Arrogance & Hypocrisy of "Traditionalists"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nota_Bene
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Nota Bene:
It’s amazing to see the arrogance and hypocrisy of self-described “traditionalists” on these threads. Many of them rail-away at liturgical irregularities and abuses – often rightly so. Yet at the same time they concoct and support other irregularities and abuses because they fit their prideful notion of what is “better”, versus what the Church actually directs.
Well, I agree with you but I don’t see the point. This just gets them stirred up again!

For anyone scratching their heads and wondering what this is all I about, here are some educational sites.

ic.net/~erasmus/RAZINDEX.HTM
tcrnews2.com/sspx.html cin.org/cinmateo.html
sspx-cult.com/SSPXDeprogramming.htm matt1618.freeyellow.com/shawn.html jloughnan.tripod.com/sspx-1.htm home.earthlink.net/~grossklas/index.htm

ARTICLES AND DOCUMENTS
catalog.osv.com/Catalog.aspx
newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm#IIIC columbia.edu/cu/augustine/a/jp2-vc2.html home.earthlink.net/~grossklas/schism.htm ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/QUOPIUS.HTM - ewtn.com/library/councils/v1.htm#6
 
Nota Bene:
SSPX = just another Protestant sect w/ incense…
You know “Crusader”, you have been throwing bags of stones, and intentionally provokeing flamewars by your actions. At the very least, be correct. The SSPX may be schismatic, but their sacraments are valid, somtging that Protestants lack, so that puts the SSPX at a level no worse than Eastren orthdox.

Anyways “Crusader” I hope the mods shut you down again. The last thing that is needed is a flamewar.
 
I am a Traditionalist. When I converted from the Lutheran church I converted into the New Order. I couldn’t believe how much The New Mass was like the Lutheran services I grew up in. Everyone said that it was because Luther broke away from the Catholic Churc and took the Liturgy with him. Then I found out later that the Mass was nothing like that until Vatican II. If you do your homework you will find out role of Archbishop Bugninni(A Freemason) and the six Protestant onlookers. I would love to tell you all day how I feel about the New Mass but if you have no idea what the True Mass is the arguement is useless. I would encourage all Catholics to campare the New Mass with the True Mass. Vatican II WAS NOT a dogmatic counsil. Do not look at just what Vatican II says. Look at the Church History and that thing that Newchurch ignores called Tradition. Study past heresies. Study how the Modernism that infests the Church today was shot down many times by many popes. See how numerous saints, like Augustine, and laypeople took defiant stances against the pope. You can accuse us of being arrogant all you want. That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. I don’t like these forums. I am by no means a teacher and I do not have the authority to do so. If you have questions, ask a priest. Both Traditional and Newchurch. Laypeople, traditional and novus ordo, that do bible studies and doctrine Q & A’s are nothing more than the blind leading the blind. I am not telling you to be a Traditionalist. Do your homework. Then form an opinion. Go to a Tridentine Mass. Remember St. Pius X said "the Mass is not for the instruction of the faithful,"it is for the worship of Almighty God. Look at the stats since Vatican II. I would love to tell you them but you won’t believe me so look them up yourself. Look at the great Arian heresy. It infected the church, bishops and even popes for centuries. Our church and clergy are not exempt from the work of The Evil One. Christ said the gates of hell would not prevail, He did not say they wouldn’t attack it. Please do your homework on both sides. If the Newchurch still claims Tradition then why have they abandon it? I would love to tell you how old the Latin Mass was but you find out. It was old enough to be considered Tradition. If the church claims Tradition then why are the Sacraments done different today? I would love to tell you how old the Traditional Sacraments are but you find out. They were old enough to be considered Tradition. I said only one Hail Mary in a New Mess in the 6 years I attended it. The Traditional Mass says it every Mass. If she is the Mother of God and does intercede for us, then why does the New Mess almost completely ignore her? Please do some research. Start at traditio.com and go to “commentaries from the mailbox”. That’s a great place to start.

Dominus vobiscum
 
40.png
tennman1275:
I am a Traditionalist. When I converted from the Lutheran church I converted into the New Order. I couldn’t believe how much The New Mass was like the Lutheran services I grew up in. Everyone said that it was because Luther broke away from the Catholic Churc and took the Liturgy with him. Then I found out later that the Mass was nothing like that until Vatican II. If you do your homework you will find out role of Archbishop Bugninni(A Freemason) and the six Protestant onlookers. More Rad Trad propaganda. I would love to tell you all day how I feel about the New Mass but if you have no idea what the True Mass is the arguement is useless.*** If what you “feel” is a denial of the validity of the “New Mass,” then it makes you a heretic.I would encourage all Catholics to campare the New Mass with the True Mass. Vatican II WAS NOT a dogmatic counsil. Still infallible. Do not look at just what Vatican II says. Look at the Church History and that thing that Newchurch ignores called Tradition. No, it doesn’t ignore it, it expands upon it. The theology of the Mass is dogma, which cannot change. The order of the Mass is discipline, and no pope may bind his successor in matters of discipline. *** Discipline can change. Study past heresies. Study how the Modernism that infests the Church today was shot down many times by many popes. See how numerous saints, like Augustine, and laypeople took defiant stances against the pope. You can accuse us of being arrogant all you want. That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. I don’t like these forums. I am by no means a teacher and I do not have the authority to do so. If you have questions, ask a priest. Both Traditional and Newchurch. Laypeople, traditional and novus ordo, that do bible studies and doctrine Q & A’s are nothing more than the blind leading the blind. I am not telling you to be a Traditionalist. Do your homework. Then form an opinion. Go to a Tridentine Mass. Remember St. Pius X said "the Mass is not for the instruction of the faithful,"it is for the worship of Almighty God. Look at the stats since Vatican II. I would love to tell you them but you won’t believe me so look them up yourself. Look at the great Arian heresy. It infected the church, bishops and even popes for centuries. Our church and clergy are not exempt from the work of The Evil One. Christ said the gates of hell would not prevail, He did not say they wouldn’t attack it. Please do your homework on both sides. If the Newchurch still claims Tradition then why have they abandon it? ***See above. ***I would love to tell you how old the Latin Mass was but you find out. It was old enough to be considered Tradition. If the church claims Tradition then why are the Sacraments done different today? I would love to tell you how old the Traditional Sacraments are but you find out. They were old enough to be considered Tradition. I said only one Hail Mary in a New Mess in the 6 years I attended it. The Traditional Mass says it every Mass. If she is the Mother of God and does intercede for us, then why does the New Mess almost completely ignore her? Please do some research. Start at traditio.com this is a sedevacantist site and go to “commentaries from the mailbox”. That’s a great place to start.

Dominus vobiscum
More Protestantism. I wonder that you bothered leaving the Lutheran church.
 
40.png
GregChant1545:
I chuckle at those who take issue with those who attend parishes staffed by members of the Society of St. Pius X. The SSPX is a priestly society and NONE of the parishioners are members.
Wrong. The SSPX has never been a priestly society. It is not an order and has never been approved by their local ordinary nor the Pope. The Society was established as a “pious union of the faithful” not a priestly fraternity as the SSPX claims ad experimentum, by Bishop Charriere, Bishop of Lausanne, Geneva, and Fribourg, Switzerland, for a period of six years and the six year period was not extended, the Society has been operating without a legal mandate since the mid 1970’s.
 
40.png
ByzCath:
One of them is attendance and support of schismatic “Trad” Masses.

There is one post where someone is proclaiming the reverence experienced at an SSPX Mass. One can not forget that the SSPX is in schism so any percieved “reverence” must be taken with that in mind.

How is it reverent to be schismatic?
I don’t consider those who support the schismatic Masses to be true Catholic traditionalists because they tend to deny the authority of an ecumenical council and also the authority of popes over the Church.

Having said that, you cannot conclude that they are not reverent just because they are schismatic. Do you claim that the Orthodox are not reverent or that all of the Protestants are not reverent? What absurdity.

I am a traditionalist and who strongly prefers the traditional Latin rite of Mass and who thinks that the changes to the Latin rite of Mass have been a trememdous mistake. I do not however, deny their validity or the authority of the pope to make changes to the Mass. This is what I mean by “Traditionalist.” Please do not make the mistake of lumping traditional Catholics like myself with those who support movements like the SSPX.
 
The SSPX may be schismatic, but their sacraments are valid,
This isn’t quite true. Only some of their sacraments are valid. They do not have faculties, which are needed, to do weddings or confessions. Marriages and confessions by an SSPX priest are not valid.
 
I think the "liberals and "modernists" (AKA anyone who disagrees with "traditonalists") quietly visit forums like this to gather ammo for the next fight.:
Catholic Christians (of moderate, liberal and conservative tendancies) that pay the price of the abuses and irregularities pushed by both groups of extremists…
I never fight over religion, especially OUR shared religion. Rather, I seek to share in the primary purpose that binds us all together, our Risen Lord. If I allow all the “ya but’s”, or “don’t you believe this or that,” then I risk finding myself tangled up in personalities and become less effective. I risk losing that one common denominator, our joined love for Jesus and His purpose ~ His message.

Rather than argue or go to “war:” with others, which is pride based, I seek to find common ground, a place of unity under the wings of HIs love for us. To further enhance my spiritual well-being with His message and how I can incorporate that into my daily life. To listen to how others do the same and to share the daily struggles that may occur as a result.

Semper fi
 
40.png
BulldogCath:
I totally agree-why is it that when you are a defender of the faith, you get labeled all kinds of rediculous labels-I see all kinds of notions about SSPX about them being schismatic, and they may be, I dont know and dont care for that matter, and if you dare claim to be a supporter of them, thier positions as it pertains to the liturgy, or pre-Vatican II tradition for that matter-you wait and see how fast you see **SUSPENDED **under your name.
I’m afraid that you don’t really know what you’re talking about here. I have very vigorously expressed my dissatisfaction with the current Latin rite of Mass and my preference for the old traditions and, as you can see, “suspended” does not appear under my name - and it never has. Even when the threads I participated in were closed by the administrators and the entire topic of sedevacantism was banned my account remained active and in good standing.

forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=870

forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=1240

forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=4355
 
40.png
tennman1275:
I am a Traditionalist. When I converted from the Lutheran church I converted into the New Order. I couldn’t believe how much The New Mass was like the Lutheran services I grew up in. Everyone said that it was because Luther broke away from the Catholic Churc and took the Liturgy with him. Then I found out later that the Mass was nothing like that until Vatican II. If you do your homework you will find out role of Archbishop Bugninni(A Freemason) and the six Protestant onlookers. I would love to tell you all day how I feel about the New Mass but if you have no idea what the True Mass is the arguement is useless. I would encourage all Catholics to campare the New Mass with the True Mass. Vatican II WAS NOT a dogmatic counsil. Do not look at just what Vatican II says. Look at the Church History and that thing that Newchurch ignores called Tradition. Study past heresies. Study how the Modernism that infests the Church today was shot down many times by many popes. See how numerous saints, like Augustine, and laypeople took defiant stances against the pope. You can accuse us of being arrogant all you want. That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. I don’t like these forums. I am by no means a teacher and I do not have the authority to do so. If you have questions, ask a priest. Both Traditional and Newchurch. Laypeople, traditional and novus ordo, that do bible studies and doctrine Q & A’s are nothing more than the blind leading the blind. I am not telling you to be a Traditionalist. Do your homework. Then form an opinion. Go to a Tridentine Mass. Remember St. Pius X said "the Mass is not for the instruction of the faithful,"it is for the worship of Almighty God. Look at the stats since Vatican II. I would love to tell you them but you won’t believe me so look them up yourself. Look at the great Arian heresy. It infected the church, bishops and even popes for centuries. Our church and clergy are not exempt from the work of The Evil One. Christ said the gates of hell would not prevail, He did not say they wouldn’t attack it. Please do your homework on both sides. If the Newchurch still claims Tradition then why have they abandon it? I would love to tell you how old the Latin Mass was but you find out. It was old enough to be considered Tradition. If the church claims Tradition then why are the Sacraments done different today? I would love to tell you how old the Traditional Sacraments are but you find out. They were old enough to be considered Tradition. I said only one Hail Mary in a New Mess in the 6 years I attended it. The Traditional Mass says it every Mass. If she is the Mother of God and does intercede for us, then why does the New Mess almost completely ignore her? Please do some research. Start at traditio.com and go to “commentaries from the mailbox”. That’s a great place to start.

Dominus vobiscum
It would sound like you started with traditio.com and ended with them. Does traditio by any chance teach the document Pastor Aeternus? It’s a pre-Vatican II document. You might want to look into it. ewtn.com/library/councils/v1.htm#6

I have serious problems with websites that claim quotes come from saints that didn’t and are completely historically challenged.
 
40.png
theMutant:
I’m afraid that you don’t really know what you’re talking about here. I have very vigorously expressed my dissatisfaction with the current Latin rite of Mass and my preference for the old traditions and, as you can see, “suspended” does not appear under my name - and it never has. Even when the threads I participated in were closed by the administrators and the entire topic of sedevacantism was banned my account remained active and in good standing.

forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=870

forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=1240

forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=4355
I agree with Mutant. As a matter of fact, didn’t someone already point out that a Pauline Mass proponent has been banned too? If you are banned, it’s because you left the path of civil debating and started to resort to name calling on either side of the issue. While I can clearly see debating this issue, I can’t see anyone saying such silly things as “why don’t you just leave the Church since you’re already gone anyway” and the like.
 
While I strongly disagree with the SSPX, in the interest of honesty, STOP CALLING THEM PROTESTANTS. Protestantism are those who adhere to the religious views proposed by the so-called Reformers in the 16th and 17th centuries and those groups which have spawned directly from them. The SSPX rejects the majority of those views so they are not Protestants. To call them Protestants makes no more sense than calling the Orthodox Protestant because they “protested” against the claims of authority of the bishop of Rome and the addition of the filioque to the creed. They are not Protestant.
 
40.png
theMutant:
While I strongly disagree with the SSPX, in the interest of honesty, STOP CALLING THEM PROTESTANTS. Protestantism are those who adhere to the religious views proposed by the so-called Reformers in the 16th and 17th centuries and those groups which have spawned directly from them. The SSPX rejects the majority of those views so they are not Protestants. To call them Protestants makes no more sense than calling the Orthodox Protestant because they “protested” against the claims of authority of the bishop of Rome and the addition of the filioque to the creed. They are not Protestant.
If they can call us “New Church,” I don’t see why we cannot call them Protestants. They are, as I pointed out, protesting.
 
40.png
theMutant:
I am a traditionalist and who strongly prefers the traditional Latin rite of Mass and who thinks that the changes to the Latin rite of Mass have been a trememdous mistake. I do not however, deny their validity or the authority of the pope to make changes to the Mass. This is what I mean by “Traditionalist.” Please do not make the mistake of lumping traditional Catholics like myself with those who support movements like the SSPX.
I, too, hope that no one makes that mistake, just as I hope no one assumes that those of us who have only ever known the Mass of Paul VI and who love it are a bunch of tree hugging liberals who actively encourage the “smoke of Satan” to come into the Church. I’ve never questioned the validity of the TLM mass, nor mocked it. I expect the same courtesy. I’ve, though a rank sinner, do try to humbly obey the just leaders of the Church. Most people here do. Yet we are constantly called liberal and modernist, etc.
 
40.png
JKirkLVNV:
I, too, hope that no one makes that mistake, just as I hope no one assumes that those of us who have only ever known the Mass of Paul VI and who love it are a bunch of tree hugging liberals who actively encourage the “smoke of Satan” to come into the Church. I’ve never questioned the validity of the TLM mass, nor mocked it. I expect the same courtesy. I’ve, though a rank sinner, do try to humbly obey the just leaders of the Church. Most people here do. Yet we are constantly called liberal and modernist, etc.
I see that we are in similar situations but hold opposite views. I grew up with the current Latin rite of Mass and I defend its validity although I believe that the changes were mistakes for reasons I go into in the first thread to which I linked above. I do not consider any Catholic who prefers the current Rite of Mass to be any of those things. I do not consider them to be bad Catholics for preferring the current Latin rite of Mass and many of those I know are, in fact very conservative.
40.png
JKirkLVNV:
If they can call us “New Church,” I don’t see why we cannot call them Protestants. They are, as I pointed out, protesting.
So, because they are being dishonest in applying an incorrect name to those who share your view it justifies you doing the same to them? Please show me where THAT is taught in Scripture or Tradition. No, I’m sorry, as frustrating as it is, it is simply wrong to call them Protestants because they do not believe in the foundational beliefs of Protestantism (Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide).
 
40.png
theMutant:
I see that we are in similar situations but hold opposite views. I grew up with the current Latin rite of Mass and I defend its validity although I believe that the changes were mistakes for reasons I go into in the first thread to which I linked above. I do not consider any Catholic who prefers the current Rite of Mass to be any of those things. I do not consider them to be bad Catholics for preferring the current Latin rite of Mass and many of those I know are, in fact very conservative.

So, because they are being dishonest in applying an incorrect name to those who share your view it justifies you doing the same to them? Please show me where THAT is taught in Scripture or Tradition. No, I’m sorry, as frustrating as it is, it is simply wrong to call them Protestants because they do not believe in the foundational beliefs of Protestantism (Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide).
They are schismatics, plain and simple. I imagine in another 30 years or so when they can no longer be called schismatics, they will be given some other polite name like the Orthodox. Heck, maybe they’ll be the Novus Protestants or Jansenists or something of the like! 😉
 
40.png
theMutant:
I see that we are in similar situations but hold opposite views. I grew up with the current Latin rite of Mass and I defend its validity although I believe that the changes were mistakes for reasons I go into in the first thread to which I linked above. I do not consider any Catholic who prefers the current Rite of Mass to be any of those things. I do not consider them to be bad Catholics for preferring the current Latin rite of Mass and many of those I know are, in fact very conservative. ***On the contrary, I do not now, nor have I ever, held that the TLM was a mistake. So we cannot be said to hold opposite views. I simply wish to hear and understand the Mass as it is said in the vernacular. I wish that Mass to be celebrated with loving respect and I wish the priest to hew to the rubrics, but that is the Mass I will attend as long as I am able. ***

So, because they are being dishonest in applying an incorrect name to those who share your view it justifies you doing the same to them? Please show me where THAT is taught in Scripture or Tradition. No, I’m sorry, as frustrating as it is, it is simply wrong to call them Protestants because they do not believe in the foundational beliefs of Protestantism (Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide).
No, I disagree, not from an historical perspective, you are certainly correct there, but from a moral perspective they cannot be said to be doing other than protesting, so they can be said to be at least small “p” protestants. Thus, I do no moral
wrong to call them that. Add to that the fact that some of my dearest friends as well as my entire family are Protestants and you will see, that for me at least, it is simply an issue of wanting to be as precise as possible, not to be of necessity insulting. They may, I suppose, continue with their barbs, but if I’m a modernist, a liberal, then so have been the last four successors to Saint Peter. I’m sorry to disagree with you, you seem a very nice and reasonable person.
 
Thank you David aka the Mutant, for your most excellent posts.

I find myself saddened when one’s up bringing within the Church of the pre-Vatican II days are all labeled and lumped together.

And yes change can occur through channels, but there are many who are trying to suppress and distort the voice also, just check the negative responses to people who prefer the pre-Vatican II Mass, prayers, calendar and breviary’s.

I’ll consider myself a dissent regarding the Church as it sets today, maybe I’ll reconsider things when the Liturgy/Mass is performed/celebrated with the priest & laity facing East.

Arrogant ? No I just hold and practice the faith of my grandparents and parents that was passed on to me, its called TRADITION.

james
 
40.png
Jakub:
I’ll consider myself a dissent regarding the Church as it sets today, maybe I’ll reconsider things when the Liturgy/Mass is performed/celebrated with the priest & laity facing East.
This is the way the Eucharist was celebrated when I was a member of the Episcopal Church, so I have a very good sense of what it’s like. I would just ask this: why? Why is this something that is such an enormous deal, the direction that the priest is facing? As it happens, I don’t think it matters. I support the Indult, esp. since it means that fewer people may go running to the schismatic SSPX. So given that, convince me: why does it matter which way the priest faces? What abuse is it to have him face the congregation? Is it somewhere asserted that Our Lord celebrated the Institution of the Eucharist ad orientum?
 
40.png
theMutant:
I don’t consider those who support the schismatic Masses to be true Catholic traditionalists because they tend to deny the authority of an ecumenical council and also the authority of popes over the Church.
Pope Pius XII stated…

"A day will come when the civilized world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God, that His Son is merely a symbol, a philosophy held by so many others, and in the churches Christians will search in vain for the red lamp where God awaits them, like Magdalen weeping before the empty tomb, “Where have they taken Him?”

Pope Paul VI

"We have the impression that through some cracks in the wall the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God: it is doubt, uncertainty, questioning, dissatisfaction, confrontation… We thought that after the Council a day of sunshine would have dawned for the history of the Church. What dawned, instead, was a day of clouds and storms, of darkness, of searching and uncertainties."

We do follow our Popes

Fogny
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top