Not attending N.O.

[latinmasslover]

Ah, the arrogance of youth…you are very young, aren’t you?

How Christian of you. Your ridicule would be valid if many of the older generation weren’t saying the same things. If you read what Cardinals Bacci and Ottoviani said regarding the New Rite I think you might not make such presumptuous statements. Most information that the “arrogant youth” receive are from the older generation.

Age has nothing to do with it. Just because I’m not 70+ doesn’t make my concerns/disagreements any less valid. Stick to the issues and keep your cheeky and ignorant comments to yourself.

 

[latinmasslover]

Ask the question more politely, then, and you’ll get an answer more to your liking. Act like a beligerent child and you’ll be answered like one.

“True, I myself have done it?” You have a gift for understatement.

If disagreeing with you makes me a “beligerent child” then I’m guilty. My question was not asked in a rude way; it wouldn’t have appeared that way had you just answered it in the first place.

Maybe what I said was an understatement, but I at least admit to it.

 

[latinmasslover]

You say that you just disagree on some “non-infallible” matters, yet you would leave the Church if the Pope made a decision you didn’t like on one of these matters???

I never said that I’d leave the Church, and I never would. I’m not a sedevacantist; however, I’m also not a papist. I’m not implying that anyone here is by that statement, just cementing my postition. The Pope is not infallible in everything, and I’m sure everyone here will agree with that; there are times when he’s wrong. Disagreeing doesn’t make me a heretic or schismatic.

 

[ThereCanBeOnly1]

Regardless of what you think of Matt1618, he USED credible sources (primary sources, regarded as more reliable than secondary)… This is a ridiculous statement, it does not follow that if one uses credible sources that he/she is credible/reliable. This may be deemed ‘Non Sequitur’ or the Fallacy of false Cause.

So whether you have a problem with Matt1618 (and your declaration that he does not speak for the Church is absurd, neither do you), And Nor Do You. I do not think that he has a problem with the reference but YOUR misconception that the reference must be correct. Most of your posts are 'argumentum verbosium’

 

[Sure]

I never said that I’d leave the Church, and I never would. I’m not a sedevacantist; however, I’m also not a papist. I’m not implying that anyone here is by that statement, just cementing my postition. The Pope is not infallible in everything, and I’m sure everyone here will agree with that; there are times when he’s wrong. Disagreeing doesn’t make me a heretic or schismatic.

Okay. I thought it really sounded like you’d be leaving and I’m glad that you would not! Certainly the Pope can be wrong about non-infallible things, yet we are still bound to obey him in matters of law.

Just as an aside, I am PROUD to be a “papist” and hopefully you are, as well:

dictionary.reference.com/browse/papist

 

[joanofarc3]

If you can read Bob (or There Can Only Be 1’s) posts and not see the errors, then that only confirms YOUR mindset, which is at odds with the Church, as does your ability to mention the OF in the same sentence as the Black Mass, though I suspect like some people your age, you’re justing saying that for the attention it will get you). Bear in mind, your opinion of the OF is not that of the Church, in particular, not Pope Benedict’s. You mention TRUTH, but in fact, you’ve confused a very narrow and ill-informed opinion for the truth. It doesn’t matter what your opinion is of various facts, the facts remain facts. You can bemoan or even deny that the sun will rise, it doesn’t alter the truth of the matter. Your opinion is not expressive of the mind of the Church or the Pope.

You want examples? Bob insists that the Mass cannot be changed or altered by the lawful authority per Trent. Untrue, as even pre-conciliar popes have demonstrated. He’s insisted that to even suggest that the Mass could be in the vernacular is to incurr anathema per Trent or that Mass can only be in Latin. Also demonstarbly untrue. There Can Only Be 1 has insisted that the similarity of the OF and other liturgies is because the Mass has been deliberately and maliciously Protestantized and he has mocked and abused a very orthodox poster who very calmly and dispassionately attempted to point out the reasons for those similarities (here):
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=190738

These are just a few examples. If you don’t see it after you’ve read their posts, then I suggest you contact your local community college and see if there are remedial reading courses on offer. One of the basic skills of reading is determining an author’s purpose in writing. Generally they write to entertain, or to persuade, or to inform. They can, however, deliberately mislead (Mein Kamph would be one example). Perhaps you should brush up on that particular skill.

Quite an attack. You really should save that energy for discussions with liberal Catholics who actually distort the Faith. I personally know Latin and one thing she isn’t is an attention seeker. Her statement comparing the Black Mass and the New Rite was only to point out that the two are valid but not equally glorifying to God or nourishing to His people. Follow your own advice and read with comprehension. You (as in “your group”) tell the “trads” to not assume the worst with a person’s statements when you yourself do the same exact thing. Stick to the point? heck no! (Latin has done this also but she is trying to overcome it, as she’s admitted to it.) Not the spirit of Vatican II bud.You resort to personal condescending attacks. Mocking her because she’s not over 50? St. Paul warns against this, FYI. Besides, just because she did it doesn’t justify you doing it. Act your age, whatever that is, and set an example. You really ought to stop condemning her and others and start asking why the Pope feels it’s more important to pray with non Catholics than to safeguard the greatest treasure Christ left His Church. That’s essentially what all the “trads” want to know.

Before you open your mouth in patronization keep in mind that these people you mock are very sincere and your mockery only makes you look like a “papist.” If they’re wrong (which I personally do not think) then they’re wrong, but try to follow in the Pope’s example and be decent about it.

Don’t worry, I’m giving an equally harsh lecture to latin about this too.

God Bless.

 

[joanofarc3]

Okay. I thought it really sounded like you’d be leaving and I’m glad that you would not! Certainly the Pope can be wrong about non-infallible things, yet we are still bound to obey him in matters of law.

Just as an aside, I am PROUD to be a “papist” and hopefully you are, as well:

dictionary.reference.com/browse/papist

By “papist” I mean taking everything he says as Gospel just because he’s the pope. I still obey in matters of law, where I can go more traditional I do, but I don’t disobey the current laws of the Church. As the CCD I went to growing up wasn’t very informative I’ve had to study the Church on my own. Believe it or not, I’m working on my charitable (or lack thereof ) approaches, but it’ll take time. As I do not want to fall into schism my next study topic (starting next week hopefully) will be the Magisterium and when she’s infallible. I’ve heard contradictory answers among orthodox and liberals, so this will take time and prayer.

BTW, do you still have the link to the letter you mentioned in another thread, Bishop (?) Burke’s? I didn’t get a chance to read it before but I’d like to get a chance at it weekend. Thanks.

 

[latinmasslover]

Okay. I thought it really sounded like you’d be leaving and I’m glad that you would not! Certainly the Pope can be wrong about non-infallible things, yet we are still bound to obey him in matters of law.

Just as an aside, I am PROUD to be a “papist” and hopefully you are, as well:

dictionary.reference.com/browse/papist

Whoops, joan didn’t log out and I almost used her name. What a lecture. I do want to apologize for my uncharitable remarks; what can I say, I’m a sinner and let my pride take over for a while there. That’s no excuse, but I admit things could’ve been worded a bit differently.

Anyway, to Sure:

By “papist” I mean taking everything he says as Gospel just because he’s the pope; in that sense I’m not. I still obey in matters of law, where I can go more traditional I do, but I don’t disobey the current laws of the Church. I do take his words seriously but, as others have pointed out, sometimes his wording isn’t…totally clear. As the catechism classes I went to growing up weren’t very informative I’ve had to study the Church on my own…

As I do not want to fall into schism my next study topic with joan and some others (starting next week hopefully) will be the Magisterium and when she’s infallible. I’ve heard contradictory answers among both orthodox and liberals, so this will take time and prayer.

BTW, do you still have the link to the letter you mentioned in another thread, by Bishop (?) Burke? I didn’t get a chance to read it before but I’d like to get a chance at it weekend. Thanks.

 

[Jo_Benedict]

Note:

This thread is closed. Thanks to all who participated in the discussion.