What is the best argument to promote the TLM?

[SpiritusSanctus]

have you actually read the documents? Or, for example, the documents of Trent?

There is nothing to divide. The Holy Spirit guides the Church, and when the Church speaks as Magisterium (and Vatican 2 certainly fits within the definition), then if one does not understand the intent or meaning of the documents, one goes back to the fact that the Church cannot err in teaching about the faith or morals. As both John Paul 2 and Benedict 16 have said and said repeatedly, the documents must be interpreted in light of the 2000 year Tradition of the Church. Implicit in that statement is that they can be so interpreted.

The fact that various individuals - some theologians and a lot of laity - can’t seem to find their way through it is not proof of much of anything other than that they either don’t get it, or don’t want to. It helps to keep in mind that many of the heresies in the past were due to some theologians not getting it. Putting one’s trust in a theologian or a lay person, no matter how good they may sound, as against the Magisterium of the Church is not a good bet.

Ok, so if we’re going by the 2000+ year Tradition of the Church, then why are we accepting what was allowed at Vatican II? If we’re going to go by Tradition, then we need to move away from what was done at Vatican II and start going by what the Church before Vatican II said on such matters.

As for the documents of Vatican II, like I said, nowhere in those documents will you find a word of what they were really doing. Trent’s documents actually gave detail.

 

[pnewton]

I’ll agree with you to the extent it is difficult to promote the TLM in an established church where people are basically set in their ways and would see the TLM as a threat. However, churches who are devoted 100% to the old liturgy, such as the SSPX or the Institute, seem to have little problem in drawing attendees.

My parish too has no problem with attendance other than crowding. Many parishes are I know also facing overcrowding issues. I think looking at those who reall pack them in is one of the hesitancies that a priest may have with a TLM. Where Masses are already bursting and SRO, the fact that SSPX have well attended Masses is not a big factor.

 

[Timothysis]

Ok, so if we’re going by the 2000+ year Tradition of the Church, then why are we accepting what was allowed at Vatican II? If we’re going to go by Tradition, then we need to move away from what was done at Vatican II and start going by what the Church before Vatican II said on such matters.

Didn’t you read what he said? Both Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI have said that the documents of Vatican II must be read in the light of Tradition. Do you even understand what that means? It means anything related in matters of faith or morals must be held in the same light of Tradition as the Church has always held, be it pre or post Vatican II. There is no difference between the two.

As for the documents of Vatican II, like I said, nowhere in those documents will you find a word of what they were really doing. Trent’s documents actually gave detail.

I take it, then, that you have not and will not read any of the document of Vatican II. I ask you, do you not see the absurdity in denouncing things you have not ever read? Your penchant for conspiracy theories is fine for a laugh but it does not make you appear as one who is knowledgeable or consistent in the things you write.

 

[JamestheOlder]

Is this a game? Do we need box scores or something to tell who is winning?

If you like the TLM, enjoy it. If you like the NO, enjoy it. Only the Roman Rite is having this “game” of one-ups-man-ship. Give it a rest and try to worship God the best way YOU can.

Grow up, as the Church Herself has. Be GLAD there are two forms so they may by enjoyed by more.

I attended the TLM for longer than some of you have been alive. I now worship at a NO Parish and enjoy it thoroughly, especially the devotion shown to the Eucharist by young people at the LifeTeen Mass.

God bless you all! Now, go get a life!

 

[Timothysis]

Is this a game? Do we need box scores or something to tell who is winning?

If you like the TLM, enjoy it. If you like the NO, enjoy it. Only the Roman Rite is having this “game” of one-ups-man-ship. Give it a rest and try to worship God the best way YOU can.

Grow up, as the Church Herself has. Be GLAD there are two forms so they may by enjoyed by more.

I attended the TLM for longer than some of you have been alive. I now worship at a NO Parish and enjoy it thoroughly, especially the devotion shown to the Eucharist by young people at the LifeTeen Mass.

God bless you all! Now, go get a life!

Ouch!!! Everything you’ve said is right, of course. I once had a priest tell me that “the Church is only as small as people make it.” Based on some of the comments here it must be minuscule!

 

[ProVobis]

Where Masses are already bursting and SRO, the fact that SSPX have well attended Masses is not a big factor.

It is to me. Personally I don’t like packed Masses, either OF or EF.

 

[mick321]

Although some solid arguments have been expressed, most of you are missing the obvious.

Timothysis and OTJM are not likely to attend the TLM under any circumstance.

Prove me wrong gentlemen.

I dare you.

 

[Layman]

Is this a game? Do we need box scores or something to tell who is winning?

If you like the TLM, enjoy it. If you like the NO, enjoy it. Only the Roman Rite is having this “game” of one-ups-man-ship. Give it a rest and try to worship God the best way YOU can.

Grow up, as the Church Herself has. Be GLAD there are two forms so they may by enjoyed by more.

I attended the TLM for longer than some of you have been alive. I now worship at a NO Parish and enjoy it thoroughly, especially the devotion shown to the Eucharist by young people at the LifeTeen Mass.

God bless you all! Now, go get a life!

The N.O. and the TLM are different. We’re discussing their merits and demerits in the Traditional Catholicism sub-forum.

Thing is, up to recently, very few people could attend a TLM at all. It’s still a rarity, especially a sung Mass. As for a sung Easter Triduum, I just realised I attended one of the few in the entire United Kingdom recently.

So you’re lucky you could attend it for many years.

Thanks to post-Vatican II teaching, now most Catholics aren’t educated enough to know what they’re seeing at such a Mass.

 

[ProVobis]

I attended the TLM for longer than some of you have been alive.

Sorry that it was such a struggle for you.

I guess I like the OF because I don’t have to do anything, just move my mouth.

 

[Timothysis]

Although some solid arguments have been expressed, most of you are missing the obvious.

Timothysis and OTJM are not likely to attend the TLM under any circumstance.

Prove me wrong gentlemen.

I dare you.

You have been proven wrong on this little tantrum before. Do us all a favor and grow up.

 

[SpiritusSanctus]

Didn’t you read what he said? Both Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI have said that the documents of Vatican II must be read in the light of Tradition. Do you even understand what that means? It means anything related in matters of faith or morals must be held in the same light of Tradition as the Church has always held, be it pre or post Vatican II. There is no difference between the two.

I take it, then, that you have not and will not read any of the document of Vatican II. I ask you, do you not see the absurdity in denouncing things you have not ever read? Your penchant for conspiracy theories is fine for a laugh but it does not make you appear as one who is knowledgeable or consistent in the things you write.

The Vatican II documents may have seemed Traditional, but Vatican II was far from Traditional. No, I won’t read the documents you speak of because they don’t say anything about what they were really doing and I already know what it was they were really doing. Reading those documents that don’t even reveal anything would be a waste of time.

 

[Ockham]

Ouch!!! Everything you’ve said is right, of course. I once had a priest tell me that “the Church is only as small as people make it.” Based on some of the comments here it must be minuscule!

Then why do you need to continue this incessant defence of the NO? It is no surprise that many people who prefer the TLM don’t like the NO. Your style of posting here isn’t tolerated in the L&S forum I can promise you.

 

[Lujack]

Although some solid arguments have been expressed, most of you are missing the obvious.

Timothysis and OTJM are not likely to attend the TLM under any circumstance.

Prove me wrong gentlemen.

I dare you.

Are we back to this again?

 

[Lujack]

Then why do you need to continue this incessant defence of the NO? It is no surprise that many people who prefer the TLM don’t like the NO. Your style of posting here isn’t tolerated in the L&S forum I can promise you.

Maybe because he likes it? The Traditional Catholic forum does not exist as a private “I have the Ordinary Form” club, it exists as a resource for people who are interested in the Extraordinary Form and the things most commonly associated with it. People who are interested in learning about the EF are no less welcome here than people who have found an FSSP parish to attend.

If someone was ripping the EF as a bad Mass in the Liturgy and Sacraments forum, I’d have no doubt that you’d be in the thread protesting in its defense. Furthermore, there are those of us who are interested in the EF and would like to learn about it without having to wade through bashing of the form of the Mass that we attend every Sunday. And you don’t need to bash the OF to appreciate the EF.

 

[Lujack]

The Vatican II documents may have seemed Traditional, but Vatican II was far from Traditional. No, I won’t read the documents you speak of because they don’t say anything about what they were really doing and I already know what it was they were really doing. Reading those documents that don’t even reveal anything would be a waste of time.

Who are “they” and what was it that “they” were “really doing”? And if you haven’t even read the documents of Vatican II, how can you comment on it?

 

[SpiritusSanctus]

Maybe because he likes it? The Traditional Catholic forum does not exist as a private “I have the Ordinary Form” club, it exists as a resource for people who are interested in the Extraordinary Form and the things most commonly associated with it. People who are interested in learning about the EF are no less welcome here than people who have found an FSSP parish to attend.

If someone was ripping the EF as a bad Mass in the Liturgy and Sacraments forum, I’d have no doubt that you’d be in the thread protesting in its defense. Furthermore, there are those of us who are interested in the EF and would like to learn about it without having to wade through bashing of the form of the Mass that we attend every Sunday. And you don’t need to bash the OF to appreciate the EF.

What he’s trying to say I think is that Traditional Catholics have a right to voice their opinion on the TLM and NO since this is the Traditional section.

 

[SpiritusSanctus]

Who are “they” and what was it that “they” were “really doing”? And if you haven’t even read the documents of Vatican II, how can you comment on it?

“They” as in Paul VI and the people he hired to run the show at Vatican II. I’ve seen a few sentences of the documents of Vatican II, but they don’t reveal what really went on. Vatican II never gave a valid description of what they were really doing. The words Of Archbishop LeFebvre and those who were directly involved with Vatican II are what I go by and thus how I know what went on.

What really went on was a modern reform of the Church in an attempt to draw the Catholic faith closer to protestant faiths by gathering suggestions from protestant observers. Thus why things such as CITH, EMs, and the removal of altars among many other things took place at Vatican II.

 

[Ockham]

And you don’t need to bash the OF to appreciate the EF.

You are correct there. However, most people have reasons why they prefer one over the other and that’s when the NO troops launch their counter-attack.

 

[Timothysis]

Then why do you need to continue this incessant defence of the NO? It is no surprise that many people who prefer the TLM don’t like the NO. Your style of posting here isn’t tolerated in the L&S forum I can promise you.

I maintain an "incessant defence of the NO" against those who would misstate and even lie about what exists at the heart of it. Is that so bad?

And if you don’t like my “style of posting,” then perhaps you shouldn’t read it, friend.

 

[Timothysis]

“They” as in Paul VI and the people he hired to run the show at Vatican II. I’ve seen a few sentences of the documents of Vatican II, but they don’t reveal what really went on. Vatican II never gave a valid description of what they were really doing. The words Of Archbishop LeFebvre and those who were directly involved with Vatican II are what I go by and thus how I know what went on.

You do, of course, know that Archbishop LeFebvre signed the documents of Vatican II, don’t you?

What really went on was a modern reform of the Church in an attempt to draw the Catholic faith closer to protestant faiths by gathering suggestions from protestant observers. Thus why things such as CITH, EMs, and the removal of altars among many other things took place at Vatican II.

Once again, you couldn’t be more wrong. If you actual took the time to read the documents you would see that none of them called for the things you describe. Perhaps you should actually know about the subject at hand before you post on it?