crap is what the V2 NO sect believes and promotes. Nothing will change until Catholics wake up and realize these heathens are not Popes, Cardinals, Bishops, or Priests. Yes they occupy the buildings but to call these heathens Catholic is blasphemy. Most of the Catholic men, and women, of the world still insist on calling Bergolio the Pope. This is what must change before restoration begins. So no, Ursala, there are no Catholic men left to storm St Peters. They have all been emasculated by the sexual revolution.
Why doesn’t His Humbleness just join the Bahá’í Faith and be done with it? After all, their main thesis is the essential worth of all religions, and the unity and equality of all people.
He has. Its called the NO V2 religion and he is their “pope.” The question should be why do so many people who claim to be Catholic look to a pagan as their “Pope?” Who are the deluded ones? The apostate who heads the conciliar fake church or the trads who still think Bergolio is a Catholic Pope?
Heretical Christianity is dying, and out from the ashes will come true Christianity. The term “Christ” is a Greek word for anointed one or Messiah. Yeshua wasn’t the Messiah, so so-called Christians aren’t true Christians. The real Christians are the Jews, for they long for a real Messiah, a real Christ (or Christian age) that will make the wolf lie with the lamb, as the Prophet Isaiah promised.
Judaism then. Judaism now. Judaism forever.
Jewish scriptures confirm that temple sacrifice ceased with the Sacrifice of Christ on the Cross:
Both the Talmud as the Zohar report that animal sacrifices were offered once a year, on Yom Kippur, by the Jewish high priest for forgiveness of sins, and that a red thread became miraculously white as a sign that God has accepted the sacrifices; if the colour change did not occur and the thread remained red, people were dejected as this was a sign that God had not heard the prayers and sins were not forgiven (Sohar, Vajikra, 3).
The Talmud reports that this miracle of divine confirmation (the red thread turning white) of the acceptance of the priestly sacrifice had already ceased for forty years before the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem (Babylon Talmud, Rosh Hashanah 31b and Jerusalem Talmud (yYom 6,3,43c), in 70AD. This means “the miracle of the red thread” had not occurred since the year 30AD, the time when Jesus was crucified at Calvary. Jews who followed Christ taught that the sacrifice of the Cross of Christ replaced the animal sacrifices of the Old Covenant, and a New Covenant had begun.
The Jewish high priesthood ended de facto with the tearing of the robes (both upper and lower garment) of Caiaphas on Holy Thursday, the rending of the Temple Curtain on Good Friday and the absence of discoloration of the red thread on Yom Kippur in autumn of the same year. De jure the office of high priest ended with the death of the last high priest Phannias ben Samuel (office holder from 66-70 AD) in the destruction of the temple.
The temple could never be rebuilt.
That’s a bit of a leap: any evidence that “Yeshua” is not the Messiah?
There’s a ton of evidence that “Judaism,” besides being a being a modern term, has nothing to do with God or “Christianity”.
Yes 2 Cents agreed and I guess many who log in here cannot understand that.
When you are made aware of the disordered lives of certain priests and cannot stomach the hypocrisy of feigned holiness and when you have theatrically proud “stars” of innovative Liturgies, it is a wasteland.
We tried many times but had to leave in the middle of the absurdities, there was nothing there for those of us who go to Mass to give Honor and Glory to God and we saw it as a near occasion of sin for our children undermining everything we tried so hard to pass on as the True Faith. One Ecclesia Dei affiliated priest suggested we could fulfill our Obligation canonically by going to an Orthodox Church.
Well said Ursula! Here we have a kabllah ( cabala) center where Talmudic Jews can go to enhance their worship. They feature tools like forecasting your activities for year to come through astrology .
Too bad the ” Jews who say they are Jews but are not “, according to Jesus still refuse to recognize the”Synagogue of Satan” that He referenced. Worse even still, is that our Prelates have willfully ignored His teaching on that.
Why are you on a Catholic blog?
That was for Michael65, btw.
I don’t believe the Tanakh is infallible, nor that the people who set up the canon were infallible people. Ever heard of the Jewish Apocrypha?
You’re using your New Testament-programmed mind to interpret certain passages.
Yeshua was, without a doubt, not the Messiah, for he did not make the wolf lie with the lamb nor bring world peace. If you’re going to call yourself a Messiah and not bring world peace, then you are as useful as no Messiah at all. What’s the difference?
Also, Yeshua can’t be the Messiah if New Testament-ism is false. New Testament theology is dependent on the concept of libertarian free will and moral realism (that we make choices and deserve punishment for ‘evil’ choices). But free will is incoherent. We do what we desire to do, and one cannot ‘choose’ one’s desires or distastes. Even if one could control one’s desires, they’d be random or based off what one desires to desire, and the second-order desire would be random or based on what one desires to desire to desire. Free will is incoherent, and so then is your false “Christianity.” There is no logical reason for the Deity to punish us if we don’t do anything evil by our own free will.
@FatherMonk – Assuming you’re right about “Judaism” being a modern term, so what? It’s just a word, describing a (set of) belief system(s) that may or may not be true.
I’m here because I had the desire to come here, and I have no ultimate control over my desires.
Perhaps God is giving you the grace to seek the true faith…the Catholic Faith.
That’s impossible, 2Vermont. God is defined as morally perfect amongst other things. Moral perfection depends upon libertarian free will. (Otherwise, one just does what they’re inclined to do…no reason for moral praise.)
One does what one is inclined to do. One can’t ‘choose’ one’s inclinations, and even if one could, they’d be random or based off what one is inclined to be inclined-towards. What one is inclined to be inclined-towards would be baseless or based on what one is inclined to be inclined to be inclined-towards. So you’re left with an infinite regress of inclinations, randomness, or a foundational set of inclinations coming from the Deity.
Free will is incoherent, and so then is ‘God’.
The Old Irish Woman’s Rosary
The catechesis of Bridget Murphy
Ever had trouble explaining the Rosary to someone? Well, the following may not be the perfect method, but it is very simple and very beautiful and will comfort many…….
Lady Beatrice Allen, a noble and wealthy English Lady, and ardent Protestant by conviction, once accosted a poor Irish woman whom she found saying her Rosary. In the hope of converting “the poor benighted creature”, as she considered her, good Lady Beatrice asked the poor woman why it was that she said that silly prayer. “Silly prayer, my Lady, you call it, but it is for me my joy and consolation. When I am sad and sorrowful it consoles me, and when I am well and happy it gives me more joy and pleasure.
How could it be silly, my Lady, to speak to the Holy Mother of God and sure that is what I am doing when I say the Rosary.” “Well then,” replied Lady Beatrice, “will you tell me all about it,” quite sure that she was going to hear a story of gross superstition.
The explanation of the Rosary which this poor vendor of vegetables gave Lady Beatrice was so clear and, withal, so impressive that she afterwards confessed that she had never heard from Bishop or Dean of her religion, a sermon that gave her more to think about. Weeks and months passed and she could not get the words of the old woman out of her mind, much as she tried. it was all so simple, so true, so sincere. Sufficient to say that our noble Lady put herself under instruction and was received into the Catholic Church at the end of a year. This caused terrible trouble in her up-to-then happy home. Her husband and friends thought she was mad.
During the bitter struggle that ensued, Lady Beatrice never abandoned the Rosary that she had so well learned to say and love and, at the end of the second year, her husband and children joined the Church!
Here is briefly how this dear old unlettered woman preached her sermon on the Rosary: Holding up her beads to Lady Beatrice she showed her the Crucifix and said: “When I begin to say my beads, my Lady, I kiss the five wounds of Jesus Christ as His Holy Mother did when He was taken down from the Cross and placed in her arms, I thank Him for all He suffered for me and I beg him to pardon my sins and take me to Heaven after my death.
Then, as you see my Lady, there are two parts in the Rosary; one is small and has only five beads. That tells that life is short and my sufferings will soon be over, and that I had better be ready for I may die any day, and I pray for a happy death.”
“There is the big part, the five decades, and that reminds me of the long life that is to come that will never end. And I say to myself: ‘take care Bridget Murphy that you go to Heaven and not to Hell’ and I try my best to be good and not to offend God.
On the big beads we say the Our Father, the prayer that God Himself gave to us. he must hear us, for sure he promised to do so. It was he Who put the words into our mouths and He must be our Father if He says it. Oh! it’s a beautiful prayer and I love to say it. To think that God is my Father! That is enough to make anyone happy.
“On the small beads we say the Hail Mary, and that prayer too, came from God for it is what the Angel Gabriel said to the Blessed Virgin when he told Her that She was to be the Mother of God. Oh! How pleased the Blessed Virgin must be to hear again the self-same words of the Angel, for I wish with all my heart to give Her again the happiness and joy the Angel gave her. She is my Mother, I make bold to ask Her to give me some of her great joy and holiness for a true mother gives everything to her children.
In the Holy Mary I ask the Blessed Mother to pray for me, her poor child, now, during this hard and wearisome life, to help me in all my little troubles but above all, I ask Her to pray for me when I am dying, at the hour of my death. Amen. Now, my Lady, how could God’s Mother, Who is so good and sweet refuse to listen to my poor prayers? I know She hears me, I am sure of it, and I am never tired saying the Hail Mary’s and giving Her pleasure.
“But you must be tired repeating all those hail Mary’s”, queried Lady Beatrice. “I am never tired, my Lady, of speaking to the Mother of God. I now want to explain to you that when we are saying the holy prayers we are thinking of how Our Lord became man and lived for 33 years on earth. These we call the Joyful Mysteries.”
“After that we think of all His terrible sufferings and how He died on the Cross. These are the Sorrowful Mysteries.” Here the good woman became wonderfully eloquent, talking about the Passion and death of Jesus Christ. She felt all she said, for her poor voice became broken and tears ran down her cheeks .
“Last of all, my Lady, we think of how Our Lord rose up from the dead, glory be to God, and how He went up to Heaven. These are the Glorious Mysteries. But before going He told St. Peter and the other Apostles that He would send down the Holy Spirit to comfort and console them and us all, and that He Himself would be always with us to help us. And truth He is in the Blessed Sacrament which we have in the Church. Every morning I go to Mass and, poor and bad as I am, the priest tells me that I must go to Holy Communion. And I say the Joyful Mysteries and I think that the good God comes into my heart as He did when He went into the womb of the Blessed Virgin herself, and I ask Her to help me to receive my God as She Herself did. And I am sure She does, for I feel such comfort and peace.”
Lady Beatrice listened in wonder and asked the old woman: “Who taught you all these wonderful things?” “It was the nuns at home in Ireland where I went to school, and the Parish Priest, Father O’Toole, God be merciful to him. He had a great way with him and used to explain everything very clearly.”
It was Lady Beatrice herself who told us this story but at much greater length and with many more details which, due to our limited space, we cannot give in all their fullness. She loves to tell the story of her conversion to priests and she wears on her arm the old Irish woman’s rosary in the form of a bracelet. She treasures this as one of her most prized possessions. From this fact we see how the Rosary can give to the humblest of the faithful a clear grasp and understanding of the great Mysteries of our Faith.
Source: Fr. Paul O’Sullivan. O.P.
Well Michael lets hope you do not desire to kill , rape or commit any other illegal acts because YOU have no control over Your inclinations.
You sound more like an atheist than a Jew.
Free Will is a gift from God and you do have a choice to know love and serve Him in this world so you can be with Him in the next or, choose to deny Him and the fact that He is a Living God.
Life is was and always will be about choices and controlling ones inclination to do evil or do good.
Bad choices always have consequences either her or in the afterlife. You choose Michael, your name itself means ,”Who is like unto our God”.
Sleeper may your namesake make you awake.
Let’s hope that even if I do have the desire to harm others, that I also have a higher-order desire to be empathetic and compassionate. One can still have compassion without having morality. Whatever you do, it’s what you want (desire) to do. Otherwise, it would have no basis; it’d be random.
One can be an atheist and a Jew at the same time. I believe in G-d in the same sense I believe in the Messianic Age. Not now, but in the future.
“Michael” was given to me by my biological parents. I had no control over it.
Michael65, do you believe there is objective truth or is all reality based on individual preception, thus subjective?
Dear Sweep…Sometimes I wish I was unaware of all the absurdities you mention. Life would be so much easier if I could join the “Ignorance is bliss” crowd. I admit there are times I envy those who could sit through a N.O. “mess” and actually believe they are fulfilling their Catholic obligations. Do not misunderstand. I believe there are many good and holy people functioning in the N.O. establishment (both clergy and laity). I am just not one of them and I pray for God’s mercy when I have no choice but to pray at home when there is no True Mass available to me. The Second Vatican Council was a disastrous turning point for every Catholic who must now live through the consequences whether they know it or not. Thank you Sweep for your comment.
Any (sede or other) contacts in Rome, Tom?
Is there no one in Rome who could at least throw a blanket to cover this abomination?
This would not get one into prison and would be a most merciful act, right within the Cradle of Christendom!
The Messiah already came. You missed Him.
In fact, the Messiah can be found everyday, within Catholic Church offering the Holy Mass, where the Messiah comes flesh and blood in the form of bread and wine, in the hands of Holy Priests who are prophesied to surpass the Judaic Levitical priests after the order of Melchizedek. The Messiah lives amongst us and Catholics receive Him every day.
And the Messiah will come again, in glory to judge the living and the dead. This means you Mr. Michael 65. If you don’t like him, then into everlasting hellfire you will go.
And once you and your kind are gone. Then finally, there will be peace.
And you can roll up and cry in a ball about how ‘anti-semitical’ it all is for eternity, but no-one will give a damn for the damned who chose to follow a false religion far removed from its original.
Michael, You state,”I have no ultimate control over my desires.”
Basically said , you have no control of self, therefore you are not really responsible for your actions.
Taking responsibility for your actions is the first sign of maturity.
Empathy denotes understanding of another’s predicament while expressing compassion IS expressing love.
God had so much Love for humanity , that He sent His ONLY Son .
There is no greater desire than the love that one has for another, than to lay down one’s life for him.
Love is the highest desire and Love seeks to be shared recognized and reciprocated to grow.
Jesus Christ is the perfection of Love itself and He Will Come Again Michael.
Be truly wise and do not remain empty .
So… Mr. Michael 65 follows a religion he knows isn’t infallible??? Sounds like a nutcase to me! But then again, we know what Mr’ Michael 65 is all about… Michael believes that he himself is God and is so fit to judge and discern the truth according to his own senses that he can freely decide which arbitrary apocryphal and voodoo mystical books he prefers to follow that will conveniently line up with his own perverse desires and which he can imagine himself a powerful wizard diving into the depths of occult knowledge that no other man has ever had, safe him.
Thankfully, unlike him, we have a ‘New-Testament-programmed’ mind given generously to us by the Messiah which sheds true light and fulfills all prophetic wisdom from the Old Testament. Whereas Michael, clearly must run to the Rabbi Nostradamuses of occult apocryphal texts that he knows are erroneous and fallible in order to reach the conclusion that he has no free will anyway… Grade A level genius here, this guy!
Such a clever guy that he fails to even comprehend the basic Christian understanding of sin and temptation, where we precisely DO THE OPPOSITE of what he claims we do. Free will isn’t the ability to do what we desire – this is a false definition he set up himself and is like a clumsy ox trying to impose on us.
Free Will is simply making a choice between doing God’s Will, or Our Will. Some desires are in line with God’s Will. Some desires are not in line with God’s Will. The job of a Christian is to align Himself, like the Messiah did, with the Will of the Father in Heaven. Once we do, we have peace – the PEACE only God gives, which is not the absence of war and conflict, such worldly things that only a poor fool crawling on the ground like Michael wants.
“Oh poor me! It’s all God’s Fault! He made me have these desires! He put me in this garden! He gave me this woman who gave me the fruit! He made the snake that tempted the woman! It’s all God’s fault! WAAAHH WAAAHHH”!
– Mr. Michael 65, Atheist, Apocryphal Jew, Possibly High School Student, medically Certified Will-Free license to do whatevah.
Basically Michael is saying that he has a problem in the brain and the electrical signals are shooting off any which way, possibly due to the drugs, and he accidentally found himself in possession of a computer upon which his hands flailed and incoherent words came out and over time assembled themselves into something legible. The wonders of the Darwinian mythical fairy tale of evolution. I’m very certain Michael factored that into his research. Don’t worry mikey, there will be plenty more of that in Hell, where you will neither know up nor down, nor have control over your nerves nor your motor functions, which will just be a logical extension of your worldview, one that you have no control over, but it’s yours all the same! The Deity is only giving you want you want! Which you so aptly describe here! That’s actually what you’ve chosen to believe, though you somehow contradictorily argue that you didn’t, but you just keep telling yourself that… that’s what you’re programmed to do!
So basically Michael has less capability than a particle at the planck level, where modern science has proven determinism wrong, and now there is evidence that between the state of potentiality that Schrodinger described as a particle existing between two states, there is no discernible reason why is will either go left or right and collapse the plane into reality. So either we exist in a multi-verse where every possibility happens, or it seems that even the simplest forms of nature exhibit and element of Free Will! But this is developed even further because when we discover that things still remain ordered, it’s almost as if…. gasp… every particle and atom’s behavior is orderly and following the dictates of some hidden higher power! As if nature is in complete conformity with something greater than it that sets it in order!
I doubt Michael will find any of this in his apocryphal books he accidentally reads… hopefully one day a significant chain of events forces his desires to read better books and bring him into the Catholic Church.
Michael is just one accident away from it happening!
Why is “Moral perfection” dependent “upon libertarian free will”?
Where do you get all these strange ideas and definitions you make up? Is it all those inclining inclinations that incline you to incline words into new inclined sentences that incline arbitrarily to what they’ve always been inclined to mean? What is the degree of you inclined inclination? 90 degrees? 180? To my inclinations it seems quite certain that you incline 260 degrees into a series of circular reasoning that is ultimately self-refuting.
Sure you can’t choose your tests and temptations. But God isn’t sending you to Hell for that! He’s sending you to Hell for what you choose to do once the temptations come. Kinda like rainy weather. You don’t control the rain, but you can choose to either go out or stay home. Both of those are good choice God likes… or you can even choose to ignore the warnings Not to go sailing in stormy weather, because it’s probably just something the Christians made up to spoil your fun, and then drown at sea. That’ll show us! That’ll especially show God! He doesn’t control you! And you’re free to be as far away from Him as possible after you die and throw out everything He provides you with… Like Free Will, Love, motor functions, thought processes, joy, and all that stuff.
You can however, keep all your inclinations! Those will serve as the wonderful fuel for the fires of eternity!
We on the other hand prefer to be forever free of those inclinations, through God’s Grace or their Purgation. Just the bad inclinations, mind you, we prefer to keep the GOOD DESIRES, those are awesome!
Where do you get off defining what is ‘harmful’ and what is ‘compassionate’ and what is ’empathetic’?
It’s all random in’nit? What’s the basis?
How do you tell whether the harmful thing you are doing is actually really compassionate?
How do you know whether the compassionate thing you are doing is actually harmful?
Are you sure you’re empathizing? Or is it an illusion? And doesn’t stuff like empathy and sympathy indicate that there is a conscience influencing our decision making in contrast to the electrical signals and animistic desires?
And how does one explain the existence of concepts like the ‘Dilemma’ and the ‘paradox’ and ‘guilt’ and ‘anxiety’ if our decision-making is entirely a deterministic product? Why is all that there and how is it a functional advantage?
And what is this word you are using… the word ‘hope’…?
What is the “hope”?
Where does the “hope” come from?
Is that chemical illusion as well?
Are you contradicting yourself now because you want to have it both ways?
And again what is this distinction of compassion as a ‘good’ apart from morality? By declaring that compassion is a desirable trait, then are you not setting up a moral system be default?
Poor michael… still in high school… in his angsty phase, with rock music and the skull t-shirt and the kippah cap and with his little hands grasping this big thing called philosophy found in little erroneous bits from his collection of apocrypha he bought at the local Wicca book shoppe.
It is now time for him to leave behind the childhood wonder-version of reality and start dealing with the grown-up rocky hard surface world where words and sentences have meanings and not feelings. Especially ones that contradict.
I wish I had one. But frankly, I think its better the whole world see frankie for who he is and who he is not.
“In our time more than ever before, the greatest asset of those disposed toward evil is the cowardice and weakness of good men, and all the vigor of Satan’s reign is due to the easygoing weakness of Catholics. Oh! if I might ask the Divine Redeemer, as the Prophet Zachary did in spirit (Zach. 13:6a): ‘What are those wounds in the midst of Thy hands?’ The answer would not be doubtful: ‘…With these I was wounded in the house of them that loved me (Zach. 13:6b). I was wounded by my friends, who did nothing to defend me, and who, on every occasion, made themselves the accomplices of my adversaries.’ And this reproach can be leveled at the weak and timid Catholics of all countries.”
-Pope St. Pius X, at the beatification of Joan of Arc (Dec. 13, 1908)
I will grant, for the sake of argument, that materialism is false, biological evolution is false, there is mental causation, and that there is some indeterminism at the quantum level. We still do not have libertarian free will. L.F.W. simply means the ability to choose between alternate possibilities.
“He’s sending you to Hell for what you choose to do once the temptations come.”
On what basis does one ‘choose’ to give in to or resist a temptation? One would have to have the desire to overcome the temptation. If resisting a temptation is not based on a desire to overcome it, then it’s baseless. It is random. You might say, “You can choose to have the desire the overcome the temptation.” But on what basis is that made? You would have to have the desire for the desire to overcome the ‘evil’ desire, or else it is random. See the regress? There is no escape.
Free will makes no sense. Given this true fact, morality is an illusion. This means that the New Testament deity does not exist, for He is defined as (among other things) morally perfect. There is no logical reason to “judge the living and the dead” if what they did was determined or random.
“Free will isn’t the ability to do what we desire” I never said that.
Where does my hope come from? I have hope for the Messianic Age. I can’t help but have hope. Intelligence is evolving: We are at the cusp of a technological revolution in which robots will do the work for us.
I do believe in objective truth. Consciousness is an objective truth, that consciousness desires happiness is a truth, and the present phenomenon is an objective truth. One can use their reasoning to arrive at other truths, such as the truth that free will and ‘God’ do not exist.
I have no ultimate over myself, and neither does anyone else. There is no MORAL responsibility. However, there is still causal responsibility. Just as we can say a hurricane is responsible for killing people, we can say that a serial killer is responsible for death. But neither the hurricane nor the human has free will, and so there is no basis for moral condemnation. One can still “existentially” condemn a hurricane, though. One thinks of Mel Gibson murdering a toaster.
Michael65, some have used their reasoning to come to the truth that there must be a God and free will. If there is objective truth, then both beliefs cannot both be true. I would dare say the downside of you being wrong is much greater than the downside if I am wrong.
Raised a Protestant, I could not help but be alarmed at the changes made in the Novus Ordo making it more like a Protestant service than the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
The following differences between the two are extracted from another website that I would like to cite but whenever I have done so in the past, Louie never posts them:
Brief Comparison of the Old & New Rites of Mass
You may find these and other differences between the Traditional Latin (‘Tridentine’) Mass and the New (Novus Ordo) Mass of the 1960’s (most commonly said at Catholic parishes at the end of the 20th century):
The ‘Tridentine’ Mass has a more vertical focus – a focus more on God than on fellow parishioners
The ‘Tridentine’ Mass is clearly a sacrifice (as opposed to a meal, as many ‘moderns’ want the faithful to view the Mass)
The ‘Tridentine’ Mass emphasizes self-denial, awareness of sin
In the ‘Tridentine’ Mass, the priest typically faces eastward, symbolically towards Christ (not towards the parishioners)
In the ‘Tridentine’ Mass, there is increased reverence at the altar and extreme reverence for the Holy Eucharist
In the ‘Tridentine’ Mass, there are ample references to atoning for sin, hell, judgment, and the intercession of saints
In the ‘Tridentine’ Mass, a fixed liturgy – containing the traditional prayers – is used throughout the Church, which is not subject to personal preference or manipulation
In the ‘Tridentine’ Mass, there are reverent silent periods where the priest leads prayers on our behalf
In the ‘Tridentine’ Mass, there is more genuflecting and kneeling
The ‘Tridentine’ Mass uses a different, fuller calendar
In the ‘Tridentine’ Mass, there are fewer rote responses by the parishioners
In the ‘Tridentine’ Mass, the unchanged, traditional prayers of consecration are used
In the ‘Tridentine’ Mass, Holy Communion is given only by priests – to kneeling communicants on the tongue (excepting, of course, those physically unable to kneel)
In the ‘Tridentine’ Mass, there are no ‘altar girls’, no lay readers (typically), and no ‘Eucharistic ministers’
In the ‘Tridentine’ Mass, there is a longer silent period after Communion for prayer & thanksgiving
In the ‘Tridentine’ Mass, pipe organs and Gregorian chant are employed rather than guitars and drums
In the ‘Tridentine’ Mass, the priest is not sitting off to the side while laity ‘take charge’
In the ‘Tridentine’ Mass, there is no hand-holding or “kiss of peace” among the laity
In the ‘Tridentine’ Mass, the stable rubrics help assure that liturgical abuses do not occur
And, of course, the Latin language is used for the majority of the ‘Tridentine’ Mass (you may follow along with a Latin/English missal)
Latin Mass attendees state that the above contribute to a more holy and reverent atmosphere with fewer distractions.
The Desire for the Traditional Mass – a Mere ‘Preference’?
Oftentimes the desire for the traditional Latin (‘Tridentine’) Mass is seen as a mere preference or attachment. Some may believe it has something to do with being resistant to change or about one’s personal likes. Many think the two Masses are the same, except for the language. Sadly, those who think such things are very misinformed. The truth is that the two Masses are significantly different, even if said in the same language, and that many (most?) of those who desire to attend this Mass do so not because of a mere preference, or resistance to change, or nostalgia, but because they are cognizant of the superiority of the old Mass. They do not base their conclusions on preferences or feelings, but on objective truths.
Their desire for the Traditional Mass may have been influenced by the poor fruits of the New Rite of Mass over the past several decades* – by their fruits you shall know them (Mt. 7:16) – such as a huge drop in Mass attendance, widespread loss of belief in the Real Presence, greatly reduced reverence, significantly fewer conversions, widespread loss of faith, etc., by the many liturgical abuses common to the New Mass, or by concerns of high-ranking prelates, such as Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci who stated that (emphasis added):
“[T]he Novus Ordo Missae – considering the new elements, susceptible of widely differing evaluation, which appear to be implied or taken for granted – represents, as a whole and in detail, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Holy Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent, which, by fixing definitively the ‘canons’ of the rite, erected an insurmountable barrier against any heresy which might attack the integrity of the Mystery.”
“[T]he new liturgy will delight all those groups hovering on the verge of apostasy who, during a spiritual crisis without precedent, now wreak havoc in the Church by poisoning Her organism and by undermining Her unity in doctrine, worship, morals and discipline.”
“To abandon a liturgical tradition which for four centuries stood as a sign and pledge of unity in worship, and to replace it with another liturgy which, due to the countless liberties it implicitly authorizes, cannot but be a sign of division – a liturgy which teems with insinuations or manifest errors against the integrity of the Catholic Faith – is, we feel bound in conscience to proclaim, an incalculable error.”
“We have limited ourselves above to a short study of the Novus Ordo where it deviates most seriously from the theology of the Catholic Mass. Our observations touch upon deviations which are typical. To prepare a complete study of all the pitfalls, dangers and psychologically and spiritually destructive elements the new rite contains, whether in texts, rubrics or instructions, would be a vast undertaking.”
Note that Cardinal Ottaviani had “formerly headed the Vatican’s Holy Office, which had the charge of protecting the integrity of the Catholic Faith.”
Or, they may have come to the realization after learning how closely the New Mass parallels Protestant ‘worship services’ or by discovering that the changes incorporated into the New Mass parallel the changes made by the 16th century Protest-ant ‘Reformers’ who purposely instituted those changes to destroy the belief of Catholics. They may be troubled by the unprecedented fabrication of a Mass by men in the 1960’s and that its creation was influenced by Protestant ‘observers’ – and that the person in charge of the New Mass’ creation was a suspected Freemason. Perhaps they are troubled by the unprecedented manner in which the New Mass was imposed on the faithful and by the fact that the New Mass is now acceptable to many Protestants – always fierce opponents of the Mass – and that some Protestants have even used the New Mass in their own ‘churches’. Perhaps they were troubled by the fact that those responsible for the creation of the New Mass stripped the prayers of the traditional rite of Mass of nearly all ‘negative topics’ (e.g. sin, judgment, hell, purgatory) and nearly all reference to the supernatural and to the Mass being a sacrifice. Or perhaps they have simply come to believe that God is more pleased with a Mass – the true re-presentation of Calvary – that is wholly focused on God, rather than one that seems to focus on our neighbor and ‘self-affirmation’.
It is clear that the desire for the Traditional Latin (‘Tridentine’) Mass has much deeper roots than a simple preference or personal opinion, but it instead is based on objective truths. In fact, it seems well-nigh impossible that an honest, well-informed Catholic could successfully argue the superiority of the new rite of Mass over the old rite. Even if one was to ignore the decades of bad fruits associated with the new rite of Mass*, the differences between the two rites speak for themselves.
Ah yes… then let us make way for our Robot Overlords.
I don’t suppose Mike, that the Messiah you are waiting for will be arriving on a spaceship too?
Now, one need only acknowledge reality Mikey, where plenty of people overcome addictions, alcohol, drug addiction. porn addiction, gambling, homosexuality and a host of behaviors which many of the saints own personal lives attest to that easily demonstrate that free will is no illusion, and that desire itself is an act of the will.
So… you’re factually and observably, historically, scientifically, insert-any-other-disciplinary incorrect.
What you really ought to be saying it that, “I Michael65, am too darn lazy and too darn attached to my own sins and way of life, which I find very comfortable unlike the poor saps starving in Africa or being killed in the Middle East, to change my way of doing things.” That’s your desire, and you don’t want to change it simple because you don’t wish to. That’s all. Everything else is an excuse-factory. You choose to give in. You don’t choose to change. Everything is ordered that way precisely because you desire Hell itself – No God, no Free Will, no logic. And that is what you will have there, because that’s what you stubbornly want and God will allow you to choose it. We choose otherwise.
That’s it. No need to embarrass yourself with any appeals to irrationality. The only one running to endless regression is you. We, like Aristotle and Plato appeal to the prime mover that ends regression, who is Himself infinite and unmade. And from whom we derive our Free Will being Made in His Image.
But let’s grant you all of the above anyway – no free Will. This then doesn’t automatically get rid of God, it just means you are now in the Protestant camp where some heretics believed that all men are either predestined for heaven or Hell and there’s nothing you can do to change that, so we might as well sin all we want because God has already hand-picked us. Same situation. Nothing you can do. Oh sure, I guess you can rail at this version of God about how unfair it all is, but in the end it’s a piss in the wind.
And you still don’t answer the question about why you ‘hope.’ ‘Hope’ implies that you can feel your way towards something that deterministically doesn’t exist. And why would a deterministic system create things like hope, dilemma, anguish, regret, etc. Doesn’t make sense. Ergo – the made up world you imagine exists, doesn’t, because it fails to account for any of that. And so too does the ‘god’ or ‘messiah’ you imagine to come likewise not exist. Though, given you’re susceptible, you could easily for the one claiming to be the ‘Messiah’, we call that guy the ‘Anti-Christ.’ The great deception that will come upon the world, where people like you are ripe for the picking.
So, you failed to answer the question of the existence of hope in a deterministic system where no free will exists. You imagine you can have intelligence apart from God who is the source and for which it is demonstrably seen that those who go further away from him devolve into their passions and ignore their rationale, such as what you have done. There is no ‘evolution.’ If anything mankind towards the end regresses. When the robots come, they won’t be doing your job for you. They’ll be taking your job from you, and you’ll be left unemployed along with many others, and this will lead to general unrest, which means we are heading for a world with increased violence, and, yes, also automated killing machines being developed by DARPA. Already, many people will be laid off beginning next year by the machinery. Then the corporations imagining they are cutting costs will actually self-destruct with fewer people around to afford anything. We’ve seen this play out with industrialization. This leads to a lot of unhappiness! but let’s not let the facts get in the way of your utopian dreams.
Many on this blog believe in something called ‘The Message of Fatima.’ Go look it up if you want to know the future.
You will not have peace. Peace is only for men of good will. But since you deny the existence of your will, and therefore the capacity to choose between good and evil… there will be NO peace for you. Ever.
Well then, overall I guess it doesn’t matter then, that one like you is programmed and per-destined towards Hell.
Also, considering that one can be ‘existential’, again, like hope and other concepts, please explain how one can be ‘existential’ in a closed deterministic system?
Why are you always appealing to and using concepts that can only exist within a free will paradigm, Michael?
You can’t have it both ways… that would mean a contradiction! Another concept by the way, that can only exist within a free will paradigm, like a paradox does.
Please explain for us, why within the non-free-will deterministic system, when such ‘errors’ occur, that the system does not collapse?
You like robots and computers, right? Well, if you’ve ever had any experience in coding and programming languages and basic mathematics, when the program logic encounters a calculation that leads to non-defined declarations and loops and illogical results, then that’s when the program grinds to a halt and crashes.
So considering everything you are appealing to are similarly appealing to infinity and undefined and oppositional values that create dilemmas, paradoxes and regrets and hopes, why doesn’t the simulation of life crash and grind to a halt?
Why is that precisely not what we observe?
I believe in the will, as did Friedrich Nietzsche and Arthur Schopenhauer. It’s obvious we will to do things. I just don’t believe the Will is free. It is determined to be in less pain. Anytime you do anything, it’s your mind calculating what will make Consciousness happier. It’s a strawwoman to say I don’t believe in the will.
People overcome addictions. So what? That proves the will can be strong; it doesn’t show the will is free.
“You choose to give in.” How do you know that? I’ve already shown that ‘choices’ don’t exist. On what basis is a so-called choice made between A and ~A? You want to do A, so you do A. If you say, “I want to do A, but I will do ~A instead,” that would be because you have a higher-order desire to do ~A. (Even when you say, “I don’t want to go to work,” but you do anyway, that’s because you have a higher-order desire to not-starve or not-be perceived as a bum. Otherwise, it’d be random.) So you actually don’t want to do A. Every “choice” you make is based off desires/drives/inclinations, or else it would be baseless: chaotic…random…out of thin air.
It does not follow from atheistic Judaism that there is no logic. You shoveled that from the dirt of the Platonic Realm.
“But let’s grant you all of the above anyway – no free Will. This then doesn’t automatically get rid of God,”
But it does. God is defined as morally perfect. You can’t have morality/moral realism without free will. Or you could say that God is omnibenevolent, but the presence of suffering proves otherwise. If you say that ‘god’ is neither moral nor loving, then there’s no reason to call that ‘god’. That ‘god’ can go to Platonic Hell. The Protestant ‘god’ is worse than the Catholic one. Only the Jewish G-d will reign supreme.
Hope. I have hope because order can come from chaos. Think of an ant colony. Stupid ants together form a smart society. The ultimate end of the chaos is the Messianic Age. (Or you might call it Heaven, nirvana, the Beatific Vision, a turn to oneness…different labels for the same end.)
Robots will take our jobs. I like that. I’d rather have fun than do work. Work sucks.
Thanks for posting this, Ever Mindful! I was touched by it. This was the best post on this page. Maybe our mixed up poster Michael, will try to take up the Rosary and give it a try. Blessed Advent and Christmastide to all here.
So once again Michael65 contradicts himself and moves the goalposts with each subsequent post.
First he doesn’t believe in the will. Then he does believe in the will, but adds qualifiers, basically anything to avoid responsibility for himself.
Michael65’s arugment is basically this.
– God created Gravity.
– God allows us to make choices within a boxed context of gravity.
– Gravity doesn’t allow Michael65 to jump off a cliff and float safely to the ground.
– Ergo God has stacked the deck and doesn’t allow us complete free will to do whatever we want.
– Ergo God doesn’t exist.
Michael65, still reading apocryphal texts mixed in with darwinian nonsense still hasn’t grasped the facts several posts later while he’s too busy rearranging his argument.
Free will exists in the context of the moral law just as it does within the context of the physical law – such as gravity. Michael65 is free to violate God’s moral laws, just as he can violate God’s physical laws. But no-one and nothing is obligated to make Michael65 float safely to the ground or get into heaven or avoid the natural consequences of his choices. Michael doesn’t like this, so he like a fool, declares that free will doesn’t exist because God won’t send him to Heaven by allowing Michael to do whatever he wants without consequence.
So Michael constructs a warped non-scientific worldview where he can reduce consciousness to firing synapses and put the responsibility back on God Himself (Like Adam blaming God for giving him the woman, and Eve blaming God for making the Snake). And Michael65 still runs far far away form answering how hope, and dilemma and anguish and other self-contradictory states exist within a deterministic world.
here he embarassingly states that ‘hope’ can come about, just like ‘order’ from ‘chaos’, then he uses the hilarious comparison that elementary school evolutionnists like to use to show such a system, such as with regards to ants building structures or snowflakes forming amongst other examples where a more complex structure emerges from smaller components and phenomena. Displaying that Michael doesn’t know anything at all about science or basic philosophy.
Michael65 fails to consider that ants still possess intelligence enough to build anthills just as human beings build skyscrapers and all work within the context of physical laws and chemical structures. All this shows is that intelligent design exists and that basic fundamental unbreakable laws govern the universe. Michael65 has once again resorted to circular reasoning and using as proof the very thing he is attempting to prove.
Then once agian michael fails to grasp the example of how his warped view of no free will doesn’t disprove God. Indeed he is correct (finally) that this sort of god doesn’t align with the Christian notion, but the argument I made isn’t that it is compatible to the True God of Christianity, but rather that if it were the case that God was in such a state then it still gives michael65 no advantage whatsoever other than that he would still be beholden to such a god, and all he can do is make disparaging remarks about such a god on a message board. How noble! As I said, Michael65 is only pissing in the wind.
Now once again let’s examine his hilarious views of ‘free will’ which he still has failed to grasp because he prefers to avoid responsibility for his actions, and somehow his ‘jewish god’ will somehow be very okay with him despite that his ‘jewish god’ exists nowhere in the Old Testament which he rejects because that God does hold people responsible for their actions. But given Michael65 is reading some sacred texts hidden form everyone else and known only to him and his little cult, I suspect he won’t tell us for fear of scrutinizing his fragile little bubble.
He says he already has shown that choices ‘dont’ exit’… Really? Where? Just sying something over and over again doesn’t make it so.. .especially since he says he’s choosing to ‘hope’… oh… but this is somehow something he’s forced to do… Even though he has never explained how hope or regret can exist within a determinate system where choices don’t exist and as to why such a system can ‘evolve’ such systems that run counter to it. Why hope when outcomes are already determined? Why regret actions when things are already determined? Why didn’t the Michael65 jewish apocryphal mystic god of evolutionary messsianism and his invisible robot armies not evolve these things out? And how could a deterministic system make them in the first place? Michael65 doesn’t know. He just presupposes, with religious faith, that they did, like how we get ‘something’ from ‘nothing’, how we get biological matter from rocks, and how we get mammals from fish and michael65 from a monkey. No need to explain any of it, just magical fairy tale stories for idiots looking to explain away the Christian God.
“On what basis is a so-called choice made between A and ~A?”
ANSWER: Free Will. Man is made in God’ Image and his consciousness is therefore free to make choices within the confines of natural and spiritual reality. And there are natural consequences for doing so. These are both positive and negative. Example: jumping off a cliff, versus not being suicidal. Aligning yourself with God’s law via disciple, versus rejecting God and disobeying Him to your own folly, but at least you get to keep your pride.
“If you say, “I want to do A, but I will do ~A instead,” that would be because you have a higher-order desire to do ~A. ”
Answer: Free Will. Usually aided helped by Discipline and God’s grace, or by being undisciplined and rejecting God’s grace. Some people want to do bad, but have a higher grasp of their functions to choose good instead. Whereas some may want to do good, but are not disciplined enough and do bad instead. St. Paul described this very feeling by stating “The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.” We fight against the dictates of our body and our desires just as we do physical weather and the actions of other people. Free will operates within structures and conflicts. That’s how it’s supposed to work. But this reality is too much for Michael65, so he has to flee to a sophist argument, where he declares all things deterministic in the face of contrary evidence, or puts the fault on God as making God to be ‘evil’ for giving him a body that has desires at odds with his own ‘higher-order’ desires. But in reality Michael65 isn’t a robot, he’s just lazy and selfish and a petulant child who blames everyone else and feels life is sooooo totalllly unfair (sigh)…
“Every “choice” you make is based off desires/drives/inclinations, or else it would be baseless: chaotic…random…out of thin air.”
ANSWER: No $#!* Sherlock! But what you’ve repeatedly refused to face is that there are desires/drives/inclinations ordered to God, and there are desires/drives/inclinations ordered away from God, and that is the crux of the matter. None of it is random. Because amongst all Michael65’s talk of ‘higher-order desires’, he’s totally oblivious to the BIGGEST HIGHER ORDER DESIRE – GOD HIMSELF! GOD’S OWN WILL! And we derive our own Free Will from that GREATEST HIGHER ORDER DESIRE ITSELF! THAT DESIRE TO ALLOW HUMANITY TO FREELY CHOOSE TO LOVE OR REJECT GOD! THAT HIGHER ORDER THAT GOVERNS THE UNIVERSE ITSELF! ALL ITS PHYSICAL LAWS REGARDING THE UNIVERSE AND OUR BODIES AND ALL OUR INTERNAL SPIRITUAL INCLINATIONS AND DISPOSITIONS EMOTIONS DESIRES ETC.!
Michael65 didn’t go all the way up the chain of command! Because that destroys his little petty argument, because the HIGHEST ORDER DESIRE belongs to God and allows us to Choose and accept the consequences good and bad of our decisions, and that such choices be Freely Made, and that we are aided towards the Good only by uniting ourselves Freely to His Divine Grace. We think His thoughts after Him, and we do no good on our own apart from cooperating with Him. We are saved by His sanctifying Grace. Our ultimate desire is either to freely choose Him or to reject Him. Rejection leads to the total loss of everything and leads to Hell. Acceptance leads to Heaven where we are in total conformity to His perfection! Either by enough grace and penitence and discipline in life, or after purgation of our bad desires and inclinations in the afterlife before coming into His presence.
And the determining factor is Love. Either of Him above all or of ourselves above Him. That’s the first choice we need to make.
Michael65 has chosen himself. And he’s crafted a god and religion to serve himself as god, and a messiah he demands cater to his own prejudiced demands. And to put the cherry on top, he has absolved himself of all actions and responsibility by negating his own free will. Thus making himself out to be the very sort of god he admonishes and rejects here. Time for Michael65 to get himself a mirror.
Good point, we gentiles are loosing it.