A test

[pjn6444]

With the second Vatican Council and some of the work of Paul VI and John Paul II a lot of regulations have been loosened. There are a lot of choices. In the mass there are a lot of choices. Is this a test from God? Is he testing us to see if we will still be faithful to His commands, even without being forced to? It just seems odd that the Church would do things a certain way for 1900 years and then say it was not a big deal. (this is not about the mass as much as it is about other precepts) Then I was wondering why. Why would the Church suddenly not emphasize these things anymore? I was then contemplating on the idea of God testing us. God seems to test people a lot in the Bible. I thought maybe God is testing us to see if we will choose Him, or choose the world. What do you all think?

 

[Richie_Nelson]

With the second Vatican Council and some of the work of Paul VI and John Paul II a lot of regulations have been loosened. There are a lot of choices. In the mass there are a lot of choices. Is this a test from God? Is he testing us to see if we will still be faithful to His commands, even without being forced to? It just seems odd that the Church would do things a certain way for 1900 years and then say it was not a big deal. (this is not about the mass as much as it is about other precepts) Then I was wondering why. Why would the Church suddenly not emphasize these things anymore? I was then contemplating on the idea of God testing us. God seems to test people a lot in the Bible. I thought maybe God is testing us to see if we will choose Him, or choose the world. What do you all think?

I wonder if people felt the same way about indoor plumbing and electricity. It’s been that way for centuries so it has to be good? Anything else is bad?

 

[Sure]

God often uses things, of which he is not the cause, to test us. For instance, a terminally ill child. The illness is not caused by God, yet the opportunity presents a challenge and a test for our Faith.

In the same way, many things were eliminated that should not have been. This has led to some chaos and is a trial for the Church. But like always, the Church will prevail. She will withstand the test and grow stronger.

 

[laudamus_te]

I wonder if people felt the same way about indoor plumbing and electricity. It’s been that way for centuries so it has to be good? Anything else is bad?

So, you’re saying that the Church was not good for 1900+ years.

 

[pjn6444]

I agree with “sure” that was more my intent. I am not saying God did this. I am comparing it more to Job. God did not do it, but he used the event to test Job. And to “Richie Nelson” if God had said indoor plumbing was wrong, I would not use it, but since He has not made such a declaration your comment is irrelevant.

 

[Sure]

I agree with “sure” that was more my intent. I am not saying God did this. I am comparing it more to Job. God did not do it, but he used the event to test Job. And to “Richie Nelson” if God had said indoor plumbing was wrong, I would not use it, but since He has not made such a declaration your comment is irrelevant.

Usually, God brings good things out of evil.

 

[i_have_no_names]

So, you’re saying that the Church was not good for 1900+ years.

I don’t think that was what Richie was saying. He didn’t say that there was anything wrong with not having indoor plumbing and electricity. People were happy without it and the environment was probably far better off. But that doesn’t mean there’s anything particularly wrong with having indoor plumbing and electricity, either. If we didn’t have electricity, I wouldn’t be communicating with you right now, and vice-versa.

So shoot me if you will, but I thought Richie made a valid point. The way it’s been for centuries is good, but that doesn’t mean that all change is bad.

Anyway… The Traditional forum makes me angry sometimes. I know you’re trying to hold on to the traditions you grew up with and love, but you don’t have to say that everything else is somehow evil. I have never, in my 15 years, had the opportunity to attend a Traditional Latin Mass, because I grew up (and still live) in a small Canadian city, where Catholicism isn’t as big as in the US. Is it my fault? Am I going to Hell because of this? It’s a question I never would even have known existed before. But now it keeps me awake at night sometimes.

 

[I_Believe]

With the second Vatican Council and some of the work of Paul VI and John Paul II a lot of regulations have been loosened. There are a lot of choices. In the mass there are a lot of choices. Is this a test from God? Is he testing us to see if we will still be faithful to His commands, even without being forced to? It just seems odd that the Church would do things a certain way for 1900 years and then say it was not a big deal. (this is not about the mass as much as it is about other precepts) Then I was wondering why. Why would the Church suddenly not emphasize these things anymore? I was then contemplating on the idea of God testing us. God seems to test people a lot in the Bible. I thought maybe God is testing us to see if we will choose Him, or choose the world. What do you all think?

You are reading it well friend. I had the privilege of hearing a Redemptorist missionary touch on this recently.(at a diocean parish TLM, for all those rolling their eyes).

Our faith is being tested by the chaos and confusion since VII, versus bloody persecution.

"Why would the Church suddenly not emphasize these things anymore? "

Holy Mother Church is not to blame. The Second Vatican Council itself really isn’t to blame.

The problem, IMO, was that after John XXII’s death, those who had already lost the true faith seized the Council. They were the ones who wanted revolutionary change. Modernism manifest, pure and simple.

Those who see this are ridiculed and contradicted. Roman Catholicism wasn’t fun before VII. Today, there is far too much freedom to try new approaches to building faith. Those who know only the Novus Ordo will defend it with such arguments as “I want a Masss I can understand. I want to participate.” The NO IS easier to understand. For US. I, I, I, We, We, We.

It is not the fault of the contempoary Catholic. That is all they know. It is what they were raised to believe it should mean to be a Roman Catholic. A user friendly faith is easier to deal with than the old Catholicism. The Catholicism that taught us we live in a filthy world that is to be despised.

Who is right ? And who is wrong ?

Pope BXVI has given us a choice. It’s all in the hands of the priests now. Will more of our new priests come from the traditional seminaries or the other ones ? We’ll see.

 

[laudamus_te]

I don’t think that was what Richie was saying. He didn’t say that there was anything wrong with not having indoor plumbing and electricity. People were happy without it and the environment was probably far better off. But that doesn’t mean there’s anything particularly wrong with having indoor plumbing and electricity, either. If we didn’t have electricity, I wouldn’t be communicating with you right now, and vice-versa.

So shoot me if you will, but I thought Richie made a valid point. The way it’s been for centuries is good, but that doesn’t mean that all change is bad.

His words were: “It’s been that way for centuries so it has to be good?” This insinuates that it could be bad. Sorry, but I think it’s a ridiculous analogy to make in the first place. We’re talking about the Catholic Church, it’s traditions and customs, some passed on from Apostolic times. Change can be good, certainly, but only when dogma is not affected.

Anyway… The Traditional forum makes me angry sometimes. I know you’re trying to hold on to the traditions you grew up with and love, but you don’t have to say that everything else is somehow evil.

It is not just holding on to traditions we grew up with and love! It’s not because the TLM is prettier; or more conducive to a deeper connection with Jesus in His Passion and Sacrifice; or because of the “smells and bells.” It is all of those things, surely, but it is deeper than that. The TLM is so identifiably Catholic, and there is no doubt as to what is happening on the altar. And I don’t know who you are suggesting has said that “everything else is somehow evil.” Certainly, when Catholics are led to believe error, that is evil.

I have never, in my 15 years, had the opportunity to attend a Traditional Latin Mass, because I grew up (and still live) in a small Canadian city, where Catholicism isn’t as big as in the US. Is it my fault? Am I going to Hell because of this? It’s a question I never would even have known existed before. But now it keeps me awake at night sometimes.

I’m sorry that you have not had the opportunity to attend the TLM, and I pray that you will some day. It is silly to ask if you’re going to Hell because of this, and I’m sure you don’t really think anyone else believes this! It’s not the Mass that will save you from Hell (though, it’s a great help), it’s living your life in accordance with the Church’s teachings - the teachings that have been handed down from Jesus himself and the Apostles, and pronounced infallibly by Popes.

 

[Dempsey1919]

While I have a preference for the Extraordinary Form of the Mass, I find it quite alarming how some people on this forum behave like the Mass of Pius V is an infallable part of the sacred deposit of faith. It is not. It is merely an expression of that faith and is definitely subject to change if the Church deems it necessary.

You may not like it, but the Church decided that the liturgy needed to be changed. This did not change the faith in any way. It wasn’t modernism. It wasn’t a conspiracy. It wasn’t demonic. It was a decision made with the full authority of the Magisterium. The Mass of Paul VI is the valid Mass of the Roman Rite and must not be treated disrespectfully, regardless of personal preference. It is sacred and must be treated as such.

Vatican II will eventually be vindicated and seen as the great work of the Holy Spirit in modern times. Those who find fault with this Council must not have kept abreast of the legitimate developments within theology after Vatican I in the years preceding Vatican II. A thorough study of the council documents will show that most of the changes that we have experienced these past 40 years were not called for by the Council.

The changes that we have regretfully experienced are caused more by changes within society than by the documents of Vatican II.

 

[bpbasilphx]

It just seems odd that the Church would do things a certain way for 1900 years and then say it was not a big deal. (this is not about the mass as much as it is about other precepts)

**But the Church DIDN’T always do things a certain way for 1900 years.

These things developed and changed and grew over time.

There have been periods of laxity, strictness, minimalism, and fervor–following each other fairly regularly.

The only thing each period has in common is a longing for the good old days: as either remembered or (more usually) imagined.**

 

[Richie_Nelson]

I don’t think that was what Richie was saying. He didn’t say that there was anything wrong with not having indoor plumbing and electricity. People were happy without it and the environment was probably far better off. But that doesn’t mean there’s anything particularly wrong with having indoor plumbing and electricity, either. If we didn’t have electricity, I wouldn’t be communicating with you right now, and vice-versa.

So shoot me if you will, but I thought Richie made a valid point. The way it’s been for centuries is good, but that doesn’t mean that all change is bad.

Anyway… The Traditional forum makes me angry sometimes. I know you’re trying to hold on to the traditions you grew up with and love, but you don’t have to say that everything else is somehow evil. I have never, in my 15 years, had the opportunity to attend a Traditional Latin Mass, because I grew up (and still live) in a small Canadian city, where Catholicism isn’t as big as in the US. Is it my fault? Am I going to Hell because of this? It’s a question I never would even have known existed before. But now it keeps me awake at night sometimes.

Thank you for answering, I couldn’t have said it better myself.

thanks, Richie

 

[Gara3987]

God often uses things, of which he is not the cause, to test us. For instance, a terminally ill child. The illness is not caused by God, yet the opportunity presents a challenge and a test for our Faith.

In the same way, many things were eliminated that should not have been. This has led to some chaos and is a trial for the Church. But like always, the Church will prevail. She will withstand the test and grow stronger.

And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [Matthew 16: 18]

 

[Gara3987]

With the second Vatican Council and some of the work of Paul VI and John Paul II a lot of regulations…

The way that I look at it, if it’s not broke do fix it. It is unfortunate that sometimes change can been good, but unfortunately the changes the Church has gone and is going through was is not one of them. An interview with Father Amorth @ fisheaters.com/amorth.html, and he speaks of the problems with the new rituals which were formed for the Exorcists priest. And also Pope Leo XIII had a vision:

Exactly 33 years to the day prior to the great Miracle of the Sun in Fatima, that is, on October 13, 1884, Pope Leo XIII had a remarkable vision. When the aged Pontiff had finished celebrating Mass in his private Vatican Chapel, attended by a few Cardinals and members of the Vatican staff, he suddenly stopped at the foot of the altar. He stood there for about 10 minutes, as if in a trance, his face ashen white. Then, going immediately from the Chapel to his office, he composed the prayer to St. Michael, with instructions it be said after all Low Masses everywhere. When asked what had happened, he explained that, as he was about to leave the foot of the altar, he suddenly heard voices - two voices, one kind and gentle, the other guttural and harsh. They seemed to come from near the tabernacle. As he listened, he heard the following conversation:

   The guttural voice, the voice of Satan in his pride, boasted to Our Lord:

•   "I can destroy your Church."       *
  
   The gentle voice of Our Lord:

•   "You can? Then go ahead and do so."

•    Satan:

•   "To do so, I need more time and more power."

•    Our Lord:

•   "How much time? How much power?

•    Satan:

•   "75 to 100 years, and a greater power over those 
  who will give themselves over to my service."

•    Our Lord:

•   "You have the time, you will have the power. 
  Do with them what you will."

•         Let us think about this for a minute.  This happened in 1884.  The       devil said he needed 75 to100 years.  Well, 75 years from 1884 is 1959.        Wow, what a coincidence that it was on January 25, 1959, that John       XXIII publicly summoned the Second Vatican Council.       
   Remember that after the vision, Pope Leo XIII immediately wrote the Prayer       to St. Michael to help us overcome the devil in his quest.  He instructed       that it be said after every low Mass.

One of the first changes to come from Vatican II, was the deletion of the Leonine Prayers which included the prayer to St. Michael. These prayers were eliminated in 1964, the 80th year of the devils 75 - 100 years needed to destroy the Catholic Church. It would seem that this would be the time to especially say that prayer, not to delete it.
The 100th year would be 1984. By 1984 John Paul II had let the devil develope a church that is called Catholic, but is not.
This is obvious from his teachings.
A quick look at some of what JPII taught just from 1978-1984:

                         **The teachings of John Paul II**
                                      5/6/80: 
          All men are saved
          
          11/17/80: 
          Luther had a profound religious spirit
          
          12/23/82: 
          Heretics are Christians
          
          5/22/84: 
          Masons are sons of God the Father
          
          6/17/84: 
          Buddhism is a great religion

**What the Church has always taught

**
Eugene IV:
All outside the Catholic Church cannot be saved

          Innocent III: 
          If anyone patronizes heretics, he is a heretic
          
          Pius VI: 
          Only Catholics can be Christians
          
          Pius IX: 
          The Masons are sons of the Devil
          
          St. Pius X: 
          Buddhism is a false 
          pagan religion.

John Paul II has said much more against the teachings of the true Catholic Church, but this only a brief summary up to 1984, Satan’s 100th year.
You decide: In 75 - 100 years (1959-1984) did the devil keep his promise and succeed to destroy the Church? Since Christ said that His Church would be with us always, this is impossible.

However the devil has twisted and distorted church teachings so much that there truely is a brand new church, a new order (Novus Ordo) and the true church has been reduced in population to a mere shell of what it once was, but it will survive: “That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.” Matt. 16:18 & 28:20

 

[Freshman88]

I don’t think it was a test.

I believe the situation we are in is born out of a complete misunderstanding of liturgy. I feel the Catholic community itself is very confused as to what is liturgy, the importance of liturgy and the role of liturgy.

If all priests understood lex orandi lex credendi then I do not think that we would have the abuses that we see.

If anything the situation does not present a test, rather, the situation presents the Church with an opportunity to better understand liturgy. Once we have done this, everything will be a lot more clear.

 

[pjn6444]

Consider this Christ said Satan would never win. I can say that Germany never won against the Soviet Union, but they sure got close. Millions were lost but the country was not lost. Satan will never have an ultimate victory. Millions will be lost but the Church will never fall. Hitler’s troops were at the gates of Moscow, but never took Moscow. Similarly, Satan’s forces may be at the gates of the Holy See, but He will never take it.

 

[Freshman88]

Consider this Christ said Satan would never win. I can say that Germany never won against the Soviet Union, but they sure got close. Millions were lost but the country was not lost. Satan will never have an ultimate victory. Millions will be lost but the Church will never fall. Hitler’s troops were at the gates of Moscow, but never took Moscow. Similarly, Satan’s forces may be at the gates of the Holy See, but He will never take it.

I understand and agree.

though I have to raise an eyebrow to identifying the Vatican with the Soviet Union in your metaphor.

 

[pjn6444]

Metaphors are not perfect. I was in no way intending to make a direct association. It was merely the best one I could think of.

Also. to the poster who put up the stuff from Leo XIII, thank you. I was looking up the original long version of the St. Michael’s prayer. I was quite moved by your post. I found this interesting part of the prayer. It is the third paragraph of the original.

“These most crafty enemies have filled and inebriated with gall and bitterness the Church, the spouse of the immaculate Lamb, and have laid impious hands on her most sacred possessions. In the Holy Place itself, where the See of Holy Peter and the Chair of Truth has been set up as the light of the world, they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety, with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck, the sheep may be.”

You do not pray for something if there is not a problem. You do not pray for health if you are not sick. May God have mercy on us all.

 

[I_Believe]

While I have a preference for the Extraordinary Form of the Mass, **I find it quite alarming how some people on this forum behave like the Mass of Pius V is an infallable part of the sacred deposit of faith. It is not. **

What is fallible about it ?

It is merely an expression of that faith and is definitely subject to change if the Church deems it necessary.

Yes, of course. But unprecedented revolutionary change ?

I hear what you are saying, and there is some truth in what you said about changes were already occuring. But do you find it alarming when members of the Curia voice their opinion concerning the NO ? Are they making too much of it ?

Bugnini’s main man said the liturgy has been destroyed. He co-authored the NO.

I agree that laymen should not attack the NO itself. But look at what some have done to it. Far too many priests think they can customize it. It seems that if the GIRM does not forbid it, then it must be ok. It never ends. It gets worse and worse.

 

[jimmy]

So, you’re saying that the Church was not good for 1900+ years.

Actually what his post implies is that Vatican II was not bad. He said nothing about the 1900 years before that.

The Latin Mass is not 1900 years old either and nothing is that was changed.