Quote from: Änσnymσus 8/17/2022, 1:42:44 PM
I disagree.
If we are to be true Catholics, we are to wear our Faith on our sleeve.
We cannot go to mass one moment and then listen to worldly music as we drive home.

Firstly, you're defining "worldly music" as any music that isn't Chant. You can't show me ONE Church teaching, writing of a saint, much less any living Traditional Catholic priest or bishop who condemns ALL non-sacred music as bad for Catholics to listen to, because it is profane (not sacred) and therefore to be avoided.

It's not fitting to eat or clean our bodies in church either -- but it's perfectly acceptable OUTSIDE OF CHURCH. Also clipping one's nails, cutting hair, talking out loud, and a hundred thousand other "good" -- but not sacred -- activities. There is a distinction between SACRED and PROFANE.

It has nothing to do with Integral (7-day-a-week) Catholicism or "living the Faith".  We act differently outside of Church than we do during Mass. That is not hypocrisy or failure to "live the Faith". That is more "A time for every purpose under heaven". See Ecclesiastes 3:1.

By the way, I'm the first one to preach "integral Catholicism". But what you're talking about ISN'T IT. It's a misshapen, distorted version of it.

[1] All things have their season, and in their times all things pass under heaven. [2] A time to be born and a time to die. A time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted. [3] A time to kill, and a time to heal. A time to destroy, and a time to build. [4] A time to weep, and a time to laugh. A time to mourn, and a time to dance. [5] A time to scatter stones, and a time to gather. A time to embrace, and a time to be far from embraces. [6] A time to get, and a time to lose. A time to keep, and a time to cast away. [7] A time to rend, and a time to sew. A time to keep silence, and a time to speak. [8] A time of love, and a time of hatred. A time of war, and a time of peace.

I disagree.
If we are to be true Catholics, we are to wear our Faith on our sleeve. 
We cannot go to mass one moment and then listen to worldly music as we drive home.

So ... you're a Jansenist.  Got it.

I disagree.
If we are to be true Catholics, we are to wear our Faith on our sleeve. 
We cannot go to mass one moment and then listen to worldly music as we drive home.

What is your definition of "worldly music"? Does it include absolutely anything that would not be used at Mass?
For example, on the rare occasion that I travel to/from Mass by myself, I like to listen to this:



I can't see it being used at Mass, but I don't know that I could honestly label it as "worldly" either.

So many errors are due to people being unable to think in terms of distinctions (which is why I often get on my soapbox about them) and thereby creating false dilemmas.

Of course we are called to do all things for Christ.  But not all things are DIRECTLY for Christ.  When I go to the bathroom for a #2, that is directly at the service of nature, and indirectly at the service of Christ in so far as our nature is ultimately ordered toward Christ.  That does not mean I need to put on some Gregorian chant while I do my business.

You fail to distinguish between -- 1) grace and nature, 2) merit, sin, imperfection, and even neutral things, 3) harmful, beneficial, or neutral.

And there are many permutations among these.

Then, on top of that you throw out a very broad and meaningless term "worldy" that requires proper distinctions.

Distinguo.  If by "worldly" you mean songs with impure or blasphemous lyrics or lascivious melodies, concedo.  If by "worldly," you mean Mozart, nego.

So the permutations between some of the above distinctions:

BENEFICIAL for grace and BENEFICIAL for nature
BENEFICIAL for grace but NEUTRAL for nature
BENEFICIAL for grace but HARMFUL for nature
NEUTRAL for grace but BENEFICIAL for nature
NEUTRAL for grace and NEUTRAL for nature
NEUTRAL for grace but HARMFUL for nature
HARMFUL for grace but BENEFICIAL for nature
HARMFUL for grace but NEUTRAL for nature
HARMFUL for grace and HARMFUL for nature

Of course, grace builds upon nature, so that, generally speaking, in broader terms, when you benefit nature, you benefit the potential for the life of grace to increase.  But that's indirect.

Let's take listening to Mozart.  I would hold that it can benefit nature (it stimulates the mind and uplifts the emotions).  But directly it does not result in any increase of grace.  Indirectly, however, by helping our nature, it may give more fertile ground for grace to increase.  For a Jansenist, however, if it doesn't directly increase grace, it's bad or sinful (that's one of the chief condemnations of Jansenism by the Church).  We are not required to do everything at all times to directly benefit grace and the supernatural life.

And, finally, as the Jansenists do, you make no distinction between God's commandments and the evangelical counsels.  While it is sinful to break the commandments, it's not sinful to not always meet the standards of perfection.  Perfection would have everyone living as celibate religious, but it is not sin to be married.  And one could go on ...

Anything with drums except classical.

So....you think I shouldn't listen to this:

So many errors are due to people being unable to think in terms of distinctions (which is why I often get on my soapbox about them) and thereby creating false dilemmas.

Of course we are called to do all things for Christ.  But not all things are DIRECTLY for Christ.  When I go to the bathroom for a #2, that is directly at the service of nature, and indirectly at the service of Christ in so far as our nature is ultimately ordered toward Christ.  That does not mean I need to put on some Gregorian chant while I do my business.

You fail to distinguish between -- 1) grace and nature, 2) merit, sin, imperfection, and even neutral things, 3) harmful, beneficial, or neutral.

And there are many permutations among these.

Then, on top of that you throw out a very broad and meaningless term "worldy" that requires proper distinctions.

Distinguo.  If by "worldly" you mean songs with impure or blasphemous lyrics or lascivious melodies, concedo.  If by "worldly," you mean Mozart, nego.

So the permutations between some of the above distinctions:

BENEFICIAL for grace and BENEFICIAL for nature
BENEFICIAL for grace but NEUTRAL for nature
BENEFICIAL for grace but HARMFUL for nature
NEUTRAL for grace but BENEFICIAL for nature
NEUTRAL for grace and NEUTRAL for nature
NEUTRAL for grace but HARMFUL for nature
HARMFUL for grace but BENEFICIAL for nature
HARMFUL for grace but NEUTRAL for nature
HARMFUL for grace and HARMFUL for nature

Of course, grace builds upon nature, so that, generally speaking, in broader terms, when you benefit nature, you benefit the potential for the life of grace to increase.  But that's indirect.

Let's take listening to Mozart.  I would hold that it can benefit nature (it stimulates the mind and uplifts the emotions).  But directly it does not result in any increase of grace.  Indirectly, however, by helping our nature, it may give more fertile ground for grace to increase.  For a Jansenist, however, if it doesn't directly increase grace, it's bad or sinful (that's one of the chief condemnations of Jansenism by the Church).  We are not required to do everything at all times to directly benefit grace and the supernatural life.

And, finally, as the Jansenists do, you make no distinction between God's commandments and the evangelical counsels.  While it is sinful to break the commandments, it's not sinful to not always meet the standards of perfection.  Perfection would have everyone living as celibate religious, but it is not sin to be married.  And one could go on ...

I don't believe st. Paul was a jansenist when he said:

Let the word of Christ dwell in you abundantly, in all wisdom: teaching and admonishing one another in psalms, hymns, and spiritual canticles, singing in grace in your hearts to God. All whatsoever you do in word or in work, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.

I don't believe st. Paul was a jansenist when he said:

Let the word of Christ dwell in you abundantly, in all wisdom: teaching and admonishing one another in psalms, hymns, and spiritual canticles, singing in grace in your hearts to God. All whatsoever you do in word or in work, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.

Well, maybe then you're a Protestant who (mis)-interprets Sacred Scripture.  I just went to great lengths to explain that, yes, indeed all that we do should be directed to Our Lord ... but that does not mean that every activity we perform has to be DIRECTLY done in the name for the Lord.  I don't go to relieve myself "in the name of the Lord" ... except only indirectly in that this natural activity is ORDERED toward God.