Vetus Ordo and Going to NO Mass

[Bonaventure]

Apparent inconsistency in a time of crisis doesn't effect the Catholicity or sanity of an SSPXer. In rejecting, refusing, and/or avoiding a protestantized, novel, fabricated, and non-apostolic rite, they are following their sensus Catholicus and keeping the Faith. Catholicism is not a baptized form of voluntarism.

Nor is Roman Catholicism a baptised form of cardboard popery, is it? But then again, you already agree with that. You're just fulfilling your duties of moderator.

Excuse me? If you've got a point you want to make, go ahead and do so. Sarcasm isn't necessary.

[tmw89]

Protestant sophistry is a bit odd for a traditional Catholic forum.

I agree.

Regarding the NO, this is about as spot-on as it gets:

It "closely resembles the old" inasmuch as the traditional Protestant liturgies resemble the roman rite. It's not as if the novus ordo organically developped from the editio typica of 1962. No, it represented a complete and unprecedented rupture in the normal liturgical growth of the roman liturgy. It's simply not the same apostolic roman rite founded by St. Peter and St. Paul. It's a completely new one, per admission of its own creators. It has no apostolic foundation because it broke away from the rite of the apostles. The same can be said of the Protestant liturgies.

The new mass was "fashioned from scratch" in the sense that a new rite was fabricated to replace the old, just like Luther or Cranmer fabricated their own back in the 16th century, drawing from the old mass. The similarities between the novus ordo and the vetus ordo are accidental, not substantial.

If only the man who posted that would post on SD.

[TerrorDæmonum]

I gave the GIRM's advice.

Perhaps that's Protestant too.

The GIRM has its own issues, and does not address how to deal with violations of the GIRM or the issue that the Bishops (who under Chapter 9 have the freedom to establish certain norms for the liturgy) may not be orthodox in practice and teaching.

And that is the main issue...the GIRM is suspected of not being Catholic.

And that should answer all your points. The GIRM itself, the norms of the Bishops, and the Novus Ordo missal itself are suspect, which is what caused this thread to ever exist.

[Vetus Ordo]

For example, you are completely ok with saying that, in your opinion, someone going to the NO should logically follow its GIRM.  To insinuate that not doing so, however, is illogical or unCatholic is breaking forum rules.

If I say that someone who goes to the NO should logically follow the GIRM (and the Church of course agrees) then it's logically inescapable that I would consider illogical that someone actually and consciously should disobey the GIRM when going to the NO. Isn't that so?

So, to be clear, it's not against the forum rules to say that you should follow the GIRM but against forum rules to say that if someone doesn't follow the GIRM it's illogical?

You don't have to be a trad to post here, but you also can't try to convert trads away from the basic traditionalist thesis.

A thesis is just a thesis, Louis. I'm not converting anyone to anything, unless you're trying to read things in my posts that aren't really there.

[Bonaventure]

For example, you are completely ok with saying that, in your opinion, someone going to the NO should logically follow its GIRM.  To insinuate that not doing so, however, is illogical or unCatholic is breaking forum rules.

If I say that someone who goes to the NO should logically follow the GIRM (and the Church of course agrees) then it's logically inescapable that I would consider illogical that someone actually and consciously should disobey the GIRM when going to the NO. Isn't that so?

So, to be clear, it's not against the forum rules to say that you should follow the GIRM but against forum rules to say that if someone doesn't follow the GIRM it's illogical?

You don't have to be a trad to post here, but you also can't try to convert trads away from the basic traditionalist thesis.

A thesis is just a thesis, Louis. I'm not converting anyone to anything, unless you're trying to read things in my posts that aren't really there.

Oh, come off it. Don't insult the intelligence of the members and moderators of this board.

[Vetus Ordo]

And that is the main issue...the GIRM is suspected of not being Catholic.

And that should answer all your points. The GIRM itself, the norms of the Bishops, and the Novus Ordo missal itself are suspect, which is what caused this thread to ever exist.

All of things listed are ratified by the Church. In fact they're essencial to the normal functioning of the Church. In essence, what you're saying, is that the Church herself is suspect of not being Catholic.

[LouisIX]

For example, you are completely ok with saying that, in your opinion, someone going to the NO should logically follow its GIRM.  To insinuate that not doing so, however, is illogical or unCatholic is breaking forum rules.

If I say that someone who goes to the NO should logically follow the GIRM (and the Church of course agrees) then it's logically inescapable that I would consider illogical that someone actually and consciously disobeys the GIRM when going to the NO. Isn't that so?

So, to be clear, it's not against the forum rules to say that you should follow the GIRM but against forum rules to say that if someone doesn't follow the GIRM it's illogical?

You don't have to be a trad to post here, but you also can't try to convert trads away from the basic traditionalist thesis.

A thesis is just a thesis, Louis. I'm not converting anyone to anything, unless you're trying to read things in my posts that aren't really there.

You are welcome to post your opinions, but any time you argue against a basic tenet of traditionalism you are breaking forum rules.  Your posts here are both snarky and in contradiction with the forum's rules.  You do not have to be a trad, but you may not argue against traditionalism.

It's not a discussion, Vetus.  I'm kindly asking you to keep your opinions on the Novus Ordo to yourself if you cannot express them without arguing against the theological stance of the forum.

[TerrorDæmonum]

All of things listed are ratified by the Church. In fact they're essencial to the normal functioning of the Church. In essence, what you're saying, is that the Church herself is suspect of not being Catholic.

That is not the essence of what I am saying.

Your fact is wrong. They are not essential. They are quite mutable. They only apply to one form of the Roman Rite as well.

[Vetus Ordo]

Excuse me? If you've got a point you want to make, go ahead and do so. Sarcasm isn't necessary.

You're a sedevacantist, are you not?

You agree that the "cardboard popery" as practiced by the Society of St. Pius X isn't really tenable when it comes to Roman Catholicism, otherwise you wouldn't be a sedevacantist, would you? However, I understand that as a moderator of this forum you should overlook that for the sake of peace. That's what I meant by "fulfilling your duties of moderator."

[Bonaventure]

I believe that it is a mistaken, but understandable reaction and view of the current crisis in the Church. It's erroneous, but it's adherents are still Catholic.

You, however, are not arguing against it because you agree with me or want to sway people to a more logical or "consistent" argument.

[Vetus Ordo]

I believe that it is a mistaken, but understandable reaction and view of the current crisis in the Church. It's erroneous, but it's adherents are still Catholic.

They are still Catholic because the pope really isn't the pope, because if he were really the pope, they'd be in trouble, wouldn't they?

You, however, are not arguing against it because you agree with me or want to sway people to a more logical or "consistent" argument.

...and all I did was tell Lirael to follow the GIRM, which contains what the Church expects her to do in the mass she's attending. I should refrain from that in the future.

[TerrorDæmonum]

...and all I did was tell Lirael to follow the GIRM, which contains what the Church expects her to do in the mass she's attending. I should refrain from that in the future.

This forum is called "Ask a traditionalist" not "Ask anybody".

If you are not a traditional Catholic, then I do not think you should answer any questions in this forum.

[Vetus Ordo]

...and all I did was tell Lirael to follow the GIRM, which contains what the Church expects her to do in the mass she's attending. I should refrain from that in the future.

This forum is called "Ask a traditionalist" not "Ask anybody".

If you are not a traditional Catholic, then I do not think you should answer any questions in this forum.

Ah...yes, you're correct. I got carried away.

[Bonaventure]

They are still Catholic because the pope really isn't the pope, because if he were really the pope, they'd be in trouble, wouldn't they?

You know theology and philosophy just as well, if not better, than I.

...and all I did was tell Lirael to follow the GIRM, which contains what the Church expects her to do in the mass she's attending. I should refrain from that in the future.

Sure....good ol' Vetus just has no idea about the trad arguments against going to the NO...

[tmw89]

...and all I did was tell Lirael to follow the GIRM, which contains what the Church expects her to do in the mass she's attending. I should refrain from that in the future.

This forum is called "Ask a traditionalist" not "Ask anybody".

If you are not a traditional Catholic, then I do not think you should answer any questions in this forum.

Ah...yes, you're correct. I got carried away.

Vetus, it is the decision of the moderators that your ability to post here be suspended for three (3) days.

Upon you return, if you do wish to post RE the Church & theology, please couch what you post with "I am a Protestant, but..." or somesuch.  Stop playing games.