This is why trads are "angry"

[EddieArent]

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.

One just needs to take a look at what happened in Los Angeles a week ago and wonder why no action is taken against Cardinal Mahoney. If you could ever lump in all the liturgical abuse in one weekend, that was the place to start. They could careless about Trent.

:banghead:

 

[Sean_O_L]

katolic wrote:

Taken from the ctngreg list[by a Frenchman]

Mr S wrote:

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

There used to be an old saying:
“Frogs can’t jump sideways” - which can be literal, but can also mean Frenchmen can’t look for solutions outside of the square, etc.

Whether this be so ot not - this is not to say that "Frogs can’t jump backwards!

Witness:

On the one hand:-
May 5, 1988

Lefebvre signed a PROTOCOL OF ACCORD for himself and Society Members:

“3) Regarding certain points taught by Vatican Council II or concerning later reforms of the liturgy and law, and which do not appear to us easily reconcilable with Tradition, we pledge that we will have a positive attitude of study and communication with the Apostolic See, avoiding all polemics.” (Archbishop Lefebvre and the Vatican, Father François Laisney, p.77).

But, then, on the other hand he WELSHED on his SIGNED WORD:-
June 30, 1988

Lefebvre consecrated 4 bishops: “Operation Survival”. “Catholic”, Aug/Sep 88, p1.

Let me now refer you to the Captain (ret.) Roniel Aledo / Bishop Fellay (attempted) Debate

Verily, verily - they (the SSPX propagandists) CAN’T handle the truth!

 

[TNT]

bear06:

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!

Speaking of the big PA, here’s a part I like to read, especially in these times, and those on the horizon:

For the Holy Spirit promised to the successors of Peter, not that they would unfold new doctrine which He revealed to them, but that, with His assistance, they would piously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith handed on through the Apostles. All the venerable Fathers and holy orthodox doctors venerated and followed their * apostolic doctrine*; they knew full well that this See of St. Peter always remained unstained by all error, according to the divine promise which Our Savior made to the chief of His disciples when He said, ‘I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail, and you, having turned, strengthen your brothers.’
What has been the constant “apostolic doctrine” on:
A. Ecumenisim: Hint Mortalium Animos
B. Religious Liberty. Hint Quanta Cura (expunged from DS in 1965 edition.)
C. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass
D. The Latin use in the Roman Rite…thru Vat II…
E. The death penalty.
E. Salvation in false religions.
F. Modernism as a true heresy. Hint Pascendi., Syllabus of Errors.
G. The role of Freemasonry in the internal corruption of the clergy.
F. Communion given non-Catholics sans any Sacrament of Penance.
H. Handling the Blessed Sacrament by unordained personnel.
I. Hell could be empty.
J. Doodling the Bible translation.
K. Misquoting Christ in the Consecration from what is known by Scripture and Sacred Tradition.
M. Maintaining homosexuals in the priesthood. (NO command from this pope to cease and desist, and remove all. else consequences… more was written on the “death penalty” and the enviroment.
N. Altar girls.
O. Destruction of Holy Days of Obligation, Fasting, Abstinence.
P. Modesty of dress at Mass.
All of the above novelties and destruction of Christian discipline have been promoted with 0 effecive objection though they were closely held by the Church as Apostolic doctrinal points.

Just a point of interest. The SSPX continues to hold against every one of these novelties.
They adhere to the authority of the pope, but only to
“piously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith handed on through the Apostles. All the venerable Fathers and holy orthodox doctors venerated and followed their * apostolic doctrine*;” ¶
and:
“not that they would unfold new doctrine which He revealed to them” ¶

Yes, I like PA. I’m thinking of re-baptising myself as PATNT on the Forum.
I love this place.
It reminds me of my family of 11 who each thought they were the only sane one in the bunch.

 

[Sean_O_L]

katolic quoted:

remember the rumour mills that ground over Bishop Rifan’s sitting in choir
at a concelebrated Mass at a Brazillian Bishop’s Conference meeting.

I think that “trads” would also do well to heed the words of Bishop Rifan, as recorded on the http://www.uvoc.org/#concelebration website:

Some persons have questioned the occasional participation of Dom Fernando and some of his priests in Masses celebrated in the Rite of Paul VI.

Dom Fernando is a Catholic bishop, member of the Catholic episcopate, in communion with the Holy Father the Pope. Thus, like every Catholic bishop, even those of a different rite, he must demonstrate this full communion practically.

No one can be Catholic while remaining in an attitude of refusal of communion with the Pope and with the Catholic episcopate. In fact, the Church defines as schismatic those who refuse to submit to the Roman Pontiff or to remain in communion with the other members of the Church who are his subjects (canon 751).

Now, to refuse continually and explicitly to participate in every and any Mass in the rite celebrated by the Pope and by all the bishops of the Church while judging this rite, in itself, incompatible with the Faith, or sinful, represents a formal refusal of communion with the Pope and with the Catholic episcopate.

The objective fact cannot be denied that the rite of Paul VI is the official rite of the Latin Church, celebrated by the Pope and by all the Catholic episcopate.

If we consider the New Mass in itself, in theory or in practice, as invalid or heretical, sacrilegious, heterodox, sinful, illegitimate or not Catholic, we would have to hold the theological conclusions of this position and apply them to the Pope and the entire episcopate residing in the world - that is, the whole teaching Church: that the Church has officially promulgated, maintained for decades, and offers every day to God an illegitimate and sinful worship — a proposition condemned by the Magisterium — and that, therefore, the gates of hell have prevailed against her, which would be a heresy. Or else we would be adopting the sectarian principle that we alone are the Church, and outside of us there is no salvation, which would be another heresy. These positions cannot be accepted by a Catholic, either in theory or in practice.

Our participation, therefore, is based on doctrinal principles. And it does not mean that we do not have reservations about the new rite, as we have already respectfully brought to the attention of the Holy See. Neither does our participation signify approval of everything that may happen. To be united to the hierarchy of the Church and in perfect communion with her does not mean approval of many errors that grow in the bosom of the Holy Church, provoked by her human part. And, of course, we lament profoundly with the Holy Father that the Liturgical Reform has given room for “ambiguities, liberties, creativities, adaptations, reductions and instrumentalizations” (Ecclesia de Eucharistia, n. 10.52.61) and also has given “origin to many abuses and led in a certain way to the disappearance of the respect due to the sacred” (Cardinal Edouard Gagnon, Offerten Situng — Röemisches, nov.dez. 1993, p. 35). Above all, we reject every profanation of the Liturgy, for example the Masses in which the “Liturgy degenerates into a ‘show,’ where one is tempted to make religion interesting with the help of silly changes in fashion…with momentary successes for the group of liturgical fabricators”, as Cardinal Ratzinger criticized (Introduction to the book La Reforme Liturgique by Mgr. Klaus Gamber. p. 6).

For all these reasons, we preserve the venerable rite of St. Pius V, but “cum Petro et sub Petro”, in full communion.

 

[TNT]

Sean O L:

katolic wrote:

Mr S wrote:

Witness:
On the one hand:-
May 5, 1988

Lefebvre signed a PROTOCOL OF ACCORD for himself and Society Members:

“3) Regarding certain points taught by Vatican Council II or concerning later reforms of the liturgy and law, and which do not appear to us easily reconcilable with Tradition, we pledge that** we will have a positive attitude of study and communication with the Apostolic See**, avoiding all polemics.” (Archbishop Lefebvre and the Vatican, Father François Laisney, p.77).

But, then, on the other hand he WELSHED on his SIGNED WORD:-
June 30, 1988

Lefebvre consecrated 4 bishops: “Operation Survival”. “Catholic”, Aug/Sep 88, p1.

Verily, verily - they (the SSPX propagandists) CAN’T handle the truth!

Understanding that an objection is not of necessity a Polemic.

Let us assume that Fr. Laisney is correct.

1. Lefeb Stated: “**do not appear to us easily reconcilable with Tradition” They continue that position. NO WELSH there.
   2. And stated: “**we will have a positive attitude of study and communication with the Apostolic See,” They did so and then communicated their findings to the Vatican. NO WELSH there.
2. And stated: “avoiding all polemics.” He simply told them what he intended to do and why. NO WELSH there.
   Finally:
   No where in the Fr Laisney recital does it show that Lefb. would never recognize a state of necessity, or that he would never consecrate a bishop as a result. NO WELSH there.
   From the corruption of the seminaries, priesthood, bishops, it would appear he was closer to correct than incorrect. (Austria, Weakland, Ryan, Mahoney, Kasper, Keeler et al come to mind.) If you don’t like those names I have a dozen or so more…all consecrated by Paul VI and his successor. Which means they were, to these popes, orthodox teachers of the Traditional Catholic Faith, spiritually mature, holy worthy men, and certainly not homosexual.

 

[pnewton]

TNT:

Speaking of the big PA, here’s a part I like to read, especially in these times, and those on the horizon:

What has been the constant “apostolic doctrine” on:

D. The Latin use in the Roman Rite…thru Vat II…

F. Modernism as a true heresy. Hint Pascendi., Syllabus of Errors.

G. The role of Freemasonry in the internal corruption of the clergy.

J. Doodling the Bible translation.

N. Altar girls.
O. Destruction of Holy Days of Obligation, Fasting, Abstinence.

I do not know how the words “constant” or “apostolic” are being applied. I found six items on this list that on face value can not be or are not constant teaching since the apostles. Obviously this many mistakes calls to question the validity of the whole list, although some of the items are also obvious apostolic teaching to all of us, teaching not refuted by faithful Catholics (of any flavor) today.

 

[Jakub]

My Byzantine brother David,

How many female Eucharistic Ministers do you have at your Church that walk adjacent to the Holy Altar and go to the Holy Tabernacle to retreive and replace Hosts, distribute the Body and Blood of our Lord ? Well I usally have 4 and have not seen a Deacon participate in months. The Priest has taken the role of a presider, I would say that at least 65% of the priests duties have been delegated to the laity, while he sits.

In fact last time I received communion on the tongue the priest was alittle put off. And what has become of the altar servers that were there to catch the stray Particles/Droplets of the Body and Blood of our Lord ? Zero none, nobody cares.

We will get our house in order in time, even here in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, Cardinal Mahony or not.

Please attend to your Byzantine Traditions, let the Roman Catholics attend to theirs.

james

 

[Kielbasi]

But, then, on the other hand he WELSHED on his SIGNED WORD:-
June 30, 1988

Lefebvre consecrated 4 bishops: “Operation Survival”. “Catholic”, Aug/Sep 88, p1.

Archbishop Lefebvre wanted dearly for the Latin mass to outlive him, as such he didn’t have much of a choice in the matter. If he hadn’t done it, we wouldn’t be talking about it , as the latin mass movement would be in its death throes.

 

[JustSomeGuy]

At the very least, let’s take lefevbre(sp?) out of this discussion, whatever it’s about now. (i really didn’t understand the original post.)

lefebvre is a schismatic. he is not a hero, or a poster child for any idea, good or otherwise. when he ordained bishops, he made himself an enemy of the Church. and in doing so, he negated any promise he ever made to Jesus Christ as a shepherd of His people. ordaining a bishop to pass on apostolic succession for the sake of perpetuating his own ideas is the same act of earlier bishops that left us protestantism as their legacy. he, as well as those in past centuries, violated a sacred aspect of the Church. he has forfeited any claim he may have had to defend any position at all. those who are so big on defending the traditions of the Church should think long and hard about citing someone who spit in the face of God in order to make a point.

john

 

[bear06]

Speaking of the big PA, here’s a part I like to read, especially in these times, and those on the horizon:

Yes, this is one of my favorite parts of PA. You seem not to be reading it though! Need a re-read, T!

BTW, I’m all for naming the baby PA but my husband doesn’t like exotic sounding names!

 

[Fogny]

Jakub:

My Byzantine brother David,

How many female Eucharistic Ministers do you have at your Church that walk adjacent to the Holy Altar and go to the Holy Tabernacle to retreive and replace Hosts, distribute the Body and Blood of our Lord ? Well I usally have 4 and have not seen a Deacon participate in months. The Priest has taken the role of a presider, I would say that at least 65% of the priests duties have been delegated to the laity, while he sits.

In fact last time I received communion on the tongue the priest was alittle put off. And what has become of the altar servers that were there to catch the stray Particles/Droplets of the Body and Blood of our Lord ? Zero none, nobody cares.

We will get our house in order in time, even here in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, Cardinal Mahony or not.

Please attend to your Byzantine Traditions, let the Roman Catholics attend to theirs.

james

James, is the priest lazy or is this the way the Bishop wants it? Is this practise wide spread, because it is not right and it is in violation of canon law. This practice makes me sick.

Fogny

 

[Jakub]

Fogny,

Does my bishop approve ? Just check the bottom of my post & see my Archdiocese and who my Bishop is !

james

 

[EddieArent]

JustSomeGuy:

At the very least, let’s take lefevbre(sp?) out of this discussion, whatever it’s about now. (i really didn’t understand the original post.)

lefebvre is a schismatic. he is not a hero, or a poster child for any idea, good or otherwise. when he ordained bishops, he made himself an enemy of the Church. and in doing so, he negated any promise he ever made to Jesus Christ as a shepherd of His people. ordaining a bishop to pass on apostolic succession for the sake of perpetuating his own ideas is the same act of earlier bishops that left us protestantism as their legacy. he, as well as those in past centuries, violated a sacred aspect of the Church. he has forfeited any claim he may have had to defend any position at all. those who are so big on defending the traditions of the Church should think long and hard about citing someone who spit in the face of God in order to make a point.

john

Spit on the face of God? No way. Disobiediant to the Pope. Sure, that act was. But atleast he didn’t kiss a Koran and pray for peace with a bunch of heretics at Assisi. No longer peace through Christ, but peace through Buddha, Allah, et al false relgions. Is that spitting in the face of God?

“I am the Lord your God. You shall have no other Gods besides Me.”

 

[TNT]

bear06:

Yes, this is one of my favorite parts of PA. You seem not to be reading it though! Need a re-read, T!

BTW, I’m all for naming the baby PA but my husband doesn’t like exotic sounding names!

I have read it thru. The part I quoted was the Intro to the context (or restraint) of a remaining part which you have quoted exclusively.

Now, Can you not use P and A as the initials of the first and middle name. I’m such a great compromiser!
Like Patrick Allen or Patricia Amelia …
On 2nd thought I still like Aeternus as a middle name.
It might even spur a later desire to embrace Latin in the little bugger.
I can picture them chanting PA in the original language at all family gatherings.

 

[pnewton]

EddieArent:

Spit on the face of God? No way. Disobiediant to the Pope. Sure, that act was. But atleast he didn’t kiss a Koran and pray for peace with a bunch of heretics at Assisi. No longer peace through Christ, but peace through Buddha, Allah, et al false relgions. Is that spitting in the face of God?

Of course not!

Showing respect to others (non-Christians) does not make one a non-Christian or an idolater.

 

[bear06]

I have read it thru. The part I quoted was the Intro to the context (or restraint) of a remaining part which you have quoted exclusively.

I know your quote was part of it, I just don’t think you really read it. If you did, you know that all of your stress is for naught!

Now, Can you not use P and A as the initials of the first and middle name. I’m such a great compromiser!
Like Patrick Allen or Patricia Amelia …
On 2nd thought I still like Aeternus as a middle name.
It might even spur a later desire to embrace Latin in the little bugger.
I can picture them chanting PA in the original language at all family gatherings.

I’m afraid if it’s a boy it will be William Ronald (after grandpa) and if it’s a girl it will be Sophia ? We’re still trying to decide on a middle name. I guess we’d better hurry up. Suggestion welcome but it can’t be too exotic. Sophia is exotic enough for my husband!

 

[TNT]

bear06:

I’m afraid if it’s a boy it will be William Ronald (after grandpa) and if it’s a girl it will be Sophia ? We’re still trying to decide on a middle name. I guess we’d better hurry up. Suggestion welcome but it can’t be too exotic. Sophia is exotic enough for my husband!

** Sofija** (1) from Greek; from the **Latinized **Greek Sophia: Greek word sophia “išmintis,” [reason]
I don’t think Aeternus = Eternal is exotic. It has tons of meaning. Their soul will be just that, and later the body. Plus, that is the adjective for Catholic Truth. sooo many meanings!
Yep, that’s the middle name…if it’s a girl, of course. I will pray the rosary today that it is
Yes, Sat evening is SSPX Mass with the SSPX former chrismaticWife…I’ll offer it and the suffering up to a girl also. NOOOOOOOOOOOO criticism.
VIVA SOPHIA AETERNUS
**PS. **Read Mortalium Animos

Is there any doctrine in it or is it just disposable blather? Ok, “historical conditioning”, same thing, using camouflage words.
Does the VATII church ever refer to it in this age of ecumenism. After all , that’s its whole subject.
And in Pascendi, what does St Pius X say is penetrating into the very veins and Heart of the Catholic Church?
How shall we ever know who they are?

 

[bear06]

** Sofija**

(1) from Greek; from the **Latinized **Greek **Sophia**: Greek word sophia "išmintis," [reason]

I don’t think Aeternus = Eternal is exotic. It has tons of meaning. Their soul will be just that, and later the body. Plus, that is the adjective for Catholic Truth. sooo many meanings!
Yep, that’s the middle name…if it’s a girl, of course. I will pray the rosary today that it is
Yes, Sat evening is SSPX Mass with the SSPX former chrismaticWife…I’ll offer it and the suffering up to a girl also.

Ahhhhhhhhhhhh!!! I have 4 girls and my last one was a boy. We’re hoping that he gets a little playmate (for his sake and ours). We’ll be happy with whatever we get but don’t pray for a girl!

 

[TNT]

bear06:

Ahhhhhhhhhhhh!!! I have 4 girls and my last one was a boy. We’re hoping that he gets a little playmate (for his sake and ours). We’ll be happy with whatever we get but don’t pray for a girl!

If no Aeternus Girl, then NO BOY. Thus saith the Lord.
I’ve made up my mind. Either it’s William Aeternus, or Sophia Aeternus. “The prayers of a righteous man are Effective, indeed”.
My Uncle John had 8 Children. ONE was a boy, the 5th in line. He turned out great. Besides, we had 4 boys and they just beat the hell of each other, and made them cry. My Mom became a referee.
Here is a site on the growing popularity of Sophia as a name. Astonishing.

 

[bear06]

TNT:

bear06:

If no Aeternus Girl, then NO BOY. Thus saith the Lord.
I’ve made up my mind. Either it’s William Aeternus, or Sophia Aeternus. “The prayers of a righteous man are Effective, indeed”.
My Uncle John had 8 Children. ONE was a boy, the 5th in line. He turned out great. Besides, we had 4 boys and they just beat the hell of each other, and made them cry. My Mom became a referee.
Here is a site

on the growing popularity of Sophia as a name. Astonishing.

Ahhhh!!! I didn’t know it was popular. I may have to change my mind. I’m not into the trendy. The funny thing is that whenever we pick an obscure saint I turn around and find 20 kids with the same name. Hopefully my Caeli Regina will remain unique for awhile longer. She seems to be the only one I can still call on the playground and not have other kids look at me!