I guess potshots against the mainstream is all well and good I suppose…
So true.
The Ordinary Form of the Mass celebrated by active priests in union with their bishop and the pope in Rome is worthy of condemnation to some here, but illicit celebrations of the Extraordinary Form by suspended priests who act in disobedience against the Holy See and who do not even have an active ministry in the Church are to be praised.
Go figure.
Subito SUBITO!!
Good to see you, Matt!
The Society saved my faith. Locked into an area where preaching in contradiction to the Faith, Morals and even Marian Dogma, coupled with auditorium, and in some cases carnival atmosphere, I stopped going to Mass for a few weeks. I only grudgingly went to the Society, having believed the bad press mentioned in the op. My first Mass and the Pastor approached me, asked if I had time to talk, and talk we did.
Two years later, I have never looked back. The sanest thing I have ever done is unplug the cable and the main computer in my home, and pray the prayers I was taught to pray. Its a wonder how getting to know the Saints and the Blessed Mother personally can cure you of even the severedst temptations.
The Society saved me–or at least showed me the way.
I am forever grateful.
The other poster was implying that the TLM is superior to the NO and wants it abrogated. I actually attend the TLM upon occasion.Please explain to me how someone wanting a full restoration of the TLM is a potshot against the mainstream? Are you implying that mainstream Catholicism wants the total abrogation of the TLM? I hope that is not the case. For the record, I saw no malice in his response. I did see condescension in yours though. You are better than that, I know it. God Bless you.
“They Have Uncrowned Him” was one of the best books I have read. It changed–maybe broadened, or even illuminated is a better word–my perspective and how I view the world. It was an eye opener.Deo Gratias! So good to see you again, maurin! I remember our days back on CCF. Hasn’t it been quite some time? That was probably back around 2004 that I left that forum.
http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/ma(name removed by moderator)ages_pictures/lefebvre2.jpg
Thanks be to God for the work of His Excellency Marcel Lefebvre. The priest at our chapel mentioned the other week that when His Excellency died, all of the clouds in Europe disappeared. How truly blessed we were to have a man of God fighting for the Faith and for our Lord Jesus Christ. Santo Subito!
**My advice to those who want to learn more about His Excellency Marcel Lefebvre, please read his words yourself. **Here are a few books written by him as well as a few (such as “The Horn of the Unicorn”) which is about him: astore.amazon.com/acatlif-20?_encoding=UTF8&node=1
It was a bad thing because he expressed his love for the TLM by wishing that the OF disappear. That is the necessary implication of wishing that the TLM would be the only form of Mass. This is understandably offensive to people who are attached to the OF.First off, I don’t want to get off on a tangent regarding the SSPX, but I will point out that Tommymore was making an inflammatory comment against a poster because they expressed a love and devotion to the TLM. He never specified which Church/order/diocese etc…he simply expressed a love for the TLM. How is that a bad thing?
VetA expressed his love for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Nothing more, and nothing approaching your interpretation of his post.The other poster was implying that the TLM is superior to the NO and wants it abrogated. I actually attend the TLM upon occasion.
You are not at all being just here, floresco. Do the shortcomings of the posters defending the NO reflect poorly on the NO?It was a bad thing because he expressed his love for the TLM by wishing that the OF disappear. That is the necessary implication of wishing that the TLM would be the only form of Mass. This is understandably offensive to people who are attached to the OF.
Emmit, you have chosen to publicly identify yourself with the SSPX. This is a big responsibility. Any personal failures or human frailties of yours (and these are unavoidable) are going to reflect on the Society. If you are uncharitable, unfair or unreasonable, it could very well influence people to think of the SSPX this way. And conversely, your virtues will encourage people to think well of the Society. This seems quite daunting to me. I will pray for you.
He said that he “wished it was the only Mass,” this statement implies abrogation of the Novus Ordo (which would be a mistake). I have no problems with someone loving the TLM. As I have said I do go more frequently than you probably assume. I have actually grown to appreciate the beauty of the Tridentine Liturgy, but I also love and appreciate the Ordinary Form. It gets my dander up when it is implied that the Novus Ordo is objectively inferior, or even worse, invalid.VetA expressed his love for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Nothing more, and nothing approaching your interpretation of his post.
Breathe, man. Noone is your enemy.
I also read where he or she was taking a potshot at the Church’s valid and licit Ordinary Form. Here’s the quote again:VetA expressed his love for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Nothing more, and nothing approaching your interpretation of his post.
Breathe, man. Noone is your enemy.
Wishing for the OF to go away, and the snipe about Eastern Rites being “fine” implies that the Western Rite (OF) is not fine. Expressing a love for a Rite is commendable, if it were a licit Rite being loved it would be most commendable.I love the SSPX. love the TLM. wish the TLM was the ONLY Mass (not for Eastern Rites, obiously there Mass is fine to my knowldge).
I believe, Tommy, that you are jumping to a conclusion when youj say he wishes thE NO were abrogated. He may have very well been using hyperbole in his expression. You might think to ask him for clarification before blazing both barrels.He said that he “wished it was the only Mass,” this statement implies abrogation of the Novus Ordo (which would be a mistake). I have no problems with someone loving the TLM. As I have said I do go more frequently than you probably assume. I have actually grown to appreciate the beauty of the Tridentine Liturgy, but I also love and appreciate the Ordinary Form. It gets my dander up when it is implied that the Novus Ordo is objectively inferior, or even worse, invalid.
The best way to know someone’s intention is to ask them, instead of guessing or worse, assuming the worst.I also read where he or she was taking a potshot at the Church’s valid and licit Ordinary Form. Here’s the quote again:
Wishing for the OF to go away, and the snipe about Eastern Rites being “fine” implies that the Western Rite (OF) is not fine. Expressing a love for a Rite is commendable, if it were a licit Rite being loved it would be most commendable.
I was making an observation about the way things work, I am not claiming it is fair that it works this way. And Emmit is doing more than defending the SSPX. He includes it in his religion description and, in his profile, says he intends to be a Society priest. I think it is highly likely that some people will consider him as representative of the SSPX.You are not at all being just here, floresco. Do the shortcomings of the posters defending the NO reflect poorly on the NO?
I was just thinking about that. I do have temper issues, and I hold strong opinions. I could blame my upbringing or my Scottish/German heritage, but that would be pathetic (at best). I humbly apologize for flying off the handle (please note the complete sincerity of this apology). I do believe that the majority of people in the SSPX are very sincere in their desire to preserve the ancient Tradition of Holy Mother Church. I think the Archbishop went about it the wrong way, but I do not question his motives. Again, please accept my deepest apologies for my absolutely indefensible behavior over the last few days.I believe, Tommy, that you are jumping to a conclusion when youj say he wishes thE NO were abrogated. He may have very well been using hyperbole in his expression. You might think to ask him for clarification before blazing both barrels.
Also Tommy, many of your posts get mine and others’ dander up, but we do our best to reason with you in as calm a manner as possible. Please consider doing the same. After all, if we are all lucky it will be in the same Heaven where we will be worshipping at the Golden Altar described in Revelation.
Whatever his intentions (and I am prepared to believe they were good) he chose an unfortunate way to phrase his comment. I have no difficulty in seeing how it could upset people. I think it would be better to acknowledge that they have a legitimate grievance than to continue to defend his post.The best way to know someone’s intention is to ask them, instead of guessing or worse, assuming the worst.
Has anyone thought to ask VetA?
You aren’t merely making an observation, you are making a judgment.I was making an observation about the way things work, I am not claiming it is fair that it works this way. And Emmit is doing more than defending the SSPX. He includes it in his religion description and, in his profile, says he intends to be a Society priest. I think it is highly likely that some people will consider him as representative of the SSPX.
Thank you for this. St. Thomas More is one of my favourite Saints and I have found it distressing to see his name attached to your posts. I have some pretty bad temper issues myself, so I can relate to your difficulties.I was just thinking about that. I do have temper issues, and I hold strong opinions. I could blame my upbringing or my Scottish/German heritage, but that would be pathetic (at best). I humbly apologize for flying off the handle (please note the complete sincerity of this apology). I do believe that the majority of people in the SSPX are very sincere in their desire to preserve the ancient Tradition of Holy Mother Church. I think the Archbishop went about it the wrong way, but I do not question his motives. Again, please accept my deepest apologies for my absolutely indefensible behavior over the last few days.
Rosa Mystica, Ora Pro Nobis.
So you believe a person should be lambasted for a poor choice of words before getting clarification? Isn’t that a shoot first, ask questions later mentality?Whatever his intentions (and I am prepared to believe they were good) he chose an unfortunate way to phrase his comment. I have no difficulty in seeing how it could upset people. I think it would be better to acknowledge that they have a legitimate grievance than to continue to defend his post.
His profile does state:You aren’t merely making an observation, you are making a judgment.
Are the Initials OP, or SJ after a Priest’s name a description of his religion, or a description of the Spirituality he follows?
Like I said, you are not being just in this instance. And with the recent scandals in the Church are we to equate these disordered souls with the reality of Christ’s Church? I should think not. These particular posts of yours are not entirely different. I would beg you to reconsider.
Of course, anyone can call themselves anything they want to, but I am much less inclined to visit an SSPX service as a result.Soon to be SSPX Priest