SSPX Teaching Video

[ethelzguy]

After watching this video, I find it rather dull and uninspiring.

The person speaking is not particularly articulate, and he keeps saying the same thing over and over.

If a person or group is going to take on the HMC (or any other well-established entity), it might serve them better to choose spokespersons and topics that better articulate their postion.

I have read other SSPX and Sedevacanist propaganda, much of which was well better presented than this particular video.

 

[piouswoman]

Then that means that the time for that tradition was over. What is so hard to get about this?

I’ve never understood why people worship tradition so much. In many cases it seems to supplant God- thus making it an idol.

The time for tradition is over? Wow. Do you know anything at all about the Catholic faith? It is quite obvious, lay Catholics today, have been so poorly catechized, so robbed of the truth by the modernists, that they have indeed lost the faith, and they don’t even know it…as a Catholic, it is your duty to KNOW your faith. To choose to remain ignorant is morally wrong.

Divine Revelation has come down to us through Holy Scripture, written down under divine inspiration, and through Tradition, handed down orally from Apostolic times.
Our Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, came to earth to reveal Divine truths to men. After His death, His Apostles and disciples wrote about Him and His teachings.
The deposit of faith which Jesus Christ entrusted to the Church is made up of two parts: Holy Scripture, and Divine Tradition, this latter being composed of the truths passed down by word of mouth, and not written down till after the death of Christ’s Apostles and disciples, principally by the Fathers of the Church,
Divine Revelation was completed at the death of the last of the Apostles. Since that time no new revelation has been made for the instruction of the whole of mankind. Whenever the Church decides a point it does so according to Scripture or Tradition. It simply finds out what has been revealed from the beginning.

Divine Tradition must be believed as firmly as the Bible, because in also contains the word of God.
**Divine Tradition teaches us all the doctrines that were taught by the Apostles. It comes to us from the Apostles. Every single doctrine the Church teaches comes direct from the Apostles. The Church does not issue new doctrines.
Furthermore…Protestant denominations ***reject ***Tradition.

 

[piouswoman]

I hope you get help for your problem.
The Church guards both Scripture and Tradition.
What you’re saying is a rejection of Christ’s promise that He will guard the Church for all time.

Please take such issues to prayer.

Would you mind elaborating upon and explaining this accusation?

 

[Timothysis]

The time for tradition is over? Wow. Do you know anything at all about the Catholic faith?

He said that maybe it was “time for that tradition…”

Emphasis is mine. He didn’t mean that it was time to do away with tradition.

 

[piouswoman]

He said that maybe it was “time for that tradition…”

Emphasis is mine. He didn’t mean that it was time to do away with tradition.

There is no maybe, there is no time. Divine Tradition can never be “over”. Divine Tradition is only “over” when schismatics reject it by choice or it is erroneously rejected by those laboring under the false notion that our faith may “change” to fit in with the modern world, with modern man and modern ideas.

 

[catharina]

Would you mind elaborating upon and explaining this accusation?

Not at all. It’s very simple.

YOU say: “The Church has excommunicated Tradition.”

I say, then you are declaring the Church to be dead and extinct, to be a complete failure - contrary to Our Lord’s promise that HE will guard the Church (Scripture and Tradition).

 

[NicPais83]

The time for tradition is over? Wow. Do you know anything at all about the Catholic faith? It is quite obvious, lay Catholics today, have been so poorly catechized, so robbed of the truth by the modernists, that they have indeed lost the faith, and they don’t even know it…as a Catholic, it is your duty to KNOW your faith. To choose to remain ignorant is morally wrong.

Please refrain from making broad generalizations such as this. I think many of us posting on this thread have been well catechized. Also, you are twisting what he actually wrote, not reading what he wrote. I am not saying that it was necessarily worded well, but what you are criticizing him for is not what he is talking about.

Church teaching is based on both Scripture and Tradition. As Catholics, we are to believe that God has revealed to us what we need for salvation through both what is written down and what the Apostles gave us, as commanded by Christ. I was catechized long after the Second Vatican Council and have the same exact beliefs that anyone catechized before it has, and unless anyone here has said otherwise, it is inappropriate to assume that anyone here is lacking in their instruction. Now, had he said that the Eucharist is only a symbol, or that we don’t need to confess our sins, that would have been a different matter altogether.

As for any question on the authority of Rome and the magesterium today, criticism of them is more in line with Protestantism than Catholicism, past, present, or future. And I can only think that the devil enjoys seeing us argue amongst ourselves over an Ecumenical Council, instead of loyally following the institution that Christ erected and sanctified by His Blood for our salvation.

 

[Genesis315]

The new liturgy is a direct insult to all the English martyrs including St. John Cardinal Fisher, the courageous Catholic bishop who died for their faith and the Latin Mass.

The English martyrs chose to suffer the ultimate sacrifice rather than break off unity with the Roman Pontiff, what they knew was an indispensable part of the faith.

 

[NicPais83]

There is no maybe, there is no time. Divine Tradition can never be “over”. Divine Tradition is only “over” when schismatics reject it by choice or it is erroneously rejected by those laboring under the false notion that our faith may “change” to fit in with the modern world, with modern man and modern ideas.

I have NEVER read anything from the Second Vatican Council that said that the faith may change to fit in with the modern world. I have NEVER been told that our faith or beliefs had changed at the Second Vatican Council, except on a few occasions. These occasions were all from people that felt that the Church was wrong and were trying to either speak in “the spirit of Vatican II” or condemn the Second Vatican Council. Interestingly, while they were extremists on opposite ends of the spectrum, they both came to the same conclusions about the magesterium.

 

[consumedconvert]

There is no maybe, there is no time. Divine Tradition can never be “over”. Divine Tradition is only “over” when schismatics reject it by choice or it is erroneously rejected by those laboring under the false notion that our faith may “change” to fit in with the modern world, with modern man and modern ideas.

Of course we all must make a distinction between small-T tradition (like, say, Romanesque Architure) and Tradition (like Apostolic Succession). The one may be changed or done away with completely. The other is unchanging, though HMC’s understanding of it may deepen or Her impementation of that Tradition may change (e.g., allowing young children to take Communion).

 

[nannygirl]

nannygirl, what is your Protestant background? By any chance were you part of one of the “older” Protestant denominations (Lutheran, Reformed, Methodist, Presbyterian, etc.?)

This is true of all autonomous and non-denominational churches–they are each run locally, and you have to take each church as you find it and not expect it to be run like other churches that you are familiar with.)

Hi Cat,

My background- I was baptised and confirmed as an infant in the Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church, but went to a very traditional Episcopalian church till I was about 12. I didn’t attend church again till I was 27 years old when I was “born again” during the “Jesus Movement” while attending a Charismatic believer’s baptism, speaking in tongues-type non-denominational church (Full Faith Church of Love -it was the 70’s ).

For the next 15 years or so, I was very involved, but started to question some things when they started promoting a well-known “faith-healer”. I walked out one day when they started preaching that if you were sick or poor it was because you didn’t have enough faith. I wandered around for a couple of years, looking for some place more orthodox where I would fit in. (I also attended an E Free church down the street for awhile.) My biggest criteria at the time was if anyone said hello back to me.

I ended up attending a fundamentalist independent Baptist church. (While I was there I started attending Bible Study Fellowship (BSF), an international Bible Study group and became involved in leadership, becoming the assistant children’s supervisor. I was in it for 10 years, loved it and learned a great deal about teaching young children.)

Then came a split and so did I. In the fall of 1997 I found a small group of reformed Baptists who followed the 1689 Confession of Faith that was meeting at the nearby Baptist seminary, so I joined them. In 2003 the pastor left to teach college and they didn’t find another pastor, so they disbanded. I was devastated. It was the best group of people I ever had the pleasure to know.

By that time I was confused and disillusioned with all the different teachings and denominations. I didn’t know where to turn. I had never considered Catholicism because I didn’t consider them to be Christians. About that time my former daughter-in-law started dating a Catholic man who had a huge friendly, fun Catholic family. I was fascinated by them because they were so “Christian”, but of course I had been taught that they were “of the devil”! One day my daughter-in-law told me she was going to attend RCIA classes. I almost had a heart attack. All I could think of was that my poor grandchildren were going to be corrupted. So I decided that I would go to the classes, too, so that later on I could refute everything the instructor was going to teach her. Well, needless to say, I realized that the Catholic Church was the real original Church founded by the Lord Jesus himself. What a relief - end of confusion. I came into the Church the following spring in 2006. All of the creeds I had learned as an Episcopalian were the same at the CC.

I went to Holy Mass with my daughter-in-law for awhile, but decided to visit the churches in and around my own parish because of the distance. (I really love my “welcoming” church. Their Holy Mass is a very beautiful and reverent NO Mass. I would never confuse it with a Protestant service. )

I was very surprised with the churches in my area. The few I attended were very much like my old Charismatic church, even down to the architecture. No crucifixes, bells or incense. No kneeling. It was extremely informal. That’s how it reminds me of a non-denominational Protestant church- with people clapping and lots of Protestant “hippie” hymns. People milling around in Hawiian shirts, shorts and tank tops. I really was confused by it the first time I experienced it. I really thought I was in the wrong church or I was having a flashback. That said, I’m not putting anyone down, I’m just giving my opinion on what effect it had on me.

 

[piouswoman]

Not at all. It’s very simple.

YOU say: “The Church has excommunicated Tradition.”

I say, then you are declaring the Church to be dead and extinct, to be a complete failure - contrary to Our Lord’s promise that HE will guard the Church (Scripture and Tradition).

What I say is MY opinion, just as what you say is YOUR opinion…I never said that the Church was extinct, in fact, I have never even suggested it, it was YOU who falsely implied it of me…So how can the Church be “extinct” when there still remain those who cling to Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture? How can it be extinct when there are those who hold fast to tradition? When you make statements such as the one above, you trivialize and mock the very words of Our Lady, who in many apparitions warned of the apostasy that would take place in the Church starting at the very top. You are assuming that you know better than Our Lady. You act as though the hierarchy of the church are above men, are on a level with God, and are immune from*** human error***.

Our Lady of Good Success was quite clear on what would be the demise of the Catholic Church—the general theme–a lax and perverse clergy. Certain members of the Catholic clergy would become as thieves stealing that Tabernacle light…thieves that would steal what is rightfully ours by virtue of our baptism in the Catholic Church—our Faith. They would rob us of Doctrine, Dogma and Tradition—ransacking the Church as it were leaving us in total darkness without even as much as the light of the Sanctuary Lamp (which signifies the presence of the Holy Eucharist—Jesus Christ, Himself). Our Lady of Good Success went into great detail to explain what the five reasons were for the extinguishing of the light.
ourladyofgoodsuccess.com/frames-3-4-2005/article-ologs.html

 

[piouswoman]

I have NEVER read anything from the Second Vatican Council that said that the faith may change to fit in with the modern world. I have NEVER been told that our faith or beliefs had changed at the Second Vatican Council, except on a few occasions. These occasions were all from people that felt that the Church was wrong and were trying to either speak in “the spirit of Vatican II” or condemn the Second Vatican Council. Interestingly, while they were extremists on opposite ends of the spectrum, they both came to the same conclusions about the magesterium.

Then you haven’t been reading enough.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaudium_et_Spes
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_cons_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html
cta-usa.org/cta-ad.html
wf-f.org/JFH-GaudiumEtSpes.html

 

[Cat]

nannygirl,

That is really interesting. Thank you for sharing your wonderful testimony. Sometimes I wish that this Forum had a “Convert’s Corner,” reserved for stories of conversions and reversions. Everyone’s path is so different, yet they all lead to the same Church.

I guess the parishes in our diocese, and the parishes that I’ve visited when travelling, have been pretty traditional, even though they use the NO Mass.

People kneel, and they are silent at the correct times, and give the correct responses at the correct times.

Yes, the dress is casual, but to be honest, I never notice dress.

My parish is very contemporary, with stark decor, but it is still very different than the Protestant buildings, which often double as gymnasiums, fellowship halls, and concert halls. Other parishes in our city are quite ornate.

We hear applause occasionally. Whenever someone makes a presentation (budget, retreat, etc.) there is always applause–I think it’s done to encourage the person, because many people are terrified at the idea of getting up in front of several hundred people and speaking.

Also, there is sometimes applause after the Mass is over.

We do a lot of the St. Louis Jesuit hymns, Haugen, Haas, etc., but we also do a lot of traditional hymns. There is usually some Latin, and the priests often sing the various prayers.

I think that our Masses are very much the way Pope Benedict XVI envisions the NO Masses.

My point is that an NO Mass is so totally different than Protestant “worship experiences” and most evangelical Protestants find them “weird” or “strange” or “confusing” or “boring” or “non-participatory” (yes, even with all the standing and kneeling and sitting and responses–many Protestants don’t see this as participating, they see it as “rote and ritual,” therefore it is “bad.”).

Although my husband and I don’t attend Protestant churches very often, occasionally we do (with relatives). Usually these experiences begin with twenty minutes or so of praise and worship, often led by a rock band (which is usually what I call “geezer rock” played by 50 somethings!, but sometimes there is an actually rock band with young people–younger than 40, I should say!).

There is no processional into the church. The pastor is either introduced, or he (or she) bounds out onto the “stage” and yells, “Hello, everyone and WELCOME to our worship experience!”

Usually at this point, the audience is told to greet each other, and the greeting time is quite lively.

There is usually more singing, with solos or choirs, but much of this is done with sound tracks, not live music.

Then if there is a sermon, it lasts about 20-40 minutes. Often a Bible verse or two is cited, but more often the sermon is about “life.” It has been a long time since I’ve heard anything “deep” or theological at a Protestant worship experience.

Often there isn’t a sermon, but something else; e.g., a play, a panel discussion, a video, etc.

Then it’s over. Very seldom are there altar calls or invitations. Communion, if it is offered, is often offered on a table at the back of the church, and the people are invited to help themselves.

This is so incredibly different that what I grew up with, and what is currently done in the NO Mass. There is no order, no form, no liturgy, no “regularity.” Everything is a constant surprise. You never know what will happen next. (It’s even more wild in the Pentecostal churches, where various manifestations of the spiritual gifts might break out!).

 

[catharina]

What I say is MY opinion, just as what you say is YOUR opinion…I never said that the Church was extinct, in fact, I have never even suggested it, it was YOU who falsely implied it of me…So how can the Church be “extinct” when there still remain those who cling to Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture? How can it be extinct when there are those who hold fast to tradition? When you make statements such as the one above, you trivialize and mock the very words of Our Lady, who in many apparitions warned of the apostasy that would take place in the Church starting at the very top. You are assuming that you know better than Our Lady. You act as though the hierarchy of the church are above men, are on a level with God, and are immune from*** human error***.

Our Lady of Good Success was quite clear on what would be the demise of the Catholic Church—the general theme–a lax and perverse clergy. Certain members of the Catholic clergy would become as thieves stealing that Tabernacle light…thieves that would steal what is rightfully ours by virtue of our baptism in the Catholic Church—our Faith. They would rob us of Doctrine, Dogma and Tradition—ransacking the Church as it were leaving us in total darkness without even as much as the light of the Sanctuary Lamp (which signifies the presence of the Holy Eucharist—Jesus Christ, Himself). Our Lady of Good Success went into great detail to explain what the five reasons were for the extinguishing of the light.
ourladyofgoodsuccess.com/frames-3-4-2005/article-ologs.html

It seems you enjoy getting yourself emotionally worked up so I won’t say: “Put a cork in it.” In regard to YOUR statement that “the Church has excommunicated Tradition” - hey, that was YOUR singular and unusual STATEMENT.

For the sake of all that is holy, do NOT try to make it a statement of Our Blessed Mother.

By stating your egregious and horrific opinion that ‘the Church has excommunicated Tradition,’ YOU are denying Our Lord’s promise to protect His Church. YOUR WORDS are equal to THAT conclusion. Forget about any supposed opinion, yours or mine. Just WATCH what YOU SAY. Some of us are not willing to be subjected to the excesses of your rants, especially when those rants are twisted to mar the holiness of Our Lord and His mother.

 

[Our_Refuge]

=Cat;3751426]
A modern Mass may bear some resemblance to older Protestant services; e.g., Lutheran, Reformed, Methodist. But these services were “borrowed” from Catholic Mass, not the other way around. And in this day and age, even these older Protestant churches are striving to offer more worship “experiences” along the lines of the non-denominational megachurch worship “experiences.”

I think people who make the claim that the “modern” Masses are “protestantized” have no experience with Protestant worship services other than perhaps a Lutheran wedding or funeral. I wish that people would stop making these claims.

The term is not used to describe a Baptist or Church of Christ service. It is used to show a resemblance to a Luthern or Anglican Mass.
The statement "protestantized’ liturgy is in context of the Traditional Latin Mass. In the TLM communion is received only on the tongue. The protestant reformer Ulrich Zwingli introduce communion in the hand which was adopted for the Novus Ordo thereby “protestantizing” the Mass.
The TLM is in Latin. Luther and Cranmer eventually introduced the all vernacular mass which was adopted by the Novus Ordo therby “protestantizing” the Mass.
The TLM rubrics require that the Tabernalce be on the altar. The reformers removed the tabernacle. The Novus Ordo also removed the tabernacle from the altar thereby “protestantizing” the Mass.
In the TLM the priest faces liturgical east. The reformers faced the people and this was adopted in the Novus Ordo thereby "protestantizing " the Mass.
Active participation of the laity, popular music, the stripped down sanctuaries all were reforms made during the protestant reformation.
It doesn’t mean that doctrine has been ‘protestantized’ or the Mass is invalid but we need to be honest about it. The mass was changed to bring about a “road to union” and to remove impediments such as Latin and the adorned sanctuaries. This may have been a good thing or maybe the reforms went too far and maybe Pope Benedict will make the necessary changes to bring everything back into order. It remains to be seen.

One only need to read the words of Father Bugnini, the secretary of the Consilium that wrote the New Mass to see why the Mass was changed.

“Love of souls and the desire to facilitate in every way, by removing anything that could even remotely be an impediment or make them feel ill at ease, **the road to union **on the part of separated brethren, has induced the Church to make even these painful sacrifices"
L’Osservatore Romano of 19 March 1965

 

[NicPais83]

Then you haven’t been reading enough.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaudium_et_Spes
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_cons_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html
cta-usa.org/cta-ad.html
wf-f.org/JFH-GaudiumEtSpes.html

The last two are not Catholic. Where in the first two does it say that the faith and traditions of the Catholic Church are to change at all?

 

[consumedconvert]

The last two are not Catholic. Where in the first two does it say that the faith and traditions of the Catholic Church are to change at all?

I particulaly find “Call to Action’s” insistence that the Vatican have more financial transparency particularly amusing.

According to more than one source I’ve read, I make much more than the average mid-level Vatican official. And I’m not exactly rich!

Then-Cardinal Ratzinger, in his book-length interview, made a passing reference that this “near penury” (or something like that) is very intentional.

They don’t want people there for the money.

Also interestingly, a man actually takes a 100% pay cut when he becomes Pope. The Pope has no yearly salary.

But all that’s an aside (some might call me addicted to asides). Call to Action has been excommunicated by an American bishop, and the excommunication has been upheld by Rome.

CC

 

[catharina]

I particulaly find “Call to Action’s” insistence that the Vatican have more financial transparency particularly amusing.

According to more than one source I’ve read, I make much more than the average mid-level Vatican official. And I’m not exactly rich!

Then-Cardinal Ratzinger, in his book-length interview, made a passing reference that this “near penury” (or something like that) is very intentional.

They don’t want people there for the money.

Also interestingly, a man actually takes a 100% pay cut when he becomes Pope. The Pope has no yearly salary.

But all that’s an aside (some might call me addicted to asides). Call to Action has been excommunicated by an American bishop, and the excommunication has been upheld by Rome.

CC

PLEASE - don’t forget to add to this statement:

“Call to Action” has been excommunicated by an American bishop, and the excommunication has been upheld by Rome" and that applies to all Catholics in the DIOCESE OF LINCOLN NEBRASKA.

Neglecting to add that important fact can create a false impression.

 

[consumedconvert]

PLEASE - don’t forget to add to this statement:

“Call to Action” has been excommunicated by an American bishop, and the excommunication has been upheld by Rome" and that applies to all Catholics in the DIOCESE OF LINCOLN NEBRASKA.

Neglecting to add that important fact can create a false impression.

My apologies. I was not aware.