Latin Vestments

  • Thread starter Thread starter Harpazo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It is not traditional to reject what is pronounced by the Church, and the NO has been pronounced to be the OF. As much as I love the EF and consider it in almost every way to be superior to the NO it is possible to be a Catholic in good standing and prefer the OF in the same way.

At the same time, that does not mean the NO is immune from criticism. I have many criticisms against it. But I recognize that it is valid and licit.
 
Harpazo said:
I would appreciate it if you and others would cease from derailing this thread. Is it so hard to have a simple discussion about Latin vestments without people getting their panties in a bunch. Please take your bickering to another thread.

Alaha minokhoun,
Andrew
Click to expand...
No need to start with the ad hominem attacks. You made some pretty cutting and inflammatory comments about Latin Rite vestments to begin with, so the other comments are hardly a case of derailing anything…
 
Harpazo, what would you like to know? Yes, some of our vestments can be plain when compared with the rather flamboyant vestments of the Eastern Rite, but there is a reverence in reserve that is often laudable. What precisely would you like to know?
 
JuanCarlos said:
It is not traditional to reject what is pronounced by the Church, and the NO has been pronounced to be the OF. As much as I love the EF and consider it in almost every way to be superior to the NO it is possible to be a Catholic in good standing and prefer the OF in the same way.

At the same time, that does not mean the NO is immune from criticism. I have many criticisms against it. But I recognize that it is valid and licit.
Click to expand...
I also recognize that the Novus Ordo is usually valid (valid in the sense that it confects the Eucharist). As for licit, it depends on what you mean by licit.

Again, I have trouble taking anything seriously from a lay “Eucharistic Minister” whose screen name is Spiller! :eek:
 
VivatJesus said:
Umm, scroll up a bit, “Spiller”…my post was a response to someone else calling traditionalists arrogant. Pot/kettle/black! 😉
Click to expand...
I stand by it and I think most REASONABLE people, reading the posts by many “traditionalists,” would come to the same conclusion. A similar cursory examination for arrogance on the part of those who do NOT self-identify as “traditionalists” would (again, by reasonable, objective people) not yield as many examples of arrogance, at least not in these fora. Further, for clarification, I don’t accuse “all” or even “most” traditionalists of this arrogance. Just a few. Unfortunately, they’re the loudest and more than likely do the greatest harm to the EF by their arrogant pronouncements.
 
VivatJesus said:
LOL, what does age have to do with ANYTHING?? Do you think that all Trads are under the age of 30?
Click to expand...
Most of the mouthy ones 😛

Generally, the more mature trads are patient in their posts, and do more than just arrogantly bash the HMC and her clergy. I have also noted that many of them have offered prayers recently for the reunification of the SSPX with Rome, while the youngsters just spew venom and refuse to admit that the SSPX is even remotely in the wrong.
 
VivatJesus said:
I also recognize that the Novus Ordo is usually valid (valid in the sense that it confects the Eucharist). As for licit, it depends on what you mean by licit.

Again, I have trouble taking anything seriously from a lay “Eucharistic Minister” whose screen name is Spiller! :eek:
Click to expand...
As some might have trouble believing you’re in any way associated with a group such as the Marines.
 
JKirkLVNV said:
I stand by it and I think most REASONABLE people, reading the posts by many “traditionalists,” would come to the same conclusion. A similar cursory examination for arrogance on the part of those who do NOT self-identify as “traditionalists” would (again, by reasonable, objective people) not yield as many examples of arrogance, at least not in these fora. Further, for clarification, I don’t accuse “all” or even “most” traditionalists of this arrogance. Just a few. Unfortunately, they’re the loudest and more than likely do the greatest harm to the EF by their arrogant pronouncements.
Click to expand...
There have been several posters already who have said that YOU GUYS seem to be the most arrogant and venemous.
 
JKirkLVNV said:
Harpazo, what would you like to know? Yes, some of our vestments can be plain when compared with the rather flamboyant vestments of the Eastern Rite, but there is a reverence in reserve that is often laudable. What precisely would you like to know?
Click to expand...
You know what I found offensive? Pope Benedict celebrated a Mass at St. Pete’s on the Feast of Ss. Peter & Paul where ABps. and a Cardinal received their palliums.

Everyone was vested in red as Ss. Peter & Paul were obviously martyred for the faith. Everyone except an Eastern Catholic ABp. who was vested in gold. I don’t care if he never wears red vestments day to day – he could still have had a set made this this special occasion. Just so he wouldn’t have stuck out so terribly from the others. He still would have looked markedly different – just not quite so flamboyant and ostentatious.
 
VivatJesus said:
I also recognize that the Novus Ordo is usually valid (valid in the sense that it confects the Eucharist). As for licit, it depends on what you mean by licit.

Again, I have trouble taking anything seriously from a lay “Eucharistic Minister” whose screen name is Spiller! :eek:
Click to expand...
At certainly the same success rate as the Tridentine Mass, the Divine Liturgy or St. John Chrysostom, the Holy Qurbono or other forms of the Eucharist.

And for your own edification there are no “lay Eucharistic Ministers” no matter what your catechesis has told you.
 
Do you think God cares about vestments, or how we treat our brothers who have a differnt idea about what they like to see on a vested priest?
 
VivatJesus said:
Why is that, Vegas?
Click to expand...
I’ve known Marines. My youngest brother was a Marine. Your attitude toward legitimate authority is not that of a Marine. You want to talk about the “spirit of Vatican II?” Fine, I’d be willing to bet we’re largely on the same page. You cross lines, however, that ought not be crossed. You mock and you mock men who have done far more in the service of Christ than I rather imagine either of us will ever do.
 
VivatJesus said:
There have been several posters already who have said that YOU GUYS seem to be the most arrogant and venemous.
Click to expand...
Note, I said “reasonable” and “objective.” That doesn’t mean someone has to agree with me to be either reasonable or objective. They simply have to be able to read objectively and speak or write reasonably.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top