How to respond to traditionalist catholics about their attitude towards the new mass

[JKirkLVNV]

Archbishop Lefebvre was also a member of the College of Bishops.

The Anglican “archbishop” of Canterbury wasn’t, though he received episcopal treatment from Paul VI.

And the Vicar of Christ attempted to accomodate him. He had a great deal of what he wanted. He was the one who reneged on the deal, not Peter’s successor.

And what does Canterbury have to do with it? You have taken one small thing, the giving of a ring by one pope and a cross by another and blown it up far beyond what they intended. No pope has posited that Anglican possess valid orders. Address the posts and stop dodging. You still haven’t answered ANY of my questions: What would Paul have done? What do you think WE should do?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Link

I’ll have to check it at home, AJV, I’m at another computer.

 

[AlexV]

Giving episcopal insignia to someone is SIGNIFICANT. It’s not like a box of cookies. It’s not a basket of fruit. It has deep theological significance.

As for what individuals would have done, it all depends on whether you have a false notion of obedience. Some people seem to think if you disobey the pope or your Ordinary, you’ve already formed your own church and should probably apply for tax-exempt status.

That false notion of obedience is what leads to people actually admitting they’d do jumping jacks at the Consecration if the pope said.

I guess when a Renaissance pope decided to appoint his son cardinal, it was a matter of obedience to support him.

 

[pnewton]

As for trust, I’ll trust in the liturgy of the centuries. I’ll leave you to figure out how to make sense out of your chaotic liturgy.

I will trust the Holy Spirit and His leadrship in the Church today while I scratch my head over who said their liturgy is chaotic. I know the one I attend (Pauline) is not.

 

[AJV]

Giving episcopal insignia to someone is SIGNIFICANT. It’s not like a box of cookies. It’s not a basket of fruit. It has deep theological significance.

As for what individuals would have done, it all depends on whether you have a false notion of obedience. Some people seem to think if you disobey the pope or your Ordinary, you’ve already formed your own church and should probably apply for tax-exempt status.

That false notion of obedience is what leads to people actually admitting they’d do jumping jacks at the Consecration if the pope said.

I guess when a Renaissance pope decided to appoint his son cardinal, it was a matter of obedience to support him.

Reminds me of Savonarola and his tiffs with Alexander VI. I wanted to link to an online book on Savonarola that I found on books.google. It was highly interesting especially the ordeal by fire which was an amusing anecdote. I’ll look for it tomorrow. Content yourself with Catholic Encyclopedia entry for now.

Perhaps we should have an ordeal by fire ourselves to end all these arguments. Any takers?

 

[AlexV]

Imagine if a bishops’ conference announced the Ascension would no longer be celebrated on Thursday (as it had been for centuries), but would be on Sunday. Now imagine if the faithful rose up and said “No, you will not change our tradition for no good reason other than you don’t think we can really make it to Mass twice in a week.” Imagine if the faithful rose up and said, “You’ve made us laugh…we can’t be expected to observe a feast on Saturday or Monday because we would then be expected to worship TWO DAYS IN A ROW?!”

Then imagine if the same faithful said “Fine, take away our Holy Day and we won’t give 2 envelopes on the same day” (in many parishes, people are told to give twice on Ascension SUNDAY). You can’t take away our traditions without consequence, especially when our contributions once upon a time built some of the churches that you ordered needed to be “renovated” for “Vatican II liturgy”, even though the liturgy of Vatican II was the 1962 Missal, and even though Vatican II never said churches needed to be renovated.

The people should have the sensus fidelium.

 

[AJV]

Imagine that.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Giving episcopal insignia to someone is SIGNIFICANT. It’s not like a box of cookies. It’s not a basket of fruit. It has deep theological significance. **And again, from your position of sitting in judgement of the Vicar of Christ, you have no idea what significance was INTENDED. Closer ties, exploration of commonalities, dispelling of misconceptions, gentle evangelization through proximity, and then we swoop in and convert them while they still have a dazed smile on their face? OR “Nah, let’s just burn 'em.” **

As for what individuals would have done, it all depends on whether you have a false notion of obedience. Some people seem to think if you disobey the pope or your Ordinary, you’ve already formed your own church and should probably apply for tax-exempt status. **The Mass promulgated by the Pope and celebrated by him and his successors isn’t a notion. How can attendance upon it and support of it be a false “notion” of obedience? That’s what you keep going on about and that’s what I’d like you to answer: what are we supposed to do about it? **

That false notion of obedience is what leads to people actually admitting they’d do jumping jacks at the Consecration if the pope said. **Which won’t ever happen and it shows the poverty of your argument. Because that HAS to be what it is, as you cannot genuinely believe that any Pope would order anything so ridiculous. It’s as meaningless as the question “Can God create something to heavy for God to pick up?” and “What is the hand of one hand clapping?” and"Does a tree falling in the forest, yada, yada, yada?", fit only for consideration by college freshmen who are passing a bong around the room. **

I guess when a Renaissance pope decided to appoint his son cardinal, it was a matter of obedience to support him.

**
You’re reaching for straws, Alex, reaching for straws. But I’ll bite: what was your average Joe Catholic at the time supposed to do about it? Did Alexander hold a referendum? Was there a place you could line up and vote? Should they have hissed and booed? What were they supposed to do? AND what are we supposed to do?
**

 

[JKirkLVNV]

The people should have the sensus fidelium.

But see, I think that what your proposing is that the people should have the sensus Alexium. And that’s okay, I wish they had the sensum Johannium. But I know they already have the sensum fidelium, by definition.

 

[bear06]

Peter was the shepherd, and Paul was one of his sheep. Baa indeed.

As for trust, I’ll trust in the liturgy of the centuries. I’ll leave you to figure out how to make sense out of your chaotic liturgy.

As for the bishops, I’ll also leave them to sort out their own problems. In the case of some American ones, that means fiscal disaster and the abuse scandal they largely allowed to fester and erupt in their territories. They have bigger fish to fry than worrying about the liturgy. In the case of some French ones, they should be wondering why their churches are empty.

And Paul never said “Let’s go ordain bishops without Peter’s approval because of his actions”. You are simply missing the story. Paul wasn’t rebuking an official teaching of Peter’s. Paul certainly wasn’t saying that the teachings were in error as Lefebvre did. So, in short, it is wrong to equate Peter and Paul with Lefebvre and John Paul II.

Also, it might be nice to point out that the TLM has not saved all from scandal (and I’m assuming you know what I mean). So you might not want to point a finger at a liturgy as the cause of all that’s evil unless you are going to point it to the TLM too.

BTW, the liturgy I attend is not chaotic. It is most beautiful.

 

[AlexV]

I’m not reaching for straws.

You bet I’ll “stand in judgment of Christ’s vicar” when he gives the sacred symbols of episcopal office to a layman.

You bet I will. Because there is NO possible justification for it. None whatsoever.

Episcopal rings and pectoral crosses mean something. Whether you want to obfuscate that or not. As I said, they’re not boxes of candy or baskets of fruit. They carry significance. They visually signify EPISCOPAL OFFICE.

And the “archbishop” of Canterbury is a layman. Period.

As for “hissing and booing”, that’s exactly what happened, we’re told, when Gregory I tried to change some wording in the Canon Missae.

A valuable story indeed.

Stand by and let a pope give symbols of the fullness of the priesthood to a layman without comment and criticism? Never. The truth is more important than a pope.

 

[AJV]

**
You’re reaching for straws, Alex, reaching for straws. But I’ll bite: what was your average Joe Catholic at the time supposed to do about it? Did Alexander hold a referendum? Was there a place you could line up and vote? Should they have hissed and booed? What were they supposed to do? AND what are we supposed to do?
**

I really should look for that book. There’s another one that pops up but that isn’t it. The interesting thing about Savonarola was that he too announced that the Pope’s excommunication against him was null and void. He didn’t last long. They had an ordeal by fire between his followers.

 

[bear06]

Link. Enjoy.

 

[AJV]

As for “hissing and booing”, that’s exactly what happened, we’re told, when Gregory I tried to change some wording in the Canon Missae.

Exactly. We’re told. It’s fable, or rather pious fiction. If they had such respect for every word of the Canon they sure didn’t show it when they multiped variable parts and saints happily in the Middle Ages.

Stand by and let a pope give symbols of the fullness of the priesthood to a layman without comment and criticism? Never. The truth is more important than a pope.

Amen

You can’t criticise Pope Paul VI. It was his double put there by modernists and masons. I have it on good authority.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I’m not reaching for straws.

You bet I’ll “stand in judgment of Christ’s vicar” when he gives the sacred symbols of episcopal office to a layman.

You bet I will. Because there is NO possible justification for it. None whatsoever.

Episcopal rings and pectoral crosses mean something. Whether you want to obfuscate that or not. As I said, they’re not boxes of candy or baskets of fruit. They carry significance. They visually signify EPISCOPAL OFFICE.

And the “archbishop” of Canterbury is a layman. Period.

As for “hissing and booing”, that’s exactly what happened, we’re told, when Gregory I tried to change some wording in the Canon Missae.

A valuable story indeed.

Stand by and let a pope give symbols of the fullness of the priesthood to a layman without comment and criticism? Never. The truth is more important than a pope.

I would posit by saying that they were being given to an entire group of people, all the people who follow that man, as a gesture of goodwill and hopes for a closer walk in the future, someday, ONE walk. It’s still not a repudiation of the valid ruling that they don’t possess true orders. I would unclench about that, if it were me. But that’s just me. I tend toward optimism when it comes to Christ’s promise to protect the Church.

 

[bear06]

Oooh! Oooh! Here’s a new question which should point to the absurdity of the “what would you do if the pope ordered us to do jumping jacks at the Consecration?” question.

What would you have done if PETER had said to do jumping jacks at the Consecration!!!

 

[bear06]

You bet I’ll “stand in judgment of Christ’s vicar” when he gives the sacred symbols of episcopal office to a layman.

The arguments keep changing. Why don’t you just put together a lengthy post of all the popes supposed transgressions so new ones don’t keep popping up and changing the thread again and again. Let’s just get it out of the way all at once.

You bet I will. Because there is NO possible justification for it. None whatsoever.

Actually, Alex, I believe this would be out of your purview.

 

[bear06]

You can’t criticise Pope Paul VI. It was his double put there by modernists and masons. I have it on good authority.

You are on a roll today, my friend!

 

[JKirkLVNV]

What would you have done if PETER had said to do jumping jacks at the Consecration!!!

“Blessed are the jocks, for they shall inherit the Kingdom of Heaven.”

 

[JKirkLVNV]

What would you have done if PETER had said to do jumping jacks at the Consecration!!!

And we’d be singing “Jumpin’ Jack Flash” instead of “Gift of Finest Wheat.”

Which rather begs the question, wouldn’t you rather sing “Jumpin’ Jack Flash” than “Gift of Finest Wheat?”

But I digress…