T
TristanCross
Guest
She? :tsktsk:
What is Novus Ordo?
My problems do lie within the doctrine.
I’ll be sure to go to the Apologetics side.
- Status
What is Novus Ordo?
My problems do lie within the doctrine.
I’ll be sure to go to the Apologetics side.
J
JustaServant
Guest
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
Novus Ordo is a term that is no longer used to describe the normative Mass of the Latin Catholic Church. The Holy Father has called it the Ordinary Form or OF. The old Latin Mass that it has replaced is rightly called the Extraordinary Form or EF.She? :tsktsk:
What is Novus Ordo?
My problems do lie within the doctrine.
I’ll be sure to go to the Apologetics side.
Why don’t you lay out what your problems with doctrine are? Just one at a time.
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
TLM08, I am sorry to hear this news. There are Latin Masses around (I don’t know where you live), and I do know they often become available due to desire/“demand” by the faithful in a particular area.
I would like it if you did not abandon the church of your birth.
I would like it if you did not abandon the church of your birth.
T
TLM08
Guest
I really do appreciate your reply and concern, but there have been many things about the catholic faith that have been problematic for me to resolve for a very long time. I have read the work of Scott Hahn, Karl Keating and many other catholic apologists but there is simply no way to reconcile much of catholic practice with the Word of God no matter how much spin is put on it.
The modern day catholic church doesn’t even assert much of what is considered to be required belief. Rarely will you hear catholic doctrine even spoken of at Mass. The confessionals remain empty while the communion lines remain full. The vast majority of Catholic couples ignore the ban on artificial birth control and many do not believe in the “real presence”. I have been to quite a few Latin Masses during the past couple of years (as my screen name reflects) and I have a tremendous amount of respect for traditionalists. It is only there that you will hear authentic catholic faith in practice.
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
And you cannot find within driving distance a parish populated by traditionalists? In my parish confession is heard daily and there are always a few people in line, at every Mass, 7 days/week. At last Sunday’s Mass the line stretched almost to the doors of the vestibule, and these are regular attendees, not annual visitors. Yes, there’s a lot of apostasy, ignorance, erroneous catechesis, etc. within many Catholic churches, but there are houses of formation which open their doors to laity for Masses (such as the Carmelites, such as other orders who have Masses which the public may attend). Even seminaries do so, often. I don’t think any of those are heterodox.The modern day catholic church doesn’t even assert much of what is considered to be required belief. Rarely will you hear catholic doctrine even spoken of at Mass. The confessionals remain empty while the communion lines remain full. The vast majority of Catholic couples ignore the ban on artificial birth control and many do not believe in the “real presence”. I have been to quite a few Latin Masses during the past couple of years (as my screen name reflects) and I have a tremendous amount of respect for traditionalists. It is only there that you will hear authentic catholic faith in practice.
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
I really think we should stick to answering Tristan’s problems with the Church. Arguing over OF and EF will not answer Tristan’s problems and derails the thread.
TLM, I’ll keep you in my prayers. You are obviously struggling and are at least still worshipping the Lord. Next time you attend your Bible only church, ask yourself how we got the Bible. Who preserved it through the centuries and who translated it? Which Church did Christ build on Peter? Your approach to Church is backwards. The Church came first, and the Bible came out of the Church, which was and is still lead by the Holy Spirit, the Advocate, who will not let the gates of Hell prevail against it.
Read the Early Church Fathers. You will see that the Catholic Church was there. She is the mustard seed, that grew into the largest of trees where the birds could make their home.
God bless,
M
Monica4316
Guest
Hi, the Church doesn’t say we have to be perfect to be saved, we just need to stay in a state of grace: ie: stay with God… not leave Him. We leave Him when we willingly choose sin… but God offers us a way back through confession, if we’re repentant.
btw, anger is a mortal sin when you choose it, when it’s a temptation that you’re trying to resist, it’s probably venial.
we do have to be perfect for Heaven (as the Bible tells us to be), but this can happen in purgatory, and purgatory is only for those who are ALREADY saved and all their sins forgiven. We don’t need to be perfect to be saved though.
the Mass is NOT a re-sacrifice of Christ. It’s a representation of the one Sacrifice at Calvary. Meaning that…it’s like we’re spiritually there, before the Cross…the Eucharist is Jesus and He is risen but it’s the same Jesus who died for us.
(check the catechism, it answers a lot of questions like this, it says the Mass is not another sacrifice but the same one, re-presented to us)
Jesus saves us but He gives His graces through His Church. The Church is His Body. We believe the Catholic Church is the one true Church, but non Catholics are imperfectly united to it through their baptism, and so as long as they didn’t knowingly reject the Church, they have the hope of salvation also.
But we leave others’ salvation up to God, we just pray for them and entrust them to His mercy.
God bless
T
TLM08
Guest
Thank You, and I will continue to pray for all of us. It’s more than a little hard to believe that God will build his church on a sinful human being. St. Paul tells us in 1 Corinthians 3:11 that Christ is the foundation of the Church. Nowhere does Paul tell us to follow St. Peter or declare that he (Peter) is the foundation.
The Old Testament was written many centuries before the Lord Jesus Christ was born and is obvious proof that Scripture was around long before the Church. I have read some of the early fathers including Jurgen’s work and the Didache. Of course, they look very catholic in practice but just like the work of modern day apologists, they are not the inspired Word of God.
M
MercyMia
Guest
Um - when we say that the Church came before scripture, we are referring to the New Testament. The Catholic Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, chose the books of the NT out of the hundreds (maybe thousands) or writings of the time and declared them inspired. One of the tests for scripture was that it did not contradict anything the Church believed via its oral traditions and practices. It is only because of the Catholic Church that you enjoy the certainty of scripture. If we are not the Church that Christ established, then why do you use our scripture? There is no way around the fact that the Church came before the bible. And the difference between the Didache and “modern day apologists” is that the Didache is a “captured in time” snapshot of how the earliest Christians worshipped, and yes that was a Catholic worship.
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
TLM08, Magnificent religious orders developed from flawed human beings. Some of the greatest saints were once some of the greatest sinners of all time, yet God chose to work through them, to show the power of his holiness, not their holiness.
The Catholic Church is not about the (true) unholiness of its many members, including its head, including some previous heads who were scandalously and egregiously unholy, including some who engaged in outright evil. We say One, Holy, Catholic, & Apostolic not because of moral purity but because of the Spirit which guides the Church, because of the Holy Spirit which enables holiness within the Body of believers, singularly & collectively.
We are all, without God’s grace, empty, worthless vessels in the spiritual realm-- regardless of what we do in the worldly realm.
God’s grace is available to the entire universe – certainly not just to Catholics, many of whom seem not to bother to avail themselves of that powerful grace. The Christian scriptures are available to all who seek their wisdom, not just to Catholics. Spirituality and holiness is available to all who seek God in prayer, and through scripture. But the one thing you cannot deny is the power of the sacraments. The sacraments are unique to Catholicism. I will argue that for you, your belief in prayer has also liberated you to conquer weaknesses that otherwise you would not have been able to. And I can vouch that that is true for me as well. Prayer is, no, not unique to Catholicism, but as a religious body, there is more of a commitment to prayer, an investment in prayer, than there is among Protestants – precisely because of our Trinitarian belief in the presence of the Holy Spirit when we pray.
I love Protestants. A few months ago on CAF I mentioned a brief episode about some Protestants who approached me to assist me in need. I love the deep faith in Christ many of them have, and certainly their appreciation for, study of, reverence for scripture which generally far exceeds that of Catholics, because they make the time for scripture. We should all strive to have that reverence and understanding, coupled with the graces of the sacraments of Eucharist and regular Reconciliation (unique to Catholicism), as well as the deep tradition of prayer (unique in its breadth & depth to Catholicism) which fructifies that scripture study and empowers it to liberate us to become as fully Christ-like as we can on earth.
The Catholic Church is not about the (true) unholiness of its many members, including its head, including some previous heads who were scandalously and egregiously unholy, including some who engaged in outright evil. We say One, Holy, Catholic, & Apostolic not because of moral purity but because of the Spirit which guides the Church, because of the Holy Spirit which enables holiness within the Body of believers, singularly & collectively.
We are all, without God’s grace, empty, worthless vessels in the spiritual realm-- regardless of what we do in the worldly realm.
God’s grace is available to the entire universe – certainly not just to Catholics, many of whom seem not to bother to avail themselves of that powerful grace. The Christian scriptures are available to all who seek their wisdom, not just to Catholics. Spirituality and holiness is available to all who seek God in prayer, and through scripture. But the one thing you cannot deny is the power of the sacraments. The sacraments are unique to Catholicism. I will argue that for you, your belief in prayer has also liberated you to conquer weaknesses that otherwise you would not have been able to. And I can vouch that that is true for me as well. Prayer is, no, not unique to Catholicism, but as a religious body, there is more of a commitment to prayer, an investment in prayer, than there is among Protestants – precisely because of our Trinitarian belief in the presence of the Holy Spirit when we pray.
I love Protestants. A few months ago on CAF I mentioned a brief episode about some Protestants who approached me to assist me in need. I love the deep faith in Christ many of them have, and certainly their appreciation for, study of, reverence for scripture which generally far exceeds that of Catholics, because they make the time for scripture. We should all strive to have that reverence and understanding, coupled with the graces of the sacraments of Eucharist and regular Reconciliation (unique to Catholicism), as well as the deep tradition of prayer (unique in its breadth & depth to Catholicism) which fructifies that scripture study and empowers it to liberate us to become as fully Christ-like as we can on earth.
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
Well, the Catholic Church also determined which OT books were inspired. There was no definitive codex of the OT until approx 90 when Jewish scholarx dismissed 7 books of the OT because there were no Hebrew versions, only Greek and Aramaic (and possibly to distance themselves from the new Christian sect). These became is known as the Massoretic manuscripts. Fragments of these 7 books written in Hebrew have been subsequently found at Qumran, thus supporting the CC’s position this books were indeed inspired.
But that is off topic.
T
TLM08
Guest
M
MercyMia
Guest
So then you acknowledge that the Catholic Church did, in fact, decide upon the books of the New Testament?Then why doesn’t she obey them?
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
St Paul was also a sinful human. He was present when St. Stephen was stoned. Jesus is the foundation of the Church, and Seat of Peter is the earthly presence. Archeological digs in St. Peter’s reveal that St. Peter had a special place among the early Christians.
"St. Irenaeus::
(emphasis mine)
Yes, but they can give us accurate descriptions of the practices of the day. In fact, nonCatholic historians add credibility to the CC’s Teachings. Flavius Joseph was a Jewish historian and contemporary of Jesus. His writings include Jesus and beliefs of the first Christians.
I have never heard of a Church Father by the name of Jurgen.
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
It is Protestants who do not obey. They do not believe in the Real Presence (John 6 and Last Supper quotes “This is my body, take and eat”).Then why doesn’t she obey them?
A
Alindawyl
Guest
God uses who and what he will. He created the universe out of nothing. He built the nation of Israel on a sinful human being. Building a Church on a sinful human being is hardly beyond his power.
The one doing the building is Jesus the high priest, and he is without sin.
Really? In verse 10 just before that, St. Paul is talking about laying the foundation himself:
According to the grace of God given to me, like a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building upon it. But each one must be careful how he builds upon it,
Which is then followed by verse 11:
for no one can lay a foundation other than the one that is there, namely, Jesus Christ.
You may want to read the chapter in its entirety to get a better idea of the context in which this is being said.
Whether or not St. Paul tells us that is irrelevant. Jesus himself does in Matthew 16:18.
The bible can’t explain what the words written in it mean. It’s just a book and lacks intellect. I can’t remember who (it may have been Patrick Madrid), but a rather prominent Catholic apologist was in a debate once where he was asked by a Protestant to give an example of something found in Sacred Tradition but not Sacred Scripture.
His answer was the bible’s table of contents
This is why we need an authority to guide us. We can no more decide individually what Scripture means than we can decide individually what books should comprise Scripture.
I
Ite_ad_Ioseph
Guest
TLM’'s problem is that he says, Why doesn’t the Church follow the books it decided upon, but doesn’t tell us what is troubling him. I encourage you to ask questions. Don’t look to Scott Hahn, (I heard he had some weird tendencies, like refering to the Holy Spirit as a female entity once, which isn’t supported anywhere on earth) but the Church Fathers. This website has a whole library of apologetics I suggest you check out.
I have been vindicated as a Catholic by all the intellectuals that converted to the Faith who came before me, Belloc, Chesterton, Tolkein was a genius and Catholic, then you have Pascal and Descartes, to great Catholic scientist/philosophers, so you should ask yourself why so many ‘intelligent’ people converted to this Church.
The Church is the Pillar and Ground of Truth (1 Timothy 3:15)
I have been vindicated as a Catholic by all the intellectuals that converted to the Faith who came before me, Belloc, Chesterton, Tolkein was a genius and Catholic, then you have Pascal and Descartes, to great Catholic scientist/philosophers, so you should ask yourself why so many ‘intelligent’ people converted to this Church.
The Church is the Pillar and Ground of Truth (1 Timothy 3:15)
T
TLM08
Guest
I can’t sit here and honestly proclaim that Scott Hahn, Karl Keating, Dave Armstrong, or any other catholic apologist is wrong. These men are far intellectually superior to me. I will say that Scott as well as many others are highly skilled at putting a spin on scripture to justify a good deal of catholic teaching. They are able to explain things in a way that makes sense. Some of the most brilliant minds in Western/European culture have debated the catholic-protestant issue for centuries. There have been a large number of great minds who have left catholcism as well.
But the bottom line for me is that catholic practice is a different gospel than we find in the New Testament. The sternest warning in scripture comes from the apostle Paul in the Book of Galatians (Chapter 1) when he says:
*“But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!” *
Salvation is not based on our performance, a gift from God to all those who believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who in death on the cross, took our punishment for sins and rose from the dead and sits at the right hand of the Almighty and will come again in judgement.
It is this that allows the Christian to live his life for God, doing good works out of love and gratitude rather than fear and doubt. This doubt tends to keep man focused on himself and his performance rather than God and what He has done for us!
T
TLM08
Guest
Reading John 6 in it’s full context many times over really showed me that Christ was driving home a point to the followers about who he was and what he could provide, which was not free dinners, but eternal life!
Here Jesus scolds the crowd of followers who were only following Jesus for another free meal
When they found him on the other side of the lake, they asked him, “Rabbi, when did you get here?” Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, you are looking for me, not because you saw miraculous signs but because you ate the loaves and had your fill. John 6:25-26
The crowd (not Jesus) then brings up the Old Testament bread (manna) that physically sustained Nation of Israel. These people are physically hungry!
"So they asked him, "What miraculous sign then will you give that we may see it and believe you? What will you do? Our forefathers ate the manna in the desert; as it is written: ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’ " John 6:30-31
Jesus tries to get the crowd to get their minds off of their stomach and focus on the fact that he is the Son of God in the flesh. He is saying “feed” on me!
Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty. John 6:35
I don’t know about you, but within an hour or so after communion, I still get hungry and thirsty. Jesus was obviously not talking about physically eating here. Jesus did the same thing with the woman at the well a couple of chapters prior:
*When a Samaritan woman came to draw water, Jesus said to her, “Will you give me a drink?”
The Samaritan woman said to him, “You are a Jew and I am a Samaritan woman. How can you ask me for a drink?” Jesus answered her, “If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water.”
“Sir,” the woman said, “you have nothing to draw with and the well is deep. Where can you get this living water? Are you greater than our father Jacob, who gave us the well and drank from it himself, as did also his sons and his flocks and herds?”
Jesus answered, “Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again, but whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life.”
The woman said to him, “Sir, give me this water so that I won’t get thirsty and have to keep coming here to draw water.” John 4:8-15*
John 6 has nothing to do with the last supper. They are two different events that occured 3 years apart. Jesus also called himself a “door”, “vine” and a “gate”. When Jesus declares that he is the “Bread of Life” he is not speaking physically. This was simply his method of teaching.
- Status