A test

[dbacks5439]

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
          Have documentation?
          11/17/80: 
          Luther had a profound religious spirit
          Documentation?
          12/23/82: 
          Heretics are Christians
          Documentation?
          5/22/84: 
          Masons are sons of God the Father
          Documentation?
          6/17/84: 
          Buddhism is a great religion
          Documentation?

**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

Ok, now that we've established that your accusations are baseless, let's now preach a gospel of Love and not hate. Mmmkay? Great.:thumbsup:

 

[pjn6444]

Again I really did not start this to be a discussion of TLM versus NO. One of my concerns was women covering their heads in church. St. Paul explicitly condemns it. I was wondering why for so long something would be in place and then it is just decided it is not necessary or that it did not need to be enforced. Also why is communion now distributed under both forms? While for a long time it had been practiced that it was only given under the form of bread. There are many others.

 

[bpbasilphx]

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.

**This is a Catholic urban legend. The so called Leonine prayers were originally said when the Holy See was being politically squeezed by the House of Savoy and papal lands were being confiscated by the new Italian kingdom.

Later the intention of these prayers were changed to be said against modernism.

Still later their intention was 'for the conversion of Russia."**

 

[bpbasilphx]

One of my concerns was women covering their heads in church. St. Paul explicitly condemns it.

**St, Paul explicitly COMMANDS it, not “condemns” it.

And the Eastern Churches in communion with Rome have always had communion in both kinds.**

 

[pjn6444]

Please excuse me for the ambiguity of my statement. I meant of course that St. Paul condemns women not covering their heads. When I stated the problem of head coverings. I meant that they were not being worn.

 

[i_have_no_names]

Also why is communion now distributed under both forms? While for a long time it had been practiced that it was only given under the form of bread.

Well maybe I just don’t know what I’m talking about (it’s not unprobable), but to me, that seems like an odd question. A young child could answer it for you no problem. Jesus gave us both his body and his blood, and told us to “do this in memory of me”. Why would we only half-obey? Just because for a long time it’s been practised that it was only given under the form of bread doesn’t mean it was right for that long period of time. Not if Jesus himself told us to celebrate it under both forms.

BTW, Happy Easter everyone! :bounce:

 

[jimmy]

Again I really did not start this to be a discussion of TLM versus NO. One of my concerns was women covering their heads in church. St. Paul explicitly condemns it. I was wondering why for so long something would be in place and then it is just decided it is not necessary or that it did not need to be enforced. Also why is communion now distributed under both forms? While for a long time it had been practiced that it was only given under the form of bread. There are many others.

Christ gave us both the bread and wine. He did not give us just the bread and say, ‘I am fully present in the bread so you don’t have to have the wine.’ Further the Church used both for the first 1200 years in all traditions so why wouldn’t you?

 

[dbacks5439]

Also, we need to look at the overall history of the Latin Rite. Slowly over time communion was changed so that we receive under one kind. Vat. II saw this and went back to receiving under two kinds. We simply recovered lost tradition.

 

[Dempsey1919]

The reason one form of communion (bread) was given was because there was a fear that the precious blood may fall to the floor when the person drank. Also, giving communion under one form was easier when the Church was very full.

 

[AJV]

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.

Except that the St. Michael’s prayer wasn’t prescribed in 1884. This is the 1884 decree for the prayers after low Mass. The next instruction was in 1886 which would mean that Leo XIII waited almost two years before instructing his prayer be said.

DECRETUM URBIS ET ORBIS.

Iam inde ab anno MDCCCLIX sa. me. Pius PP. IX. ad impetrandam Dei opem quam tempora difficilia et aspera flagitabant, praecepit, ut, in templis omnibus Ditionis Pontificiae, certae preces, quibus sacras Indulgentias adiunxerat, peracto sacrosancto Missae sacrificio, recitarentur. Iamvero gravibus adhuc insidentibus malis nec satis remota suspicione graviorum, cum Ecclesia catholica singulari Dei praesidio tantopere indigeat, Sanctissimus Dominus Noster LEO PAPA XIII. opportunum indicavit, eas ipsas preces nonnullis partibus immutatas toto orbe persolvi, ut quod christianae reipublicae in commune expedit, id communi prece populus christianus a Deo contendat, auctoque supplicantium numero divinae beneficia misericordiae facilius assequatur. Itaque Sanctitas Sua per praesens Sacrorum Rituum Congregationis Decretum mandavit, ut in posterum in omnibus tum Urbis tum catholici orbis Ecclesiis preces infrascriptae, ter centum dierum Indulgentia locupletatae, in fine cuiusque Missae sine cantu celebratae, flexis genibus recitentur, nimirum :

Ter Ave Maria, etc.

Delude dicitur semel Salve Regina, etc. et in fine:

V. Ora pro nobis, sancta Dei Genitrix.

R. Ut digni efficiamur promissionibus Christi.

OREMUS : Deus refugium nostrum et virtus, adesto piis Ecclesiae tuae precibus, et praesta ; ut, intercedente gloriosa et Immaculata Virgine Dei Genitrice Maria, beato Josepho, ac beatis Apostolis tuis Petro et Paulo et omnibus Sanctis, quod in praesentibus necessitatibus humiliter petimus, efficaciter consequamur. Per eumdem Christum Dominum nostrum.

R… Amen.

Contrariis non obstantibus quibuscumque.
Die Epiphaniae Domini MDCCCLXXXIV,

D. CARDINALIS BARTOLINIUS
S. R. C. Praefectus.

L + S

LAURENTIUS SALVATT,
S. R. C. Secretarius.

No prayer mentioned to St. Michael.

 

[John_Higgins]

Hey, Gara3987, how 'bout doing your own research instead of parrotting romancatholicism.org ?

John

 

[edward_george]

A quick look at romancatholicism.org reveals a lot of unsubstantiated myths about the “heresies of Benedict XVI.” While all of this is amusing, even more amusing is the fact that the picture of Pope Benedict sitting beneath a giant menorah is very obviously photoshopped. Credibility=0.

-ACEGC

 

[John_Higgins]

A further irony on this site is that they show quotes from Ven. Pius IX. I seem to recall the one that declared him Venerable was John Paul II (whom they proclaim was a heretic–go figure).

John

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

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 agree completely. I believe we are being justly punished by God. When you consider the things that the Blessed Mother said in approved apparitions from the 19th and early 20th century - about how angry God was with people working on Sunday, and other minor sins compared to today - and then consider the sinfulness of the world at this time, it make complete sense that God would unleash a serious punishment on us.

What is the worst punishment God can unleash? It is not a terrible physical chastisement. That will often bring people to their knees. The worst punishment God can inflict is what he has inflicted upon us. I’ll let St. John Eues explain…

St. John Eudes "The most evident mark of God’s anger and the most terrible castigation He can inflict upon the world are manifested when He permits His people to fall into the hands of clergy who are priests more in name than in deed, priests who practice the cruelty of ravening wolves rather than the charity and affection of devoted shepherds … When God permits such things, it is a very positive proof that He is thoroughly angry with His people, and is visiting His most dreadful anger upon them. That is why He cries unceasingly to Christians, “Return, O ye revolting children … and I will give you pastors according to My own heart” (Jer. 3, 14:15). Thus, irregularities in the lives of priests constitute a scourge visited upon the people in consequence of sin."

We are being justly inlicted with this very punishment in our day.

 

[Chuck_H]

An historical view.

No doctrine here or dogmatics.

A view of history presents the Church that went from a suffering Church that had no “possessions” other than Jesus Himself to a state religion in the last stages of the roman empire.
The introduction of temporal power and possessions presented new temptations and hurdles for the successors of Peter and the Church. A careful read of European history is almost simultaneously a read of the Church during the times from around 900AD to 1550. While Christianity remained true to the ultimate mission of Jesus the flavor of its practice, the manner of presentation slowly changed. The Church became landlord and state ruler of the dominion. Once a landlord and ruler it became practical that “controls” be developed to enhance the application of power. During those ages we see the mass separated from the people behind rails that encouraged the sense that Sacred men (clergy) were above and more worthy than the common laity. The language of the Church becomes Latin for more practical reasons than sacred reasons so that communication could be assured between countries but it can be linked in short order to the clergy in that they and they alone can read the Bible and Canons. The slow change of the apostles mass from a gathering with a ordained priest presider to a sealed off tridentine mass, entirely in Latin, altar rail and insistence that no lay person had the dignity or right to touch the Sacred Eucharist all worked to enforce the temporal power. As such the Church was in danger of losing its real mission. A careful look at the Church of the middle years shows a miserable condition for the laity and an increasing arrogance of the clergy. The misery of the laity can be seen as one reason for the success of heresy and protestantism with the other reason being a simple lack of taught rational catechism. Most lay people (serfs and peasants were left basically ignorant and in virtual servitude to a political magisterium and divine right rule political system. The next two centuries show an increasingly educated laity and the reduction of the political power of the Church in government and national politics. Along with this education came a greater longing to be an intimate part of the Sacrifice of the Mass rather than an onlooker to the separated celebration of a sacred cleric.
Vatican II was the Church’s answer to that longing. With the removal of the altar rail, the return of the liturgy to the vernacular and allowance of the laity to be involved in the liturgy of the Mass the Church returns to Its organic roots.

With all of its problems with renegades, Vatican II is a great leap in the right direction. The Priest, the Bishop and the Pope do best when their only authority is moral and Christ given

Again, this is my take and I claim no divine revelation.

 

[Richie_Nelson]

Fascinating and enlightnening. But, prepare for flogging…not from me though

 

[dbacks5439]

An historical view.

No doctrine here or dogmatics.

A view of history presents the Church that went from a suffering Church that had no “possessions” other than Jesus Himself to a state religion in the last stages of the roman empire.
The introduction of temporal power and possessions presented new temptations and hurdles for the successors of Peter and the Church. A careful read of European history is almost simultaneously a read of the Church during the times from around 900AD to 1550. While Christianity remained true to the ultimate mission of Jesus the flavor of its practice, the manner of presentation slowly changed. The Church became landlord and state ruler of the dominion. Once a landlord and ruler it became practical that “controls” be developed to enhance the application of power. During those ages we see the mass separated from the people behind rails that encouraged the sense that Sacred men (clergy) were above and more worthy than the common laity. The language of the Church becomes Latin for more practical reasons than sacred reasons so that communication could be assured between countries but it can be linked in short order to the clergy in that they and they alone can read the Bible and Canons. The slow change of the apostles mass from a gathering with a ordained priest presider to a sealed off tridentine mass, entirely in Latin, altar rail and insistence that no lay person had the dignity or right to touch the Sacred Eucharist all worked to enforce the temporal power. As such the Church was in danger of losing its real mission. A careful look at the Church of the middle years shows a miserable condition for the laity and an increasing arrogance of the clergy. The misery of the laity can be seen as one reason for the success of heresy and protestantism with the other reason being a simple lack of taught rational catechism. Most lay people (serfs and peasants were left basically ignorant and in virtual servitude to a political magisterium and divine right rule political system. The next two centuries show an increasingly educated laity and the reduction of the political power of the Church in government and national politics. Along with this education came a greater longing to be an intimate part of the Sacrifice of the Mass rather than an onlooker to the separated celebration of a sacred cleric.
Vatican II was the Church’s answer to that longing. With the removal of the altar rail, the return of the liturgy to the vernacular and allowance of the laity to be involved in the liturgy of the Mass the Church returns to Its organic roots.

With all of its problems with renegades, Vatican II is a great leap in the right direction. The Priest, the Bishop and the Pope do best when their only authority is moral and Christ given

Again, this is my take and I claim no divine revelation.

ROTFL!!! Where…Oh man, sorry. Calm down. Okay. Whew! Could you show me in the conciliar documents where it says take down the communion rails, say Mass versus populam, reception of Holy Eucharist on the hand, and ditching the cassock in favor of more “modern” clothing?

 

[Chuck_H]

ROTFL!!! Where…Oh man, sorry. Calm down. Okay. Whew! Could you show me in the conciliar documents where it says take down the communion rails, say Mass versus populam, reception of Holy Eucharist on the hand, and ditching the cassock in favor of more “modern” clothing?

Who needs to show documents? The eye sees, the mind is aware. The mass remains sacred and the laity are made part of it. I am sorry if some see this reality as somehow sinful. The good churches I have had the privilege to attend across the Midwest in both conservative and liberal diocese have opened up the Sanctuary and in only one of the churches I have attended was the altar rail still even present. Since I find God in the mass as it is and find the Sacrifice of the mass still accorded the honor It is due I find no “test” but a reaffirmation.
As I said in my post, it is my view, no doctrine or dogma but my view and my testimony. You are most welcome to skip over it as you wish.

 

[dbacks5439]

Who needs to show documents? The eye sees, the mind is aware. The mass remains sacred and the laity are made part of it. I am sorry if some see this reality as somehow sinful. The good churches I have had the privilege to attend across the Midwest in both conservative and liberal diocese have opened up the Sanctuary and in only one of the churches I have attended was the altar rail still even present. Since I find God in the mass as it is and find the Sacrifice of the mass still accorded the honor It is due I find no “test” but a reaffirmation.
As I said in my post, it is my view, no doctrine or dogma but my view and my testimony. You are most welcome to skip over it as you wish.

You’re entitled to your own view, that’s not in question. But without documentation and evidence, nobody will take you seriously. Sounds to me that you’re catholic, but not Catholic. Learn what the Church really teaches and get back to me.

 

[Chuck_H]

You’re entitled to your own view, that’s not in question. But without documentation and evidence, nobody will take you seriously. Sounds to me that you’re catholic, but not Catholic. Learn what the Church really teaches and get back to me.

Then why do you mock me? I mock no one here; Simply give my view.