What do you suppose she wants?

  • Thread starter Thread starter HOPEFUL_IN_UK
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

HOPEFUL_IN_UK

Guest
So… I was looking for information on TLM’s in Scotland and I came across a web site regarding such things. I noticed they were local and I called the number. I talked to a friendly woman who listened to me talk about why I was calling (I am feeling lonely and I miss the sort of community of people I knew in Cincinnati where I attended a very reverent NO Mass at a great parish.) She told me that we ought to meet. I am currently living in a town where, if you’re not born and raised there, they really can’t be bothered and I’m feeling lonely. So, that sounded great. I told her, “I’m going to the (licit) Mass at Sacred Heart tomorow…” and she said, “Oh, no! Don’t go there! Meet me at St. Andrew’s chapel. It’s an SSPX Mass and it’s just much better. All you’ll get at Sacred Heart is Latin prayers with the same old watered-down homily.”

I told her that I wasn’t so sure about that. She assured me that she’s looked into it and it was OK to go. I agreed to go, “unless my husband objects.” DH and I talked about it, and I read about stuff (mostly on here, the Ask the Apologist section) and decided not to risk it. I emailed her and told her that I would be going to the (indult) Mass, instead. I told her that I had concerns and schism and stuff and would just prefer not to go.

By the time she responded - very friendly - I’d already attended the Mass and had a very positive experience. I told her that we would probably be going as a family, but also attending the NO Mass locally on other days. She wrote back saying she was glad I enjoyed the Mass, but was very surprised that I’d even want to attend a NO Mass at all. She said that, while it’s valid, it would be like buying a cut of meat because the butcher said it wouldn’t poison me, rather than because it was delicious. She also gave reasons why I shouldn’t worry about SSPX and said she wanted to meet and said “I won’t try to convince you to attend SSPX.”

So, I agreed to meet her. I called her last night to set up a time. We had the weirdest conversation. I think I was making her angry because I just kept insisting that I think it makes more sense to go to the indult Mass (which is less than two miles from the SSPX, at the exact same time) because it’s better to be obedient. She went so far as to start almost yelling about the problems she has with the priest who says the Mass at Sacred Heart. She said that he’s just another NO priest who recites the Latin Mass and that he has no reverence for the Eucharist. (Apparently, he once participated in an ecumenical prayer service where people said and did things she didn’t like and, along with a group of forty priests, he didn’t publically object.) She agreed that he doesn’t say anything heretical in his homilies, but the homilies at SSPX are just so much better and so you get “the whole package.”

I just kept saying that I think it’s better to attend the licit Mass and that, honestly, I’d rather attend a NO Mass than support disobedience. I also told her that I’m not comfortable with some of the rebellious element that are attracted to the SSPX - referencing an article on her own web site that deplored how a lot of SSPX leaders are rejecting Pope Benedict XVI’s revised prayer for the conversion of Jews.

She got irate. She went on and on, telling me all the sins and faults of the Archbishop and his predecessor. I found this upsetting, I guess. I kept saying that obedience was always pleasing to God and that if the bishops are wrong, they’ll take the rap. She said that she was hurt and surprised to hear me say that I’m going to give tacit consent to the schism she says the mainstream bishops are in.

In short, it was a conversation very much like the debates and arguments you see on here… only, at the end of it, she was still insistent that we meet for coffee this Saturday afternoon.

I am not expecting this to be a friendly get-together, after all. I’ve been in situations, before, when someone has been really keen to meet up with me even though we obviously aren’t hitting it off personally… when that person was trying to sell me Amway or talk me into going to their particular evangelical church. In other words, I feel like she wants to recruit me.

Why do you suppose that is? What do you think she wants?! Obviously, none of you can be expected to know that. I suppose I could go, myself, to find out what she wants. I fully expect her to show up with plenty of printed material for me to read. :rolleyes: I think she thought, when I first called her, that I was a total naive lamb who, annoyed with her parish priest over a trifling matter and professing homesickness for the thriving orthodox Catholic community she had back home, was in need of direction.

It just seems very odd to me… I’m attending a TLM at a diocesan parish. She even said, herself, that the pastor there is “one of the best priests in Glasgow.” (A visiting priest says the Latin Mass.) It’s a parish that desperately needs members. It’s beautiful and old and very historic (Celtic FC was born in this parish). It’s also shabby and crumbling and the pastor is so prayerfully fighting to keep it together, while around him the neighborhood Protestants stage frequent Orange Marches, vandalize the building, and verbally harrass him. Una Voce Scotland supports this parish and I met some lovely people there.

Why are people choosing to go to the SSPX chapel, two miles away, at the same time? They’re not a parish community. They don’t even have a proper pastor. Priests from England drive up on weekends and scoot around Scotland, dispensing Masses.

This all confuses and saddens me. Meanwhile, I’m not sure if I should cancel this coffee meeting with this woman. I have a bad feeling about it.
 
I say you should cancel.

She is trying to pressure you to do something you have decided not to do.

And looking at your post I have not noticed you mentioning anything good about this new contact -and that should be the deciding factor.
 
You are right… I’ve been doing more and more reading about this subject. That’s one reason why I’ve been more active on here the past week, and I’m also reading all sorts of web sites and links.

I feel kinda bad for my post (the OP of this thread), now, because maybe it’s gossipy or scandalous, but I really am pretty freaked out about all of this.

I like the Tridentine liturgy just fine. I agree with many other people about the advantages of it - it seems to go hand-in-hand with a more reverent atmosphere, etc. However, my main objective is to find some conservative/orthodox Catholics in this area who are enthusiastic about being Catholic and want to talk about their faith outside of church. I guess I’m hoping to find that in the self-defining “Traditionalist” crowd. But, I really do fear the crazy. Where does prefering the Tridentine Mass leave off and start to cross the line to schism? A grudging, “Yeah, the New Mass is valid, but it’s not good” makes me nervous. Especially when someone feels like they have to argue with me just because I say that will be attending weekday Mass in my neighborhood. That’s just weird.

The more I read, the more freaked out I am getting. I know that not all Traditionalists are freaks, but the freaks are so noisy that they seem to dominate the discourse with their crazy conspiracy theory talk.

Where is the appeal in thinking that the Church is so fragile that only a “remnant” of faithful exist while the Pope and the bishops all go careening off a cliff?! I’m a convert to Catholicism… I didn’t go to all that trouble just to be a protestant, again! :mad:
 
I say go, it can’t hurt. Remain calm, set the example (so hard to do at times, I know). She probably won’t freak out publicly and face to face. It’s easier to lose your cool online and on the phone, different in person. Trying to “recruit” you? Well, if she believes what she’s saying, she does have an obligation. If you believe she’s in error, you’re obliged to point it out (as you have). There’s an offer of friendship with a Catholic woman who holds the same beliefs, the same truths. Make it clear that you don’t want to argue this, but discuss. Staying calm in a discussion like this is vital to both sides. Invoke the Holy Spirit together before any discussion, pray three Aves, and go from there. If you still disagree, maybe a friendship can be gained. Many Blessings!
 
Where is the appeal in thinking that the Church is so fragile that only a “remnant” of faithful exist while the Pope and the bishops all go careening off a cliff?! I’m a convert to Catholicism… I didn’t go to all that trouble just to be a protestant, again! :mad:
Well, Jesus warns in the Bible that this will happen, and many of the Saints do as well. 😦 Sad but true. This happened in the beginning of the Church…the Pope and approx. 80% of the Bishops supported the Arian heresy…the Church didn’t fall then, and the Church won’t fall now.
 
There may be dwindling numbers… but they won’t be outside the Vatican. There may even be heretics WITHIN the Vatican… but the locus of the magisterium will not be outside it. (Even if the Pope needs to move house to Avignon or something.)

If the Pope actually goes so far as to be on the outside of that… then the whole thing is for naught.

Could you give me a link to where the Pope supported the Arian heresy? Sorry to run you around like this, but I have to ask.
 
I say bring her on here at Catholic Answers. Sounds like a gold mine of information she could bring to us.
 
There may be dwindling numbers… but they won’t be outside the Vatican. There may even be heretics WITHIN the Vatican… but the locus of the magisterium will not be outside it. (Even if the Pope needs to move house to Avignon or something.)

If the Pope actually goes so far as to be on the outside of that… then the whole thing is for naught.

Could you give me a link to where the Pope supported the Arian heresy? Sorry to run you around like this, but I have to ask.
The thing with the Pope Liberius (first pope *not *canonized:eek: ) is that there’s debate on whether or not he truly supported the heresy, or if he just went along with it because he was weak/under duress. Pope Honorius was excommunicated for simply *tolerating *heresy. I have to go to bed pretty quick, but I will look for some links…most of my information comes from books, so it’s sometimes hard to find the reference online (especially when I can’t remember which book:blush:).

Jesus said that the apostasy will be so great that, if possible, the elect (saints of heaven) would be deceived. The Freemasons have acknowledged (though they say today that it’s from a politcal standpoint) that the way to “destroy” the Church is through obedience.

The way I look at it, St. Peter goofed in a few things:
  1. tried to turn Jesus away from the Passion (good intentions)
  2. drew the sword (again, good intentions)
  3. ran away from the Lord (with the others…cowardice)
  4. denied Christ three times (and again, cowardice)
At the Crucifixtion, who was present with Jesus and His Blessed Mother? Of the Apostles, the bishops, one. Of the disciples, the laity, three, wasn’t it? That’s a small number, when we consider that at least 72 were sent out to do some preaching.

My point is, it happened then and the Church still stands. It’s not as “big a deal” as some make it. I mean, it is a big deal, but it shouldn’t be as damaging to the faith of some as it is. Some think “Well, if JPII was wrong about this, then the Church is just one among many,” and some say “We have no pope because he was wrong about this or that.” The SSPX are really the middle ground in this. Some don’t express it well, or are too extreme. Well, there are extremists everywhere, even among those “in union with Rome.”

I was going to say something else but it slipped my mind. I must be really ready for bed. I’ll look for the links and post them when I find them.

Does any of this make sense? God Bless.
 
Could you give me a link to where the Pope supported the Arian heresy? Sorry to run you around like this, but I have to ask.
And this, my friend, is a very good question. There is no proof of this. St. Anastasius (on who actually lived during his lifetime) called him a champion of orthodoxy.
 
I’ll let Latinmasslover get a night’s sleep and see what she can come up with. She’s being a really good sport about all of this and I do appreciate it. (LML, if you’re not a woman, I do apologize! I think I’ve gotten that in one of your posts, but I may be wrong.)
 
The thing with the Pope Liberius (first pope *not *

canonized:eek: ) is

This is another point that is debatable. Denzinger’s lists him as Pope St. Liberius. You’ll also find many links to him being called that.
The way I look at it, St. Peter goofed in a few things:
  1. tried to turn Jesus away from the Passion (good intentions)
  2. drew the sword (again, good intentions)
  3. ran away from the Lord (with the others…cowardice)
  4. denied Christ three times (and again, cowardice)
 
I wouldn’t go, and her reasoning is suspect, if you ask me. I’d rather buy meat guaranteed free from poison than delicious meat (not guaranteed free from poison), but anyway…

If you are talking about Sacred Heart Church, Bridgeton, then this is a proper TLM according to the 1962 Missale Romanum; more info here.

For what it’s worth, I live in Edinburgh, and am at a regular at St Andrew’s (Ravelston) where the (former indult) TLM is celebrated each Sunday.

I can understand travelling some distance to go to Mass - I know once gentleman who travels from Aberdeenshire each Sunday - but not when there is a TLM just round the corner.
 
That’s the one I went to!

I still call it “indult” because it’s easier to type than “diocesan-approved” and less contentious than “licit.” Well, sometimes I use “licit.”

I am actually saddened that people won’t go two miles further (after driving long distances to get to Glasgow) in order to get “meat guaranteed not to poison.” Good point, btw.

(Oh, and I’ll bet you know who I’m talking about in this thread… :rolleyes: )
 
Are you prepared to get up and leave if she shows up with another person or more to try and “convince” you??

Are you prepared to stick to your guns and tell her that when Pope Benedict XVI resolves the SSPX “situation”, you will follow his lead.

Are you prepared to tell her that even though her choice of liturgy to meet the Sunday obligation may be valid, it is not permitted when the EF or the NO is available to you…period.

If so, go, and like another suggested, encourage her to join the CAF. If she objects or demeans this site, it should give you a pretty good idea that she is totally close minded. So leave her in God’s hands.
 
Methinks latinmasslover is a closet schismatic, supporter of the SSPX. 😦
 
Oh! It’s HER!!!??? 😉
Yeah… her.

I just got an email off her in which she implores me to read some link and then promises to not try and convince me to change my mind.

I only called her because I was feeling lonely and hoping to find some other orthodox Catholics. I didn’t read the web site carefully enough, or was blind to the red flags that should have been so obvious. It was only after she started trying to talk me into SSPX that I clued in… and although she’s saying that she thinks the licit EF is a good place for me at the moment, it’s clear that she expects me to be taking just the first step towards attending SSPX.
 
Are you prepared to get up and leave if she shows up with another person or more to try and “convince” you??

Are you prepared to stick to your guns and tell her that when Pope Benedict XVI resolves the SSPX “situation”, you will follow his lead.

Are you prepared to tell her that even though her choice of liturgy to meet the Sunday obligation may be valid, it is not permitted when the EF or the NO is available to you…period.

If so, go, and like another suggested, encourage her to join the CAF. If she objects or demeans this site, it should give you a pretty good idea that she is totally close minded. So leave her in God’s hands.
I’ve already told her those things. I am quite sure that if the Pope wanted us to know it was OK to go to their Masses, it would be broadcast LOUD and CLEAR. I do think he sympathizes with some of the people involved. I also think that he’s trying to move carefully because, frankly, there are some people who don’t wanna be reconciled.

More and more, I am becomming convinced that there are a lot of closet sedevacantists hiding out in there. As the obstacles to attending licit EF masses are removed, they’ll be forced out into the open.
 
Methinks latinmasslover is a closet schismatic, supporter of the SSPX. 😦
Well, certain topics here are banned from discussion and some people may not feel comfortable openly stating their positions.

You want my honest opinion? I think a lot of perfectly nice people have gone to the SSPX over the years, in search of good liturgy and in order to escape the liberal nonsense that is truly prevalent in so many parishes. Since access to indult EFs is often limited, these people were pretty much shoved to the side and made to feel marginalized… which left them as easy pickin’s for a lot of truly rebellious people. Just like people who fall prey to cults.

Now, you’ve got situations where the two options sit SIDE BY SIDE and people are staying at the illicit Masses! I think that’s because they’ve been brainwashed into thinking that anything that has the approval of the Vatican must be wrong. They’ve been poisoned against the Pope just as completely as someone raised in the Church of Christ (fundementalist.)
 
You want my honest opinion? I think a lot of perfectly nice people have gone to the SSPX over the years, in search of good liturgy and in order to escape the liberal nonsense that is truly prevalent in so many parishes. Since access to indult EFs is often limited, these people were pretty much shoved to the side and made to feel marginalized… which left them as easy pickin’s for a lot of truly rebellious people. Just like people who fall prey to cults.
I would certainly agree with you there. But now that there is the motu proprio and a framework to ensure access to the Extraordinary Form, there is no “excuse” for marginalisation and/or drifting. And yes, it will take effort on both “trad” and “liberal” sides alike to ensure that everyone keeps talking.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top