Posted: 6/1/2007 6:39:33 PM EDT
|
I was recently at a Jesuit church in another state and was astounded by the difference in the general practices and perception of 'spirituality" and the difference in the delivery of the sacraments in general there as opposed to other places I have lived. The protocol for a high mass was really watered down in this instance. Liturgically speaking there are certain prayers and practices that differentiate a high mass or feast day from an ordinary mass. It lead to an interesting discussion with a very pragmatic Jesuit Priest about the practice of ones faith as opposed to the development of spirituality. I was surprised that a Jesuit (they are known for being more outside the box in their thinking..or more liberal in general) had a such a practical, direct, literal approach to the sacraments. All the pomp and circumstance is not necessary per se and I have to agree to a point. More than that he presented an interesting perception about difference in practical religion vs. spirituality. That being that formation ( studying scripture, service, living the faith) does not have any bearing on the the development of the relationship with God or the soul. Only God can develop the spiritual soul. In essence you can be a Sunday bench warmer ( those that go out of obligation or not at all) and no other effort is needed. I was interested in others perception. What are your ideas about the practice of faith as it relates to your spiritual development. Do you feel you have to work on relationship/understanding of God ( which fulfills the know love and serve God purpose of our existence thing that was pounded into us by the nuns) or does it just happen though life. |
|
Of course since we are corporeal beings, it's sophism to claim you can have "spirituality" without some sort of routine/exterior practice that helps focus the mind on God and God's things.... this is what "religion" does for "spirituality" - it focuses it and maintains it in the face of a million distractions and errors. Thus the Church's wisdom (thought by some liberals as foolishness) in maintaining certain fixed rubrics for sacraments; sure if the priest doesn't believe and thus just goes through the motions there won't be much "spirituality" manifested even though there's grace. But that's the celebrants fault not the rubrics. One can play an instrument with 'feeling' or robotically, but it's not the fault of the trumpet if the notes are sounded weakly. Ditto with rubrics. Those who believe and thus conduct themselves with decorum and solemnity have proven via their fruits to be holy (spiritually mature) individuals whereas those who run off into novelty for novelty's sake priding themselves on being cutting edge often lose the faith entirely. There's no great counter cultural liberal 'saint' one can point to in the last 40 years....indeed, those who claim to be liberals often when asked will admit to not believing major core doctrines! So what good is a 'spirituality' if it so downplays religion that it leads one out of the faith that religion was meant to serve and protect? I've seen magnificent "high mass" novus ordo rite Masses with all the bells and smells....as well as magnificent simple masses said outdoors. Too many snarky people try to create a false dicotomy between religion and spirituality as though we were dualistic creatures and not "incarnate spirits"; show me a spirituality and I'll show you a religious tradition either long ago formed or being formed right now. As Christians we must never fall into the temptation to invent the wheel as though nothing came before our time and no one else had thought of it before. Jesus came, gathered his apostles, endowed them with teaching authority, and the mandate to go to the whole world. He didn't give that authority to EVERYONE and he didn't preach a "religion-less" spirituality if only because as we see in Acts, it was called "the Way". If your belief involves "a way" of being spiritual, then you have religious practices; morals, doctrine, rubrics. Put another way, one cannot grasp Jesuit spirituality without understanding St Ignatius and the spiritual exercises - but those are not just "anything" one may subjectively wish them to be; there's a structure to the exercises that if not followed doesn't properly focus the mind, heart, and soul. |
|
The chief danger to any spirituality (indeed any relationship with another person) is pride. And how better to mask pride than to vainly suppose that ANY WAY one whimsically decides to pray IN PUBLIC, ie. liturgically, is just as good if not superior to ways declared legit and good by the church for use? Conversely how better to maintain a sense of humility and openness than to obey the rubrics given you and not seek to 'do it my way'? Spirituality = relationship and it's impossible to have a relationship with God without humility and a willingness to obey him in small things and large. I've always found it amazing for people who supposedly believe the big things (trinity, incarnation, etc. balk at relatively small things - like following rubrics! |
I can't pretend to understand the Jesuit spirituality. I have however two friends who found their vocation with the Jesuits and given the spiritual practices in the Jesuit order one is probably the most enlightened educator I have ever known. Teaches theology at St Xavier in Cincy, and the other is a liturgical musician. Both excel in their ministries. I am more familiar with the Franciscans, Capuchins and Benedictine and few smaller orders. I suppose the anomaly that presented was the austerity of ritual as it relates to spirituality. I am at loss to accurately describe this. This priest expressed that the need for the practice of the ritual was rudimentary to grace being given. The way I understood it is that the grace was already given and the actual practice of ritual, service, or extraordinary formation was not needed? But it goes deeper than that. The practice of things we understood as developmental to ones spirituality were not necessary either. I guess that is the paradox for me. Catholic tradition is full of symbolism ritual and the practice of service, selflessness, living the faith. There is a bit of a paradox. Is all this really necessary then? And I agree on pride being a huge barrier to any relationship. Are all the bells and whistles we have pride or a form of vanity? |
BS (to be polite). Anyone who thinks offering a rosary before Mass is too ostentatious is either stupid or meanspirited (or both). We're talking pastoral practice here to help the grieving family not "what would be OK if the Mongol horde was on the horizon".  Ditto with general absolution: yes, yes, a priest can, in SOME RESTRICTED circumstances given general absolution - like when the ship is sinking or the terrorists are about to crash the plane....but if you have time and there's no threat of imminent death, it's just more pastorally sound to help people individually. I grant the Jesuit that the Mass (as Thomas Aquinas said) could be really bare bones, just a couple words, just the words of consecration, etc. and funeral rites too could - if circumstances called for it - be bare bones...but if he's not dying or the people in church aren't in imminent danger, then it's not "pure spirituality" that kept him from doing the little extra pomp to help the family; it's pure BS. This is because the pomp was established to direct our hearts and minds to the mystery being celebrated; if the priest was trained properly he'd know that far from obsuring Christ, the extras mean to draw the mind towards Christ. This is because pomp (like GOOD MUSIC, proper decorum, solemn attitudes, gentlemanly manners, kind hearted homilies, all help prepare the soul for grace - they don't PRODUCE grace, they dispose us to enter into grace. So while he's accurate that pomp is not needed for grace to be there, he missed the point which was that insofar as his attitude was not taking their values into account his 'stripped down version" was a distraction, not a help to their prayer. The fact that you were troubled is case in point. If his 'spirituality' was the right way to go, we wouldn't even be discussing this. But since the woman was such that one of the family would reasonably expect the bells and whistles, it makes far more pastoral (and theological) sense to give them the bells and whistles. Hearts and minds tend to be openned by pomp used the CORRECT WAY; Who doesn't get goosebumps when Hail to the Chief is played with fanfare, and the echo of artillery and jets flying over bounces off the hills? And this is just to open people to the POTUS and be impressed when he arrives.... Well, Jesus and his grace are more important than the POTUS so why wouldn't we - inculturated to respect civic pomp - not appreciate ecclesial pomp? |
There. That makes sense. The things that help prepare the soul to receive grace. And give direction to the heart. |
|
I am a firm believer that there are a multitude of things we can do to enhance our personal relationship with God (how I view "spirituality"). Prayer, scripture study, fasting, service, church attendence, are all things that can benefit our spirituality. I believe that Jesus very much taught about the inner conversion process and how the higher law has everything to do with what is in our hearts. At the same time "organized" religion was also important to the Savior since Apostles, priests, teachers, etc. were called to minister to the members, ensuring correct doctrines and performing ordinances. "Zion" has always had a community-oriented meaning. In short, I believe in both a personal and community/organized-religion aspect to spirituality. |
1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus Mark 2:7 Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only? 1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. Only God can forgive sins, 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus |
ing. Keep your attacks on Catholic beliefs to a different thread.
|
I am grateful for the good moderators of this site that have kept me out of trouble as well as help keep the site out of trouble. That said, and even though some posts may seem to be trolling, I've never backed down from a good fight or a good question. And the answer to the claim that only God can forgive sins and that only Jesus Mediates with the Father is.... a) Jesus was the one who, after his Resurrection, breathed on his apostles and said "receive the Holy Spirit, whose sins YOU FORGIVE, ARE FORGIVEN THEM, WHOSE SINS YOU HOLD BOUND ARE HELD BOUND" AND he was also the one who said "I am sending you" and told them, "behold I am with YOU ALWAYS". And what did he command them to do if not to offer up prayers and supplications to the Father IN HIS NAME. None of us Catholics are presuming to go to the Father apart from Christ, even the saints and Mary derive their holiness not from themselves but through Christ. His Mediatorship is not in any way lessened by Christian A praying for Christian B. The first troll question is simply a failure to read the WHOLE scripture as opposed to little bits taken out of context and the second troll question is simply A MISUNDERSTANDING OF WHAT MEDIATORSHIP MEANS AND WHAT INTERCESSORY PRAYER IS - AND IS NOT. Virtually all of the trolling questions on this site I've seen thus far in 2 years have not been meanspirited as much as just misinformed. While I have lost my temper on occasion (and been privately corrected by our good moderators - for which I'm grateful), I hope I've on balance treated every question or claim as a legitimate question to be answered - if not for the person asking it, then for the general public who didn't ask the question but may want an answer nevertheless. 
|
Please count me in on being grateful to the moderators but also to those who respond to my question in this case. Looneybin...thank you too! My question is a gut wrenching one for me. I don't like not having understanding about this subject. And truthfully it involved the funeral of my mother. My exchange with the priest was peaceful and educational but confusing. JusAdbellum very eloquently and adeptly used a very misunderstood sacrament in our church to address my confusion. Reconciliation doesn't USE the priest as a mediator. Because SIN affects the entire body of Christ ( that is faith community) the priest is the representative of accountability to the faith community. GOD remains GOD and we seek forgiveness from GOD. Not only do you need to seek forgiveness from God but also from those we have wronged. Think about how far reaching that is. How many people are affected by a single sin that would need to be reconciled with. If we could only realize that, and see how grievous sin is...that it causes a rip in the relationship with God who loves us profoundly... we would fear sinning as we fear the thought of not taking another breath. All the Sacraments are close encounters with God. That is to say, GOD'S presence is first and foremost the center piece and it is very sacred. An intimate exchange of grace and growth. And confession or Reconciliation is exactly that. These are intrinsic to our faith. Back to the question. The priest suggested that only God can form the spirituality of a soul and all the things we do, formation, education, service, ritual, symbolism to prepare to receive grace are not necessary. However, after reading some the responses I think the quandary I couldn't articulate adequately is really ...that I see those things as way of continually accepting the grace of God. I want to know more and live my life according to His will and to honor God. I was taught the reason I was here in the first place is to KNOW LOVE and Honor God. Take away the things I know as showing love is like a death in itself. I am sorry if this makes no sense to some. In my mind, what the priest suggested would be like having someone who loves you profoundly, place a kiss on your lips but you have no way of showing that you love them back. Your lips don't move you don't embrace them you don't smile or respond and they are left empty. Yet you keep getting kissed. It goes no where from that point? How unfair. That seems wrong to me. In a way the rituals of the church (for me anyway) have always heightened my realization of the presence of God. They don't take the place of it but they signal to me to be more aware respectful and conscience to show my love of God. I take exception that there is no need to freely return the grace given to us. ( no action needed) |