The Novus Ordo Service: Renounce It Entirely

[Teilo and a Half]

I see what you are claiming, and I would certainly deny your premise that traditional Catholics find themselves without a magisterium.

They have a "magisterium" insofar as they are guided by their endeavors to learn about the faith and (above all) to cultivate a life of prayer and penance, and thus attain to the guidance of the Holy Ghost by the maternal patronage of the Blessed Virgin Mary. However, although this may work for the individual Catholic in a particular situation, it will not do to explain away the ecclesiological "mystery" (as John Lane calls it) of not being able to identity hierarchs endowed with Apostolic mission and ordinary jurisdiction, and certainly not amongst the traditionalist clerics who have sought and gained Sacred Orders contrary to the Canons they profess to observe. The Church must always have a living teaching authority, not just books: and it must be a legitimate authority, whose lineage can be traced to the Apostles, not just some random guy who brought a vestment set at eBay and set up shop in some "chapel" in the outskirts of town.

The current situation is difficult, but again, your approach does not solve the problem. I do not know how a man as knowledgeable as yourself could claim that, say, the U.S. Council of Catholic Bishops serve as the authority, the rule of Faith, for us layman.

I'm not as knowledgeable as you may think ;-)

The hierarchy has many problems, and its pastoral neglect and imprudence have led many to err or worse, but Christ is to take care of His Church.

As a Californian, my supposed shepherds have done nothing but fail me and the rest of the Faithful ever since the Second Vatican Council. This is merely one example in a world awash with stories of men in episcopal attire utterly failing their most minimal duties as Christians.

I could say a similar thing of the traditionalist clerics who have failed me, together with many others whom I've known throughout the years. The hypocrisy and incongruities were too much for me. In the end (and this is my own opinion), one of the most tragic legacies of the Second Vatican Council was that it occasioned the genesis of certain acephalous clerical frauds who have become spiritual parasites, destroying vocations and families. Unfortunately, not all were like Archbishop Lefebvre, or Archnbishop Thuc, or Rev. Fr. Saenz y Arriaga, &c.

But, as I have written before, I'm not going to get "specific" here at SD. I shan't profane this place with "traddieland melodrama."

[Bonaventure]

My friend, it appears we have to agree to disagree, at least for the time being, and do our best living our lives and getting to Heaven.

Your main problem appears to be the ecclesiological "mystery," and I as said in a previous post and to others who left traditional Catholicism, leaving doesn't eliminate the problem, it merely explains it away in a different matter.

As you said, "[t]he hierarchy has many problems, and its pastoral neglect and imprudence have led many to err or worse, but Christ is to take care of His Church."

A sedevacantist could say the same exact sentence with a change here or there.

In any case, I hope this forum helps you.

[Teilo and a Half]

My friend, it appears we have to agree to disagree, at least for the time being, and do our best living our lives and getting to Heaven.

Yes, that is the whole point: fulfilling our duties of state in a prayerful manner, and endeavoring industriously to attain to heavenly beatitude by perseverance in faith and good works.

Your main problem appears to be the ecclesiological "mystery," and I as said in a previous post and to others who left traditional Catholicism, leaving doesn't eliminate the problem, it merely explains it away in a different matter.

Agreed: as I've written, the problem never goes away, it's just the way you view it that can change.

As you said, "[t]he hierarchy has many problems, and its pastoral neglect and imprudence have led many to err or worse, but Christ is to take care of His Church."

A sedevacantist could say the same exact sentence with a change here or there.

In any case, I hope this forum helps you.

I hope so too. As you may know, one of my purposes here is to post what old Hobbles scanned (or what I managed to save therefrom) for the edification of the members of SD. I know that this is what he would have wanted me to do. Unfortunately, my changing schedule doesn't allow me to post the scans regularly as he did back when he was posting on CI.

[voxxpopulisuxx]

Ive never known it taught or said that Christ wants us to deny the plain and obvious Truths...in favor of clerical pronouncments.

[Teilo and a Half]

Ive never known it taught or said that Christ wants us to deny the plain and obvious Truths...in favor of clerical pronouncments.

As the First Vatican Council has taught, reason and faith can never contradict one another: when there is an apparent contradiction, then it is because either reason or faith have been misinterpreted.

In the end of the day, it boils down to the epistemological question: how are we to know what's what in the midst of this crisis? As long as we earnestly try to be good Catholics, it will be alright, no matter what opinion we adopt to explain this whole mess (which is the evil brought about by the negligent hierarchs). For us layfolk, it is not a problem we can fix for the whole of Christendom: all we can do is to profess and practice our sacred faith, fulfilling the vows we made at holy Baptism, and be faithful to the exigencies of our state of life.

[voxxpopulisuxx]

T.5 you are right in general ...but the obvious errors...like the NO...assisi...communion in the hand...etc...you are accountable.

[Jayne]

This is what ultimately compelled me to abandon sedevacantism and traditionalism altogether. It's all about authority: whom am I to trust? Whom has been sent to be today's living successors of the Apostles?

I don't understand what exactly compelled you to abandon not only sedevacantism, but being a "trad" completely.

Well, in the before-time, in the long-long-ago, sedevacantism and traditionalism were indissolubly tied to one another for me: rejecting one would mean recanting the other. Now that I can make the distinction between these two, the questions that compelled me to recant sedevacantism are the very same ones that prohibited me from identifying myself as a "traditionalist" as some would have the term defined: the questions of Apostolicity, mission, jurisdiction, &c. It is a personal conviction, not something I wish to impose upon others. If I've given the contrary impression, I apologize.

I know there are very many, profound problems in the Church, and the more I have distanced myself from sedevacantism the clearer I can see just how complex and enormous is the cluster of crises that we witness in the Church today. It's pretty terrifying really.

I think that I agree with you on these matters, but I consider myself a traditionalist.  On the other hand, a significant proportion of the posters here apparently do not.

[Teilo and a Half]

T.5 you are right in general ...but the obvious errors...like the NO...assisi...communion in the hand...etc...you are accountable.

How am I accountable for that whereupon I can claim no responsibility? I was not alive when the Novus Ordo was promulgated, I was a baby when the first Assisi fiasco occurred and I'm really pissed off about the Communion in the hand thing, so...

Unless you think that I should explain myself for adhering to clerics who have done those things (like the Assisi's -funny, I never had to pluralize "Assisi" before), then that's different. However, I think I did that already. I don't agree with what the hierarchs have done, but I can't fix their problems and errors by myself.

I think that I agree with you on these matters, but I consider myself a traditionalist.  On the other hand, a significant proportion of the posters here apparently do not.

That's what I meant, that I am not a traditionalist (or, for some, a Catholic at all) in the eyes of my former friends and colleagues in the movement. I consider myself a traditionalist, but I know that almost everyone will disagree, so I just gave up using the word altogether.

[Jayne]

I think that I agree with you on these matters, but I consider myself a traditionalist.  On the other hand, a significant proportion of the posters here apparently do not.

That's what I meant, that I am not a traditionalist (or, for some, a Catholic at all) in the eyes of my former friends and colleagues in the movement. I consider myself a traditionalist, but I know that almost everyone will disagree, so I just gave up using the word altogether.

I understand.  Thanks for the explanation.

[voxxpopulisuxx]

By going to thw NO you legitimise and support it

[Gottmitunsalex]

By going to thw NO you legitimise and support it

This has been the most keen and precise answer to the issue.

As Elliot Ness said:" The best way to teach is by example"

[Teilo and a Half]

By going to thw NO you legitimise and support it

No, by attending the Mass in the Ordinary form, I merely assent to what the Church itself has promulgated. I do not think there is anything heretical in the liturgical books promulgated by the Apostolic See. Thankfully, I do not have the responsibility to condemn nor condone what has been duly promulgated.

[voxxpopulisuxx]

You saw the pictures..you know the history...you know that the no was created and promulgted whole cloth less than 60 years ago...youve seen the devistation and societal decay caused..but you defer to prelates instead of your own basic good sense. You are accountable. You are a collaborator in the auto destruction of the Church. You cannot hide behind I am only following  orders...you are in a sense blaming God

[Teilo and a Half]

You saw the pictures..you know the history...you know that the no was created and promulgted whole cloth less than 60 years ago...youve seen the devistation and societal decay caused..but you defer to prelates instead of your own basic good sense. You are accountable. You are a collaborator in the auto destruction of the Church. You cannot hide behind I am only following  orders...you are in a sense blaming God

Uh... well, I see... I'm being condemned by yet another "lay inquisition." What cogent logic too!

The pathetic thing is that your statement encapsulates the very mentality that made me flee from the traditionalism that seeks to usurp those prerogatives that are proper to the Apostolic See alone: you have not the competence or authority to condemn anyone as "collaborator in the auto destruction of the Church." You are inebriated with pride disguised as zeal for Holy Mother Church.

I'm not letting phantom anathemas from random internet posters sting my conscience. You may pursue your lay jihad as much as you please, but it wont touch me...

Keep calm and carry on. :-D

[voxxpopulisuxx]

You saw the pictures..you know the history...you know that the no was created and promulgated whole cloth less than 60 years ago...youve seen the devastation and societal decay caused..but you defer to prelates instead of your own basic good sense. You are accountable. You are a collaborator in the auto destruction of the Church. You cannot hide behind I am only following  orders...you are in a sense blaming God

Uh... well, I see... I'm being condemned by yet another "lay inquisition." What cogent logic too!

The pathetic thing is that your statement encapsulates the very mentality that made me flee from the traditionalism that seeks to usurp those prerogatives that are proper to the Apostolic See alone: you have not the competence or authority to condemn anyone as "collaborator in the auto destruction of the Church." You are inebriated with pride disguised as zeal for Holy Mother Church.

I'm not letting phantom anathemas from random internet posters sting my conscience. You may pursue your lay jihad as much as you please, but it wont touch me...

Keep calm and carry on. :-D

Again you are deliberatly misdefining what Im saying.throwing out the victim card....boo hoo...oh your trying to sting me...ohhh your trying to begin jihad (really...jihad?) waaa
.Im not trying to sting your conscience...I am trying to wake up your brain the brain God gave you.  go back and read what you wrote...you blame God for the crisis by stating it is HIS ministers who are causing the problem...

Gen 1:12 And Adam said: The woman, whom thou gavest me to be my companion, gave me of the tree, and I did eat..... Gen1:17 And to Adam he said: Because thou hast hearkened to the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldst not eat, cursed is the earth in thy work; with labour and toil shalt thou eat thereof all the days of thy life.
18 Thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou eat the herbs of the earth.
It is your Pride that would deign in the same breath to attempt to hold the prelates who are obviously uncatholic are the competent authority...much the same way Adam cried himself the victim of eve...I mean after all God you gave her to me. So yes it is objectively easy to see with competence and authority that just as Adam collaborated with eve in the destruction of paradise (while pretending he was only following those whom God sent him) those who openly support and engage in the NO when they KNOW it is a novelty and the cause of so much irreligion and a weakening of Gods Church are collaborating in its destruction. That you lashed out at me personally for pointing this out is telling indeed.
Buzz words
inquisition!...Pathetic!....Jihad!....Illogic!...Incompetent! Authority! Random Phantoms! Keep Calm! Oh MY   






Athanasius. Inebriated with pride?