How to show extreme traditionalist the errors of her ways?

[fisherman_carl]

There is this extreme traditionalist catholic who says the post Vatican II church is in heresy and the 7 sacraments are invalid. And she says that the pope did not have the authority to change the Mass, say from Latin to English, because it was already established as doctrine that can not be changed by Pope Pius V. What she says doesn’t make sense to me but I was hoping someone with a bit of knowledge on this issue would chime in here to give some good refutation to her ideas. She also subscribes to that holyfamilymonastery website.

 

[Spirithound]

she says that the pope did not have the authority to change the Mass, say from Latin to English, because it was already established as doctrine that can not be changed by Pope Pius V.

This cannot possibly be an unchangeable doctrine of the Catholic Church because the Mass is said in different languages in different Churches. Even in the Roman Church, the original language was Greek, and somewhat before the time of Charlemagne, other languages were used as well, before the pope decreed everyone in the West should use Latin.

 

[centurionguard]

IMHO I can only understand one big reason why Pope Pius V wrote the QUO PRIMUM.

dailycatholic.org/quoprimu.htm

Which was to combat the Reformation period.

 

[centurionguard]

There is this extreme traditionalist catholic who says the post Vatican II church is in heresy and the 7 sacraments are invalid. And she says that the pope did not have the authority to change the Mass, say from Latin to English, because it was already established as doctrine that can not be changed by Pope Pius V. What she says doesn’t make sense to me but I was hoping someone with a bit of knowledge on this issue would chime in here to give some good refutation to her ideas. subscribes She also stop that holyfamilymonastery website.

ubscribes She also stop that holyfamilymonastery website

You have to admit that The Holy Family Monastery and Bro. Michael Dimond, O.S.B. writings can bend on the extreme itself.

Both orthodox forms of the OF and EF Masses are in every way legitimate as each other.

 

[Theophorus]

There is this extreme traditionalist catholic who says the post Vatican II church is in heresy and the 7 sacraments are invalid. And she says that the pope did not have the authority to change the Mass, say from Latin to English, because it was already established as doctrine that can not be changed by Pope Pius V. What she says doesn’t make sense to me but I was hoping someone with a bit of knowledge on this issue would chime in here to give some good refutation to her ideas. She also subscribes to that holyfamilymonastery website.

Whoa that is not doctrine, not by a long shot. Quod Primum( the papal bull often quoted here) reserves the authority to make changes to the Mass to the Holy Father. Pope St. Pius V himself changed the Mass while he was alive by adding the Feast of Our Lady of Victory after the battle of Lepanto. Now the argument can be made that this is just tinkering at the edges but Venerable Pius XII revised the Holy week liturgies in 1955 which was defiantly more than mere tinkering! So the only one who can make such changes to the Mass including issuing a new edition is the Holy Father by virtue of that same Apostolic Authority Pope St. Pius V used to introduce his edition of the Missale Romanum in 1570. Now while we can legitimately debate some of the finer details of the missal of Paul the VI, he had the authority to do what he did.

God willing the Missal will often be updated to include the Churches newest saints!

 

[ConstantineTG]

It hard to tell people something else if they are thoroughly convinced in what they believe in. There a reason proselytizing is not a good way of sharing the faith. Just pray for them that their hearts not harden and open their eyes and ears to Christ and his vicar on earth.

 

[JM3]

Council of Trent

SESSION THE TWENTY-FIRST,
Being the fifth under the Sovereign Pontiff, Pius IV., celebrated on the sixteenth day of July, MDLXII.

CHAPTER II.
The power of the Church as regards the dispensation of the Sacrament of the Eucharist.

**It furthermore declares, that this power has ever been in the Church, that, in the dispensation of the sacraments, their substance being untouched, it may ordain,–or change, what things soever it may judge most expedient, for the profit of those who receive, or for the veneration of the said sacraments, according to the difference of circumstances, times, and places.**And this the Apostle seems not obscurely to have intimated, when he says; Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and the dispensers of the mysteries of God. And indeed it [Page 142] is sufficiently manifest that he himself exercised this power,- as in many other things, so in regard of this very sacrament; when, after having ordained certain things touching the use thereof, he says; The rest I will set in order when I come. Wherefore, holy Mother Church, knowing this her authority in the administration of the sacraments, although the use of both species has,–from the beginning of the Christian religion, not been unfrequent, yet, in progress of time, that custom having been already very widely changed,–she, induced by weighty and just reasons,- has approved of this custom of communicating under one species, and decreed that it was to be held as a law; which it is not lawful to reprobate, or to change at pleasure, without the authority of the Church itself.

 

[Stylites]

There is this extreme traditionalist catholic who says the post Vatican II church is in heresy and the 7 sacraments are invalid. And she says that the pope did not have the authority to change the Mass, say from Latin to English, because it was already established as doctrine that can not be changed by Pope Pius V. What she says doesn’t make sense to me but I was hoping someone with a bit of knowledge on this issue would chime in here to give some good refutation to her ideas. She also subscribes to that holyfamilymonastery website.

Who made her pope and judge of the Church?

 

[kevin1313]

There is this extreme traditionalist catholic who says the post Vatican II church is in heresy and the 7 sacraments are invalid. And she says that the pope did not have the authority to change the Mass, say from Latin to English, because it was already established as doctrine that can not be changed by Pope Pius V. What she says doesn’t make sense to me but I was hoping someone with a bit of knowledge on this issue would chime in here to give some good refutation to her ideas. She also subscribes to that holyfamilymonastery website.

 

[odile53]

It sounds like her logic is severely flawed, and I don’t know if that is just related to her views of things Catholic, or if her distorted logic overflows into other areas. I suppose what I’m saying is that I don’t know if you’re just dealing with a misinterpretation of something that she heard somewhere, or if she is perhaps a little unbalanced. If it’s the second case, you might as well save your breath, and just ask her if she’s discussed this with her priest.

My first impulse would be to wonder just who died and left her in charge, but I’m trying in charity to move away from those types of reactions. I try to tread carefully with people who are “extreme,” as I personally have never had anything good come out of direct refutation of their views.

Just my take on it. Yeah, I’m a big chicken!

 

[kevin1313]

There is this extreme traditionalist catholic who says the post Vatican II church is in heresy and the 7 sacraments are invalid. And she says that the pope did not have the authority to change the Mass, say from Latin to English, because it was already established as doctrine that can not be changed by Pope Pius V. What she says doesn’t make sense to me but I was hoping someone with a bit of knowledge on this issue would chime in here to give some good refutation to her ideas. She also subscribes to that holyfamilymonastery website.

Your friend probably believes that the Church has been without a pope since 1958 when Pius XII died. If so, you might ask her if she seriously believes that the Church can survive more than half a century without a pope. If so, why not five centuries? Or longer? The logic seems to lead to the belief that the Church doesn’t need a pope except for the first, Peter, and possibly the last. At all other times popes are optional.

You might also ask her if she seriously believes that the Holy Ghost would not provide a safegard against imposter “popes” other than individual Church members accusing, trying, and judging a “pope” from afar? Wouldn’t He have a process in place-such as a canonical trial-to follow to formally decide the matter? Isn’t it only fair and charitable that the accused have his day in court to defend himself?

While my suggestions do not address your friend’s concerns, perhaps they might help put her in a frame of mind to seek other solutions than the Protestant notion of everyone deciding for themself such a weighty matter.

 

[ProVobis]

There is this extreme traditionalist catholic who says the post Vatican II church is in heresy and the 7 sacraments are invalid. And she says that the pope did not have the authority to change the Mass, say from Latin to English, because it was already established as doctrine that can not be changed by Pope Pius V. What she says doesn’t make sense to me but I was hoping someone with a bit of knowledge on this issue would chime in here to give some good refutation to her ideas. She also subscribes to that holyfamilymonastery website.

Perhaps she was a little bit misinformed. Both forms of the Latin Rite Masses were promulgated in Latin. The Pope didn’t change the language himself (in fact Vatican II insisted that Latin be preserved) but allowed the bishops to determine to what extent to allow translations of Paul VI’s Latin missal in their countries.

As far as Pope Pius V, he didn’t define any doctrine that wasn’t expressed by the Council of Trent.

 

[fisherman_carl]

Thanks for all your replies. I quoted some of what you guys said to here. But she is set in her ways. She just started to insult me more and more so I broke off our conversation. I tried to be polite but also explain the truth as I see it. She called me naive and a bunch of other things because I don’t agree with her.

She of course disagreed with what you guys said calling it lies or misinformed. She thinks the pope and the bishops actually planned to deprive the Mass with the changes. She thinks they know it is an elicit Mass but continue it anyway. A lot of what she says is incoherent and sounds very much like a conspiracy theory.

I said a prayer for her. Hopefully, someday she will come to her senses.

God Bless