Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 17

Author Topic: Email from Fr. MacDonald  (Read 13988 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Änσnymσus

  • Guest
Re: Email from Fr. MacDonald
« Reply #55 on: October 31, 2022, 02:39:28 PM »
Quote from: Änσnymσus on October 31, 2022, 02:00:16 PM
I have zero interest in doing your homework for you. If you don't know where to look the sspx archives are a great starting place. You are perhaps new to tradition? Otherwise these requests make no sense.

But in the interest of being helpful, please see His Excellency's EC #387, in which he states “Take for instance the Novus Ordo Mass. The New Rite as a whole so diminishes the expression of essential Catholic truths...that it is as a whole so bad that no priest should use it, nor Catholic attend it. ... f I say that the new Mass must always be avoided, I am telling the truth ....”

But even more plainly said by His Excellency was in a recording wherein he notes that while valid it is ILLICIT. Nothing illicit can give grace. He calls the New Mass "intrinsically evil" and that we must not attend.

The new Rite of Mass is evil according to His Excellency. Also according to Trent. Also according to +Lefebvre.

There is no defense for His Excellency's change of mind on this subject. He is too well educated and too well-formed to make this mistake. Either he was lying before when he said to the avoid the New Mass or he is lying now saying people can attend. But no man can serve two masters as Vigano says with respect to the New Mass and the Old Mass.

Most of this post is stuck in the same rut: Hewko discussing the rite, where Johnson is discussing the passage of grace.

It begins by quoting Williamson saying the new Mass must always be avoided, but overlooks qualifying that remark with the objective-subjective distinction (i.e., nobody should go to it, but there can be subjective reasons which permit it), as it necessarily must.

Let's let Greg Taylor explain it to us by quoting...Bishop Williamson (1996, nearly 20 years before Mahopac):

"When Archbishop Lefebvre said it [i.e., that Catholics can satisfy the Sunday obligation by attending the new Mass], he meant that the Novus Ordo Mass is objectively and intrinsically evil, but Catholics unaware of, or disbelieving in, that evil, because of the rite’s official promulgation, may subjectively fulfil their Sunday duty by attending the new Mass.”
https://thecatacombs.org/showthread.php?tid=4402 

What could be clearer?

We have Taylor quote mining in an attempt to highlight an alleged contradiction betwen Williamson and Lefebvre, but he ends up vindicating Williamson unwittingly, by explaining Williamson and Lefebvre see it the same way, per Williamson's 1996 explanation.

The post mentions grace once, but immediately conflates it with the rite (yet again), calling it "illicit," and concluding that "nothing illicit can give grace."  Need I point out ad nauseum that Johnson is speaking of the sacrament, while you continually lapse back to speaking of the rite?

Do you think Vigano believes noconciliarists receive grace from Holy Communion?



Logged

Änσnymσus

  • Guest
Re: Email from Fr. MacDonald
« Reply #56 on: October 31, 2022, 02:55:50 PM »
Quote from: Änσnymσus on October 31, 2022, 02:39:28 PM

Most of this post is stuck in the same rut: Hewko discussing the rite, where Johnson is discussing the passage of grace.

It begins by quoting Williamson saying the new Mass must always be avoided, but overlooks qualifying that remark with the objective-subjective distinction (i.e., nobody should go to it, but there can be subjective reasons which permit it), as it necessarily must.

Let's let Greg Taylor explain it to us by quoting...Bishop Williamson (1996, nearly 20 years before Mahopac):

"When Archbishop Lefebvre said it [i.e., that Catholics can satisfy the Sunday obligation by attending the new Mass], he meant that the Novus Ordo Mass is objectively and intrinsically evil, but Catholics unaware of, or disbelieving in, that evil, because of the rite’s official promulgation, may subjectively fulfil their Sunday duty by attending the new Mass.”
https://thecatacombs.org/showthread.php?tid=4402

What could be clearer?

We have Taylor quote mining in an attempt to highlight an alleged contradiction betwen Williamson and Lefebvre, but he ends up vindicating Williamson unwittingly, by explaining Williamson and Lefebvre see it the same way, per Williamson's 1996 explanation.

The post mentions grace once, but immediately conflates it with the rite (yet again), calling it "illicit," and concluding that "nothing illicit can give grace."  Need I point out ad nauseum that Johnson is speaking of the sacrament, while you continually lapse back to speaking of the rite?

Do you think Vigano believes noconciliarists receive grace from Holy Communion?





Good catch: How was that woman in Mahopac not among those who are "unaware of, or disbelieving in, that evil, because of the rite’s official promulgation?"

If so, subjectively she would be among those fulfilling their Sunday obligation at the new Mass, and retaining her good disposition, would receive an increase of sanctifyin grace at Holy Communion.

I'm not seeing the problem (unless like the other post states, this is a manufactured confusion erected to divide the resistance by playing upon the unlettered ignorance of the faithful, some of whom have bought into the ruse).
Logged

Offline de Lugo

Re: Email from Fr. MacDonald
« Reply #57 on: October 31, 2022, 03:01:58 PM »
Quote from: Änσnymσus on October 31, 2022, 02:55:50 PM
Good catch: How was that woman in Mahopac not among those who are "unaware of, or disbelieving in, that evil, because of the rite’s official promulgation?"

If M. Taylor says Msgr. Williamson was right in 1996, then how did he become wrong in 2015 or 2022?


:popcorn:
Logged

Änσnymσus

  • Guest
Re: Email from Fr. MacDonald
« Reply #58 on: October 31, 2022, 03:18:39 PM »
Quote from: Änσnymσus on October 31, 2022, 02:55:50 PM
Good catch: How was that woman in Mahopac not among those who are "unaware of, or disbelieving in, that evil, because of the rite’s official promulgation?"

If so, subjectively she would be among those fulfilling their Sunday obligation at the new Mass, and retaining her good disposition, would receive an increase of sanctifyin grace at Holy Communion.

I'm not seeing the problem (unless like the other post states, this is a manufactured confusion erected to divide the resistance by playing upon the unlettered ignorance of the faithful, some of whom have bought into the ruse).
I stand to be corrected but in the video didn't the woman ask about Novus Ordo Masses only during the week and elsewhere, that she was well aware of the Traditional Mass? If so, that plainly shows that she was not ignorant of the true Mass.
Logged

Änσnymσus

  • Guest
Re: Email from Fr. MacDonald
« Reply #59 on: October 31, 2022, 03:32:59 PM »
Quote from: Änσnymσus on October 31, 2022, 03:18:39 PM
I stand to be corrected but in the video didn't the woman ask about Novus Ordo Masses only during the week and elsewhere, that she was well aware of the Traditional Mass? If so, that plainly shows that she was not ignorant of the true Mass.

The 1996 criterion of Msgr. Williamson (which M. Taylor says was also the thinking of Msgr. Lefebvre) is not that one be ignorant of the traditional Messe, but that one is "unaware of, or disbelieving in, that evil, because of the rite’s official promulgation." 

From what I recall of that video, this description would certainly have fit the woman.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 17
« previous next »