to all Traditional Catholics

[mattm09]

You may not be saying that you get to judge what heresy is, but you have been saying in this thread that our brothers in the NW are heretic or have heretical practices/doctrine. Hence, you are actually judging what a heresy is or not.

And what I am saying is that neither you or I have the authority to do that. That’s the Holy See’s job. And for me, as a faithful Catholic, if The Pope says that it is OK, then it is OK. I may not like it, I may not completely understand it, but I know that the Church know better than me. We believe that Our Pope and Our Church are guided by the Holy Spirit, and we know that they make tons of research before approving a new movement or practices. Then, who are you to condemn our brothers and tell them they are pure heresy! That pride, judgmental nature, and I know better attitude is the same that I find in the Cafeteria Catholics and protestants.

2nd. Like I said earlier, I just want to be called your brother in Christ instead of just a “Neocatechumenal.” I believe the same things as you. The Mass I attend is just as valid and licit as the one you may attend, presided by a priest, validly ordained by a bishop. The Church we are part of is ONE. I don’t understand Traditionalists one single bit, but I don’t deny the fact that I am united with them through Christ or call them heretics. I really think you should go back and read the excerpt from a seminar given by the Holy Father.

 

[Dauphin]

You may not be saying that you get to judge what heresy is, but you have been saying in this thread that our brothers in the NW are heretic or have heretical practices/doctrine. Hence, you are actually judging what a heresy is or not.

No, I’m using the standard of the Church to evaluate, based on the Magisterium’s own criteria, what is or isn’t in accord with the Church’s teaching:

"Forasmuch as, under the former Testament, according to the testimony of the Apostle Paul, there was no perfection, because of the weakness of the Levitical priesthood; there was need, God, the Father of mercies, so ordaining, that another priest should rise, according to the order of Melchisedech, our Lord Jesus Christ, who might consummate, and lead to what is perfect, as many as were to be sanctified. He, therefore, our God and Lord, though He was about to offer Himself once on the altar of the cross unto God the Father, by means of his death, there to operate an eternal redemption; nevertheless, because that His priesthood was not to be extinguished by His death, in the last supper, on the night in which He was betrayed,–that He might leave, to His own beloved Spouse the Church, a visible sacrifice, such as the nature of man requires, whereby that bloody sacrifice, once to be accomplished on the cross, might be represented, and the memory thereof remain even unto the end of the world, and its salutary virtue be applied to the remission of those sins which we daily commit,–declaring Himself constituted a priest for ever, according to the order of Melchisedech, He offered up to God the Father His own body and blood under the species of bread and wine; and, under the symbols of those same things, He delivered (His own body and blood) to be received by His apostles, whom He then constituted priests of the New Testament; and by those words, Do this in commemoration of me, He commanded them and their successors in the priesthood, to offer (them); even as the Catholic Church has always understood and taught." - From Chapter 1 of the 22nd Session of the Council of Trent.

Kiko’s doctrine is manifestly opposed to this.

And what I am saying is that neither you or I have the authority to do that. That’s the Holy See’s job.

Agreed. The question is, are we free to disagree with it?

And for me, as a faithful Catholic, if The Pope says that it is OK, then it is OK.

That’s the opposite of being a faithful Catholic. Members of the Church’s hierarchy can make poor decisions, even some that endanger the faithful.

I may not like it, I may not completely understand it, but I know that the Church know better than me. We believe that Our Pope and Our Church are guided by the Holy Spirit, and we know that they make tons of research before approving a new movement or practices. Then, who are you to condemn our brothers and tell them they are pure heresy! That pride, judgmental nature, and I know better attitude is the same that I find in the Cafeteria Catholics and protestants.

The Holy Ghost does not guide the Church in all things, but simply preserves it in truth, preventing it from defecting and abandoning the Catholic doctrine. The hierarchy is capable of making poor decisions, and no faithful Catholic who understands the Church’s teaching would say otherwise.

 

[Walking_Home]

uote:
Originally Posted by mattm09 View Post
On this forum I am more of a spectator than someone who participates, and over the time I’ve been viewing this forum and** my judgments against Traditional Catholics and people in general on this forum have amassed.** As important and beautiful as tradition is,** I feel as though they have forgotten the reality of the love of Jesus Christ and have traded it for natural religiosity.** I have been deeply offended by hostile attitudes taken on this forum, especially against the Catholics that worship according to the current Missal and not the Extraordinary Form. I ask this: are these forums really evangelizing with Christ as the light at the end of the tunnel? Or is it merely hot air vents for disgruntled Traditional Catholics? I must ask for the forgiveness of everyone on this forum now. I may have not spoken or acted much, but in my mind the judgments against all here are too much and putting me in deep sin.

“We are not Christians for what we do, we are Christians for what we have received” -Benedict XVI

I guess you made your point

---

And what point is that. That the OP came here --making such statements —and we here in this forum --were not to respond. Looks like nothing other than the Pot trying to call the kettle black.

 

[mattm09]

---

And what point is that. That the OP came here --making such statements —and we here in this forum --were not to respond. Looks like nothing other than the Pot trying to call the kettle black.

I’m no better than the rest. I’m sorry all for my hypocrisy.

Good night and God bless!

 

[Walking_Home]

uote:
Originally Posted by Walking_Home View Post
And what point is that. That the OP came here --making such statements —and we here in this forum --were not to respond. Looks like nothing other than the Pot trying to call the kettle black.

I’m no better than the rest. I’m sorry all for my hypocrisy.

Good night and God bless!

---

mattm09 —I honestly do not hold any hostility toward you. To me you come across as a person trying to do his best – but has fallen victim to one who deceives.

 

[LilyM]

The Mass I attend is just as valid and licit as the one you may attend, presided by a priest, validly ordained by a bishop.

Actually, if your Mass has the abuses mentioned by an earlier poster - things like the Agnus Dei or the lavabo and other prayers being omitted - then it is NOT licit.

I’m glad NW seems to have done good for you, but I must point out a few things. Firstly those quotes about early Christians not having altars or priests is a huge red flag for me.

The Apostles were the first priests, commissioned as priests by Our Lord a the last supper. And their successors shared in the priestly ministry. This has been constant Church teaching from its earliest days. So they absolutely had priests right from the beginning, and knew the Apostles and their successors to be such.

Likewise the comment about no altars. That upon which a sacrifice is performed is an altar, by definition. Christians certainly, from the earliest days, understood that the Eucharist was indeed a sharing in the sacrifice of Christ. Paul says ‘when we eat this bread and drink this cup we proclaim the death of the Lord (in other words His sacrifice on Calvary).’

Therefore the table upon which the Eucharist was performed was an altar by definition, and was always understood as such.

Secondly - I don’t doubt that NW has done good for you. On the other hand, many can claim that Buddhism, Islam, Scientology or Mormonism have done good for them. Does that mean we should just let Buddhists, Muslims, Scientologists or Mormons continue on their merry way because of it? Of course not.

 

[I_Believe]

**On this forum **I am more of a spectator than someone who participates, and over the time I’ve been viewing this forum and my judgments against Traditional Catholics and people in general on this forum have amassed. As important and beautiful as tradition is, I feel as though they have forgotten the reality of the love of Jesus Christ and have traded it for natural religiosity. I have been deeply offended by hostile attitudes taken on this forum, especially against the Catholics that worship according to the current Missal and not the Extraordinary Form. I ask this: are these forums really evangelizing with Christ as the light at the end of the tunnel? Or is it merely hot air vents for disgruntled Traditional Catholics? I must ask for the forgiveness of everyone on this forum now. I may have not spoken or acted much, but in my mind the judgments against all here are too much and putting me in deep sin.

“We are not Christians for what we do, we are Christians for what we have received” -Benedict XVI

Hi Matt, please keep in mind the handful of traditionalists that post here on a daily basis are just that. A handful of folks who post on an internet forum.

Out of any parish that prays the EF exclusively, I’d bet only 3 or 4 % of the laity of that parish post on traditional catholic forums. That may be a high number.

So please don’t use an internet forum to get a feel for what it’s like to hang out with trads. Most trads don’t rant like some do here. They just live as traditional catholics.

 

[Ghoti]

I’ve never heard of any of this before now.

When I first read the term “Neocatechumenate” I thought it was just a term for someone just about to start RCIA or some such – kind of like “junior kindergarten”. Also, when I saw the stuff about “NW”, I thought it was the “Northwest” (Pacific NW, like Oregone & Washington, where there seems to be a lot of accusations of liberalism).

Can anyone point me to a site (or sites) which details out what the teachings and praxis (right word?) of the NW is, both pro and con? I’ve seen some rhetoric flung back and forth, but not a lot of footnotin’.

So far, all I have is “The Pope says it’s OK” vs “The Pope has been deceived”.

Please set me aright, folks.

 

[Walking_Home]

I’ve never heard of any of this before now.

When I first read the term “Neocatechumenate” I thought it was just a term for someone just about to start RCIA or some such – kind of like “junior kindergarten”. Also, when I saw the stuff about “NW”, I thought it was the “Northwest” (Pacific NW, like Oregone & Washington, where there seems to be a lot of accusations of liberalism).

Can anyone point me to a site (or sites) which details out what the teachings and praxis (right word?) of the NW is, both pro and con? I’ve seen some rhetoric flung back and forth, but not a lot of footnotin’.

So far, all I have is “The Pope says it’s OK” vs “The Pope has been deceived”.

Please set me aright, folks.

---

There is information provided in various forums in this site. Do a search using Neocatechumenal and/or Neocatechumenate in the Apologetics, Liturgy and Sacraments, Spirituality, and I believe also here in the Traditional forum. Or you could do a search from the main forums list page – that I think will give you all the postings from the various forums (with links) about the Neocatechumenals. You can also do a google search using Neocatechumenal and/or Neocatechumenate.

 

[Ghoti]

---

There is information provided in various forums in this site. Do a search using Neocatechumenal and/or Neocatechumenate in the Apologetics, Liturgy and Sacraments, Spirituality, and I believe also here in the Traditional forum. Or you could do a search from the main forums list page – that I think will give you all the postings from the various forums (with links) about the Neocatechumenals. You can also do a google search using Neocatechumenal and/or Neocatechumenate.

Thanks.

 

[Walking_Home]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walking_Home View Post
There is information provided in various forums in this site. Do a search using Neocatechumenal and/or Neocatechumenate in the Apologetics, Liturgy and Sacraments, Spirituality, and I believe also here in the Traditional forum. Or you could do a search from the main forums list page – that I think will give you all the postings from the various forums (with links) about the Neocatechumenals. You can also do a google search using Neocatechumenal and/or Neocatechumenate.

Thanks.

---

To get you started --here is some info provided by Sean OL.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=983128&highlight=Neocatechumenate#post983128

 

[PaulAndrew83]

The NCW is a heretical movement. Anything that denies the Priesthood of the new testament is heretical. We do not need the Pope now to tell us this because the Popes of the past have told us this. One of dauphins posts details the canons of trent that show this.

As for Popes making mistakes in disciplinary and other matters that do not touch on infallibility is of course possible. See St Paul rebuking St Peter in the new testament.

 

[latinmasslover]

On this forum I am more of a spectator than someone who participates, and over the time I’ve been viewing this forum and my judgments against Traditional Catholics and people in general on this forum have amassed. As important and beautiful as tradition is, I feel as though they have forgotten the reality of the love of Jesus Christ and have traded it for natural religiosity. I have been deeply offended by hostile attitudes taken on this forum, especially against the Catholics that worship according to the current Missal and not the Extraordinary Form. I ask this: are these forums really evangelizing with Christ as the light at the end of the tunnel? Or is it merely hot air vents for disgruntled Traditional Catholics? I must ask for the forgiveness of everyone on this forum now. I may have not spoken or acted much, but in my mind the judgments against all here are too much and putting me in deep sin.

“We are not Christians for what we do, we are Christians for what we have received” -Benedict XVI

Someone likely pointed this out already, but if not:

Did you actually read the posts in this forum? Many non traditional Catholics behave just as bad, if not worse. They’ve pat people on the head who admit to living in sin and not caring to do anything about it because God is “a God of love,” and then condemn traditional Catholics for not going with the flow. Your complaint applies to both sides.

 

[latinmasslover]

Well if you aren’t in obedience to the Pope you are pretty much a Protestant…

That is not the Church’s teaching.

If you don’t agree with the Church, you don’t agree with the truth, and the “truth is ultimately Jesus Christ.” (That quote was said by Benedict XVI, heard firsthand at the youth rally at St. Joseph Seminary in Yonkers!)

And if a pope disagrees with the Church? Are we faithful to the personal opinion of a man or the infallible teaching of the Church?

 

[BlyssfulDreamer]

On this forum I am more of a spectator than someone who participates, and over the time I’ve been viewing this forum and my judgments against Traditional Catholics and people in general on this forum have amassed. As important and beautiful as tradition is, I feel as though they have forgotten the reality of the love of Jesus Christ and have traded it for natural religiosity. I have been deeply offended by hostile attitudes taken on this forum, especially against the Catholics that worship according to the current Missal and not the Extraordinary Form. I ask this: are these forums really evangelizing with Christ as the light at the end of the tunnel? Or is it merely hot air vents for disgruntled Traditional Catholics? I must ask for the forgiveness of everyone on this forum now. I may have not spoken or acted much, but in my mind the judgments against all here are too much and putting me in deep sin.

I don’t consider myself a “disgruntled Traditional Catholic.” I am just a Catholic who regularly attends Mass at a TLM oratory. The reason behind that is simple…very simple. While the NO at my parish of registry is celebrated reverently…many of those attending there seem to have lost sight of where they are and why they are there. It is “disheartening” to see people dressed as though the Mass was an after thought in their lives. Their behavior echoes that statement.

 

[pnewton]

And if a pope disagrees with the Church? Are we faithful to the personal opinion of a man or the infallible teaching of the Church?

But that is always the question, isn’t it. I have never heard a Pope state that he was speaking couner to the infallible teaching of the Church. Yet some think they have seen this happen. It is always a circular argument and one can not divorce themselves from injecting personal opinion in making such a judgment.

 

[Cruikshank_s]

Along the line of blindly supporting EVERYTHING Rome approves of let me offer this reminder:

After all, it is just a couple of decades ago that the l’Armée de Marie was enthusiastically and officially approved by the Church, only a mere decade later to be formally suppressed by an embarrassed Episcopacy which had finally woken up to the fact that its foundress was claiming to be the reincarnation of the Virgin Mary and was, as many of the laity had been trying to tell them all along, as barmy as a box of frogs.

I say regardless of supposed orthodoxy, regardless of approval and support, one should always take the views of others with a pinch of salt. Analyze for yourself based upon the tenets of the Faith weather or not you find the teachings and practices of a group to be valid and healthy. I for one based upon the liturgical practices and deliberate omissions of certain prayers within the context of the holy sacrifice of the mass find them to be lacking in sound theology and would not support them. I would also advise close friends to steer clear.

 

[nmoerbeek]

But that is always the question, isn’t it. I have never heard a Pope state that he was speaking couner to the infallible teaching of the Church. Yet some think they have seen this happen. It is always a circular argument and one can not divorce themselves from injecting personal opinion in making such a judgment.

In Aristotle’s book on Prior Analytics I do not believe this meets the definition for circular reasoning.

If a person states that if the pope says something therefore it is right because he is the pope then that is circular reasoning.

However if I say
The pope said this however because the following saints, apostles, scriptures and it is contrary to their teaching therefore the pope is incorrect is not an example of circular reasoning.

Besides barring a pope speak ex cathedra it is not a doctrine of the church. One could make an argument that a pope could say something counter to the doctrine because he is not invoking is own power to make doctrine.

 

[pnewton]

Besides barring a pope speak ex cathedra it is not a doctrine of the church.

However, most of the “doctrine” that the last pope is acccused of contradicting was never presented ex cathedra. If speaking ex cathedra is the standard that it is applied, then contradiction is far less likely since such statements are a rarity. The accusations made against the Holy father, past and present, of contradicting Church doctrine are not contradictions that the Holy Father recognized, or any Church Curia recognized. The only ones who see a contradiction are those who are looking for one.

 

[JReducation]

Does anyone else think that this thread has gone off track? The point of the OP was that Traditional Catholics on these forums present as hostile, angry and judgmental.

I do agree that this can also be said of those on the other side of the aisle as well. There are very liberal Catholics who believe that anyone who thinks differently is less intelligent, has failed to understand the Christian message and lacks charity, probably worse.

In the end, the issue on the table has some validity, if it is looked at in its proper context. Whether Traditional or left wing, there should be no room in the heart and mind of any Christian to speak to others with hostility, make subjective judgments, or make people feel that they are wrong about everything they believe and hold dear.

We are all imperfect creatures. Our understanding of the Church is usually less than perfect. As St. Francis said to his brothers, “when you correct another be kind, gentle, grounded in truth and compassionate; but above all be humble. Don’t leave those whom you have tried to lead down the right path alone. Remember, they too have something to teach you. Above all, remember that correction must be loving and there should always be witnesses to ensure that the truth has been spoken with the greatest humility and the greatest sensitivity.”

Maybe this is what is often lacking in these dicussions, from both sides of the aisle. Unfortunately, there are many people who are in the middle and get caught in the crossfire.

JR