We Changed the Church and Regret It

[wisdomseeker]

We blame the Church when the problem clearly is US! Look at the pitiful mess that God has to work with! Once again I am reminded of Jesus looking out upon the crowds - seeing them as “dejected and harassed - like sheep without a shepherd” (Matthew 9:36, Mark 6:34).

i just dont know what to make of what you just said.

 

[Javl]

We have a habit of fixing things that aren’t broken, or don’t need fixing. When are we going to learn that the Church does not and should not adjust to the world, but that the world should adjust to the Church? Didn’t Jesus tell us that we should live in the world but not be part of the world?

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[wisdomseeker]

We have a habit of fixing things that aren’t broken, or don’t need fixing. When are we going to learn that the Church does not and should not adjust to the world, but that the world should adjust to the Church? Didn’t Jesus tell us that we should live in the world but not be part of the world?

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

i truly believe that there was a conspiracy from the begining to destroy the leadership of the Church. it came from germany and two or three other countries.

 

[CradleCath]

i truly believe that there was a conspiracy from the begining to destroy the leadership of the Church. it came from germany and two or three other countries.

I’m not sure that it could be called a “conspiracy”, but there was definitely a group of Theologians (both Karl Rahner & von Balthasar were Jesuit priests) who met in secret before the council & prepared their own schemas. They were all from the countries along the Rhine river. I don’t think that they set out to “destroy” the Church…I believe it was about power to the local ordinaries & about defying & redefining the dogma of Infallibility proclaimed at Vatican I.

I firmly believe that these men were ashamed of the piety & devotions within their own faith & their purpose was to bring the Catholic Church into “modern Protestantism” which was more palatable to their “discriminating taste”.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I’m not sure that it could be called a “conspiracy”, but there was definitely a group of Theologians (both Karl Rahner & von Balthasar were Jesuit priests) who met in secret before the council & prepared their own schemas. They were all from the countries along the Rhine river. I don’t think that they set out to “destroy” the Church…I believe it was about power to the local ordinaries & about defying & redefining the dogma of Infallibility proclaimed at Vatican I.

I firmly believe that these men were ashamed of the piety & devotions within their own faith & their purpose was to bring the Catholic Church into “modern Protestantism” which was more palatable to their “discriminating taste”.

yes, shame is the right word. i do believe in conspiracy. some today are afraid to even say this word. i am not. i do believe this conspiracy was meant to destroy the leadership of the Church and they almost succeeded. the proof is that we see disobedience to leadership, from priests, to bishops and cardinals, to laity. this is protestantism at best. i have no doubt. this is the reality of the CC today. I was reading a complaint of a parishoner the other in which this person was terrified when the priest in teh Church gave thanks to God for his brother had converted to protestantism. there is still a horrifying desire of many to protestantize the Church. it is not getting much better. since these priests are being formed in these seminaries.

 

[Javl]

i truly believe that there was a conspiracy from the begining to destroy the leadership of the Church. it came from germany and two or three other countries.

Yes, I agree. This is the major reason why ArchBishop LeFevbre rebelled. I am old enough ( 84 ) to know the pre-V II Church. When I compare it with the post-V II Church it is a difference like night and day.

Yes, there was some dissension and scandals pre-V II ( every generation has at least one ), but not like the recent ones. They were very few and far between. Priests, both secular and religious along with other religious, were faithful to their vows. Defrockings and excommunications were extremely rare. I only remember one scandal that appeared in the secular papers and that concerned a Fr. Coughlin ( called “The Radio Priest” ) who was a racist and segregationist. Othar than this, “all was quiet on the western front”.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Javl]

yes, shame is the right word. i do believe in conspiracy. some today are afraid to even say this word. i am not. i do believe this conspiracy was meant to destroy the leadership of the Church and they almost succeeded. the proof is that we see disobedience to leadership, from priests, to bishops and cardinals, to laity. this is protestantism at best. i have no doubt. this is the reality of the CC today. I was reading a complaint of a parishoner the other in which this person was terrified when the priest in teh Church gave thanks to God for his brother had converted to protestantism. there is still a horrifying desire of many to protestantize the Church. it is not getting much better. since these priests are being formed in these seminaries.

And this is why we should fight to get the Tridentine Mass back and bury the Novus Ordo Mass ( it is too Protestant for my liking ). We should all support traditional religious like the FSSP ( Friendly Society of Saint Peter ) and insist on some modicum of decency in the dress for any mass ( no torn jeans with the waist down around the knees, hot pants or tank tops ). Many times I’m embarassed to bring any interested protestant friend to a NO mass.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[wisdomseeker]

Yes, I agree. This is the major reason why ArchBishop LeFevbre rebelled. I am old enough ( 84 ) to know the pre-V II Church. When I compare it with the post-V II Church it is a difference like night and day.

Yes, there was some dissension and scandals pre-V II ( every generation has at least one ), but not like the recent ones. They were very few and far between. Priests, both secular and religious along with other religious, were faithful to their vows. Defrockings and excommunications were extremely rare. I only remember one scandal that appeared in the secular papers and that concerned a Fr. Coughlin ( called “The Radio Priest” ) who was a racist and segregationist. Othar than this, “all was quiet on the western front”.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

i do make the distinction between sins of the clergy and sins against the Liturgy(Worship to God). we know that we can fall into temptation, anyone of us including the clergy. but never with the Liturgy. what is happened today it is not only the sins among clergy but also the desecration of the Liturgy as if no one believes in God anymore.
here, this may make you cry.

montfort.org.br/index.php?secao=veritas&subsecao=igreja&artigo=missa-nova&lang=bra

 

[GaryTaylor]

Interesting. Just visited her blog. Sounds to me like she still has many psychological problems. Still hung-up in the 60’s-70’s but with a defeated attitude. Sort of feel sorry for these people. There are still many priests limping around today with the same attitude.

I pray that they find some sort of peace before they pass on.

I hear that.

 

[GaryTaylor]

And this is why we should fight to get the Tridentine Mass back and bury the Novus Ordo Mass ( it is too Protestant for my liking ). We should all support traditional religious like the FSSP ( Friendly Society of Saint Peter ) and insist on some modicum of decency in the dress for any mass ( no torn jeans with the waist down around the knees, hot pants or tank tops ). Many times I’m embarassed to bring any interested protestant friend to a NO mass.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

I agree, but the resistance is overwheming. How to convince one whats best for them is the age old question.

I’m really starting to believe that we should just be done with it, regardless of the falling away. I see no comfort in false numbers. I believe the truth will prevail and the church will correct itself. If we just get back to business,

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

And this is why we should fight to get the Tridentine Mass back and bury the Novus Ordo Mass ( it is too Protestant for my liking ). We should all support traditional religious like the FSSP ( Friendly Society of Saint Peter ) and insist on some modicum of decency in the dress for any mass ( no torn jeans with the waist down around the knees, hot pants or tank tops ). Many times I’m embarassed to bring any interested protestant friend to a NO mass.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

oh…well…you don’t like it. But don’t make the mistake of thinking that people don’t worship God at the NO. It is a valid Mass.

You want to do something constructive…try praying for the conversion of our seperated breathern.

 

[georgewithfaith]

And this is why we should fight to get the Tridentine Mass back and bury the Novus Ordo Mass ( it is too Protestant for my liking ). We should all support traditional religious like the FSSP ( Friendly Society of Saint Peter ) and insist on some modicum of decency in the dress for any mass ( no torn jeans with the waist down around the knees, hot pants or tank tops ). Many times I’m embarassed to bring any interested protestant friend to a NO mass.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

I share your sentiments. The push has begun to return to the Tridentine Mass. FSSP priests are whom all our priests should look to as the model of the ideal priest. Unlike Pope Paul VI who forced the Novus Ordo on us, Pope Benedict is allowing the Tridentine Mass to gain a following. The Pope thinks that one day support will surge for this
Mass to once again become The Only Mass. Yes the Novus Ordo is a valid Mass but sorry, it is not our best or our most sacred effort at worship. Only in the Tridentine Mass do we have the reverence and sacredness that IS our Best and that Our Lord so richly deserves from us. The Lord will win at the end and the Mass of the Ages will overthrow the Novus Ordo of Paul VI.

 

[pnewton]

The Pope thinks that one day support will surge for this
Mass to once again become The Only Mass.

Quote?

Here is where he said the opposite.

“We might say that … the liturgy was rather like a fresco [in the early 20th century]. It had been preserved from damage, but it had been almost completely overlaid with whitewash by later generations. In the Missal from which the priest celebrated, the form of the liturgy that had grown from its earliest beginnings was still present, but, as far as the faithful were concerned, it was largely concealed beneath instructions for and forms of private prayer. The fresco was laid bare by the Liturgical Movement and, in a definitive way, by the Second Vatican Council. For a moment its colors and figures fascinated us. But since then the fresco has been endangered by climatic conditions as well as by various restorations and reconstructions. In fact, it is threatened with destruction, if the necessary steps are not taken to stop these damaging influences. Of course, there must be no question of its being covered with whitewash again, but what is imperative is a new reverence in the way we treat it, a new understanding of its message and its reality, so that rediscovery does not become the first stage of irreparable loss.”

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

I share your sentiments. The push has begun to return to the Tridentine Mass. FSSP priests are whom all our priests should look to as the model of the ideal priest. Unlike Pope Paul VI who forced the Novus Ordo on us, Pope Benedict is allowing the Tridentine Mass to gain a following. The Pope thinks that one day support will surge for this
Mass to once again become The Only Mass. Yes the Novus Ordo is a valid Mass but sorry, it is not our best or our most sacred effort at worship. Only in the Tridentine Mass do we have the reverence and sacredness that IS our Best and that Our Lord so richly deserves from us. The Lord will win at the end and the Mass of the Ages will overthrow the Novus Ordo of Paul VI.

I’d be very careful with that last statement if I was you. It sounds like you are saying that the NO is against our Lord and our Lord will prevail against it.

I sure hope that is not what you are saying and you only got the wording wrong.

 

[Adeodatus]

I’d be very careful with that last statement if I was you. It sounds like you are saying that the NO is against our Lord and our Lord will prevail against it.

I sure hope that is not what you are saying and you only got the wording wrong.

He specifically said that the NO is a valid Mass.

Just because it is a valid Mass that does not necessarily entail the conclusion that it is the one our Lord wants us to have.

Example: To celebrate the 4th of July, the deacon at St. Shenanigans parish dresses up like Apollo Creed from Rocky 3 (glittery Uncle Sam costume) and does a showboating dance to James Brown’s Livin in America during his (the deacon’s) homily. Vegas showgirls prance across the sanctuary* during this time. The deacon, being caucasian, is also costumed in blackface. He finishes with a notably inapposite Chris Rock impersonation.

Now, supposing that the priest actually did what he was supposed to do, the above example could in fact be a valid Mass. Do you think that means it is also most pleasing to our Lord?

Well, the same applies to a valid form of the Mass that is in itself insufficiently reverent. Do you think it is just as reverent for the priest to say Mass with his back to the Tabernacle as it is to say Mass facing the Tabernacle?! Just one example among many.

The difference here, vis a vis validity and pleasingness to our Lord, is one that we have to go to philosophy and theology to find in a defined form: per se versus secundum quid. Something may be valid and pleasing to our Lord inasmuch as it conforms to certain basic minima, or in as much as it is done with a certain intention or fulfills a certain purpose or is externally correct. Those things are valid and, we may suppose, pleasing in a qualified way. But a Mass that is truly reverent, doctrinally not only technically correct but also steadfastly sound, beautiful, not influenced by pagan Revolutionism and in continuity with Church tradition would seem to be valid and pleasing in an unqualified way, or “in itself”.

I’m not the poster you were correcting, but I suggest rereading his comment in that light.

• • Not unlike the dancing chicken that actually appears in a sanctuary in a Youtube video.

 

[CradleCath]

And this is why we should fight to get the Tridentine Mass back and bury the Novus Ordo Mass ( it is too Protestant for my liking ). We should all support traditional religious like the FSSP ( Friendly Society of Saint Peter ) and insist on some modicum of decency in the dress for any mass ( no torn jeans with the waist down around the knees, hot pants or tank tops ). Many times I’m embarassed to bring any interested protestant friend to a NO mass.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

Hi Javl. Just wanted to say that I agree with you about a lot of things, but I don’t want to “bury the Novus Ordo Mass”, nor do I think that the Pope wants to.

For one thing, “my” Mass, the Traditional Latin Mass, was buried when I was 28 yrs. old & I would never want to do that to someone else. The Novus Ordo Mass is the only one that many Catholics know.

I think that Pope Benedict wants both Masses to co-exist until one of them “takes over” naturally. I also believe that it’s possible that the very existence of the Latin Mass may bring back the sacrificial aspect, the Theology of Sacrifice into the Novus Ordo Mass. (I know, I know…it’s still the Novus Ordo, but I’m trying to follow the rules for this forum which say that we may not pit one Mass against the other.) :sad_yes::sad_yes:

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

I’m not the poster you were correcting, but I suggest rereading his comment in that light.

.

I suggest you re-read his comments and substititute EF where he says NO…and then tell me that is correct. The our Lord is not pleased with the EF. Especially if that is where you find God.

 

[Javl]

oh…well…you don’t like it. But don’t make the mistake of thinking that people don’t worship God at the NO. It is a valid Mass.

You want to do something constructive…try praying for the conversion of our seperated breathern.

No, I’m not saying that the NO is not valid, just very different and almost like a Protestant service. If you go to an EF Mass you’d immediately see the BIG difference in spirituality and worship between the two.

As for our separated brethren, I ( we all ) do pray for them, but many times I’m sure they’re either deaf to, or just ignore, the promptings of the Holy Spirit.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

P.S. Of all the converts to Roman Catholicism that I’ve spoken to, the majority have said that it was the spirituality of the EF Mass that first attracted them.

 

[Adeodatus]

I suggest you re-read his comments and substititute EF where he says NO…and then tell me that is correct. The our Lord is not pleased with the EF. Especially if that is where you find God.

That would just render the post nonsensical.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

A reminder about the rules:

If you want to discuss this topic:

1. speak about the liturgy with due honor, regardless of what form you prefer;
2. **DO NOT **pit one form against the other;
3. Refrain from labeling either the form or the individuals who appreciate one or the other.
4. Bullying will not be tolerated.

This was my point… I felt that the poster was stepping over the line.