This is why trads are "angry"

[katolik]

Taken from the ctngreg list[by a Frenchman]

Litniks (it’s not my word, I found it there and it is a perfection so I catch it) are OBSESSED (caps intentional) by US ! We are the embodiment of what they HATE (caps intentional) much more than Satan or Evil they don’t believe in.
If you were, like me, reading main Litnik reviews (ex. La Maison-Dieu) you would know that fighting ANYTHING remotely traditional is the FIRST duty of any litnik in the world.
2) To refresh your memory or simply giving some infos you haven’t learnt :

• Abp Rembert Weakland, a prominent US litnik, wrote in “America” review that the whole Renewal was ruined by … 1984 indult. yes he did write such a stupidity. Check it out.
• cardinal Eyt (+) of Bordeaux wrote in 2001 how HAPPY he was to see the talks with SSPX stalked because he did not want anything to do with them
• cardinal Hume blocked in person, with the threat of a schism in 1986, the recognition of TLM as a legitimate rite with full equal rights than NOM.
• the German bishops issued a statement in 1993 to reject the Roman[Indult] trad. priests in their dioceses
• cardinal Lustiger went to Rome to beg the pope not to reach an agreement with Bp Fellay in 2002
• cardinal Mahony tried to block young people to attend the Indult masses
  The list is endless … alas.

1. the inadequacy of your statement is btw obvious : why trads are so much fought by the NO establishment in words and acts if we are so minute and deprived of any significance ?
   If you were right, we should have got anything we ask in a snap ! The 30-50 Catholics of Mongolia have been granted … a bishop and a diocese ! Indeed they are totally deprived of significance in Mongolia and in the world, so they’ve got more than they’ve ever asked.

We are a tiny minority in the Catholic family. A simple
observation - the major languages of traditionalists are English, French
and German, with a strong regional Portugese showing in a specific area of
Brazil. As much more Catholics speak Spanish than any of these languages
(Cardinal Hoyos being an eminent example if you excuse the pun), until
Spanish is significantly represented as a language of traditionalists
coming to Rome, we just will not be seen as a serious threat. Other major
Catholic languages such as Italian and Polish have some representation, but
to be quite honest, it isn’t enough. This confirms a view that the problem
regarding the liturgy is confined to North-Western Europe, North America
and the Antipodes. Even there, if you take a traditionally Catholic
country (now, alas, on the wane) such as Ireland, you’ll find the
traditional movement there is in the same position as the traditional
movement in southern Europe (look at the tread on ‘Mass in Malta’, another
predominantly Catholic country with strong links to the English-speaking
world) or in the Eastern European Catholic countries. I know there are
embryonic movements in each of these, but the traditional presence in
Catholic bastions such as Lithuania and Slovakia is virtually non-existent.
This is the front traditionalists present to Rome. It may be cynically,
but very unfairly, summarised as a reaction from the pampered west.

---

All this is true and as you said you’re … new.
All this has been written here by many people including Mr. Perkins and
myself … at large.

1st response : “so what ?”

Neo-Catechumenal Way started with a handful of people in 1964 and they have
been spreading in Europe, Africa and mainly Americas.
TLMers are not taking shares into a commercial society which needs quick
profit. We know we have 2000 years behind us - that is far much than the 40
years of the litniks - and the future before.

2nd response :
Traditionalist movement has already shown a great vitality : it was mainly a
French movement in early 1970’s ; it has been developping fantastically in
the 1980’s and on in the USA, and now in Australia.
There are promises in Brazil, slowly, too slowly I reckon - but there are explanations - it is creeping into Hispanic America and Africa, now the Philippines too. So you are underestimating the growth of the trad. movement especially since
1988.

3rd response :
is there any mental impediment to have a growth in Latin America and Africa ?
certainly not because TLM is the Catholic heritage of these people.
And it is my perception TLM can be perfectly adapted to the worship culture of
Latin Americans and Africans.

 

[katolik]

continuation
4th response :
the faith crisis experienced by the “West”, the pampered countries (Western Europe and N. Ameerica) is already spreading like a leper : Poland, once the emblem of the Catholic society, is showing signs ; Ireland, the Western
Poland, is living a sharp decline of Catholicism ; Portugal has just voted for Socialists massively to promote legal abortion etc. Do you think the secularist wave will stop on the shores of Latin America, Africa, Asia ?
Western trads have an experience so it’s even more their duty to make our brothers and sisters of the rest of the world benefit from what we’ve been through… and survived.
This is a message of hope : the Pumpkin cult is not a fate, you can keep the faith and stay fortes in fide.

What I am driving at, is that the argument for an International PAA is
unachievable. There is another reason for this, aside from the
international traditionalist coalition and its unbalances. That is that given the Roman Curia has fought tooth and nail to restrict the jurisdiction of the Eastern Catholic Patriarchs, the Eastern Catholic Churches would almost unanimously oppose the granting of universal jurisdiction to a Latin bishop, even if the competancy of that jurisdiction was reduced to liturgical matters.

That is false on all counts :

• since Leo XIII 1894 encyclical, warranting the autonomy of Eastern Catholic
  Churches has been a permanent drive, a trend the Vatican II Orientalum
  ecclesiarum (1964) is making even stronger. The Canon Code CCEO of 1990 is
  another example. Last year the autonomy of the Syro-Malabar Church has been
  expanded.
• cardinal C. Hoyos has proposed a PAA to Bp Fellay in 2000, this has been
  made public by both sides. So there is technically no obstacle.
• since 2002, a trad. PAA is existing within the Campos diocese.

That, of course, is not the final word. It may be much more reasonable to
look for national PAAs - especially in the United States and France. But
traditionalists need to remember something else. The church is not a
democracy - it will be the Congregation of Bishops and not us who chooses
the Bishop. And who becomes the Bishop is anybody’s guess. Even if the
bishop is drawn from the FSSP or ICR, I am sure no candidate will be
greeted with unanimous applause. But I think it is as likely, such a
bishop would be an outsider. It might even be either the Secretary or
Under-Secretary of the PCED - and I know how most of the list would react
to that.

I’ve personnally advocated regional/continental PAAs and several not just one.
Remember the proposal was made for SSPX and was so suited to this
international priestly society.
Now yes, you’re right : the pope is presiding to the nominations of
administrators. You may recall though that it is traditional to have list of
names and this was discussed in 1988 with Abp Lefebvre and card. Ratzinger.
However yes the administrators could be X or Y that some of us do not
appreciate well. So what ?
The point is we belong to the Roman Catholic Church or we go independant : if
you belong, you go by the rules, don’t you ?

Suppose we do get a PA Administrator to our liking. What happens when
there is a standoff over concelebration or saying the occasional NO? I
know proponents of a PAA hold that will not arise within a PAA - but
remember the rumour mills that ground over Bishop Rifan’s sitting in choir
at a concelebrated Mass at a Brazillian Bishop’s Conference meeting.
Unless the PAA has universal jurisdiction (which I doubt will come) any
national PAA will see traditional bishops sit at the NCCB or its
equivalents just as the Eastern Catholic bishops already do. This will
lead to all sorts of tension.

 

[BulldogCath]

Excellent-How about putting it even more simple-

IF we are wrong now
Then you were wrong then
If we were right then
Then we are right now

It is the church that left us
Not us who “left” the church

We have 2000 years of saints and tradition behind us with a mass codified by another Saint
The Novus Ordo has a mass written by a KNOWN mason and 6 Protestants-promulgated by a man many felt unfit to be Pope

We are angry because we see our Pope cuddling up to all of the false faiths in the world- many of whom were and are (no matter what the crazy definition for schismatic is that after so many years you no longer are considered such)-while we are considered a threat and are outcasts-as we are the ones who pose the greatest danger to the secret motive put in place in the late 50’s and 60’s-To Protestantize the church and eventually mold all of the faiths into one-as defined in the Book of Revelations

 

[Nota_Bene]

BulldogCath:

Excellent-How about putting it even more simple-

IF we are wrong now
Then you were wrong then
If we were right then
Then we are right now

It is the church that left us
Not us who “left” the church

We have 2000 years of saints and tradition behind us with a mass codified by another Saint
The Novus Ordo has a mass written by a KNOWN mason and 6 Protestants-promulgated by a man many felt unfit to be Pope

We are angry because we see our Pope cuddling up to all of the false faiths in the world- many of whom were and are (no matter what the crazy definition for schismatic is that after so many years you no longer are considered such)-while we are considered a threat and are outcasts-as we are the ones who pose the greatest danger to the secret motive put in place in the late 50’s and 60’s-To Protestantize the church and eventually mold all of the faiths into one-as defined in the Book of Revelations

You really don’t seem to get it. No one has any problems with you and others loving the “tlm.” What I and a great many have problems with “tlm’ers” are:

1.) That you know more than the Church when it comes to understanding what is “best.” Many of your positions are just as heterodox as the most ultra-liberal positions you so detest.

2.) Your laughable insistance that the Tridentine Mass is some sort of silver bullet that would cure all the ills of the Church if it were only made to be the normative Mass.

3.) You inaccurate judgement of the Novus Ordo Mass. (see #1 above.)

4.) Your collective ignorance of Church history. The Tridentine Mass is not 2000 years old.

5.) Your sad obsession with Protestants and Masons (applies to few tlm’ers of course.)

6.) Your support of schismatic/heretical elements like the SSPX.

 

[Nota_Bene]

BulldogCath:

Excellent-How about putting it even more simple-

IF we are wrong now
Then you were wrong then
If we were right then
Then we are right now

It is the church that left us
Not us who “left” the church

We have 2000 years of saints and tradition behind us with a mass codified by another Saint
The Novus Ordo has a mass written by a KNOWN mason and 6 Protestants-promulgated by a man many felt unfit to be Pope

We are angry because we see our Pope cuddling up to all of the false faiths in the world- many of whom were and are (no matter what the crazy definition for schismatic is that after so many years you no longer are considered such)-while we are considered a threat and are outcasts-as we are the ones who pose the greatest danger to the secret motive put in place in the late 50’s and 60’s-To Protestantize the church and eventually mold all of the faiths into one-as defined in the Book of Revelations

You really don’t seem to get it. No one has any problems with you and others loving the “tlm.” What I and a great many have problems with “tlm’ers” are:

1.) That you know more than the Church when it comes to understanding what is “best.” Many of your positions are just as heterodox as the most ultra-liberal positions you so detest.

2.) Your laughable insistance that the Tridentine Mass is some sort of silver bullet that would cure all the ills of the Church if it were only made to be the normative Mass.

3.) You inaccurate judgement of the Novus Ordo Mass. (see #1 above.)

4.) Your collective ignorance of Church history. The Tridentine Mass is not 2000 years old.

5.) Your sad obsession with Protestants and Masons (applies to few tlm’ers of course.)

6.) Your support of schismatic/heretical elements like the SSPX.

7.) The fact that you aid other hetrodox elements within the Church through your own outrageous (and erroneous) behavior.

 

[MrS]

BulldogCath:

Excellent-How about putting it even more simple-

IF we are wrong now
Then you were wrong then
If we were right then
Then we are right now

It is the church that left us
Not us who “left” the church

We have 2000 years of saints and tradition behind us with a mass codified by another Saint
The Novus Ordo has a mass written by a KNOWN mason and 6 Protestants-promulgated by a man many felt unfit to be Pope

We are angry because we see our Pope cuddling up to all of the false faiths in the world- many of whom were and are (no matter what the crazy definition for schismatic is that after so many years you no longer are considered such)-while we are considered a threat and are outcasts-as we are the ones who pose the greatest danger to the secret motive put in place in the late 50’s and 60’s-To Protestantize the church and eventually mold all of the faiths into one-as defined in the Book of Revelations

:yup:

 

[MrS]

Nota Bene:

You really don’t seem to get it. No one has any problems with you and others loving the “tlm.” What I and a great many have problems with “tlm’ers” are:

1.) That you know more than the Church when it comes to understanding what is “best.” Many of your positions are just as heterodox as the most ultra-liberal positions you so detest.

2.) Your laughable insistance that the Tridentine Mass is some sort of silver bullet that would cure all the ills of the Church if it were only made to be the normative Mass.

3.) You inaccurate judgement of the Novus Ordo Mass. (see #1 above.)

4.) Your collective ignorance of Church history. The Tridentine Mass is not 2000 years old.

5.) Your sad obsession with Protestants and Masons (applies to few tlm’ers of course.)

6.) Your support of schismatic/heretical elements like the SSPX.

7.) The fact that you aid other hetrodox elements within the Church through your own outrageous (and erroneous) behavior.

And your evidence is…

 

[Darrel]

BulldogCath:

We are angry because we see our Pope cuddling up to all of the false faiths in the world- many of whom were and are (no matter what the crazy definition for schismatic is that after so many years you no longer are considered such)-while we are considered a threat and are outcasts-as we are the ones who pose the greatest danger to the secret motive put in place in the late 50’s and 60’s-To Protestantize the church and eventually mold all of the faiths into one-as defined in the Book of Revelations

What are trads?

Last time I checked the Pope was the valid leader of the Church. Given nearly an entire life of being a protestant I cant see very much “cuddling up” going on. Secret motive to protestantize? I thought this was the year of the Eucharist? Is that a protestant conspiracy?

-D

 

[rcn]

It’s easy to be angry. It’s easy to make up excuses.

But it’s harder to be obedient. Give it a try.

 

[BulldogCath]

And you dont believe the Church is Becoming Protestant? How about in the “Year of the Eucharist” giving it to Protestants???

Ecumenical “Kirchentag” Draws Thousands To Berlin: Row Over Shared Communion **Two hundred thousand Christians from Germany and beyond gathered in Berlin for what was is perhaps the biggest ecumenical gathering ever to have taken place in Europe. **

**The five-day event, called the Ecumenical Kirchentag, or church congress, was sponsored by Germany’s Protestant denominations and Roman Catholics, which claim the loyalty of roughly 26 million members each. **

**At one event the Dalai Lama addressed more than 20,000 people. **

**Chancellor Schroeder **

**Speakers included the German President, Johannes Rau; Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder; Nobel Peace Prize winner Bishop Carlos Belo of East Timor; the Rev Konrad Raiser, general secretary of the World Council of Churches; Cardinal Walter Kasper, president of the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity; and leaders of other religions. **

**However, preparations have been marred by controversy over a united Holy Communion, which organisers had hoped would be possible at the event. Protestant and Roman Catholic organisers of the Kirchentag said they had hoped to find a way for the two groups to share in the Eucharist at the Berlin event. But Pope John Paul II’s most recent encyclical, in April, restated traditional Roman Catholic teaching on the matter, putting an end to such hopes for the official programme. Rome will not allow her people to take Communion in Protestant churches, and Roman priests may not offer Communion to non-Catholics. **

**A poll published by the German news agency DPA showed that only 12 per cent of German Roman Catholics and 8 per cent of Protestants were sympathetic to the prohibition. **

**Cardinal Ratzinger rebukes RC priest for sharing mass with Protestants **

**As it was, 2,500 worshippers packed a Protestant Berlin church on 5 June for an ecumenical mass. “All are invited,” said Gotthold Hasenhuttl, aged 69, a Roman Catholic priest and Professor of Systematic Theology, inviting non-Catholics to take the bread and wine at the mass over which he presided. **

**Speaking to journalists after the service, Hasenhuttl said he stood by his actions and claimed he had broken no church rule. However, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the Vatican’s chief doctrinal watchdog, had earlier condemned the event, saying it was a “political action”. **

**Cardinals Kasper and Lehmann **

The service was not part of the Kirchentag’s official programme. It was organised by groups campaigning for church reform. “A general invitation (to communion) is for us Catholics simply not possible,” said Cardinal Walter Kasper, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, adding, **“You cannot criticise the Pope just because in his latter years in this encyclical he has not become a Protestant”. Cardinal Kasper insisted, “there is no alternative to ecumenism”, **and “Ecumenism is not an added-extra for Christians, not a hobby for a few people,”. He said, “Ecumenism is at the centre of what it means to be a Christian,” while still defending the Pope’s encyclical. On the other hand, Catholic Cardinal Karl Lehmann acknowledged people had a “deep longing” for a common Eucharist, and said the Berlin event would give it a “new impetus”. “It’s now time to go full steam ahead,” said Lehmann, chairman of the German Bishops’ Conference. (He simply means joining the Roman Catholic Church.)

**One of the organisers of the service, Christian Weisner, from Wir sind Kirche (We Are Church), said that for Protestants and Roman Catholics to receive the Eucharist from one another had been “the practice for years, for decades in Germany and elsewhere. **

ianpaisley.org/new_details.asp?ID=130

Darrel:

What are trads?

Last time I checked the Pope was the valid leader of the Church. Given nearly an entire life of being a protestant I cant see very much “cuddling up” going on. Secret motive to protestantize? I thought this was the year of the Eucharist? Is that a protestant conspiracy?

-D

 

[Mysty101]

Hmmmm a small minority with a big mouth.

What a rude post

 

[katolik]

Mysty101:

Hmmmm a small minority with a big mouth.

What a rude post

Ma,am:
The truth hurts!!!

 

[katolik]

Mr. Nota Bene:
Have you even read this?

**Litniks (it’s not my word, I found it there and it is a perfection so I catch it) are OBSESSED (caps intentional) by US ! We are the embodiment of what they HATE (caps intentional) much more than Satan or Evil they don’t believe in.
If you were, like me, reading main Litnik reviews (ex. La Maison-Dieu) you would know that fighting ANYTHING remotely traditional is the FIRST duty of any litnik in the world.
2) To refresh your memory or simply giving some infos you haven’t learnt :

• Abp Rembert Weakland, a prominent US litnik, wrote in “America” review that the whole Renewal was ruined by … 1984 indult. yes he did write such a stupidity. Check it out.
• cardinal Eyt (+) of Bordeaux wrote in 2001 how HAPPY he was to see the talks with SSPX stalked because he did not want anything to do with them
• cardinal Hume blocked in person, with the threat of a schism in 1986, the recognition of TLM as a legitimate rite with full equal rights than NOM.
• the German bishops issued a statement in 1993 to reject the Roman[Indult] trad. priests in their dioceses
• cardinal Lustiger went to Rome to beg the pope not to reach an agreement with Bp Fellay in 2002
• cardinal Mahony tried to block young people to attend the Indult masses
  The list is endless … alas…/**

QUOTE]

 

[pnewton]

I can totally understand why some of the extremities that traditionalists have witnessed has resulted in burst of anger.

Please realize that the traditional movement is not without its own wacko’s and extremists whose behavior is not covered up by insense and latin.

It is a poor arguement though that holds these extreme postitions out as representative of the whole.

 

[Exporter]

Nota Bene:

You really don’t seem to get it. No one has any problems with you and others loving the “tlm.” What I and a great many have problems with “tlm’ers” are:

1.) That you know more than the Church when it comes to understanding what is “best.” Many of your positions are just as heterodox as the most ultra-liberal positions you so detest.

2.) Your laughable insistance that the Tridentine Mass is some sort of silver bullet that would cure all the ills of the Church if it were only made to be the normative Mass.

3.) You inaccurate judgement of the Novus Ordo Mass. (see #1 above.)

4.) Your collective ignorance of Church history. The Tridentine Mass is not 2000 years old.

5.) Your sad obsession with Protestants and Masons (applies to few tlm’ers of course.)

6.) Your support of schismatic/heretical elements like the SSPX.

7.) The fact that you aid other hetrodox elements within the Church through your own outrageous (and erroneous) behavior.

---

Nota Bene, It’s sad that you can’t see beyond your own beliefs.
I disagree with all of your problems with"timers" except #3. ( What does all your nicknames mean - be fair to the reader)
This poster agrees with BulldogCatholic.

 

[Nota_Bene]

pnewton:

I can totally understand why some of the extremities that traditionalists have witnessed has resulted in burst of anger.

Please realize that the traditional movement is not without its own wacko’s and extremists whose behavior is not covered up by insense and latin.

It is a poor arguement though that holds these extreme postitions out as representative of the whole.

That’s correct. And those extremist “traditionalist” wackos do nothing but aid and empower extremist “progressive/liberal/modernist” wackos with their odd and often abusive behavior.

 

[MrS]

katolik:

Ma,am:
The truth hurts!!!

The Truth?? They can’t handle the truth…

oops, sorry, that line was already taken…me bad:whacky:

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

BulldogCath:

We have 2000 years of saints and tradition behind us with a mass codified by another Saint
The Novus Ordo has a mass written by a KNOWN mason and 6 Protestants-promulgated by a man many felt unfit to be Pope

This here sums up my problems with the “rad-Trad” element, especially those who spew here.

First, the Trad Latin Mass is not 2000 years old.

Second, while yes, it was codified by a Saint, he was not a Saint when he codified it so this is a specious argument as no one alive can be a Saint. So there can be a day when the current Mass could be said to have been codifed by a Saint also.

Thrid, the mass was not written by a “KNOWN” mason, just putting it in capitals doesn’t make it fact. Also it was not created by protestants, this argument has been dealt with else where, it seems that the “rad-Trads” ignore the past. When their arguments are refuted they continue to spew them in other threads as if they are facts.

Fourth, doesn’t matter if you or anyone else feel that Pope Paul VI should not have been pope or was unfit to be pope because the Holy Spirit felt otherwise. Here again, not only do the “rad-Trads” raise themselves above the Church in authority, they raise themselves above God.

Seems some people think they have a right to attend the Trad Latin Mass. I believe that the Church has said that all you have a right to is the Mass.

Seems people wish to ignore the fact that there is a shortage of priests today. I do not buy the “crisis” story. God is still calling men, men are responding, its just that many vocations do not fit the mold that bishops and religious orders are looking for.

So with this shortage and the limit set by Canon Law, that a priest can not celebrate the Eucharist more than once a day, unless the bishop allows but not more than three times a day.

Can. 905 §1 Apart from those cases in which the law allows him to celebrate or concelebrate the Eucharist a number of times on the same day, a priest may not celebrate more than once a day.

§2 If there is a scarcity of priests, the local Ordinary may for a good reason allow priests to celebrate twice in one day or even, if pastoral need requires it, three times on Sundays or holydays of obligation.

Then there is the issue of cost even if a bishop has a priest or can bring in a priest. A priest from the FSSP is not free and does not say the Mass with out compensation for his order and his upkeep.

 

[aspawloski4th]

hey byz catholic, instead of your mile long diatribe. why dont you just say what you really feel, and call the councel of Trent a bogus counsel. for your information there have been bogus councels in the past, that were ingnored, usually by the order of a pope. sounds like vatican II should of been one.

 

[bear06]

aspawloski4th:

hey byz catholic, instead of your mile long diatribe. why dont you just say what you really feel, and call the councel of Trent a bogus counsel. for your information there have been bogus councels in the past, that were ingnored, usually by the order of a pope. sounds like vatican II should of been one.

How about we use factual arguments? Nobody is calling into question the validity of the Council of Trent. You, however, seem to be calling into question the validity of Vatican II. You might want to give Pastor Aeternus from Vatican I a read.

BTW, did I miss the Pope calling VII a “bogus council”? Gee, I thought I was up on the news!