Validity of the Ordinary Rite disputed by my friend

  • Thread starter Thread starter lentang2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
lol, so true, ProVobis. Not sure why I laughed at that. Mea culpa…
 
bpbasilphx said:
No disrespect intended against matt1618 but I’ve always wondered about the validity of this website and whose axe they were trying to grind. They certainly aren’t any authority on Church matters.

**And the traditionalists (some of whom are clearly schismatic) who wave around the Ottaviani intervention ARE authorities on Church matters?

Is this what you are saying?**
Click to expand...
Can you tell us what a schismatic is?

Also, were those who supported the anti-popes during the Western Schism schismatics as well?

SFD
 
SFD said:
Can you tell us what a schismatic is?

Also, were those who supported the anti-popes during the Western Schism schismatics as well?

SFD
Click to expand...
As I recall, there were saints on both sides of the schism even though one camp must have been wrong.
 
Can you tell us what a schismatic is?

**CMRI, SSPV, sedevacantists generally…

Get the idea?**
 
**No. In fact I believe the traditionalists, of which I don’t claim to be one of, are prohibited in using a particular site as reference so they don’t have much to wave around. So where’s the level playing field here?

Feel free to use matt1618 as your source if CAF rules allow it, but I’m merely expressing an observation and opinion.**

**My point is that there are certain factions that have quoted the Ottaviani intervention to “prove” the Pauline Missal is at least defective, if not invalid.

But these same people never read the REST of what Ottaviani have said.

Being an Eastern Christian, I have no direct personal interest in the matter. **

By the way, as long as we’re talking in generalities, many non-traditionalists are also clearly schismatic

**Oh, I won’t doubt that one bit!

Error, be it on the left or on the right, is still error.

And there are cafeteria catholics in both extremes.**
 
ProVobis said:
No disrespect intended against matt1618 but I’ve always wondered about the validity of this website and whose axe they were trying to grind. They certainly aren’t any authority on Church matters.
Click to expand...
…and you are…an Angry trad?..
 
Tina_in_Ashburn said:
lentang2
This is what gives legitimate traditionalists a bad rap.

This subject is very emotional for both sides. Separate the emotion from the actual statements and judge each on its own merit.

Just because somebody is crazy or a sede vacantes or an illicit priest doesn’t mean they are wrong about everything. However, these circumstances are big red flags that should make you consider the source of statements. So you are right to be concerned.

There is nothing wrong with going to the EF. As you suspect, there is something wrong with stating the OF is invalid. Only the Magisterium can state conclusions like this. The laity, even the clergy, are well within their rights to ask questions with the incongruities we see. Even if we come to dire conclusions, it is folly to act on them without direction from the Church. And more importantly, we should never direct others to actions that fly in the face of Church teaching. That is sinful. The most important thing to remember is obedience, as many go to hell being ‘right’ about the wrong things. [Luther was right about one of his 95 theses, but look where his methods got him and the following generations]. Obedience covers many failures on our part and on that of ‘stupid’ authority. [The very thing that makes obedience sanctifying is obeying what we consider stupid. How many of us have “clueless”, “stupid” parents or bosses? This becomes a crux of our salvation.] The only time we are allowed disobedience is in avoiding sin. In the case of the Mass, we do not have clear directives from the Church that the OF is sinful to attend. [As another pointed out, any Mass can be done illicitly or invalidly.]

If the priest is acting without a bishop, this is very serious and he should be avoided. Forget that he also subscribes to crazy conspiratorial beliefs, although this may be a clue to an illogical thinking process. These cannot be proved/disproved and are highly emotional issues. Besides, I always say, “just because I’m paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t after me”. LOL!

There is NO way to prove whether or not the secrets of Fatima have all been entirely revealed. When I have gotten into these discussions, they always boil down to sources quoted by the respective sides and who to believe. The arguments on both sides are based on hearsay and third parties. Fortunately, approved Marian apparitions are not required articles of Faith.

You most likely won’t get anywhere with your friend. My suggestion is to avoid confrontation and remain charitable. You won’t win caustic arguments. However I find these people interesting and I mentally file away the less crazy statements for future reference and parallels. Sometimes conclusions can be made, but with the application of logic and truth, you will come to different conclusions than they. You will find that these types pick and choose what to believe. They might believe the chair of Peter is empty, but then quote recent papal documents and statements to prove positions. Again, this is why you can’t win arguments with this type.

As far as the comments in this thread on Ottaviani, the Intervention remains one of the best and most succinct statements on the problems with the New Mass. The blind Ottaviani may have been tricked into signing a retraction by a henchman of Bugnini, the architect of the New Mass. However, even this retraction could be construed as a statement of obedience to the Pope, not necessarily a retraction for each and every item of contention. Many subsequent authors used the Intervention as a basis for further discussion and discovery on the problems of the New Mass.

Discussions on Ottaviani are beside the point here. I wanted to comment on your observations.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your model, rational post!! VERY HELPFUL TO ME!!
 
palmas85 said:
I notice that our good friend Lentang, the OP has dropped from the radar on this one. I noticed that he proclaimed himself to be a newbie when he posted this and I suppose technically he may be one, even though his first posts date back about a year, and they are all remarkably alike.

I thought I had read some of his posts before and he is to put it mildly, very anti-traditionalist to a high degree indeed.

I think that given that fact this thread should be viewed critically as it clearly supports an agenda that he has laid down in the past…

Just an opinion
Click to expand...
I am sorry for my absence, I am in the banking industry and, well, as you are all seeing right now in the media, we in this line of work have enough professional problems to occupy most of our time…sitting in a post room is a luxury for me right now. This weekend is the first time I have been able to get back to everyone.

Also, sorry if I seemed judgmental, I do not intend to be. I am concerned for my friend that he has fallen into a sect that advocates an into-papal, anti-Ordinary Form mass - to stay on point, what are your thoughts on that?

My concern: I am 53 - he has been in my life since we were 16…I care for him immensely.
 
lentang2 said:
I am sorry for my absence, I am in the banking industry and, well, as you are all seeing right now in the media, we in this line of work have enough professional problems to occupy most of our time…sitting in a post room is a luxury for me right now. This weekend is the first time I have been able to get back to everyone.

Also, sorry if I seemed judgmental, I do not intend to be. I am concerned for my friend that he has fallen into a sect that advocates an into-papal, anti-Ordinary Form mass - to stay on point, what are your thoughts on that?

My concern: I am 53 - he has been in my life since we were 16…I care for him immensely.
Click to expand...
Matt. ch. 10 said:
32 Every one therefore that shall confess me before men, I will also confess him before my Father who is in heaven. 33 But he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven. 34 Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword. 35 For I came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

35 “I came to set a man at variance”… Not that this was the end or design of the coming of our Saviour; but that his coming and his doctrine would have this effect, by reason of the obstinate resistance that many would make, and of their persecuting all such as should adhere to him.

36 And as a man’s enemies shall be they of his own household. 37 He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than me, is not worthy of me. 38 And he that taketh not up his cross, and followeth me, is not worthy of me. 39 He that findeth his life, shall lose it: and he that shall lose his life for me, shall find it. 40 He that receiveth you, receiveth me: and he that receiveth me, receiveth him that sent me.
Click to expand...
 
lentang2 said:
I am sorry for my absence, I am in the banking industry and, well, as you are all seeing right now in the media, we in this line of work have enough professional problems to occupy most of our time…sitting in a post room is a luxury for me right now. This weekend is the first time I have been able to get back to everyone.

Also, sorry if I seemed judgmental, I do not intend to be. I am concerned for my friend that he has fallen into a sect that advocates an into-papal, anti-Ordinary Form mass - to stay on point, what are your thoughts on that?

My concern: I am 53 - he has been in my life since we were 16…I care for him immensely.
Click to expand...
To be perfectly honest with you, I have a hard time believing this Priest is as far out there as you say he is, particularly given the general anti traditionalist tone in your previous posts. Since you refuse to provide any info on where this “sect” is located, or where this “Priest” blogs at, I have to take the whole thread with a grain of salt. Many people come onto the traditional; forum with a definite agenda and tend to paint ALL traditionally minded Catholics as being raving sedavacantists. Not saying that you do, but there are definitely those that do.

Without having any more info on this “sect”, any statements that I make could best be termed, well, uncharitable and ill informed to say the least. And you wouldn’t want me to be uncharitable now would you?

Now if you want to pm me and let me have some idea where this “sect” is so that I can see exactly what it is teaching, then we can have an intelligent adult conversation and maybe figure out some way to help your friend out…

Otherwise, it really seems to be just more traditional bashing.
 
lentang2 said:
Thank you for your model, rational post!! VERY HELPFUL TO ME!!
Click to expand...
I am very happy that this is helpful to you. You are welcome.

I am sorry for your friend - perhaps you can take little tiny pieces of his thinking and identify together on what you can agree and dissect certain ‘facts’ unemotionally. This is very hard. The objective is to stay away from unprovable information and stick with documented information of trusted sources, such as encyclicals. Without offering your opinion, simply demonstrating how shaky the information or sources are can be the wedge that brings in the light. Do not try to disprove what is valid of your friend’s beliefs. Don’t expect this person to admit anything in your presence. Allow him to go away and consider what you say, wondering about the questions. Above all, be kind. Us traditionalists are so sore from getting beaten up over 40 years, we “shut down” with any sort of perceived attack. Eventually the truth will succeed.

Just like wild-eyed liberals, wild-eyed traditionalists succumb to fear, anxiety and paranoia about future events and inability to correctly translate past occurrences. There is a lot of bad information going around.

Both sides can be accused of deciding what to believe first, then go about finding the supporting facts to back it up. This works in prayerful, right truth but it is a vortex when the premise is a lie.

There may be selfish personal issues at stake, but what I find that these two sides have in common is both care passionately.
 
palmas85 said:
To be perfectly honest with you, I have a hard time believing this Priest is as far out there as you say he is, particularly given the general anti traditionalist tone in your previous posts. Since you refuse to provide any info on where this “sect” is located, or where this “Priest” blogs at, I have to take the whole thread with a grain of salt. Many people come onto the traditional; forum with a definite agenda and tend to paint ALL traditionally minded Catholics as being raving sedavacantists. Not saying that you do, but there are definitely those that do.

Without having any more info on this “sect”, any statements that I make could best be termed, well, uncharitable and ill informed to say the least. And you wouldn’t want me to be uncharitable now would you?

Now if you want to pm me and let me have some idea where this “sect” is so that I can see exactly what it is teaching, then we can have an intelligent adult conversation and maybe figure out some way to help your friend out…

Otherwise, it really seems to be just more traditional bashing.
Click to expand...
You seem to be inordinately interested in getting his name out of me…hmmm.

As I already stated, I will not give out this information.

So I will simply have to learn to survive without your sage advice…:bighanky:

But hey, thanks for all the free judging! 👍
 
Lentang,

Doesn’t it seem that palmas’ point is that he doesn’t believe this mystery priest is really as evil as you claim? Nevertheless, you won’t even tell him privately in order that he may attempt to salvage the character of this priest you very well may be falsely maligning.

And you accuse him of judging!?

I’ll conclude with a bit of judgement myself. Judging from most of your posts, you are in a lot of need of a lot of sage advice, from a lot of sources, not just from palmas. God bless.
 
lentang2 said:
You seem to be inordinately interested in getting his name out of me…hmmm.

As I already stated, I will not give out this information.

So I will simply have to learn to survive without your sage advice…:bighanky:

But hey, thanks for all the free judging! 👍
Click to expand...
Not judging, just observing. Big big difference. You throw out vicious accusations against this Priest, question his motives and pretty much accuse him of being a sedavacantist or worse. Pretty bad. :eek: Yet you steadfastly to give any of us a clue as to where he is, who he is, his status in the Church, what he is doing or anything else. In fact, your outright refusal to let us determine for ourselves if this Priest is as bad as you claim he is actually speaks volumes.

Yes, I am interested in finding out where this Priest is. If he is as bad and as far out there as you have alleged, he needs to be exposed so that he cannot infect others. Very simple. However, if he is not as bad as you claim he is, then this slander must stop.
 
palmas85 said:
You throw out vicious accusations against this Priest, question his motives and pretty much accuse him of being a sedavacantist or worse. Pretty bad. :eek: .
Click to expand...
Who am I attacking viciously? Hello?! Haven’t mentioned anyone yet!:banghead:
palmas85 said:
Yet you steadfastly to give any of us a clue as to where he is, who he is, his status in the Church, what he is doing or anything else. In fact, your outright refusal to let us determine for ourselves if this Priest is as bad as you claim he is actually speaks volumes…
Click to expand...
(sigh) You still miss the point of my thread. It was not to report on the PRIEST. It was to give you the SITUATION with my friend. Then YOU give me advice on how to WORK-WITH-MY-BUDDY. Understand? Simple.
Yes, I am interested in finding out where this Priest is. If he is as bad and as far out there as you have alleged, he needs to be exposed so that he cannot infect others.
Click to expand...
Yes, I can feel the warmth of your sincerity. You are saying you are going to spearhead a campaign to ARREST THIS INJUSTICE if ONLY I would would identify him? :rolleyes:
However, if he is not as bad as you claim he is, then this slander must stop.
Click to expand...
Palmas, I think you are in over your head on this one. Please go look up the word “slander”, then come back here…slander requires…an actual PERSON or GROUP…UNTIL I name that person or group then this is all just fantasy. But seriously, I looked at many of your posts too, as you claim you did of mine…that said, I do not believe slandering this person here by giving out his name and location – to you especially – would be very wise of me…
 
lentang2 said:
Who am I attacking viciously? Hello?! Haven’t mentioned anyone yet!:banghead:

(sigh) You still miss the point of my thread. It was not to report on the PRIEST. It was to give you the SITUATION with my friend. Then YOU give me advice on how to WORK-WITH-MY-BUDDY. Understand? Simple.

Yes, I can feel the warmth of your sincerity. You are saying you are going to spearhead a campaign to ARREST THIS INJUSTICE if ONLY I would would identify him? :rolleyes:

Palmas, I think you are in over your head on this one. Please go look up the word “slander”, then come back here…slander requires…an actual PERSON or GROUP…UNTIL I name that person or group then this is all just fantasy. But seriously, I looked at many of your posts too, as you claim you did of mine…that said, I do not believe slandering this person here by giving out his name and location – to you especially – would be very wise of me…
Click to expand...
I kind of figured it was, but thanks for letting us all know. Its good to know that you will make things up just to get a rise from people in order to promote your agenda.

You see, thats why I pushed so hard. I just kind of felt that the whole thing was made up.
 
The new Mass being invalid’ is a trick to put doubts in one’s mind about this and to drawn one further and further from the Church and into cultlike behavior…or a cult…
Here is what it boils down to - no matter which exact words are used or not used - if the Church says it is a valid mass, then it IS a valid mass. Christ gave the Church the authority on earth and her decisions are supported by Christ himself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top