Why are we dividing ourselves?

[Saint_Gemma]

I disagree on a minor point. We do not have a right to attend the Extraordinary or Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite, we only have the freedom to do so. The term right implies that if His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI forced everyone to attend, for example, a Maronite Divine Liturgy, that Catholics would be justified in disobeying him by attending a Mass of the Roman Rite instead.

 

[Spiller]

Your listing does not include the Eastern Catholics…

 

[Spiller]

I disagree.
There can be no peace in the Church until the New Mass finally dies and we have complete restoration of the mass of all ages, the TLM.

Bishop Fellay got it right when he said that the death warrant for the New Mass was signed with Summorum Pontificum. That was not the Pope’s intention but it will be the result in the future.

While the New Mass is valid, many including myself, believe it is bad liturgy, **not sacred, and in no way was under the guidance of the holy spirit. **

My generation will lead the charge to kill the Novus Ordo within the next twenty years once everyone under forty flocks to the TLM.
The experiment failed. The Church should have listened to Pope Pius XII who believed the Church would commit suicide if it altered her liturgy.

“The day the Church abandons her universal tongue {LATIN} is the day before
she returns to the catacombs.” Pope Pius XII

"A day will come when the civilized world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God, that His Son is merely a symbol, a philosophy held by so many others, and in the churches Christians will search in vain for the red lamp where God awaits them, like Magdalen weeping before the empty tomb, “Where have they taken HIM?” – Pope Pius XII

:hypno:

How could anyone be THIS misled?

Anyone who actually believes this stuff must live a horribly bitter spiritual life right now and it’s only going to get worse worse for them through their lifetime. Very sad to witness.

For those of you who wonder why some view “traditionalists” as being odd and/or extreme, I sincerely suggest you print out the above posting and refer to it whenever that question hits you in the future.

 

[MelanieAnne]

I have a hard time figuring this out. For me, NO is what I am used to, but if TLM were available, I would not have a problem following the Mass.

The best analogy I can think of, one that is meaningful to me, is comparing the Mass I usually attend, where I am in the choir on Sunday morning ~ the traditional music Mass ~ to the “Life Teen” Mass that is Sunday evening.

The “Life Teen” Mass does not use the hymn book, they put the words to the songs on a large screen behind the altar. The music is very modern, the whole experience is very loud and casual. Of course part of the noise is just from all the people ~ the Life Teen Mass is always packed, and not just with teens. The time I made the mistake of going to that Mass I thought I was in the wrong church. It did not feel spiritual to me at all.

Those that love TLM are very passionate about it. Perhaps their reaction to another form of the Mass is similar to the reaction I had to the Life Teen Mass ~ perhaps the the spirituality is missing for them.

On the other hand, I agree with the OP that divisiveness is not good. When divisions erupt, I cannot help thinking how sorrowful Jesus must be. I’d rather go to the Life Teen Mass every time, if that’s what I had to do, than deliberately cause more sorrow for Jesus.

 

[Freshman88]

What Freshman88 is saying, I believe, is that the Novus Ordo, valid and sacred as it is, represents a rupture in the liturgical tradition of the Church. It fails to enunciate the Catholic faith as clearly as possible, and carries with it norms which are a dramatic break from the Church’s practice before the council.

As a consequence, we propose that the TLM is “better”, in that those who attend it will receive firmer Catholic catechesis and will have its sacrificial nature made clearer to them, their orentation brought more towards the Lord, and their faith made stronger. It is guaranteed “authentic liturgy”.

Along with this position comes the belief that the Novus Ordo, as it is practiced today, should be dramatically changed to bring it more in line with tradition. The altar should be turned around, Latin and gregorian chant should be introduced in line with the directives of the Second Vatican Council, strict guildlines for more traditional vestments should be created, the Roman Canon should be made mandatory and the optional prayers and room for “creative leeway” abolished. In addition to this, other enrichments from the extraordinary form might be considered, such as the introduction of the vastly preferable prayer for the conversion of Jews written by the Holy Father.

I really believe this to be a “middle of the road” position. Believe it or not, if I posted this on a traditionalist forum like fisheaters, I would be attacked for giving in to the post-conciliar “newchurch” by failing to distance myself fully from what is the Novus Ordo “monstrosity”, written by satanists and freemasons. I take heat from both sides

Exactly.

 

[dprewett]

I think the main problem is the fact that most people are not given the choice. TLM masses are hard to find. I go to a large parish with 3 Priests and we do not have one. I think this iss why most Traditionalits feel slighted and it seems the more liberal thinkers have made a lot of changes in the way parishes are run in order to try and appease protestants into coming back. It is correct that Mass is not about us but is worshiping God. I feel that Parishes if able should celebrate both Masses. It seems strange to me that in our Parish people fight this, are they afraid people will like the TLM more and stop attending the Mass they prefer?

 

[BamaRider]

My first Communion was in 1962, TLM Mass. I was glad to see it come back and approved by Rome. I remember in the 70s they would run you out on a rail if a priest tried it at his parish, and I didn’t understand why.

Having said that, I prefer the NO if said reverently, and with respect.

I think mixing Latin in the NO is a great compromise, and the best of both.

 

[consumedconvert]

I disagree on a minor point. We do not have a right to attend the Extraordinary or Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite, we only have the freedom to do so. The term right implies that if His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI forced everyone to attend, for example, a Maronite Divine Liturgy, that Catholics would be justified in disobeying him by attending a Mass of the Roman Rite instead.

Ah, astute observation. I might say we currently have the right, granted to us by the Holy Father until he sees fit to alter or take away those rights.

 

[consumedconvert]

Your listing does not include the Eastern Catholics…

Hmmm, I’m not familiar with the laws governing our Eastern Catholic brothers. But don’t they also have the right to attend the Latin OF or EF, just as we have the right or privilage of attending EC liturgies?

Assuming, of course, that they decided not to attend their own on a particular Sunday, either out o curiousity for what their Latin brothers do, or because there is no EC Church in their area (the nearest one to us is forty miles away).

CC

 

[saint_rafael]

The Wheat must be separated from the Chaff.

As painful as it is for the Church, the divisions will increase and get larger over the next couple of years.

The purification and chastisements from God must play out.

There are** two religions **in the Catholic Church. The last fifty years through negligence, sin, apostasy, and chastisement has allowed the weeds to continue to grow.
These are the times we live in.

There is no middle. The middle is no man’s land.
Tradition or Modernism. The war continues. There are only two sides.

 

[FAB]

The Wheat must be separated from the Chaff.

As painful as it is for the Church, the divisions will increase and get larger over the next couple of years.

The purification and chastisements from God must play out.

There are** two religions **in the Catholic Church. The last fifty years through negligence, sin, apostasy, and chastisement has allowed the weeds to continue to grow.
These are the times we live in.

There is no middle. The middle is no man’s land.
Tradition or Modernism. The war continues. There are only two sides.

I will pray for you. You have certainly lost the meaning of Christ message if you want to battle within the church and ignor the Magisteruim’s teaching. I truely feel sorry for those of you feel like this. You represent a true minority view no amount of pastoral care will heal your wounds.:console:

Peace,
FAB

 

[Freshman88]

I will pray for you. You have certainly lost the meaning of Christ message if you want to battle within the church and ignor the Magisteruim’s teaching. I truely feel sorry for those of you feel like this. You represent a true minority view no amount of pastoral care will heal your wounds.:console:

Peace,
FAB

Although I cannot speak for saint Rafael, I would like to point out that I agree with him, but I must clarify why.

There are elements within the Church that promote anti-Catholic ideas, whether it be with regards to the liturgy, theology or politics.

It certainly is not directed at the mainstream Church, but rather those extreme elements which push ideas both foreign and harmful to our faith.

 

[MelanieAnne]

Although I cannot speak for saint Rafael, I would like to point out that I agree with him, but I must clarify why.

There are elements within the Church that promote anti-Catholic ideas, whether it be with regards to the liturgy, theology or politics.

It certainly is not directed at the mainstream Church, but rather those extreme elements which push ideas both foreign and harmful to our faith.

What sorts of things do you mean?

 

[consumedconvert]

Although I cannot speak for saint Rafael, I would like to point out that I agree with him, but I must clarify why.

There are elements within the Church that promote anti-Catholic ideas, whether it be with regards to the liturgy, theology or politics.

It certainly is not directed at the mainstream Church, but rather those extreme elements which push ideas both foreign and harmful to our faith.

Two religions? Nope.

 

[Freshman88]

What sorts of things do you mean?

Anything rooted in enlightenment ideals… secularism, equality of religion, relativism, homosexual agenda, etc, etc. and which stand against the complete rule of Christ in all areas of life.

 

[Freshman88]

Two religions? Nope.

If they are promoting a view contrary to Christ, it certainly isn’t the Christian faith which motivates them.

 

[FAB]

There are elements within the Church that promote anti-Catholic ideas, whether it be with regards to the liturgy, theology or politics.

QUOTE]

As a Pilgrim Church, we are on a journey together. It is difficult to have a discussion with those who believe that much of Vatican II was as you say anti-Catholic. It also ignores the fact that revelation from the Spirit continues in the church today. We as mere mortals, need time to fully understand in many cases, this revelation. Yes there are mistakes made, but that is part of the process. To try to ignor the revelations of Vatican II, or somehow say that the magisterium was in error would also bring into question, the doctrine of infalabilty
To fully understand, we must have open hearts and minds.

Peace,
FAB

 

[Freshman88]

Freshman88;3705384:

There are elements within the Church that promote anti-Catholic ideas, whether it be with regards to the liturgy, theology or politics.

QUOTE]

As a Pilgrim Church, we are on a journey together. It is difficult to have a discussion with those who believe that much of Vatican II was as you say anti-Catholic. It also ignores the fact that revelation from the Spirit continues in the church today. We as mere mortals, need time to fully understand in many cases, this revelation. Yes there are mistakes made, but that is part of the process. To try to ignor the revelations of Vatican II, or somehow say that the magisterium was in error would also bring into question, the doctrine of infalabilty
To fully understand, we must have open hearts and minds.

Peace,
FAB

What does Vatican II have to do with? Certainly some take Vatican II out of context to promote their anti-Catholic stances, but that’s about the extent of it.

Furthermore, if this revelation you speak of contradicts the Church, it cannot be said to be part of the deposit of faith.

 

[FAB]

Anything rooted in enlightenment ideals… secularism, equality of religion, relativism, homosexual agenda, etc, etc. and which stand against the complete rule of Christ in all areas of life.

I think perhaps you are reading to many right wing conserative documents. As in any organization, there are the fringes that are pushing thier own agendas, but these issues that you site are niether to main stream of teaching of the Church.

Peace,
FAB

 

[rpp]

Freshman88;3705384:

There are elements within the Church that promote anti-Catholic ideas, whether it be with regards to the liturgy, theology or politics.

As a Pilgrim Church, we are on a journey together. It is difficult to have a discussion with those who believe that much of Vatican II was as you say anti-Catholic. It also ignores the fact that revelation from the Spirit continues in the church today. We as mere mortals, need time to fully understand in many cases, this revelation. Yes there are mistakes made, but that is part of the process. To try to ignor the revelations of Vatican II, or somehow say that the magisterium was in error would also bring into question, the doctrine of infalabilty
To fully understand, we must have open hearts and minds.

Peace,
FAB

I do not recall seeing where Freshman88 said that much of what the Second Vatican Council said or did was anti-Catholic. In fact, I do not really recall anyone on this thread mentioning Vatican II, in either a positive or negative manner. Can you point it out to me please?