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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 9

Author Topic: Avoid the Novus Ordo Mass, yes. Not every Catholic who attends it!  (Read 9646 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline josefamenendez

Re: Avoid the Novus Ordo Mass, yes. Not every Catholic who attends it!
« Reply #20 on: April 19, 2019, 06:01:09 PM »
Wow- it seems we are talking levels or degrees of Catholicity- I don't think it works that way.
Of course it's about the Faith, but it's also about validity.
How can an average Catholic remain Catholic without a valid Episcopacy, Priesthood and Sacraments? If these are in doubt aren't you just "playing Catholic"? Wasn't the VII rupture and ambiguity the greatest betrayer of our souls ever?
The Catholics that are in the Indult or the NO maybe individually saved saved by their personal faith (?), but certainly not by doubtful rites and sacraments. 
We have an FSSP parish 2 miles away from our home,  yet we travel 2 hrs once a month for a "basement" Mass with legitimate Sacraments. There really was no other choice here. 
Being in the FSSP is NOT a good place to be. You get the trappings of "tradition" without any assurance of valid sacraments. it's a fakeout. We were there. The Masses were well sung and beautiful, and the Chapel was amazing; the parish life was animated and interesting.But knowing what I know now, I realize that without absolute certainty of what I was receiving Sacramentally, I may as well have been at an Episcopalian service.
You may very well be Catholic and attend those rites, but for how long without the assurance of Sacramental Grace?
I don't think moving past the FSSP is just an upgrade- it's really everything.
Logged

Offline ByzCat3000

Re: Avoid the Novus Ordo Mass, yes. Not every Catholic who attends it!
« Reply #21 on: April 19, 2019, 06:01:28 PM »

Quote
Right, but he was minimizing the changes and arguing that those who lived during the 60s and 70s didn't think the changes were "that bad".  That's revisionist history.  Anyone who had an 8th grade understanding of the Faith knew that the new mass was more than just "different".  It was a revolutionary and shocking thing.  Those that quieted their consciences by claiming blind obedience knew that the changes were wrong.

Right, but even if they were wrong, the question still remains of in what way they're wrong. ie. do you consider them no longer Catholic, or merely in error and endangering their faith.  That seems to be what the OP is about, you seem to be saying the former and Matthew seems to be saying the latter.


Quote
The false idea that a person who stops going to church or switches to protestantism is to be "accepted as they are" because "who are (their family members) to judge".  How many families today accept the errors of other family members by their silence or do so for human respect?
 For my own part, I am a new convert (as I've mentioned.)  If I have kids some day and one them went Protestant, I would certainly make clear to them that I disapprove, that I seriously fear for their soul, and I would inform them that I intend to pray for their conversion.  So I definitely wouldn't just "accept it."  Would you go further than that, or is that about the same as you would do?  Would you refuse to have anything to do with them?


Quote
The same heretical mindset is promoted by V2 that any sincere person can be saved in any religion.Of course he didn't reject it.  But his understanding of BOD was not 100% orthodox, so his understanding of "no salvation" was faulty.  (By the way, this is why BOD was promoted to begin with by the Modernists in the 30s - to water down the "no salvation" doctrine, so they could usher in V2's new ecclesiology, to pave the way for their hoped-for, freemasonic 'one world religion').  The problem with BOD is that saints do mention it, but the Church has never defined it.  So having a faulty BOD belief is not the same as having a faulty faith due to the indult (in case that's where you were going with this).  Every V2 error has been soundly, clearly and absolutely rejected by a dogmatic statement in the past.  Not so with BOD - there's much misunderstanding and gray area.
To be honest, I'm not going much of anywhere in particular.  As I've mentioned, I'm a new convert, and I'm mostly here to learn.  I might state tentative opinions in the pursuit/interest of that end, but I'm not trying to prove myself right, or anyone else wrong, on this forum.  My goal here is primarily to ask questions, listen, and learn.

1: The reason I asked about Lefebvre is because he clearly saw the notion of "Outside the Church there is no salvation" as compatible with the notion that someone could visibly belong to a false religion and still be "inside the Church" somehow.  Your position seems to be that Lefebvre was wrong to say this, but that his erroneously saying so does not constitute either a denial of the dogma or sufficient to make him a heretic.  Given that that's the case, I'm not seeing why you wouldn't give the same charitable assessment to those in the indult who believe basically the same thing.  To be clear, I'm not saying there isn't a good reason, I'm just saying I don't understand what that reason would be.

2: Does even Vatican II say a sincere person can be saved in any religion?  I remember hearing Bishop Barron's whole interview with Shapiro when he said Vatican II says an atheist of good will can be saved according to Lumen Gentium.  And my initial reaction was "I have concerns about Lumen Gentium, but I don't think it says that."  And then I looked Lumen Gentium up, and sure enough, it doesn't say that.  I don't think *even* Vatican II says that someone can be saved without having any supernatural faith at all, furthermore, while Vatican II certainly leaves itself open to the interpretation that someone can in fact be saved while professing a false religion, I don't see how its impossible to read Lumen Gentium as compatible with the notion that if someone with no fault of their own followed the natural law, etc. that God would instead send an angel to such a person rather than leaving them ignorant.  Am I wrong about this?  And if so, why?  (To be clear, I'm not meaning this to be an apology for LG, as it seems to me that the wording was deliberately left very open ended, and that's concerning to me.) 
Logged

Offline forlorn

Re: Avoid the Novus Ordo Mass, yes. Not every Catholic who attends it!
« Reply #22 on: April 19, 2019, 06:10:03 PM »
Quote from: Pax Vobis on April 19, 2019, 05:19:12 PM
Firstly, that generation is mostly dead.  Secondly, i've talked to many in that generation and everyone knew that V2 was a change.  The new mass was such a stark, quick and violent rupture with the past that it shocked everyone.  No one could hide from the changes.  You either accepted them through "obedience" (knowing the changes weren't right), you accepted them because you were a liberal at heart who wanted an "easy" Church, or you walked away from the changes and became a Trad.
Anyone in their late 70s and older was probably catechised before V2 was finished, or before V2 reforms were put in place. And most NO masses are mostly the elderly these days, so it's quite a large proportion of people who still attend Mass regularly. The toning down and declawing of catechising in schools was a very gradual process too, my father who went to school after V2 was still catechised well in school and told all the "non-PC" things they'd be afraid to teach today(e.g EENS). So my grandparents had no reason to be concerned with what the Brothers were teaching him, and even in a scenario where the teaching had been toned down, most people would put that down to modernists refusing to teach properly rather than the Church actually abandoning its dogmas.

And people were shocked by the changes to the Mass, but the Church had decreed what the Church had decreed. For most people it was out of question to just stop going to Mass, and they'd be afraid of committing schism by attending societies such as the SSPX if they had even heard of them. For example, Tolkein famously continued to shout out Latin responses in Mass, so he was very upset with the new rite. But he kept attending the NO despite clearly preferring the old rite, and I believe it's for the reasons I listed.

Quote from: Pax Vobis on April 19, 2019, 05:19:12 PM
There are many more heresies of V2 than ecuмenism and BOD.  How about "religious liberty"?  How about no salvation outside of the Church (this is separate from BOD)?
I just named some examples. EENS is not separate from BOD, as BOD(in its modern incarnation at least - that people of non-Catholic religions can be saved) is the rejection of EENS. Or, at least in our view. The SSPX don't agree with that statement of mine.

Quote
Then there's the moral issues which have/will damn many others, even if they reject ecuмenism and BOD - NFP, false-annullments, gαy civil unions, voting for pro-choice candidates, condoning family members who apostasize and become pagan or protestant, accepting sex-ed in schools, accepting euthanasia, etc, etc.  All of these "social issues" are promoted by the local archdiocese.  Even if one attends an indult mass, you are exposed to these dangers to your faith, these temptations to sin, these temptations to compromise.  These dangers are not inconsequential.
None of those are actually teachings of even the Conciliar Church though, that was exactly my point and I've already addressed it. Why would someone stop attending their local parish Mass because some other diocese had some pro-gαy event or whatever? What does that have to do with the Mass
Logged

Offline ByzCat3000

Re: Avoid the Novus Ordo Mass, yes. Not every Catholic who attends it!
« Reply #23 on: April 19, 2019, 06:13:26 PM »
Quote
I just named some examples. EENS is not separate from BOD, as BOD(in its modern incarnation at least - that people of non-Catholic religions can be saved) is the rejection of EENS. Or, at least in our view. The SSPX don't agree with that statement of mine. 
But even if you're right about that, do you have the authority to determine that someone is a heretic because they disagree with you on that?

"I know the Church teaches the immaculate conception, but I just don't believe it."  If someone says that, they just clearly aren't a Catholic.  Like they're straight up denying a dogma.  That's clear.

"I believe that Outside the Church there is no salvation, but I disagree with your interpretation of it, [insert reason here]" seems way less clear, either way.

Logged

Offline forlorn

Re: Avoid the Novus Ordo Mass, yes. Not every Catholic who attends it!
« Reply #24 on: April 19, 2019, 06:20:06 PM »
Quote from: ByzCat3000 on April 19, 2019, 06:13:26 PM
But even if you're right about that, do you have the authority to determine that someone is a heretic because they disagree with you on that?

"I know the Church teaches the immaculate conception, but I just don't believe it."  If someone says that, they just clearly aren't a Catholic.  Like they're straight up denying a dogma.  That's clear.

"I believe that Outside the Church there is no salvation, but I disagree with your interpretation of it, [insert reason here]" seems way less clear, either way.
I wasn't making a statement of fact or calling anyone a heretic. I just stated what the modern BOD is and how it contradicts what most of us here interpret EENS to be, and then I even went on to say that the SSPX for example do not agree that BOD conflicts with EENS. We could argue until the cows come home about whether or not BOD is heresy, but it's completely irrelevant to this argument. The point is that what we would call the novelty of BOD is actually believed by a majority of Trads too, so it's a misrepresentation of the issue to paint it as Trad vs NO. 
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 9
« previous next »