Author Topic: Tired of being forced into home-aloneism (Read 6925 times)

Anna1959 · « **Reply #30 on:** October 27, 2011, 10:51:41 AM »

Yep, Paterson is like going to NYC for me (about 2 hours away). If I knew how to drive and could afford a car, I would go anywhere, more or less, to hear Mass. But not being able to drive really complicates things.

When I was a teenager I used to travel on 3 buses for a couple of hours to hear Mass down by the airport, at the Ramada Inn there (this was in the 1970s when Masses were held in motel banquet rooms.)

Part of the problem too for me now is I'm much older and have health issues that make public transit hard too due to my bad knees.

I just CAN'T understand WHY in a major city with a lot of Catholics still in it, that it is like this. Its not like I live in Timbuktu!

Back in the 1970s, there was an independent sede TLM held in the storefront of a man named Ed Heffernan....he renamed his store "The Ven. Anna Catherina Emmerich Shrine, and he would collect and store statues, altar rails, etc that churches were throwing out due to the changes of V2. He had an elderly priest live there who said Mass. But once the priest passed away, it all fell apart. But if that was still functioning, the place where it was is only 20 mins from my home, in Feasterville, PA.

LordPhan · « **Reply #31 on:** October 27, 2011, 11:15:42 AM »

Quote from: Caminus

Quote from: Stephen Francis
@LordPhan:

If I am guessing the correct 'big city' of her origin, West Caldwell is two hours from her. It's an hour from ME, and I live in NJ. Even though I have a car, it's a strain to get there because I only work a few hours a week and cannot afford gas when it's over $3 a gallon here and my car only gets 17 MPG.

@Caminus:

You can't prove that I'm wrong, so you just say, 'Oh, be quiet'? How childish. It has been proven that the Novus Mass, whether in Latin or the vernacular, is questionable because the Words of Consecration have been changed. 'For ALL' does NOT mean the same thing as 'FOR MANY', which were the Words Our Lord used.

As to the validity of the ordinations of Novus presiders, just saying 'be quiet' is not enough. The Rite of Ordination has been changed and no longer reflects a power to offer the Sacrifice of the Mass, ergo, it is not the Ordination of a valid Roman Catholic priest, but rather a minister of a 'service'.

Ratzinger is a heretic. YOU 'be quiet'.

St. Anthony of Padua, hammer of heretics, terror of Hell, pray for us.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon.

Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us.

That's all I can say to one who approaches these matters in an irrational, emotinal manner. You've told yourself this enough times, therefore it has become a certainty for you in your own mind, thus the bold declarations as if we are dealing with indisputable fact. You just don't know what you're talking about so it would be wise for you to be quiet.

From what I've seen of Steven Francis' posts he is seeking the truth, it might be more fruitful to explain your position and not degrade this conversation into the manner that our conversations devolve into with the obstinates like Raoul and Tele.

Caminus · « **Reply #32 on:** October 27, 2011, 11:18:14 AM »

Sorry, I see the same gratuitous, emotional rhetoric coming from him as well, though I am open to a different approach so long as he is good-willed about it.

LordPhan · « **Reply #33 on:** October 27, 2011, 11:20:29 AM »

Quote from: Stephen Francis

@Caminus:

You can't prove that I'm wrong, so you just say, 'Oh, be quiet'? How childish. It has been proven that the Novus Mass, whether in Latin or the vernacular, is questionable because the Words of Consecration have been changed. 'For ALL' does NOT mean the same thing as 'FOR MANY', which were the Words Our Lord used.

As to the validity of the ordinations of Novus presiders, just saying 'be quiet' is not enough. The Rite of Ordination has been changed and no longer reflects a power to offer the Sacrifice of the Mass, ergo, it is not the Ordination of a valid Roman Catholic priest, but rather a minister of a 'service'.

Ratzinger is a heretic. YOU 'be quiet'.

St. Anthony of Padua, hammer of heretics, terror of Hell, pray for us.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon.

Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us.

Actually in the Latin it says For Many and not For All. It is a fair assumption to say that almost all the Novus Ordo masses are invalid based on how they are done anyhow. But if they are done as Promulgated which I have never seen. They may be valid but Illicit. Either way one may not attend them so we are not really in an argument.

I posted two PDF files that explain why me and Caminus say that the new rite of Ordination can be valid if performed as it was promulgated. However it is on a case by case basis since they do other things at the Novus Ordo Ordinations that can invalidate it.

LordPhan · « **Reply #34 on:** October 27, 2011, 11:21:48 AM »

Quote from: s2srea

Quote from: LordPhan
The SSPX studies all ordinations to see if they are valid. If they determined it was valid why do you not believe them? The SSPX are well educated in such matters and sometimes even employ the Benedictines and Domincans who are allied with us(and are independant of the Concillar church) to study such matters.

I agree Raoul takes his bias against the SSPX too far; but, I mean, look where he's come from (his road to tradition). I think the thing that is fearful, for me, is if there is a question about about the new Rite- would it be so bad to do the conditional ordination for safety's sake?

I have yet to see evidence that we have any Priests from the Novus Ordo that havn't been conditionally ordained. I do know their Ordinations are all investigated for the reason you cited, and the SSPX is willing to Conditionally Ordain them.

LordPhan · « **Reply #35 on:** October 27, 2011, 11:29:02 AM »

Quote from: Caminus

Lordphan,

That essay doesn't say it's intrinsically illicit, but due to certain extrinsic factors one may find oneself in danger at an "indult" TLM. There is a certain subjective note in that if one's faith is not put in danger, then it would be fine to attend, provided no other options are available. See St. Thomas' question on public disputations for an example of this principle in practice. At any rate, most of the essay is devoted to the problem of the priests viz. the "indult" and not the attending laity. I agree in principle, but per accidens one may attend all else being equal if there is a state of necessity present. The author puts for the theoretical objection which is correct, but in the concrete practical order, certain things may be avoided, at least on the part of a lay person attending. Does that make sense?

I'm not sure how Indults are elsewhere, but in Toronto they attack the SSPX and it is harmful to the faith to attend one.

As you are probably aware, the Divine Law states to keep the day Holy, the Church law says to keep it Holy by attending Mass. If one is even 1 hr away from a safe valid mass then they are not obliged to attend.

There is a good holy family at my Chapel that comes 2.5 hrs for mass. I don't think they can make it every weekend but they try to and that is a sign of how strong their faith is and a setting of a great example to others.

Stephen Francis · « **Reply #36 on:** October 27, 2011, 02:44:48 PM »

Quote from: LordPhan

Actually in the Latin it says For Many and not For All. It is a fair assumption to say that almost all the Novus Ordo masses are invalid based on how they are done anyhow. But if they are done as Promulgated which I have never seen. They may be valid but Illicit. Either way one may not attend them so we are not really in an argument.

I posted two PDF files that explain why me and Caminus say that the new rite of Ordination can be valid if performed as it was promulgated. However it is on a case by case basis since they do other things at the Novus Ordo Ordinations that can invalidate it.

Which is why, with all due respect, my friend, I don't bother with the Novus Ordo at all. There didn't NEED to be any changes, and in many cases the changes run counter to dogmatic decrees. There simply is no reason to deviate from what was done in 1950, 1850 or even 1150.

Yes, I am always seeking to know more of the sublime truths that the Catholic Church teaches, but I am certainly not going to haggle over minutiae when it is clear, as you mentioned, that there are so many things (and people) in the Novus Ordo working diligently to invalidate even the few things they still have that are valid.

No, it's safer for me and for everyone to simply avoid the 'open windows' of Vat II like the plague that they let in.

The Holy Scriptures say to 'test every spirit', and I just don't trust the 'spirit of the Council'.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon.

Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us.

Raoul76 · « **Reply #37 on:** October 27, 2011, 11:04:11 PM »

LordPhan said:

Quote

I posted two PDF files that explain why me and Caminus say that the new rite of Ordination can be valid if performed as it was promulgated. However it is on a case by case basis since they do other things at the Novus Ordo Ordinations that can invalidate it.

I'm talking about the New Rite of Consecration, which is severely defective in its form. If the bishops are all fake, they can't ordain priests, even if the New Rite of Ordination is good. Pretty clever eh?

By the way, would these two PDF files be from the SSPX? :wink:

LordPhan · « **Reply #38 on:** October 27, 2011, 11:08:42 PM »

Of course they are from the SSPX. That is why the links say sspx.org.

I havn't read these in awhile but I think the consecrations are covered. Read it and let me know.

Raoul76 · « **Reply #39 on:** October 27, 2011, 11:27:22 PM »

LordPhan said:

Quote

The SSPX studies all ordinations to see if they are valid. If they determined it was valid why do you not believe them? The SSPX are well educated in such matters and sometimes even employ the Benedictines and Domincans who are allied with us(and are independant of the Concillar church) to study such matters.

I'm sorry but I don't have confidence in their leadership.

The SSPX has proved their incompetence in matters of theology many times over. Visit any sedevacantist site to see their errors enumerated, such as that they have the right to sift the Pope's teaching on faith and morals, if he is a true Pope. You see, this would make them higher than the Pope, which is implicitly democratic and Old Catholic, favoring a democratic form of Church hierarchy. But the Church is a monarchy. You can't question the Pope; IF he is teaching to the universal Church on faith and morals, and IF he is a true Pope. Yet SSPX does just that.

They also have set up their own marriage tribunal in the shadow of Vatican II. That is something only the Church can do. So either this is the true Chuch or isn't; the SSPX says it is, and acts like it isn't. They are like sedes without the courage of their convictions. Another example would be how they break with the authority of the local ordinary.

Catholic Encyclopedia, article entitled "Ordinary" --

Quote

"The jurisdiction of local ordinaries arises from Divine law or ecclesiastical law..."

They are only a Third Order, what gives them the right to set themselves up as the Church if Vatican II is the real Church? To protect the Mass, they say... But how can the true Church ask them to abolish the same Mass that was established in perpetuity at Trent?

You should try to get some other sources besides only those of the "society."

LordPhan · « **Reply #40 on:** October 27, 2011, 11:43:04 PM »

I have already told you in before that you are in error and not they, I suggest you study the faith more and not listen to your Thuc Line Priests that have no theological training. No Pope in the last 60 years has stated anything with the conditions of infallibility yet you believe as the Neo-Caths do in regards to your view that anything the Pope says goes no matter what. This of course is against all teaching for the last 2000 years including the Summa.

I suggest you go to page 2 or 3 of the general forum and read the my post of the Summa on Obedience. You will see that your view is false obedience, in your view noone could of questions Honorius, Liberius or John XXII who all commited heresy at one time or another 2 of which repented all 3 of which were valid Pontiffs.

And Lastly but most importantly, you lack a basic understanding of what is a Third Order. The SSPX is a first order, I have told you this before yet you seem to have ignored it, this of course will not protect you at judgement from your calumny.

You lack a Catholic Mindset almost as much as Tele.

I should also point out your divisiveness is by definition as per the Summa, Schismatic, of which many Heresies stem to justify the position.

Caminus · « **Reply #41 on:** October 29, 2011, 03:25:52 PM »

Anyone who uses terms like "Novus Ordo cookie" and "fake priests" and "invalid ordinations" indiscriminately, as if it were a matter of fact, is simply proof that they lack seriousness of mind, argue from emotion and have not duly studied the matter which is quite complicated. That's why I immediately discount S. Francis, et. al. It's a form of speaking that just fuels their emotion. Raoul and many other sedes speak in this manner and it betrays ignorance, blindly taking Fr. Cekada as their authority, imitating the mantra until it becomes true as existence itself. A dispassionate study of the matter should be enough to convince an honest student that the Novus Ordo sacramental forms are all per se valid.

And with regard to the notion that one ought to abstain from a diocesan TLM, all else being equal, because they may use Consecrated Hosts from a Novus Ordo Mass is but unduly scrupulous. For if the Lord can grant the graces of Communion received spiritually, certainly he would give the same graces to one who innocently received a piece of bread thinking in good faith that it was the Body of Christ. Also, the thing about Spiritual Communions is that their efficacy relies on the fervor and piety of the one making the act. Therefore to simply say, stay at home and make a spiritual communion is like saying stay at home and make a perfect act of contrition, not always necessarily effiacious by any means. Additionally, the Mass isn't soley about receiving holy Communion, but assisting at the Sacrifice of the Mass to attain the four ends of worship. One must be physically present to complete such an act.

ora pro me · « **Reply #42 on:** October 29, 2011, 05:32:00 PM »

You may recall that a poster named Pat introduced herself last month and discussed a similar predicament of being unable to get to a Traditional Latin Mass. You can read her introduction here:
http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=2683&min=830&num=10

I asked posters if anyone knew of a link where someone could “assist” at Mass by watching and praying along with a Mass online. A poster PMd me and here’s my post with the link that he sent to me: (You can also read this same post on page 85 of the thread that I linked above along with other posters' responses.)

Pat,
In response to my question above in this thread, if anyone knew of a Latin Mass that was broadcast over the internet I received the following link from a member here named "Exilenomore" by PM:

http://www.tikilive.com/show/saintjudes

Password is: jude75

Exilenomore also said the following:

"I think you may post it in public because I saw it posted on another forum as well. It is not the Mass that I attend, since it is in Texas, America and I live in Belgium, Europe.

The priest is Father Louis J. Campbell, who was ordained in 1961, so he is certainly a valid priest. I believe he has been saying the tridentine Mass for a long time and do not think he has any problems with Latin, but he seems to have some problems with his voice now. In any case, he is not 'indult' and does not say the novus ordo. :)

The Mass is temporarily not being said in the St. Jude's Shrine itself, because the latter has been damaged by a hurricane. But they are aiming to have the church back in use in December."

So, this priest is celebrating his 50th anniversary this year, or perhaps has already celebrated it! Isn't that wonderful? Congratulations to Fr. Campbell! Let's all say a prayer for this Catholic priest.[/b]

When you go to the link, don't forget that you must type in the password jude75. Wait just a minute or so and the priest will come on. He'll take another minute or 2 to finish setting up the altar, giving you a short time for you to recollect yourself to assist spiritually at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Be sure to turn up your speakers so that you can hear the choir singing Traditional hymns. So many people who have been in the NO for years are brought to tears upon hearing our beautiful Catholic hymns, treasures of our Faith!

I know that I've seen another webcam used online for the Holy Mass. Maybe other posters will post the links. Anyone?

Caminus · « **Reply #43 on:** October 29, 2011, 07:49:33 PM »

Exile was a hardcore home-aloner who sought to justify his position by convincing himself that he can attend Mass via the internet. Unfortunately, this idea is not sound at all. Even Confession via telephone is considered invalid.

PereJoseph · « **Reply #44 on:** October 29, 2011, 08:10:29 PM »

Quote from: LordPhan

The SSPX studies all ordinations to see if they are valid. If they determined it was valid why do you not believe them?

Because their determination of validity is based on a provably erroneous position in regards to the episcopal consecrations' validity which itself is nothing more than the byproduct of their entire approach to the crisis. If he disagrees with their fundamental approach, why would he agree with positions directly stemming from it ?

Quote

We seek the truth, and we have no gain in saying they are valid if they are not.

Actually, the entire SSPX position unravels if they are not valid, so there is a lot to gain.

Quote

You say they are not because you wish to justify your positions.

No, the SSPX (and therefore you, who blindly follows everything they say) are doing that.