Would you like to see a phasing out of the Novus Ordo Missae leading to a return to only the TLM?

[ProVobis]

If you observe Benedict the XVI, whom you sem to believe will restore the Church to the Tridentine rite has celebrated the mass using all of the above and seems to be enjoying himself.

Not only is he enjoying the celebration of the Eucharistic mysteries he is attracting thousands of Catholics and non Catholics.

Not that I think there’s anything wrong with it, but those that watch Mass on TV to “enjoy” themselves must have a difficult time distinguishing between entertainment and worship. If you and other Catholics think the Pope came to the US to put on a good show for everyone (you don’t see Lutheran or Baptist services being televised on CNN), then the Catholics here have a real problem and it has nothing to do with which liturgy is superior.

 

[saint_rafael]

If the church you follow is so holy, do you confess your malicious attack on the clergy, Pope, Cardinals, bishops, priests, deacons. . That is a sin you know. Do you receive our Lord Jesus after tearing down the Magisterium like this. Think about it. Please, for your sake.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

Deacon, you are utterly confused about the nature of the Magisterium. The Magisterium is not the clergy. The ordinary Magisterium is the Pope and bishops united to the Pope, when they speak on faith and morals and do it as infallible.
This includes dogmatic councils, sacred tradition, and dogma.

It is pretty sad to see Catholics comparing the agents in the Church to the magisterium. It shows a lack of catechisis. The Clergy have to uphold the magisterium and be united to it. They themselves as persons are not the magisterium.

The Church itself is holy and infallible. The agents of the Church are sinners and can fall into error. I suggest you read Pope Paul VI’s “Credo of the People of God.”

 

[ProVobis]

If the church you follow is so holy, do you confess your malicious attack on the clergy, Pope, Cardinals, bishops, priests, deacons.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

Pope, Cardinals, bishops, priests, maybe. But I wouldn’t want to incur the wrath of deacons. “Hell holds no greater fury…”

That is a sin you know. Do you receive our Lord Jesus after tearing down the Magisterium like this.

You must have seen some of your friends who tore down the pre-Vatican II Magisterium there yesterday at communion, yes?

 

[JReducation]

Not that I think there’s anything wrong with it, but those that watch Mass on TV to “enjoy” themselves must have a difficult time distinguishing between entertainment and worship. If you and other Catholics think the Pope came to the US to put on a good show for everyone (you don’t see Lutheran or Baptist services being televised on CNN), then the Catholics here have a real problem and it has nothing to do with which liturgy is superior.

On the contrary, I don’t believe the Pope came to put on a good performance. However, I do watch him on TV because I’m interested in everything that is related to the Pope and the Church. I’m not sure what you’re tyring to say.

Did I miss something?

JR

 

[ProVobis]

Did I miss something?
JR

Yes, the part where I didn’t accused you (te) of anything.

 

[JReducation]

Pope Paul VI did not issue the New Mass as infallible because he didn’t want to. He didn’t believe in papal infallibility. He had the keys but he didn’t use them.

Are you saying that Paul VI was a heretic? You’re walking a very dangerous path.

Pope Pius V, on the other hand, issued the Bull “Quo Primas” as infallible. He used his keys to bind up this doctrine forever and binded this for all future Popes. He said that the Tridentine Latin Mass must exist forever.

This was not a dogmatic statement or an ex cathedra statement. It was a statement of discipline. He was recognizing the value of the Tridentine form, not declaring a new dogma.

Benedict XVI calls it holy in the Motu Proprio. Whom shall we believe, you or Pope Benedict?

As the Rev. Deacon said, you’re way out there bordering on heresy denying papal teachings and accusing popes of being heretics.

Dangerous stuff

I believe that you really need to spend time in contemplative prayer and stop reading whatever you’re reading. Your spirit seems to be in greater need of help than your mind.

This is just a fraternal suggestion. Take it or leave it.

JR

 

[saint_rafael]

Are you saying that Paul VI was a heretic? You’re walking a very dangerous path.

This was not a dogmatic statement or an ex cathedra statement. It was a statement of discipline. He was recognizing the value of the Tridentine form, not declaring a new dogma.

Benedict XVI calls it holy in the Motu Proprio. Whom shall we believe, you or Pope Benedict?

Quo Primas was an infallible document. Here is Pope Pius V Ex-Cathedra statement:
**
“Let all everywhere adopt and observe what has been handed down by the Holy Roman Church, the Mother and Teacher of the other Churches, and let Masses not be sung or read according to any other formula than that of this Missal published by Us. This ordinance applies henceforth, now, and forever, throughout all the provinces of the Christian world”

“No one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should anyone dare to contravene it, let him know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.”**

As for Pope Paul VI, it is interesting that he hasn’t even been beatified. There is no movement for that. The Modern Conciliar Clergy won’t even go near that beehive. There are serious questions about his orthodoxy and the fact that he will go down in hisory as responsible for the blunder of the Novus Ordo.
There are also some “rumors” that I won’t mention because you people will die of a heart attack.
**
It will be up to a future Pope or Church Council to decide the fate of Pope Paul VI.**

 

[I_Believe]

Saint Rafael, I think you read the wanderer too much
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

I think Saint Rafael reads the writing on the wall.

 

[I_Believe]

Quo Primas was an infallible document. Here is Pope Pius V Ex-Cathedra statement:
**
“Let all everywhere adopt and observe what has been handed down by the Holy Roman Church, the Mother and Teacher of the other Churches, and let Masses not be sung or read according to any other formula than that of this Missal published by Us. This ordinance applies henceforth, now, and forever, throughout all the provinces of the Christian world”

“No one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should anyone dare to contravene it, let him know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.”**

Pretty straight forward I’d say.

There are also some “rumors” that I won’t mention because you people will die of a heart attack.

Forget the conspiracy theories. I think Fatima is what really scares them. It’s a shame they won’t comment on it when it’s mentioned.

 

[JReducation]

Quo Primas was an infallible document. Here is Pope Pius V Ex-Cathedra statement:
**
“Let all everywhere adopt and observe what has been handed down by the Holy Roman Church, the Mother and Teacher of the other Churches, and let Masses not be sung or read according to any other formula than that of this Missal published by Us. This ordinance applies henceforth, now, and forever, throughout all the provinces of the Christian world”

“No one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should anyone dare to contravene it, let him know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.”**

This is not a dogmatic statement. This is not the wording of a dogmatic statement.

There are also some “rumors” that I won’t mention because you people will die of a heart attack.

That’s up to God. The Church just canonizes, it does not decide a person’s faith.

You seem to have an aversion for all of the later popes.

I was thinking of you as I was listening to the Holy Father’s sermon when he quoted St. Peter and said to the laity “You are a royal priesthood chosen by Christ and you have made a significant contribution to the faith of this nation.” He also called he laity to become even more involved in the priesthood, religious life and lay ministry.

I believe that you called the “royal priesthood” the nonsense of theologians. Well here is the first Peter and the current Peter both calling the people of God nonsense.

You have a real hatred for the Church today. Hatred is not the heart of our faith. Our faith is built on love. Only when one loves can one see truth.

JR

 

[saint_rafael]

JR,

"This ordinance applies henceforth, now, and forever, throughout all the provinces of the Christian world"

That looks like a dogmatic statement. I don’t know what your defintion of forerver is.

When I talked about his fate, I was talking about his satus as a heretic. God has already decided his eternal fate.
I was saying it will be up to a Future Pope or Council to declare him a heretic.

As far as the “royal priesthood”, I agree with the Pope. The nonsense I said was going on, is the people who are equating the royal priesthood of the laity with the ordained priesthood, putting it on the same level. That’s nonsense. The ordained priesthood is an actual sacrament.

 

[Brian777]

A simple scripture quote would suffice here. “Judge not lest you be judged.” i have certainly seen judgments flying all over the place.
I almost want to come out with Rodney King’s line.
Prayers & Blessings
Deacon Ed B

accusing, judging, and condemning are all different things. It is one thing to accuse a man of heresy, it is another to condemn him to Hell for it. Only God can actually condemn a man for his sins, however the Church has always held heresy to be a mortal sin and therefore if one dies in it they will descend to hell, it is not jusging to say you are a heretic, and unless you accept the mercy of Jesus and come back home, you will lose your soul. To accuse, juadge, and then abondon someone is what Christ was against.

 

[Brian777]

saint rafael;3582232:

Quo Primas was an infallible document. Here is Pope Pius V Ex-Cathedra statement:
**
“Let all everywhere adopt and observe what has been handed down by the Holy Roman Church, the Mother and Teacher of the other Churches, and let Masses not be sung or read according to any other formula than that of this Missal published by Us. This ordinance applies henceforth, now, and forever, throughout all the provinces of the Christian world”

“No one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should anyone dare to contravene it, let him know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.”**

This is not a dogmatic statement. This is not the wording of a dogmatic statement.

If you’re referring to the rumours that he had a gay lover in his youth, that’s old news and has been discarded as not having credibility of any kind.

That’s up to God. The Church just canonizes, it does not decide a person’s faith.

You seem to have an aversion for all of the later popes.

I was thinking of you as I was listening to the Holy Father’s sermon when he quoted St. Peter and said to the laity “You are a royal priesthood chosen by Christ and you have made a significant contribution to the faith of this nation.” He also called he laity to become even more involved in the priesthood, religious life and lay ministry.

I believe that you called the “royal priesthood” the nonsense of theologians. Well here is the first Peter and the current Peter both calling the people of God nonsense.

You have a real hatred for the Church today. Hatred is not the heart of our faith. Our faith is built on love. Only when one loves can one see truth.

JR

What are the wordings of a Dogmatic statement? Just curious.

By the way im currently watching the Pope’s Mass from Yankee stadium. Utterly and without a doubt the most beautiful mass i have ever heard with the possible exception of the Solemn High Mass of the Assumption which i attended last August in Charleston, SC. If every Novus Ordo was celebrated this way (possibly with a change to ad orientem) and the TLM became just a little more widely used and conspicuous, I believe that would be a rebirth of the Roman Rite after almost 4 decades of the “smoke of Satan” clouding our vision. Praise be to God Almighty, Glory to God in His Angels and in His Saints!

PS. anybody know what Chant that was they sang during communion? it was short but beautiful. Oh now they singin a second one. awesome, awesome!

 

[I_Believe]

.

One thing I’ve finally come to know for sure. Both Traditionalists (holds hand up) and their persecutors are cherry pickers. We both look for sources to back up our opinions.

The difference is, the Traditionalists are picking the cherries that don’t rot. They are the “incorruptable” fruits, so to speak. We rely on “rock solid” (pun intended) catholic teaching.

The naysayers, pick the cherries that caused all this division in the first place. And of course, by their fruits they shall be revealed.

The Traditionalist will heed the message of Our Lady without question. The others will ignore it or atempt to “rationalize” it.

Embracing revolutionary changes is simply a bad idea folks. I mean, the Man who called the VII Council, even warned the bishops of this in his Veterum Sapientia, written in 1962. It was an Apostolic Constitution that commanded and decreed that not only were revolutionary changes not be embraced, they were not to even be discussed. Unlike Fatima, faith is not required to accept this decree. It simply must be read. And obeyed.

But, we have all this foolish "But most priests today are not fluent in Latin, so how can they pray the 1962 Mass " ? Well, if the bishops and semenaries would have remained in submission to the Papacy, we would not have these excuses would we ?

Those who defend VII can’t even refrain from picking cherries from the post Council years. They take a “if it isn’t forbidden, it must be ok” attitude. Statements like “the Smoke of Satan…” are ignored because it contradicts their defense of error(s). As is Fatima.

** Indeed, the true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries, nor innovators: they are traditionalists."
Pope St. Pius X **

 

[saint_rafael]

Watching the Papal Mass, you can see that the Pope wants it to be more reverent. He has started to place a crucifix on the altar, so it can seem like he is facing east and God. How sad!

Holy Father, just turn the altar around!

He celebrated the Mass Ad Orientem once in Rome.

I wish the Holy Father would just order that all Novus Ordo Masses be said Ad Orientem.

You can tell he knows the truth. He wants to be renconciled with tradition and that is why he started to put the crucifix in front of him. However, to be reconciled with tradition, you need Ad Orientem.

 

[EasterJoy]

Easterjoy,

Joseph Ratzinger has to know that he is no longer Cardinal Ratzinger, but the Pope, Vicar of Christ. He has more responsibilty now and is soley responsible for guiding the Church and one billion people. He is a shy humble man by nature, but he has to realize that the Papacy demands more action and he has to govern and discipline as prior Popes have guarded the Church.

If you don’t beileve that we have heretical clergy in the Church, you are living in a bubble or fantasy land. Look at the utter decadance of the archdiocese of Los Angeles in the case of Mahoney. Then you have other men like Cardinal Kasper who doesn’t believe in anything.
Pope John Paul II himself alluded to this in his sermon during the beatification of the Fatima children. He used Rev. 12:3-4. The 1/3 of stars refer to the clergy.

The Holy Spirit selected a fully capable man as Vicar of Christ. He obviously does not refrain from making sterner rebukes because he does not know how to do so. May I suggest that he has knowledge of his pastoral responsiblities that you do not? Perhaps you one who “has to realize” what is demanded of you?

I don’t believe you’ve met all these clergy that you so glibly denigrate in a public forum. I keep reading of these odd abuses being “the norm” that I have witnessed rarely, if ever. It is bad enough that so many good priests have been so glibly implicated in the shameful outrages of a few when the sins of sex abuse by clergy were publicized. How is it that people dare to wonder why priests have grown to dislike wearing clerical garb in public!?

If you want to say that too many teach or tolerate error, I don’t disagree with you, for error has inarguably been taught–and even more error chosen, though it has not been taught!–and any instances of that are too many. If you want to say that there are too many departures from the GIRM, I will agree. There shouldn’t be any. It is like the abuse scandals: the laity needs to be aware what constitutes abuse and that abuses do happen. It is not helpful nor even morally acceptable, though, to imply that men you do not know to have been unfaithful have failed the Church.

In trying to impress us all with how serious the situation is, you were using numbers that you just made up, aren’t you? There is not a poll or a survey anywhere that supports your contentions, are there? How do you possibly defend that?

As far as the “royal priesthood”, I agree with the Pope. The nonsense I said was going on, is the people who are equating the royal priesthood of the laity with the ordained priesthood, putting it on the same level. That’s nonsense. The ordained priesthood is an actual sacrament.

The priesthood, of course, confers faculties and a sacramental character which are unlike any other. All the same, baptism, which initiates us into the “royal priesthood” is also an “actual sacrament”!

Be very careful with your rhetoric, then. It is wrong and unnecessary to denigrate baptism in order to protect the priesthood.

 

[JReducation]

In answer to one of the questions as to what makes a declaration a dogmatic declaration, the wording has to include ther phrase “faith of the Church” It has to say that this is the faith of the Church. If you look at he infallible decrees the reference is always made to the faith of the Church.

This decree carries the weight of law. Which must be obeyed, except of succeeding popes. Popes are above the law. They are not above dogma, but they are above Church law. In essence, they are the law.

As to the mass facing the east (ad orientem), a Vatican spokesman said that the question had come up and that the Pope likes it, but the Vatican liturgists recommended against it. Cardianal Arenzi agreed that it could produce some “interesting” reactions. The Holy Father concurred.

Someone asked a question about the chant at the mass. The chant is what is called Plain Chant. It is different from Gregorian Chant introduced into the Church by the Benedictines and approved by Pope Gregory.

I do believe that we should hold our tongues when it comes to making such comments as “the devils smoke.” It is not only uncharitable, but not true. The Church has been going through a normal period of growth, soul searching and renewal. There have been mistakes and there will always be mistakes everytime you renew something or explore it more deeply. That’s not the devil. It’s human nature.

As to the Royal Priesthood not being equal to the Sacrament of Holy Orders, there is no dispute among theologians. However, the Sacrament of Holy Orders and the Sacrament of Baptism are equal sacraments. It is through Baptism that we become part of the Royal priesthood. The two sacraments are different in terms of the ontological realities which they confer on the individual, but their sacramental dignity can never be denied or separated. The Ordained Priesthood and the Royal Priesthood of the faithful cannot be separated. The Ordained Priesthood exists within the Royal Priesthood.

JR

 

[EasterJoy]

Watching the Papal Mass, you can see that the Pope wants it to be more reverent. He has started to place a crucifix on the altar, so it can seem like he is facing east and God. How sad!

Holy Father, just turn the altar around!

He celebrated the Mass Ad Orientem once in Rome.

I wish the Holy Father would just order that all Novus Ordo Masses be said Ad Orientem.

You can tell he knows the truth. He wants to be renconciled with tradition and that is why he started to put the crucifix in front of him. However, to be reconciled with tradition, you need Ad Orientem.

Now you’re reading the mind of the Pope, and feeling sorry that he does not know how to follow his own heart and conscience.

There is a word for this kind of commentary: projection.

 

[saint_rafael]

The priesthood, of course, confers faculties and a sacramental character which are unlike any other. All the same, baptism, which initiates us into the “royal priesthood” is also an “actual sacrament”!

Be very careful with your rhetoric, then. It is wrong and unnecessary to denigrate baptism in order to protect the priesthood.

I was in no way denigrating baptism. I was talking about those who equate the royal priesthood in Baptism with the sacrament of Holy Orders. The nonsense I rebuked was what Catechists and theologians have been saying for years, which is that the royal priesthood of the laity was acually part of the priesthood in the sacrament of Holy Orders. The error that both the royal priesthood and ordained priesthood make up the same sacrament.

 

[saint_rafael]

Now you’re reading the mind of the Pope, and feeling sorry that he does not know how to follow his own heart and conscience.

There is a word for this kind of commentary: projection.

I am not reading his mind. I am just stating what he himself has written many times in his writings on the liturgy. He talked about this in the “Spirit of the Liturgy”. He has always favored Ad Orientem. He Himself wrote the foreword for the book “Turning Towards the Lord.”

The natural symbolism of placing a crucifix in front of you is that you are turning towards God the east.

On February 16, The Tablet, a London weekly of good repute, published an article seeming to forecast Benedict XVI’s intentions about the Mass.

The source of this information was from a letter, written by Cardinal Ratzinger in June of 2003 to Professor Heinz Lothar Barth at the University of Bonn in Germany.
**
“I believe that in the long term the Roman Church must have a single Roman Rite…The Roman Rite of the future should be a single rite, celebrated in Latin or in vernacular, but standing completely in the tradition of the rite that has been handed down”.**