Arrogance & Intolerance of Nontraditionalists

[BulldogCath]

Deacon

This is the first time that I must diasagree with you, Vatican II changed everything, possibly illegally as it changed doctrine and worship codified by previous councils and infallible Popes, It was and is still revolutionary and will never die down, as it has more interest today among the 15% of Catholics that actually still go to mass as compared to the 75% before the council than it did 30 years ago. The more you dig as it pertains to the coucil the more bodies that you uncover, as your quote that nothing was changed or done incorrectly-many theologians are now looking into the council and recanting and saying that yes-much was done wrong that should not have been done. And the Novus Ordo supporters right away will say “Oh they must be rad trads or whatever”, but I am not a rad trad, but when I look at some of the postings on traditional websites and paperwork given to me by family written by traditional priests-preists who were in the NO seminary but left out of disgust (read Good bye Good men, and you will know why they left) and I understand exactly what they are saying.
Deacon Ed:

As someone who has studied the early Church, who is writing a book about the Eastern Catholic Churches so that Latin Rite Catholics can have an understanding of this great part of our Church, I find comments like this quite amusing (and I don’t mean to be intolerant or arrogant). It’s just that when people grow up with something they tend to think that what they have is what always was.

Note that not a single change from the Second Vatican Council changed “the structure of the Church” – it changed some disciplines including the format of the Mass without affecting the underlying valaidity of the Mass.

For people who cling to the format instead of the content, yes, that is very threatening. There is a scene in, of all places, an Elvis Presley movie called “Change of Habit” in which elderly women are seen in some wierd rendition of the Mass objecting (and rightly so) and wishing they could go back to the good old days when they could go to Mass and not think about anything. For too many people that was precisely the mode they were in. They’d go, read the bulletin (or the newspaper) and then leave presuming they’d been good Catholics.

This is not a universal condemnation because there were people there who prayed the Mass (my own parents made sure their four boys knew how to follow the Mass in our missals).

The other problem with the claim above is that it denies to Rome the right (divinely given!) to regulate the liturgy and the Church itself. Now that is, IMNSHO, arrogant!

Deacon Ed

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

Deacon Ed:

As someone who has studied the early Church, who is writing a book about the Eastern Catholic Churches so that Latin Rite Catholics can have an understanding of this great part of our Church, I find comments like this quite amusing (and I don’t mean to be intolerant or arrogant). It’s just that when people grow up with something they tend to think that what they have is what always was.

Note that not a single change from the Second Vatican Council changed “the structure of the Church” – it changed some disciplines including the format of the Mass without affecting the underlying valaidity of the Mass.

For people who cling to the format instead of the content, yes, that is very threatening. There is a scene in, of all places, an Elvis Presley movie called “Change of Habit” in which elderly women are seen in some wierd rendition of the Mass objecting (and rightly so) and wishing they could go back to the good old days when they could go to Mass and not think about anything. For too many people that was precisely the mode they were in. They’d go, read the bulletin (or the newspaper) and then leave presuming they’d been good Catholics.

This is not a universal condemnation because there were people there who prayed the Mass (my own parents made sure their four boys knew how to follow the Mass in our missals).

The other problem with the claim above is that it denies to Rome the right (divinely given!) to regulate the liturgy and the Church itself. Now that is, IMNSHO, arrogant!

Deacon Ed

Hello, Deacon Ed, I have no problem with Vatica 2,maybe you are theinking I am speaking of another type of traditionalist I am speaking about those who are pushing for women priests,radical feminism and the laity taking over the authority of the Church Cafeteria Catholics who like to pick and choose what they will adhere to as far as the Church teachings.Those religious and laity who feel it is hateful to speak out against homosexual acts,inclusive language God Bless

 

[itsjustdave1988]

You know, in my mind, I’m just a Catholic. Perhaps I’ll change my signin from “itsjustdave1988” to “imjustcatholic”

 

[itsjustdave1988]

This is the first time that I must diasagree with you, Vatican II changed everything, possibly illegally as it changed doctrine and worship codified by previous councils and infallible Popes

sigh

It is commentary like this that seems prove again and again that there are dissidents at both ends of the spectrum–traditionalist and modernists. Dissent is far from traditional Catholicism.

Pope St. Pius X:

"If one loves the Pope, one does not stop to ask the precise limits to which this duty of obedience extends… one does not seek to restrict the domain within which he can or should make his wishes felt; one does not oppose to the Pope’s authority that of others, however learned they may be, who differ from him. For however great their learning, they must be lacking in holiness, for there can be no holiness in dissension from the Pope. Yet there are priests – a considerable number of them – who submit the word of the Pope to their private judgement and who, with unheard-of audacity, make their obedience to the Roman Pontiff conditional upon such personal judgement." (From an Allocution given on 18 September 1912)

 

[katolik]

JKirkLVNV:

I know the other thread to which you refer and:

A) No one who argued for obedience to the Church on that thread is a “Nontraditional Catholic, the Modernists, the Liberals.” We’re just called that by Rad Trads.

B) No one in that thread desired either of the following: “the ones who want to change the Mass and the ones who want to change the role of women in the Church.” To say this is an inflammatory type of argument, like saying:

Catholic 1: “I rather like the Mass in English.”

Catholic 2: “Well, then you’re a tree-hugging, child-molesting,
Satan worshipping abortionist, as any other right-thinking
Catholic will be able to see.”

C) No one supports the abuses, which are evidently particularly rank in the American Church. We just point out the inconsistencies, slanted quotes, and outright lies of Rad Trads that sometimes post here. They sometimes slander the Mass of Paul VI, sometimes they deny the authority of the Council (VII), and of the Pope. Those who defend those things are not nontraditional, modernist, or liberal. They’re just loyal Catholics trying to defend their Faith from being undermined.

Sir:
I honourably ask you to refrain from insulting your Catholic brethren. Your charicatures are false and deceiving. You probably have never met a Traditionalist in real life and this cursed internet format is not conductive to good Christian conversation. I also suppose that talking with fundamentalists on topics of Faith also affects our outlook on some things.

The Novus Ordo Mass is not perfect in its rubrics nor its prayers. The consecration is valid as long as the three conditions are met

1. valid form [Hoc est enim Corpus meum]
   2.valid matter`[unleavened bread, made from only wheat and water]
   3.Intention[the priests intends to confect the Body and Blood of Christ]
   But that doesn’t mean that the New Mass’s prayers are 100% Catholic and good. There is a valid concern to the purity of Faith when Lutherans and Calvinists can comfortably celebrate the New Mass. How are we supposted to raise Catholics on a Protestant friendly liturgy?

 

[Nota_Bene]

katolik:

Sir:
I honourably ask you to refrain from insulting your Catholic brethren. Your charicatures are false and deceiving. You probably have never met a Traditionalist in real life and this cursed internet format is not conductive to good Christian conversation. I also suppose that talking with fundamentalists on topics of Faith also affects our outlook on some things.

The Novus Ordo Mass is not perfect in its rubrics nor its prayers. The consecration is valid as long as the three conditions are met

1. valid form [Hoc est enim Corpus meum]
   2.valid matter`[unleavened bread, made from only wheat and water]
   3.Intention[the priests intends to confect the Body and Blood of Christ]
   But that doesn’t mean that the New Mass’s prayers are 100% Catholic and good. There is a valid concern to the purity of Faith when Lutherans and Calvinists can comfortably celebrate the New Mass. How are we supposted to raise Catholics on a Protestant friendly liturgy?

By definition the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is divine – it’s Heaven on Earth. So yes, it’s perfect, and that includes the normative Mass…

Next?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

katolik:

Sir:
I honourably ask you to refrain from insulting your Catholic brethren. Your charicatures are false and deceiving. You probably have never met a Traditionalist in real life and this cursed internet format is not conductive to good Christian conversation. I also suppose that talking with fundamentalists on topics of Faith also affects our outlook on some things.

The Novus Ordo Mass is not perfect in its rubrics nor its prayers. The consecration is valid as long as the three conditions are met

1. valid form [Hoc est enim Corpus meum]
   2.valid matter`[unleavened bread, made from only wheat and water]
   3.Intention[the priests intends to confect the Body and Blood of Christ]
   But that doesn’t mean that the New Mass’s prayers are 100% Catholic and good. There is a valid concern to the purity of Faith when Lutherans and Calvinists can comfortably celebrate the New Mass. How are we supposted to raise Catholics on a Protestant friendly liturgy?

I’m not insulting anyone, young man! I gave an example of an inflammtory argument. I distinguish “rad trads” from “traditional Catholics” and I do not confuse the two, so don’t pick up a rock if it doesn’t have your name on it. I’ve no problem with traditional Catholics, I have said repeatedly that I support the Indult. You do an honest and objective search of these threads and examine who begins these arguments, these discussions (“is the NO Mass valid?,” etc.). I support fully anyone’s right to attend upon the Indult Mass. I suppose everyone has the radical freedom to attend the SSPX Mass if they wish. I will, however, defend the authority of the Church, of the Pope, the Magisterium, and an ecumenical council! What would you prefer, a liturgy that HATES Protestants?!?! Our prayers are CATHOLIC because the Pope, the visible head of our Church, who cannot lead us into error, says they are. AND you are a fine one to go calling someone to account for their “charicatures!” Look to the beam in your own eye.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

To my Brothers and Sisters in Christ: I’m taking off for two weeks to visit my family in Dallas. I think it will be good for me to stay off the site for at least that amount of time, because I’m finding that I’m getting cranked up and angry most of the time when I get done with posting/reading posts. I want to apologize and ask forgiveness of anyone that I have hurt or offended. I certainly never set out to do so. I love the Church and the Pope and my fellow Catholics (all of them). I guess I just get a little overexcited sometimes. See you in two weeks or a little latter. May Christ hold you all close within His Most Sacred Heart.

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

JKirkLVNV:

To my Brothers and Sisters in Christ: I’m taking off for two weeks to visit my family in Dallas. I think it will be good for me to stay off the site for at least that amount of time, because I’m finding that I’m getting cranked up and angry most of the time when I get done with posting/reading posts. I want to apologize and ask forgiveness of anyone that I have hurt or offended. I certainly never set out to do so. I love the Church and the Pope and my fellow Catholics (all of them). I guess I just get a little overexcited sometimes. See you in two weeks or a little latter. May Christ hold you all close within His Most Sacred Heart.

You have never seemed to be ugly or over excited to me But then again some of the posts I go :banghead: God Bless and have a safe trip

 

[Exporter]

Nota Bene:

Please do not mislabel my thread. It says “Traditionalists” not “Traditional Catholics.” There is no such thing as a “Traditional Catholic.” A traditional Catholic perhaps, but not a “Traditional Catholic.” Yikes, it’s almost as some are beginning to believe that there is a separate rite called a “Traditional Rite.” Scary

I don’t think this CA website attracts many of whom you label as “Nontraditional Catholic, the Modernists, the Liberals”, but it certainly attracts a decent number of dissenters who label themselves as “traditonalists.”

---

NotaBene, you said do not MISLABEL “YOUR” thread. You say that you HAVE a thread? I started THIS thread, but it doesn’t belong to me! Where does it say that You own a thread? Wake up!

This thread was NOT designed to attract “Liberals”, “Nontraditional Catholics” or" Modernists"! Wake up!

You keep introducing new terms, what is a “dissenter”?

Your last sentance is so mixed up it has no meaning. I can’t comment on it. Wake Up.

Why you are one of the very few who want to duel with ordinary traditional Catholics- I don’t know. Do I qualify in your book as a Roman Catholic? Was baptised at age 24, Confirmed at 28… 50 years ago as of now. Used to do repairs to the Parish school, taught CCD more than 10 years, all 3 of my boys were altar boys. Used to play golf with the Monsenior. Organized study groups for teachers of CCD.
HOWSZATT?

A Question. Would you, Note Bene, consider the Mass we see on EWTN as conforming to your brand of Catholocism?

 

[TNT]

Nota Bene:

By definition the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is divine – it’s Heaven on Earth. So yes, it’s perfect, and that includes the normative Mass…

Next?

What is a normative mass? Does that mean there is also an ABnormative mass? If so, where is it practiced?
I’ve heard of the Novus Ordo Missae (NOM) but not a normative mass.
RE: perfect:
Perfect, unable to be increased in perfection. Cannot be improved for the better.
So, God is perfect. If he changes, would he add or subtract from His perfect state?
If the TLM is perfect, and it is changed to the “normative” or NOM, and it is different, did the change add or subtract from the perfection of the TLM? Or, was the TLM imperfect, and therefore is an exception to your statement “yes, it’s perfect” ?
How do you make something different, without objectively altering its level of perfection?

Just wondering.

 

[TNT]

itsjustdave1988:

You know, in my mind, I’m just a Catholic. Perhaps I’ll change my signin from “itsjustdave1988” to “imjustcatholic”

Great idea. 1988 was NOT a good year for me. It was, in fact a nightmare.

BTW:
I’m a Roman Catholic. By definition, that’s one who is “radically traditional”.
"Sacred Trad. traditon, Scriptural Tradition, I want it ALL. The good, “bad” the ugly. I inherited it and I will pass it on, undiluted.
Modern ecumenism is not tradition.
Un-converting dialogue is not tradition.
Resurrecting the Old Mosaic Covenant as salvific is not tradition.
Having prot’s receive Holy Communion while denying the Faith is not tradition…
Liturgical substantial diversity in the same rite is not tradition.
Teaching subjective speculation as objective truth is not tradition.

Anything I forgot?

 

[Nota_Bene]

Exporter:

Nota Bene:

Please do not mislabel my thread. It says “Traditionalists” not “Traditional Catholics.” There is no such thing as a “Traditional Catholic.” A traditional Catholic perhaps, but not a “Traditional Catholic.” Yikes, it’s almost as some are beginning to believe that there is a separate rite called a “Traditional Rite.” Scary

I don’t think this CA website attracts many of whom you label as “Nontraditional Catholic, the Modernists, the Liberals”, but it certainly attracts a decent number of dissenters who label themselves as “traditonalists.”

---

NotaBene,

you said do not MISLABEL “YOUR” thread. You say that you HAVE a thread? I started THIS thread, but it doesn’t belong to me! Where does it say that You own a thread? Wake up!

This thread was NOT designed to attract “Liberals”, “Nontraditional Catholics” or" Modernists"! Wake up!

You keep introducing new terms, what is a “dissenter”?

Your last sentance is so mixed up it has no meaning. I can’t comment on it. Wake Up.

Why you are one of the very few who want to duel with ordinary traditional Catholics- I don’t know. Do I qualify in your book as a Roman Catholic? Was baptised at age 24, Confirmed at 28… 50 years ago as of now. Used to do repairs to the Parish school, taught CCD more than 10 years, all 3 of my boys were altar boys. Used to play golf with the Monsenior. Organized study groups for teachers of CCD.
HOWSZATT?

A Question. Would you, Note Bene, consider the Mass we see on EWTN as conforming to your brand of Catholocism?
My goodness…

You mislabeled MY THREAD. If you truly cannot understand what I meant by my earlier posting then nothing is going to help.

Read your first posting and then actually read the title of the thread you comment about.

 

[serendipity]

Exporter:

This poster says the nontraditionalists are arrogant and lack tolerance. Any comments?

I kind of think that calling some one arrogant represents arrogance in the caller. Kind of like yelling at some one for their lack of charity.

 

[Catholicguy]

Author: “Terrence J. Boyle” <tboyle@tboyle.net>

Subject: Re: ("Fr. M. E.) Morrison

Body: Hello:

M.E. Morrison was “ordained” in California in a Protestant church (Ebenezer Lutheran Chirch) by Thaddeus Alioto, a married man claiming to be a bishop (because he had been “consecrated” a bishop by Wallace David de Ortega Maxey).

De Ortega Maxey had been “consecrated” numerous times by various North American Old Catholic bishops (whom even the Old Catholic Churches in Europe deny have valid orders). De Ortega Maxey also claimed to have been consecrated by Antoine Aneed.

Aneed’s story is that he was consecrated a bishop by a RC Eastern Rite bishop in Syria and sent to America. Both the Vatican and the Syrian Patriarchate involved denounced the story as a fabrication.

If you have any doubts over the veracity of my statements as to where Morrison got “ordained,” just ask his fellow “independent” priest, Merril Adamson. He was “ordained” in the same ceremony. I’ve a written statement from him confirming the fact.

This is important not because of anything Morrison states on the internet, but because he dresses up his statements as coming from a RC priest.

Even the devil can quote Scripture.

Anyone e-mailing to Morrison’s list a request for the facts of his claimed ordination will be dropped.

It never ceases to amaze me how sedevacantists can be so cock-sure JP II is a fraud, yet swallow hook, line and sinker any number of bogus clerics; just because the frauds sing the music sedes like to hear.

It takes more than “right” preaching to make a priest.

Regards, Terry Boyle

[Mr. Boyle’s website is at [/color]tboyle.net/ ]

I singed-up for “traditio” years ago just to test this out. I beamed Morrison an emial asking for his bona fides re Ordination and I was kicked-off the Tradtio list

 

[BulldogCath]

I like this string-lets start looking into the changes that have been forced down our throat to date, and the proposed changes that they are pushing even further with. Every day I check Spirit Daily which compiles news articles from around the world-and the abuses and ecumenical falsehoods that are spewed each day are amazing. There is the Koran now on Catholic websites readily available for Catholics to read like it is our duty to know about Islam and Mohammed.

Exporter:

There is a thread that asks about the Arrogance & Intolerance of “Traditional Catholics”.

I believe that the traditional Catholic is no more arrogant nor intolerant than any other Catholic group.

I ask, IF the Nontraditional Catholic, the Modernists, the Liberals, the ones who want to change the Mass and the ones who want to change the role of women in the Church ARE NOT EVEN MORE INTOLERANT while walking an ARROGANT walk, don’t you agree.

There are at least two threads on this Forum on which a traditional or conservative statement is met with intolerance and harsh words.

This poster says the nontraditionalists are arrogant and lack tolerance. Any comments?

 

[Exporter]

serendipity:

I kind of think that calling some one arrogant represents arrogance in the caller. Kind of like yelling at some one for their lack of charity.

---

Now lets just analyse you post, Serendipity. You said that You Think that if I post that a group is arrogant, then that automatically makes me arrogant.No one was CALLING names!

Example: My ancestors were from Western Europe, I am a “white” man. My social characteristics are American South West. If I am discussing “Terrorists” who are operating in Iraq, and I say those people are “terrorists” - does that make me a “terrorist”?

According to your way of reasoning it makes me a terrorist!

Actually I think you are angry and anger dilutes common sence. Do you think two opposites such as Liberals and Conservatives may represent the same affinity for a common food? Then can these two opposites express a different set of traits concerning something like Abortion? Can the Liberal be Pro-Abortion and the Conservative be Pro-Life> Wake up America!

 

[pnewton]

Exporter:

According to your way of reasoning it makes me a terrorist!

A copy of this is being sent to homeland security. There will be someone knocking on your door shortly.

 

[Exporter]

pnewton,

PUH…LEEZE! You being a prison guard may lend your letter to be more credible. PUH …LEEZE. How will you turn me in to Homeland Security?

---

serendipityQuote:
Originally Posted by Exporter
*
This poster says the nontraditionalists are arrogant and lack tolerance. Any comments?*

I kind of think that calling some one arrogant represents arrogance in the caller. Kind of like yelling at some one for their lack of charity.
pnewton, a poster named Serindipity had said that Exporter was namecalling, and that since I described an entire group of peole as arrogant- ipso facto , Exporter was arrogant. That just does not pass the “test of reason”. So I made up an analogy about Terrorists on Iraq. I am not a terrorist, I am only an arrogant untolerant old guy who happens to be a Texan who is Roman Catholic. Give that to the Liberal, nontraditional almost- would- be- Catholics. Hey I am an Ex- Exporter (Freeport). I was in Clute before there was a Clute.

 

[WhiteDove]

Dear Exporter…

LOL, how, er, shrill… You’re cute when the veins stick out on your head and neck, did anyone ever tell ya???