Author Topic: What Am I ? (Read 3305 times)

gene6 · « **on:** February 19, 2016, 01:00:25 PM »

I was berated and compelled to quit an online N.O.-type community for expressing my suspicions about Pope Francis. I clearly stated that I still followed the Holy father but remained wary for reasons listed.

My background in Brief
Born and raised Roman Catholic in PA, U.S.A. Polish-German ancestory. Received first Holy Communion at the height of V2 (1964) in a traditional-transforming-into N.O. Mass. The nearest Latin Mass is in Hazelton PA (St Stanislaus) every 2nd Sunday of each month. (can attend when weather permitting as I live in the Appalachians (Mountaintop, PA). My belief in the Real Presence as defined by Lateran IV and Trent is rock-solid. I'm well aware of the history of V2 in detail. Still, I'm bound by Marian prophecy but torn by true Church visionaries who state the only benefit of receiving the Eucharist in the new Mass is consolation by the Holy Spirit because the Body and Blood are not present. Approved Marian apparitions confirm the N.O. is still valid. And so I'm at a spiritual crossroad. Holy Orders is not to be taken lightly and apparently that's exactly what V2 did. Instituted doubt in their attempt at ecuмenism of the separated bretheren.

And so..What Am I? Traditional or NO Catholic? :confused1:

Alexandria · « **Reply #1 on:** February 19, 2016, 01:07:25 PM »

What Marian prophecy binds you, may I ask?

And what "approved Marian apparitions confirm the N.O. is still valid"?

Alexandria · « **Reply #2 on:** February 19, 2016, 01:09:50 PM »

Gene, one more question.

What makes you wary of Francis?

Nadir · « **Reply #3 on:** February 19, 2016, 05:33:21 PM »

You need to study the issue.
Read The Great Sacrilege by Fr James Wathen. http://www.cathinfo.com/TheGreatSacrilegeCI.pdf

I have just finished reading it last night. Read it 10 years ago, but needing a refresher. It should clear the fog.

If you attend NO Mass you are a NO Catholic.

gene6 · « **Reply #4 on:** February 19, 2016, 07:16:13 PM »

The Marian apparitions of Garabandal , neither condemned or approved , however, the Bishop for that area stated "we have found no grounds for ecclesiastical condemnation", "the messages contain nothing contrary to traditional Church teachings on faith and morals." If theres been some new developments, I stand corrected. The apparitions were not actually approved in the sense of Romes total approval as in Fatima but that event is prominent, specifically due to the 'coincidental timing' (1961-65) with that of Vatican II which formally opened on Oct 11, 1962 and ended about the same time as the apparitions. In my own life this is paramount because I received first Holy Communion during this exact period. The miracle of the Eucharist for which Garabandal is mainly noted circled around the message given by Virgin Mary in that we are to continue receiving the Blessed Sacrament. If it was indeed Virgin Mary in the apparitions, She would have made some kind of warning about the new changes in Mass taking place at that very time. The Eucharistic miracle occurred on precisely July 19, 1962 witnessed by hundreds, beleivers and non beleivers. I'm compelled therefore to place credence in Garabandal since it was not outright condemned by Rome as in many others.

As far as Pope Francis: my main concern is the diary entry of St Faustina. Dec. 17, 1936, the exact date of Pope Francis birth. Apparently she suffered more that day than any other in her life.
Some of the statements made by Pope francis, although not on faith and morals doctrine, still ring with a strong air of compromising ones faith. Such as his stand on ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity. "Who am I to judge". Yet he turned right around and judged Trump as non-Christian. (even though I take no sides in politics-its a losing battle either way).
But then theres the visions of Katheren Ann Emerick which brings me full circle in the opposite direction. Jesus apparently warned her of the new Mass and Church as being "Babel, the mass in many languages" with nothing holy in it, mere scaffolding. I don't recall the exact book source but I can locate it. I read it twice. Its not just one visionary. Theres a plethoria of facts indicating that the N.O. may not be valid. The fact of the matter is that several Protestant leaders had a substantial hand in V2 and the changes in the very Mass they don't even believe in, so how can it even be possible that the changes were better? Its quite a conundrum.

I'll be attending Latin Mass once a month (cause that's all its offered) driving the 20 miles to get there.

Nadir · « **Reply #5 on:** February 19, 2016, 08:44:43 PM »

Quote from: gene6

The Marian apparitions of Garabandal , neither condemned or approved , however, the Bishop for that area stated "we have found no grounds for ecclesiastical condemnation", "the messages contain nothing contrary to traditional Church teachings on faith and morals." If theres been some new developments, I stand corrected. The apparitions were not actually approved in the sense of Romes total approval as in Fatima but that event is prominent, specifically due to the 'coincidental timing' (1961-65) with that of Vatican II which formally opened on Oct 11, 1962 and ended about the same time as the apparitions. In my own life this is paramount because I received first Holy Communion during this exact period. The miracle of the Eucharist for which Garabandal is mainly noted circled around the message given by Virgin Mary in that we are to continue receiving the Blessed Sacrament. If it was indeed Virgin Mary in the apparitions, She would have made some kind of warning about the new changes in Mass taking place at that very time. The Eucharistic miracle occurred on precisely July 19, 1962 witnessed by hundreds, beleivers and non beleivers. I'm compelled therefore to place credence in Garabandal since it was not outright condemned by Rome as in many others.

As far as Pope Francis: my main concern is the diary entry of St Faustina. Dec. 17, 1936, the exact date of Pope Francis birth. Apparently she suffered more that day than any other in her life.
Some of the statements made by Pope francis, although not on faith and morals doctrine, still ring with a strong air of compromising ones faith. Such as his stand on ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity. "Who am I to judge". Yet he turned right around and judged Trump as non-Christian. (even though I take no sides in politics-its a losing battle either way).
But then theres the visions of Katheren Ann Emerick which brings me full circle in the opposite direction. Jesus apparently warned her of the new Mass and Church as being "Babel, the mass in many languages" with nothing holy in it, mere scaffolding. I don't recall the exact book source but I can locate it. I read it twice. Its not just one visionary. Theres a plethoria of facts indicating that the N.O. may not be valid. The fact of the matter is that several Protestant leaders had a substantial hand in V2 and the changes in the very Mass they don't even believe in, so how can it even be possible that the changes were better? Its quite a conundrum.

I'll be attending Latin Mass once a month (cause that's all its offered) driving the 20 miles to get there.

Gene6, Welcome! I think you've come to the right place.

Please do not make your judgements based on supposed visionaries and let mere coincidences sway you. Try to stay away from apparitions etc till you get your mind clear. If you must have apparitions make sure they are approved ones. http://www.theotokos.org.uk/pages/appdisce/nineapps.html

You cannot be bound by any "apparitions which are neither condemned or approved", so steer clear of Garabandal. Has it occurred to you that it may have been devised in order to give the rubber stamp to the changes made through Vat2? As you say yourself:

Quote

If it was indeed Virgin Mary in the apparitions, She would have made some kind of warning about the new changes in Mass taking place at that very time.

You also say

Quote

I'm compelled therefore to place credence in Garabandal since it was not outright condemned by Rome as in many others.

This is not true, because even if it was approved by Rome, you are not compelled to believe it.

Quote

As far as Pope Francis: my main concern is the diary entry of St Faustina. Dec. 17, 1936, the exact date of Pope Francis birth. Apparently she suffered more that day than any other in her life.

That is neither here nor there, when it comes to judging anybody, let alone a pope. Why do you not judge this to be merely a coincidence? See, you are giving too much importance to seers and not enough to Faith. There are certainly some real issues to consider when it comes to Francis I but that is not one of them.

Keep attending that Latin Mass, as long as it is not the Novus Ordo "said" in Latin, but it a True Mass. And consider staying away from Novus Ordo. It sows confusion. I know that is a hard thing to say and you may not be ready to receive it. But do read up on Catholic Church teaching on the matter.

Have you ever heard of Quo Primum? http://laudatedominum.net/files/quo.pdf

Alexandria · « **Reply #6 on:** February 24, 2016, 02:09:30 PM »

Well, I think it's very interesting what he said about Faustina. I keep that book handy because it comes up so much in discussions, and it is a good reference book.

To make matters more interesting, I opened the book up to the exact page December 17, 1936 is on. Here's what she wrote:

Quote

I have offered this day for priests. I have suffered more today than ever before, both interiorly and exteriorly. I did not know it was possible to suffer so much in one day. I tried to make a Holy Hour, in the course of which my spirit had a taste of the bitterness of the Garden of Gethsemane....

:scratchchin:

Maria Regina · « **Reply #7 on:** February 24, 2016, 02:38:25 PM »

Quote from: Alexandria

Well, I think it's very interesting what he said about Faustina. I keep that book handy because it comes up so much in discussions, and it is a good reference book.

To make matters more interesting, I opened the book up to the exact page December 17, 1936 is on. Here's what she wrote:

Quote
I have offered this day for priests. I have suffered more today than ever before, both interiorly and exteriorly. I did not know it was possible to suffer so much in one day. I tried to make a Holy Hour, in the course of which my spirit had a taste of the bitterness of the Garden of Gethsemane....

:scratchchin:

Wow. In the Garden of Gethsemane, Christ was betrayed by Judas, one of His Twelve Apostles, with a kiss.

And to think that Faustina suffered so terribly on the very birthday of Pope Francis in 1936. Yes, it was most likely a foreboding and a time to suffer so that perhaps Francis would change his way of thinking.

There is still time, but it may be too late as the refrain from the Divine Office comes to mind:

Quote

If today you hear the voice of the Lord, harden not your hearts.

Alexandria · « **Reply #8 on:** February 24, 2016, 02:45:10 PM »

Quote from: Maria Regina

Quote from: Alexandria
Well, I think it's very interesting what he said about Faustina. I keep that book handy because it comes up so much in discussions, and it is a good reference book.

To make matters more interesting, I opened the book up to the exact page December 17, 1936 is on. Here's what she wrote:

Quote
I have offered this day for priests. I have suffered more today than ever before, both interiorly and exteriorly. I did not know it was possible to suffer so much in one day. I tried to make a Holy Hour, in the course of which my spirit had a taste of the bitterness of the Garden of Gethsemane....

:scratchchin:

Wow. In the Garden of Gethsemane, Christ was betrayed by Judas, one of His Twelve Apostles, with a kiss.

And to think that Faustina suffered so terribly on the very birthday of Pope Francis in 1936. Yes, it was most likely a foreboding and a time to suffer so that perhaps Francis would change his way of thinking.

There is still time, but it may be too late as the refrain from the Divine Office comes to mind:

Quote
If today you hear the voice of the Lord, harden not your hearts.

I'm going through a very, very, very difficult personal crisis since the beginning of Advent 2015, and it has gotten increasingly worse. Last night, I thought I couldn't go on another moment longer, and really had no words left when I turned to Our Lady for help. All I could was look at Her, and then Her Son.

Today, like little missing puzzle pieces, I have been able to put together somewhat of an answer to my dilemma.

My post is a wordy way of telling you, dear Maria Regina, yes - if today we hear the voice of Our Lord, we should not harden out hearts.

I have never liked Faustina, but even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Maria Regina · « **Reply #9 on:** February 24, 2016, 02:57:17 PM »

Quote from: Alexandria

Quote from: Maria Regina

Quote
If today you hear the voice of the Lord, harden not your hearts.

I'm going through a very, very, very difficult personal crisis since the beginning of Advent 2015, and it has gotten increasingly worse. Last night, I thought I couldn't go on another moment longer, and really had no words left when I turned to Our Lady for help. All I could was look at Her, and then Her Son.

Today, like little missing puzzle pieces, I have been able to put together somewhat of an answer to my dilemma.

My post is a wordy way of telling you, dear Maria Regina, yes - if today we hear the voice of Our Lord, we should not harden out hearts.

I have never liked Faustina, but even a broken clock is right twice a day.

REMEMBER, O most gracious Virgin Mary, that never was it known that anyone who fled to thy protection, implored thy help, or sought thy intercession was left unaided. Inspired with this confidence, I fly to thee, O Virgin of virgins, my Mother; to thee do I come; before thee I stand, sinful and sorrowful. O Mother of the Word Incarnate, despise not my petitions, but in thy mercy hear and answer me. Amen.

http://themostholyrosary.com/appendix5.htm

gene6 · « **Reply #10 on:** February 25, 2016, 04:38:17 PM »

Yea, I was waiting 7 days to become a registered full member. Why the hold up I wonder? No matter.
To Alexandria and Maria Regina specifically but not limited --

Maria certainly has a knack for interpreting the visionaries words. I never saw the Gethsemane - Judas correlation in Faustinas suffering. That's way too on point to be a coincidence. Theres a direct connection here to pope Frances. The only question is what could Faustina be implying?

Was she feeling pain for him..a good and holy Pontiff...whos about to go through the hardest times in Church history...or, was she in pain for all of Christendom because the pope will become a Judas to the true Church?

On a different note, a bit off-key to this forum perhaps -- I'm a little confused about this SSPX unity with Rome thing taking place, or in the works. I'm trying to get a 'bottom line' answere in laymans terms just what exactly is happening here. I read several of the posts, and especially Matthews post, but its too political language for me. I'm more of a spiritual-Marian-apparition-Real Presence-type Catholic. Church politics is foreign to me but I sense that I should have a basic understanding.
The one thing I know for certain is where I stand in my beliefs and faith. I lean toward the Latin Mass primarily because I believe, nay, KNOW that Holy Orders and Holy Communion must remain unchanged in liturgy as defined across time and Trent. Pius X solidified it. There was infiltration (V2) in a substantial way, the rite was poisioned.

That's my stand in summary so to speak.

LaramieHirsch · « **Reply #11 on:** February 25, 2016, 11:46:09 PM »

Quote from: gene6

I never saw the Gethsemane - Judas correlation in Faustinas suffering...

I'm a little confused about this SSPX unity with Rome thing taking place, or in the works. I'm trying to get a 'bottom line' answere in laymans terms just what exactly is happening here.... Church politics is foreign to me but I sense that I should have a basic understanding.

Wow. Fascinating that Faustina would suffer like that on the day Pope Francis was born.

Okay. Well, about the SSPX. I was quite neutral about the matter until last year. I was originally attending a diocesan TLM. Then, a schedule change forced my family out of that scheduled Mass. The only alternative TLM offered was a bi-monthly SSPX Mass at a chapel. I was very hesitant, and I needed to look into the matter carefully.

This was around the time that ChurchMilitantTV (CMTV) decided to come out with their week-long attack piece on the SSPX. Not a scholar on the matter myself, I was very confused. But thankfully, Chris Jackson of The Remnant came out with his own series of rebuttals against CMTV. Jackson's arguments made sense to me, and through the fire of it all, I came out concluding that the Society is in the right, that the Church is in a true state of emergency, and that yes, the SSPX priests are in the right in trying to maintain the Traditional Catholic way.

I wrote about all of this last year on my blog, The Hirsch Files if you're interested.

Ever since then, when I attend a Novus Ordo Mass now, it seems like the entire fiasco is some sort of an orchestrated exhibition designed to mock the Eucharist.

To be honest, the only thing that prevents me from completely abandoning the Novus Ordo is fear of somehow disregarding the still-in-place-in-spite-of-corruption authority that God has placed on the priesthood. Were it not for the power of God's Supreme Authority to overstep men's abuses, I would never go back to Novus Ordo Mass. In fact, I might even be on the fence about that.

Nadir · « **Reply #12 on:** February 26, 2016, 03:33:54 PM »

Quote from: LaramieHirsch

Quote from: gene6

I'm a little confused about this SSPX unity with Rome thing taking place, or in the works. I'm trying to get a 'bottom line' answere in laymans terms just what exactly is happening here.... Church politics is foreign to me but I sense that I should have a basic understanding.

Okay. Well, about the SSPX. I was quite neutral about the matter until last year. I was originally attending a diocesan TLM. Then, a schedule change forced my family out of that scheduled Mass. The only alternative TLM offered was a bi-monthly SSPX Mass at a chapel. I was very hesitant, and I needed to look into the matter carefully.

This was around the time that ChurchMilitantTV (CMTV) decided to come out with their week-long attack piece on the SSPX. Not a scholar on the matter myself, I was very confused. But thankfully, Chris Jackson of The Remnant came out with his own series of rebuttals against CMTV. Jackson's arguments made sense to me, and through the fire of it all, I came out concluding that the Society is in the right, that the Church is in a true state of emergency, and that yes, the SSPX priests are in the right in trying to maintain the Traditional Catholic way.

I wrote about all of this last year on my blog, The Hirsch Files if you're interested.

Ever since then, when I attend a Novus Ordo Mass now, it seems like the entire fiasco is some sort of an orchestrated exhibition designed to mock the Eucharist.

To be honest, the only thing that prevents me from completely abandoning the Novus Ordo is fear of somehow disregarding the still-in-place-in-spite-of-corruption authority that God has placed on the priesthood. Were it not for the power of God's Supreme Authority to overstep men's abuses, I would never go back to Novus Ordo Mass. In fact, I might even be on the fence about that.

Laramie, does bi-monthly mean in your case twice a month or every two months?

You are blest that the timing of your indult Mass prevented your attending it. And as for you rationale for attending the Novus Ordo, it is pretty flimsy, if not outright faulty.

Have you read either Rama Coomaraswamy's The Problems with the New Mass or Fr James Wathen's The Great Sacrilege (same message - different styles)? If you haven't I would recommend giving these top priority.

The latter is available in the CathInfo Library. One of the chief points made in both these books is that the Canon of the Mass is changed, even the form of the Consecration is changed. You must question whether you are going to Mass at all when you attend the NO.

gene6 · « **Reply #13 on:** February 26, 2016, 05:01:17 PM »

Quote from: Nadir

Quote from: LaramieHirsch

Ever since then, when I attend a Novus Ordo Mass now, it seems like the entire fiasco is some sort of an orchestrated exhibition designed to mock the Eucharist.

To be honest, the only thing that prevents me from completely abandoning the Novus Ordo is fear of somehow disregarding the still-in-place-in-spite-of-corruption authority that God has placed on the priesthood. Were it not for the power of God's Supreme Authority to overstep men's abuses, I would never go back to Novus Ordo Mass. In fact, I might even be on the fence about that.

Laramie, does bi-monthly mean in your case twice a month or every two months?

You are blest that the timing of your indult Mass prevented your attending it. And as for you rationale for attending the Novus Ordo, it is pretty flimsy, if not outright faulty.

Have you read either Rama Coomaraswamy's The Problems with the New Mass or Fr James Wathen's The Great Sacrilege (same message - different styles)? If you haven't I would recommend giving these top priority.

The latter is available in the CathInfo Library. One of the chief points made in both these books is that the Canon of the Mass is changed, even the form of the Consecration is changed. You must question whether you are going to Mass at all when you attend the NO.

Yea, LaramieHirsch, I'm glad you mentioned that. This entire matter boils down to Holy Orders; and God did say that the Church would prevail against the gates of hell. It stands to reason therefore, that the unbroken chain of ordination would remain unaffected. Valid consecration of the bread and wine is all that matters.

This brings me to address Nadir: I read Ramas -- The Problems with the New Mass. It was one of the most compelling books Id ever read on this subject.
However, the fact that the Canon of the Mass and form of the Consecration was changed by V2, in my belief, is not a substantial matter. The concern is Holy Orders. So long as a priest is ordained of the chain of ordination handed down from Peter, the consecration, to me, is valid. This is a bishop-to-bishop-to-bishop... ordination traced back across 2000 years, a spiritual continnium.

This chain appears to have formed a second linkage as result of V2. I don't believe it was broken (or Gods words would not be true), but I do believe there are imposter priests amongst both branches. The protestants who infiltrated and sat in V2 did quite well in redesigning the Mass to their own beliefs, the main one being that Christ is not really present in the consecrated bread and wine. But this was the price the Holy Roman Catholic empire paid in attempting to unite the separated brothers.

That my take on all of it. There are many who probably wont agree. I'm a spiritual Catholic before I'm a political one, and my beliefs are more akin faith. And so, when a gray area of politics arises, I tend to side with what Jesus would do in such a situation.

Pray brother, and keep on keepin on.

God Bless the Catholic Church

Nadir · « **Reply #14 on:** February 26, 2016, 08:09:17 PM »

Quote from: gene6

Quote from: Nadir

Have you read either Rama Coomaraswamy's The Problems with the New Mass or Fr James Wathen's The Great Sacrilege (same message - different styles)? If you haven't I would recommend giving these top priority.

The latter is available in the CathInfo Library. One of the chief points made in both these books is that the Canon of the Mass is changed, even the form of the Consecration is changed. You must question whether you are going to Mass at all when you attend the NO.

Yea, LaramieHirsch, I'm glad you mentioned that. This entire matter boils down to Holy Orders; and God did say that the Church would prevail against the gates of hell. It stands to reason therefore, that the unbroken chain of ordination would remain unaffected. Valid consecration of the bread and wine is all that matters.

This brings me to address Nadir: I read Ramas -- The Problems with the New Mass. It was one of the most compelling books Id ever read on this subject.
However, the fact that the Canon of the Mass and form of the Consecration was changed by V2, in my belief, is not a substantial matter. The concern is Holy Orders. So long as a priest is ordained of the chain of ordination handed down from Peter, the consecration, to me, is valid. This is a bishop-to-bishop-to-bishop... ordination traced back across 2000 years, a spiritual continnium.

This chain appears to have formed a second linkage as result of V2. I don't believe it was broken (or Gods words would not be true), but I do believe there are imposter priests amongst both branches. The protestants who infiltrated and sat in V2 did quite well in redesigning the Mass to their own beliefs, the main one being that Christ is not really present in the consecrated bread and wine. But this was the price the Holy Roman Catholic empire paid in attempting to unite the separated brothers.

That my take on all of it. There are many who probably wont agree. I'm a spiritual Catholic before I'm a political one, and my beliefs are more akin faith. And so, when a gray area of politics arises, I tend to side with what Jesus would do in such a situation.

Pray brother, and keep on keepin on.

God Bless the Catholic Church

Gene, You sound very confused. You say to Laramie,

Quote

Valid consecration of the bread and wine is all that matters.

Yet to me you say:

Quote

However, the fact that the Canon of the Mass and form of the Consecration was changed by V2, in my belief, is not a substantial matter.

What you or I might believe is of little significance. What matters is Church teaching on the subject.

Maybe you are not aware that there are certain conditions laid down by the Church if the sacrament is to be confected
1. The priest must be validly ordained (another questionable in the revamped sacrament of Holy Orders)
2. The priest must have the intention of doing what the Church does.
3. The matter of the subject must be the correct one.
4, The form (words) of the Sacrament must be correct.

How can you be sure you are actually receiving the Body and Blood of Our Saviour Jesus Christ when you know that the form has been changed.

Not that this is the only issue with the NO but it is, in my mind, the most crucial. It is sinful to participate in a rite that you doubt.

By the way, the rite of the Mass was not changed by Vatican 2 but by Paul VI in his Missale Romanorum given on Holy Thursday, April 3, 1969.

Maybe you need to reread "The Problems with the New Mass" or give the Fr Wathen book a try.

Yes, we must pray, but we must be careful about how we pray, and ensure we are not "praying protestant", which is what the Novus Ordo was intended for.

Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi, Lex Vivendi.