Day of Reparation for Amazon Synod outrages

Started by Miriam_M, November 05, 2019, 12:53:49 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Xavier

Mike, you can see Bp. Barron commenting on that survey here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yTGlYCIvks&feature=emb_logo

And the OnePeterFive article on the same poll: https://onepeterfive.com/only-26-of-us-catholics-under-40-believe-in-the-real-presence-and-thats-no-accident/

"I believe this because I experienced my own crisis of faith in the Real Presence as a teen in the 1990s, and it was directly related to my liturgical experiences.

In a draft chapter of a never-finished book I began writing over a decade ago about my discovery of Catholic tradition, I described how I wound up at a point where I literally asked Jesus how I could believe He was present in the Eucharist: ... In my teenage years, I discovered, through one of the Church's new movements, liturgical and sacramental orthodoxy. It had come not a moment too soon, because the lack of seriousness with which I felt so many of the external trappings of the liturgy were contaminated had begun to threaten my faith. I remember kneeling there on the blue shag carpeting, in front of the hideous tabernacle (this time, off to the right of the sanctuary) and asking God that if He was truly present in the Eucharist, why didn't we act like it? All the strumming guitars and torch songs and people dressed like they were going to the beach and ugly décor and nonchalance with which we approached the sacrament seemed to indicate a far less serious situation than one in which God became present, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, right there on that altar that more closely resembled a really nice dining room table than a sacred space for sacrifice." Taking just a few steps like restoring Altar rails, kneeling for Holy Communion, at least the Mass from the Offertory onward being offered versus Deum, would go a long way to remedy this imho. 74% of 70 million is like 50+ million.

I stand by my opinion that resolving problems in catechesis like this, and problems like that in France where less than 5% of Catholics are reported to go to Holy Mass, is the greatest pastoral challenge of this and the next generation. If in 10 years, the number of Catholics who attend Mass weekly, and believe in the Real Presence, can be raised to at least 50% each, that would be a great Triumph.

I looked at the video you posted, and if the NOM was celebrated at least like that in most places, the situation would not be as dire and drastic imo. But 90%+ of NOM's are not celebrated like that. In the early years, some older Priests would use the Traditional Offertory also. And, if the majority were offered like that, there wouldn't have been that vehement hostility toward Tradition that characterized the early decades; Bugnini knew most would prefer the TLM if he didn't try to pretend it was "banned"; up until Summorum Pontificum, many people wrongly claimed the TLM was "forbidden, which we now know is incorrect. "Archbishop Annibale Bugnini, whom Paul VI put in charge of the post-conciliar liturgical reform, wanted to obtain an explicit ruling to the effect that the Novus Ordo Missae of 1970 abrogates the Old Mass, so that the latter would be suppressed de jure. To apply for such a ruling to the Pontifical Commission for the Interpretation of Conciliar Documents, he needed permission from the Cardinal Secretary of State. On 10 June 1974 the Secretary of State refused to give the requested permission on the grounds that such an attempt would be seen as "casting odium on the Liturgical Tradition" (A. Bugnini, The Reform of the Liturgy 1948-1975, Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1990, p. 300-301)." ...

Cardinal Medina Estévez, Prefect Emeritus of the Congregation for Divine Worship writes in a letter of 21 May 2004:

I reaffirm my personal opinion that the abrogation of the Missal of St Pius V is not proven and I can add that the decree that I signed promulgating the third typical edition of the Roman Missal does not contain any clause that abrogates the ancient form of the Roman Rite. (...) And I can also add that the absence of any abrogation clause whatsoever did not happen by chance, nor as it caused by inadvertence, but was intentional." ... The commission met in December 1986. Eight of nine cardinals answered that the New Mass had not abrogated the Old Mass. The nine cardinals unanimously determined that Pope Paul VI never gave the bishops the authority to forbid priest from celebrating Mass according to the Missal of St Pius V ... In this context, it should be noted that the Holy See does recognize the right of the priest to celebrate the traditional Mass; this is borne out by the fact that whenever priests are unjustly suspended for celebrating the Old Mass against the will of their bishops, the Roman Curia always nullifies the penalty whenever the cases are appealed. It is the present jurisprudence of the Church that, upon appeal, any suspension that an Ordinary attempts to inflict on a priest for celebrating the Old Mass against the will of the bishop is automatically nullified." From: https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=7729
Bible verses on walking blamelessly with God, after being forgiven from our former sins. Some verses here: https://dailyverses.net/blameless

"[2] He that walketh without blemish, and worketh justice:[3] He that speaketh truth in his heart, who hath not used deceit in his tongue: Nor hath done evil to his neighbour: nor taken up a reproach against his neighbours.(Psalm 14)

"[2] For in many things we all offend. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man."(James 3)

"[14] And do ye all things without murmurings and hesitations; [15] That you may be blameless, and sincere children of God, without reproof, in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation; among whom you shine as lights in the world." (Phil 2:14-15)

Xavier

I am not in favor of telling Catholics not to go to Mass. But I will defend the right of traditional Catholics to take refuge in a TLM chapel until the liturgical storm passes. The 40 km rule of Archbishop Lefebvre is a safe and prudent rule that can still be followed in my opinion. I do not believe there is no grace in the NOM, but the danger of sacrileges resulting from, Communion in the hand, for e.g. is real. This is even admitted by many Conservative Catholic Bishops and Cardinals.

Cardinal Sarah: "The most insidious diabolical attack consists in trying to extinguish faith in the Eucharist, sowing errors and favouring an unsuitable manner of receiving it," the cardinal wrote. "Truly the war between Michael and his Angels on one side, and Lucifer on the other, continues in the heart of the faithful: Satan's target is the Sacrifice of the Mass and the Real Presence of Jesus in the consecrated host.

"Why do we insist on communicating standing in the hand? Why this attitude of lack of submission to the signs of God? [Receiving kneeling and on the tongue] is much more suited to the sacrament itself. I hope there can be a rediscovery and promotion of the beauty and pastoral value of this manner. In my opinion and judgment, this is an important question on which the church today must reflect. This is a further act of adoration and love that each of us can offer to Jesus Christ." https://catholicherald.co.uk/news/2018/02/23/cardinal-sarah-communion-in-the-hand-part-of-diabolical-attack-on-eucharist/

Pope Francis told SSPX District Superior of Argentina Fr. Christian several years ago: "You are Catholic, that is evident, I will help you." So I disagree with your opinion about the SSPX. SSPX Priests are fully Catholic and fully involved in trying to help the authorities resolve the Crisis.

I have nothing against the Priests of the Fraternity of St. Peter. However, I believe SSPX Bishops and Priests are better in catechesis and more effective in promoting Tradition. And I think +ABL was saintly and unjustly treated. So I prefer the SSPX to the FSSP.

I believe it is Priests who must and will lead the necessary work toward Restoration. Rorate Caeli estimated there are about 10,000 Traditional Priests in the world, diocesan Priests who offer the TLM included. I think the day is not far when what +ABL said will come true, "We place ourselves under God's providence. We are convinced that God knows what He is doing. Cardinal Gagnon visited us twelve years after the suspension: after twelve years of being spoken of as outside of the communion of Rome... They said we have done well. Thus we did well to resist! I am convinced that we are in the same circumstances today ...We are convinced that all these accusations of which we are the object, all penalties of which we are the object, are null, absolutely null and void, and of which we will take no account. Just as I took no account of the suspension and ended up being congratulated by the Church and by progressive churchmen, so likewise in several years –I do not know how many, only the Good Lord knows how many years it will take for Tradition to find its rights in Rome we will be embraced by the Roman authorities, who will thank us for having maintained the Faith in our seminaries, in our families, in civil Societies, in our countries, and in our monasteries and our religious houses, for the greater glory of God and the salvation of souls. Deo gratias." rom: https://fsspx.uk/en/fighting-catholic-tradition

A prayer inspired by the Mother of God for that end: "The following prayer was inspired by the Most Blessed Virgin with the intention that Christians should join hands in a chain of Light by saying this prayer every Thursday to obtain the grace of breaking all modernism in the Church and of the Church returning to its traditional values as originally set by Jesus Himself as to the celebration of Holy Mass. It is important to see to it that, especially on this weekly day of prayer, you accept all your trials without any protest and that you offer them as sufferings which will have to deliver the Church from the impact of influences that are not compatible with the intentions of Jesus Christ. ... "Jesus Christ, I implore You, do pour Your Divine Love into the priests, so that they may find the fire and the courage to restore the Sacrifice of Holy Mass to its original dignity ... Holy Priests of all the ages, I beg for Your constant intercession in favour of all Priests and Religious of every rank, so that they may rediscover their true vocation and they may offer all their actions, words and aspirations for the accomplishment of the work God has called upon them to perform." https://www.maria-domina-animarum.net/en/flowers/751-1000

As the number of TLM's and the accessibility Catholics have to them increase worldwide, I believe we will see Faith in the Real Presence increase and grow stronger everywhere.
Bible verses on walking blamelessly with God, after being forgiven from our former sins. Some verses here: https://dailyverses.net/blameless

"[2] He that walketh without blemish, and worketh justice:[3] He that speaketh truth in his heart, who hath not used deceit in his tongue: Nor hath done evil to his neighbour: nor taken up a reproach against his neighbours.(Psalm 14)

"[2] For in many things we all offend. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man."(James 3)

"[14] And do ye all things without murmurings and hesitations; [15] That you may be blameless, and sincere children of God, without reproof, in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation; among whom you shine as lights in the world." (Phil 2:14-15)

Vetus Ordo

#197
Quote from: awkwardcustomer on November 18, 2019, 08:42:42 PM
Quote from: Vetus Ordo on November 18, 2019, 06:32:55 PM
Quote from: awkwardcustomer on November 18, 2019, 04:43:48 PMNo, but transferring of the words Mysterium Fidei can help the overall process of transforming the Traditional Rite of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass into the new reformed rite of the celebration of the Paschal Mystery of Christ's Death and Resurrection.

The transfer of the words Mysterium Fidei from the formula of the consecration of the wine to another part of the mass carries no theological objection in itself, regardless of the intentions of those who presided over the changes. The Church approved it. Furthermore, the fact that the words themselves do not pertain to the essential form of the sacrament as recorded in the Gospels, and the fact that they are absent from all other ancient rites of the Church, should quieten any troubled spirits.

Quote from: awkwardcustomer on November 18, 2019, 04:43:48 PMThe General Instruction on the Roman Missal gives only three ends of the Mass, omitting, of course, the propitiatory end.

You are wrong.

You can read the whole text here. I'll just quote one of the relevant parts:

Quote from: General Instruction of the Roman Missal2. The sacrificial nature of the Mass, solemnly asserted by the Council of Trent in accordance with the Church's universal tradition, was reaffirmed by the Second Vatican Council, which offered these significant words about the Mass: "At the Last Supper our Savior instituted the Eucharistic Sacrifice of his Body and Blood, by which he would perpetuate the Sacrifice of the Cross throughout the centuries until he should come again, thus entrusting to the Church, his beloved Bride, the memorial of his death and resurrection."

What the Council thus teaches is expressed constantly in the formulas of the Mass. This teaching, which is concisely expressed in the statement already contained in the ancient Sacramentary commonly known as the Leonine, "As often as the commemoration of this sacrifice is celebrated, the work of our redemption is carried out", is aptly and accurately developed in the Eucharistic Prayers. For in these prayers the priest, while he performs the commemoration, turns towards God, even in the name of the whole people, renders him thanks and offers the living and holy Sacrifice, namely, the Church's offering and the Victim by whose immolation God willed to be appeased; and he prays that the Body and Blood of Christ may be a sacrifice acceptable to the Father and salvific for the whole world.

In this new Missal, then, the Church's rule of prayer (lex orandi) corresponds to her perennial rule of belief (lex credendi), by which namely we are taught that the Sacrifice of the Cross and its sacramental renewal in the Mass, which Christ the Lord instituted at the Last Supper and commanded the Apostles to do in his memory, are one and the same, differing only in the manner of offering, and that consequently the Mass is at once a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, of propitiation and satisfaction.

3. Moreover, the wondrous mystery of the Lord's real presence under the Eucharistic species, reaffirmed by the Second Vatican Council and other documents of the Church's Magisterium in the same sense and with the same words that the Council of Trent had proposed as a matter of faith, is proclaimed in the celebration of Mass not only by means of the very words of consecration, by which Christ becomes present through transubstantiation, but also by that interior disposition and outward expression of supreme reverence and adoration in which the Eucharistic Liturgy is carried out. For the same reason the Christian people is drawn on Holy Thursday of the Lord's Supper, and on the solemnity of the Most Holy Body and Blood of Christ, to venerate this wonderful Sacrament by a special form of adoration.

Nevertheless, the validity of the mass is not dependent upon the wording of the GIRM. The GIRM is a mere manual.

I was thinking of this.

Quote
78. Now the center and summit of the entire celebration begins: namely, the Eucharistic Prayer, that is, the prayer of thanksgiving and sanctification. The priest invites the people to lift up their hearts to the Lord in prayer and thanksgiving;
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20030317_ordinamento-messale_en.html

You are isolating one phrase without looking at the whole context of the GIRM. In fact, you stated plainly and confidently that the "General Instruction on the Roman Missal gives only three ends of the Mass, omitting, of course, the propitiatory end." This is incorrect. I've shown you the relevant passages that speak of the nature of the mass as a propitiation for sins.

It's a common myth in traditional circles that the GIRM omits the propitiatory end of the mass, mostly due to the fact that the Ottaviani Intervention is seen as the definitive critique of the NOM. However, most people fail to realize that the GIRM itself underwent subsequent developments even during Paul VI's pontificate.
DISPOSE OUR DAYS IN THY PEACE, AND COMMAND US TO BE DELIVERED FROM ETERNAL DAMNATION, AND TO BE NUMBERED IN THE FLOCK OF THINE ELECT.

Nazianzen

Vetus Ordo, the question is, which version of the GIRM was accurately describing the rite that the same people authored as authored that description?

Did Bugnini and Co. not know what their new rite was about?  Obviously they did, and they omitted reference in the description of it as propitiatory.

Then the faithful complained, and the text was corrected to assert that this was an end of the mass.  What it did not do, and could not do, was to allege that the Novus Ordo Missae expresses that intention clearly, because actually, it effectively suppresses it.

In the Immaculate,
Naz.

Vetus Ordo

Quote from: Nazianzen on November 20, 2019, 07:49:52 PMVetus Ordo, the question is, which version of the GIRM was accurately describing the rite that the same people authored as authored that description? Did Bugnini and Co. not know what their new rite was about?  Obviously they did, and they omitted reference in the description of it as propitiatory. Then the faithful complained, and the text was corrected to assert that this was an end of the mass.  What it did not do, and could not do, was to allege that the Novus Ordo Missae expresses that intention clearly, because actually, it effectively suppresses it.

The question is to stop propagating false information in 2019, claiming that the GIRM omits the propitiatory end of the mass when clearly it does not. The intentions of Bugnini, even if completely devious, are irrelevant to the validity of the liturgy. What is relevant and needs to be understood is that the Church officially promulgated the NOM and the accompanying GIRM which makes explicit reference to propitiation.

By the very nature of their official promulgation, the reformed rites of the Latin Church are protected from doctrinal error, cannot be defective or constitute "incentives to impiety," to use the famous wording of the Canon of Trent.
DISPOSE OUR DAYS IN THY PEACE, AND COMMAND US TO BE DELIVERED FROM ETERNAL DAMNATION, AND TO BE NUMBERED IN THE FLOCK OF THINE ELECT.

Nazianzen

Well then, you're not a descendant of the early traditionalists, are you?  You could not even accept the Ottaviani Intervention.  And you certainly couldn't agree with Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX.

If everyone had held your view in 1970, the mass would have been entirely wiped out, there would have been no traditionalists, and the new mass would simply have been the worship of the Catholic Church in the West.

Tell me, what authority do you have for your core principle that only the official printed text of a rite is protected from being an incentive to impiety?  What makes you think that the condemnation of Trent is compatible with widespread tolerated abuses in practice, just so long as there's a pristine book preserved somewhere in the archives?

It's a very strange theory.  Do you think it's even the natural meaning of Trent, let alone the received understanding of trained Catholic experts?

In the Immaculate,
Naz.

dellery

Quote from: mikemac on November 19, 2019, 11:22:07 PM
Quote from: Nazianzen on November 19, 2019, 02:00:56 AM
The new mass is not the mass, it's an unlawful substitute, and cannot be the object of any obligation - except the obligation to avoid it.

Says you.  Well there, you've said it.  You have condemned my parents and millions of Catholics to hell because they fulfilled their Sunday obligation with the NO Mass.  Who to heck do you think you are anyway.  You are not God.

"When Archbishop Lefebvre was absent on a Sunday, the seminarians would go and assist at Mass together at the Bernadine convent of La Maigrauge where an old monk celebrated the New Mass in Latin."  "Make every effort to have the Mass of St. Pius V, but if it is impossible to find one within forty kilometers and if there is a pious priest who says the New Mass in as traditional a way as possible, it is good for you to assist at it to fulfill your Sunday obligation."  These two quotes from an SSPX web site plus the rumour that Archbishop Lefebvre said the new Mass for the first two years seem to contradict you Nazianzen, even though Lefebvre flip flopped at a later date.

Most NO Masses are valid and licit.  I can't say the same for SSPX masses.  The canonical situation of the SSPX is unresolved and at an impasse.  "The PCED also explained that the Masses celebrated by SSPX priests are valid but illicit."

illicit
adjective
forbidden by law, rules, or custom

At this point I wouldn't attend an SSPX mass even if I lived next door to an SSPX chapel.  And even if I didn't have access to the diocesan Latin Mass and had to attend a reverent NO Mass.

Xavier I'm thinking you should have listened to Heinrich's suggestion a few months ago about considering an FSSP seminary.  It's not too late.

That's pretty extreme, Mike.
In spite of all it's shortcoming the SSPX seems to be like the only organization churning out hardy priests in large numbers. Sure, the other TLM organizations, and even the New Rite, have good priests, but they are many times the exception. My experience with the FSSP is almost nothing, but everywhere else in the Church outside of the SSPX it's common to find the faithful subjected to self-centered softness coming from the pulpit.
It's not for us to decide whether a Mass is valid/licit unless something obvious happens that clearly invalidates it. Don't overthink the situation. To shun the SSPX over them not recommending the faithful to assist at the New Mass seems like a rash judgement. We should have the charity to always assume our fellow Catholics have the salvation of souls as their priority. While I don't agree with the SSPX on this particular issue, they do not appear to have bad motivations, and in fact, only warn people away from the New Mass because they believe it will do damage to one's faith.
Blessed are those who plant trees under whose shade they will never sit.

The closer you get to life the better death will be; the closer you get to death the better life will be.

Nous Defions
St. Phillip Neri, pray for us.

Vetus Ordo

Quote from: Nazianzen on November 21, 2019, 03:02:42 AMWell then, you're not a descendant of the early traditionalists, are you? You could not even accept the Ottaviani Intervention. And you certainly couldn't agree with Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX.

The Holy Spirit was promissed to Peter and his successors, not to the early traditionalists and their successors. It's not the Ottaviani Intervention or Abp. Lefebvre that had the final say, regardless of their personal merits and their insights, it was Paul VI. The NOM was officially promulgated by the Church. This act is, essentially, the end of the matter.

Quote from: Nazianzen on November 21, 2019, 03:02:42 AMIf everyone had held your view in 1970, the mass would have been entirely wiped out, there would have been no traditionalists, and the new mass would simply have been the worship of the Catholic Church in the West.

The idea that if it weren't for traditionalists, the Church would have been deprived of the mass, or of any essential graces, unconsciously belies a complete disbelief in the Catholic model and in the traditional faith they're supposedly preserving. It's a living riddle. By definition, the Church cannot promulgate defective or heretical rites. If she could, she would have defected. Or the traditional understanding of Catholicism would be invalid.

Quote from: Nazianzen on November 21, 2019, 03:02:42 AMTell me, what authority do you have for your core principle that only the official printed text of a rite is protected from being an incentive to impiety? What makes you think that the condemnation of Trent is compatible with widespread tolerated abuses in practice, just so long as there's a pristine book preserved somewhere in the archives?

Who promulgated the NOM? The Pope with his full apostolic authority as supreme pastor of all Christians. For more than 50 years now the NOM has been the normative rite of the Latin Church and the rite that the vicar of Christ uses everyday to celebrate mass. Let that sink in. The fact that there are abuses in the NOM does not invalidate the rite itself. Abusus non tollit usum. There were frequent abuses in the TLM prior to Vatican II as well, including priests who just mumbled some pig Latin and said masses 15 minutes long. Or masses with full blown orchestras in the 19th century.

In any case, I just intervened in this thread to correct the false information that the GIRM omits the propitiatory end of the mass. It's a common myth that needs to be dispelled. Any person with sufficient literacy can check the GIRM for himself. It's sad that these things continue to be propagated in traditional circles.
DISPOSE OUR DAYS IN THY PEACE, AND COMMAND US TO BE DELIVERED FROM ETERNAL DAMNATION, AND TO BE NUMBERED IN THE FLOCK OF THINE ELECT.

mikemac

Quote from: dellery on November 21, 2019, 06:37:49 AM
Quote from: mikemac on November 19, 2019, 11:22:07 PM
Quote from: Nazianzen on November 19, 2019, 02:00:56 AM
The new mass is not the mass, it's an unlawful substitute, and cannot be the object of any obligation - except the obligation to avoid it.

Says you.  Well there, you've said it.  You have condemned my parents and millions of Catholics to hell because they fulfilled their Sunday obligation with the NO Mass.  Who to heck do you think you are anyway.  You are not God.

"When Archbishop Lefebvre was absent on a Sunday, the seminarians would go and assist at Mass together at the Bernadine convent of La Maigrauge where an old monk celebrated the New Mass in Latin."  "Make every effort to have the Mass of St. Pius V, but if it is impossible to find one within forty kilometers and if there is a pious priest who says the New Mass in as traditional a way as possible, it is good for you to assist at it to fulfill your Sunday obligation."  These two quotes from an SSPX web site plus the rumour that Archbishop Lefebvre said the new Mass for the first two years seem to contradict you Nazianzen, even though Lefebvre flip flopped at a later date.

Most NO Masses are valid and licit.  I can't say the same for SSPX masses.  The canonical situation of the SSPX is unresolved and at an impasse.  "The PCED also explained that the Masses celebrated by SSPX priests are valid but illicit."

illicit
adjective
forbidden by law, rules, or custom

At this point I wouldn't attend an SSPX mass even if I lived next door to an SSPX chapel.  And even if I didn't have access to the diocesan Latin Mass and had to attend a reverent NO Mass.

Xavier I'm thinking you should have listened to Heinrich's suggestion a few months ago about considering an FSSP seminary.  It's not too late.

That's pretty extreme, Mike.
In spite of all it's shortcoming the SSPX seems to be like the only organization churning out hardy priests in large numbers. Sure, the other TLM organizations, and even the New Rite, have good priests, but they are many times the exception. My experience with the FSSP is almost nothing, but everywhere else in the Church outside of the SSPX it's common to find the faithful subjected to self-centered softness coming from the pulpit.
It's not for us to decide whether a Mass is valid/licit unless something obvious happens that clearly invalidates it. Don't overthink the situation. To shun the SSPX over them not recommending the faithful to assist at the New Mass seems like a rash judgement. We should have the charity to always assume our fellow Catholics have the salvation of souls as their priority. While I don't agree with the SSPX on this particular issue, they do not appear to have bad motivations, and in fact, only warn people away from the New Mass because they believe it will do damage to one's faith.

The problem Dellery is not that the SSPX does not recommend the faithful to assist at the New Mass.  No traditional priest does; not FSSP, ICRSS or diocesan priests that offer the Latin Mass.  The problem is that the SSPX condemns Catholics for attending the NO Mass.

It's nice to see that the FSSP is growing.

Annual Census Shows Prolific Growth at FSSP Parishes
https://fssp.com/annual-census-shows-prolific-growth-at-fssp-parishes/

Besides this good news above some FSSP priests are becoming diocesan priests to spread the Latin Mass, like the two priests that offer the Latin Mass in our area.  This past Sunday one of our priests said that we'll have good news for our Latin Mass community coming from our bishop in January.  He said that he couldn't tell us what it was yet but it will mean the growth of our Latin Mass community in our diocese.
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

Michael Wilson

#204
 Fr. Bisig on his detailed study on the schismatic nature of Consecrations; Fr. Bisig complained that Msgr. Responded stating: "The only problem with your study, is that J.P.II Isn't Catholic".
Had to jog my memory and modify my original post; sorry.
"The World Must Conform to Our Lord and not He to it." Rev. Dennis Fahey CSSP

"My brothers, all of you, if you are condemned to see the triumph of evil, never applaud it. Never say to evil: you are good; to decadence: you are progess; to death: you are life. Sanctify yourselves in the times wherein God has placed you; bewail the evils and the disorders which God tolerates; oppose them with the energy of your works and your efforts, your life uncontaminated by error, free from being led astray, in such a way that having lived here below, united with the Spirit of the Lord, you will be admitted to be made but one with Him forever and ever: But he who is joined to the Lord is one in spirit." Cardinal Pie of Potiers

Nazianzen

Quote from: Vetus Ordo on November 21, 2019, 12:14:33 PM
Quote from: Nazianzen on November 21, 2019, 03:02:42 AMWell then, you're not a descendant of the early traditionalists, are you? You could not even accept the Ottaviani Intervention. And you certainly couldn't agree with Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX.

The Holy Spirit was promissed to Peter and his successors, not to the early traditionalists and their successors.

We agree.  The Holy Ghost was promised to the true successors of Peter.  Not to false shepherds that Our Lord especially warned us to be on the lookout for.

Quote from: Vetus Ordo on November 21, 2019, 12:14:33 PM
It's not the Ottaviani Intervention or Abp. Lefebvre that had the final say, regardless of their personal merits and their insights, it was Paul VI. The NOM was officially promulgated by the Church. This act is, essentially, the end of the matter.

It would be the end of the matter if the fact were clear, but the fact is not clear.  Both the status of the man promulgating, and the mode of promulgation, have been questioned by serious and diligent people.  Neither was manifestly clearly certain.  When people behave in very strange ways, as Paul VI did repeatedly, we are entitled to ask who they really are, and what they are up to.  Indeed, that is what Our Lord instructed us to do.

In a nutshell, your position rests on the claim that there is no doubt about the relevant facts; but there is doubt - objective, serious, doubt; ergo your position is not established.

Quote from: Vetus Ordo on November 21, 2019, 12:14:33 PM
Quote from: Nazianzen on November 21, 2019, 03:02:42 AMIf everyone had held your view in 1970, the mass would have been entirely wiped out, there would have been no traditionalists, and the new mass would simply have been the worship of the Catholic Church in the West.

The idea that if it weren't for traditionalists, the Church would have been deprived of the mass, or of any essential graces, unconsciously belies a complete disbelief in the Catholic model and in the traditional faith they're supposedly preserving. It's a living riddle. By definition, the Church cannot promulgate defective or heretical rites. If she could, she would have defected. Or the traditional understanding of Catholicism would be invalid.

I agree that the Church cannot promulgate defective rites, which is one reason why I know that the Church didn't promulgate this rite.

But you're still apparently holding to the very strange notion that the Church can fail to lead souls securely to salvation just as long as she has a "perfect" path to salvation written in a book somewhere.  So her ministers can be spreading heresy, scandalising everybody, offering their clown masses and their inculturated Pachamama liturgies and all the rest, and the fruit of this can be a catastrophic collapse in faith on an unprecedented scale, but this is all compatible with the Holy Ghost being the Soul of the Mystical Body, because there's a very clean copy of a text somewhere, which everybody ignores (maybe that's why it's so clean).

You have a theoretical Church, whereas we were promised, and we need, an actual Church.

Quote from: Vetus Ordo on November 21, 2019, 12:14:33 PM
Who promulgated the NOM? The Pope with his full apostolic authority as supreme pastor of all Christians. For more than 50 years now the NOM has been the normative rite of the Latin Church and the rite that the vicar of Christ uses everyday to celebrate mass. Let that sink in.

OK, it sank in.  You're still begging the question at issue.

Quote from: Vetus Ordo on November 21, 2019, 12:14:33 PMThe fact that there are abuses in the NOM does not invalidate the rite itself. Abusus non tollit usum. There were frequent abuses in the TLM prior to Vatican II as well, including priests who just mumbled some pig Latin and said masses 15 minutes long. Or masses with full blown orchestras in the 19th century.

Why did you switch to invalidity, from lawfulness?  I'm happy to limit the discussion to lawfulness, that is, essentially whether it's a good rite or a bad rite. 

As for your comparison of the new mass with the mass accompanied by an orchestra, don't you think that's really just a way of admitting that you don't have any argument at all?

Facts:  New Mass is man-centred, Protestant-satisfying, novelty, the fruits of which are catastrophic beyond compare.

How does a mumbled mass compare with that?  It's like somebody complains about the unlawful invasion of Iraq, and the neo-con liar replies, "Oh hell, you know there's violence in the USA too, don't you?"


Quote from: Vetus Ordo on November 21, 2019, 12:14:33 PM
In any case, I just intervened in this thread to correct the false information that the GIRM omits the propitiatory end of the mass. It's a common myth that needs to be dispelled. Any person with sufficient literacy can check the GIRM for himself. It's sad that these things continue to be propagated in traditional circles.

What's sad is that there could be anybody with the sheer FRONT as to maintain this in public. 

Our allegation isn't essentially what the GIRM says TODAY, it's that in its original form it said that the New Mass is not propitiatory. 

Now that was obvious enough, but the point was that the people behind it admitted the fact.  It told us that yes, the New Mass does suppress this aspect of the Catholic Faith, because that's what the intention of those who wrote it was. 

Now, after this was pointed out, and the faithful expressed their outrage, the text was corrected to assert (falsely) that the New Mass expresses the propitiatory purpose that the old and true Holy Sacrifice really and truly does express.  Pointing out that this newer text is different from the original, more accurate, text, is not dispelling any myths.  It's aiding the liars in their efforts, by casting dust into the eyes of those who are trying to see.

I really do think that the special characteristic of the Novus Ordo revolution is hypocrisy.

In the Immaculate,
Nazianzen.

Nazianzen

Quote from: mikemac on November 21, 2019, 06:21:41 PM
The problem is that the SSPX condemns Catholics for attending the NO Mass.

Ah, so this is your understanding?  Well, it's entirely false, completely baseless, and you need not worry any more.

The SSPX condemns nobody, especially not Catholics who attend the New Mass.

Isn't it excellent that was all a misunderstanding and you can now apologise for saying those things that you obviously didn't mean, because they were, we now know, based upon a misunderstanding?

In the Immaculate,
Nazianzen.

mikemac

Quote from: Nazianzen on November 21, 2019, 06:53:46 PM
Quote from: mikemac on November 21, 2019, 06:21:41 PM
The problem is that the SSPX condemns Catholics for attending the NO Mass.

Ah, so this is your understanding?  Well, it's entirely false, completely baseless, and you need not worry any more.

The SSPX condemns nobody, especially not Catholics who attend the New Mass.

Isn't it excellent that was all a misunderstanding and you can now apologise for saying those things that you obviously didn't mean, because they were, we now know, based upon a misunderstanding?

In the Immaculate,
Nazianzen.

You are contradicting yourself again.

Quote from: Nazianzen on November 19, 2019, 02:00:56 AM
The new mass is not the mass, it's an unlawful substitute, and cannot be the object of any obligation - except the obligation to avoid it.
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

dellery

Quote from: Nazianzen on November 21, 2019, 06:53:46 PM
Quote from: mikemac on November 21, 2019, 06:21:41 PM
The problem is that the SSPX condemns Catholics for attending the NO Mass.

Ah, so this is your understanding?  Well, it's entirely false, completely baseless, and you need not worry any more.

The SSPX condemns nobody, especially not Catholics who attend the New Mass.

Isn't it excellent that was all a misunderstanding and you can now apologise for saying those things that you obviously didn't mean, because they were, we now know, based upon a misunderstanding?

In the Immaculate,
Nazianzen.

Your smugness is not helpful.
Blessed are those who plant trees under whose shade they will never sit.

The closer you get to life the better death will be; the closer you get to death the better life will be.

Nous Defions
St. Phillip Neri, pray for us.

dellery

Quote from: mikemac on November 21, 2019, 06:21:41 PM

The problem Dellery is not that the SSPX does not recommend the faithful to assist at the New Mass.  No traditional priest does; not FSSP, ICRSS or diocesan priests that offer the Latin Mass.  The problem is that the SSPX condemns Catholics for attending the NO Mass.

It's nice to see that the FSSP is growing.

Annual Census Shows Prolific Growth at FSSP Parishes
https://fssp.com/annual-census-shows-prolific-growth-at-fssp-parishes/

Besides this good news above some FSSP priests are becoming diocesan priests to spread the Latin Mass, like the two priests that offer the Latin Mass in our area.  This past Sunday one of our priests said that we'll have good news for our Latin Mass community coming from our bishop in January.  He said that he couldn't tell us what it was yet but it will mean the growth of our Latin Mass community in our diocese.

I have never seen them issue any kind of condemnation against Catholics who assist at the New Mass. Strongly worded criticisms and warnings against it, yes, but never a rebuke or condemnation of somebody assisting it.
Blessed are those who plant trees under whose shade they will never sit.

The closer you get to life the better death will be; the closer you get to death the better life will be.

Nous Defions
St. Phillip Neri, pray for us.