Read an Interview with Matthew, the owner of CathInfo

Author Topic: What should be Tradition's path in the next 10-20 years?  (Read 946 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline XavierSem

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1255
  • Reputation: +75/-121
  • Gender: Male
  • Immaculate Heart of Mary, May Your Triumph Come!
What should be Tradition's path in the next 10-20 years?
« on: March 14, 2019, 02:22:13 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2
  • A recent report from Rorate showed there are currently around 5,000 (and possibly as many as 7,000) Priests worldwide who - thanks to the SSPX, to Archbishop Lefebvre and also to His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI - offer the Traditional Mass. All Traditional Orders (the SSPX, FSSP, ICK, other groups etc) put together would perhaps be 1/7th of that 2nd number. Thanks to Summorum Pontificum and Universae Ecclesiae, a large number of diocesan Clergy and future Seminarians have begun to offer or at least are learning to offer the Mass of the Ages and of Tradition canonized and codified by Pope St. Pius V. Prior to his election, the Pope had written, "I am of the opinion, to be sure, that the old rite should be granted much more generously to all those who desire it. It is impossible to see what could be dangerous or unacceptable about that. A community is calling its very being into question when it suddenly declares that what until now was its holiest and highest possession is strictly forbidden and when it makes the longing for it seem downright indecent." Thanks to Bp. Fellay's and the other Society Bishops and Priests' persistent insistence, we had SP and UE.

    Although it was wrongly and falsely claimed the True Mass was "forbidden" and good and holy Priests were unjustly persecuted, it was in fact always good and just to continue the traditional Mass, as even Pope Benedict XVI later acknowledged. That is proven by the fact that (1) The freemason apostate infiltrator Bugnini tried to get a decree that the Tridentine Mass was "forbidden", but this was refused because this would be "casting odium on the liturgical Tradition" (2) A commission of 9 Cardinals unanimously determined no Bishop could lawfully prohibit his Priests from offering the Tradition Mass and (3) (from the article below) "It is the present jurisprudence of the Church that, upon appeal, any suspension that an Ordinary attempts to inflict on a Priest for celebrating the Old Mass against the will of the bishop is automatically nullified." Although the New Mass cannot be per se invalid, the Old Mass is vastly superior and remains the law of the Church per Quo Primum.

    What do you think is the best path for Tradition going forward, and what do you think must be the goal to work toward by 2035-2040, say? By that time, imho, Tradition should aim to have at least 20-25,000 Priests around the world directly from traditional orders, affiliated with about 100,000 Priests directly from the dioceses who are orthodox Catholics and offer the TLM. For this, we must above all pray and sacrifice much harder, especially during this time of Lent, but also work much harder in more actively seeking (and not turning away imho) abundant holy vocations, many conversions, baptisms etc so that many enter Tradition, the Church and the monasteries, convents and seminaries. This preparation is absolutely necessary for the Army of Christ to triumph and Archbishop Lefebvre often emphasized it; for Tradition to Triumph in the wider Church, large number of Bishops who support Tradition and foster it in their dioceses will be needed. Only by that means, there will be Cardinals and later Popes (although Cardinal Burke is considered a leading Papabile according to Fr. Kevin Cusick; which would be good) who come from Tradition and support Tradition; unless the Pope were to miraculously convert or some such extraordinary thing. We can hope for that, but we cannot presume on it, since we must rely and normally keep working on the ordinary means, not the extraordinary, just like we don't stop working to provide food for our families. Therefore, imo we should work and toward this. Thoughts from people here? Is there a better path to pursue? 

    Article from Catholic Culture: https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=7729

    Quote
    Dossier on the Motu Proprio of Benedict XVI: Summorum Pontificum by Msgr. Nicola Bux, Rev. Salvatore Vitiello[/b]

    DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
    Dossier on the Summorum Pontificum

    DESCRIPTION
    This dossier provides an overview of ecclesiatical documents which pertain to the celebration of the 1962 Missale Romanum (popularly referred to as the "Tridentine" Mass or "classical Roman liturgy" and more recently by Pope Benedict XVI as the "usus antiquior" and Missal of Blessed John XXIII). The dossier details legislation on the ancient Roman use since the promulgation of the Missal of Pope Paul VI following the Second Vatican Council, leading up to the legal clarifcation made by Pope Benedict XVI in Summorum Pontificum which clarifies that the 1962 Missale Romanum is not an abrogated (abolished) missal (and therefore not an "indult" or special exemption to ecclesiastical law) but rather forms an extraordinary liturgical usage of the Roman rite. Included are many pertinent quotations and a bibliography by Rev. Dr. Uwe Michael Lang, a priest of the London Oratory and author of an important study on the direction of the priest at the altar in the liturgy, Turning Toward the Lord: Orientation in Liturgical Prayer. The document was authored and edited in part by Don Nicola Bux, a consultor to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The documents referenced are: Sacrosanctum Concilium, The Constitution Missale Romanum of Pope Paul VI (1969), the Indult Quattuor Abhinc Annos of Pope John Paul II (1984), the Commissio Cardinalitia of 1986, the Motu Proprio Ecclesia Dei Adflicta of Pope John Paul II (1988) and Cardinal Medina on the Third Editio Typica of the Missal of Paul VI (2002).

     ... The Bull Quo Primum, issued by Pius V in 1570, codified and consolidated the immemorial and universal custom that had regulated the Roman liturgy through the centuries from the time of Gregory the Great at the end of the sixth century. Two points are worth noting here:

    First, to Quo Primum we can, in any case, apply can. 21 CIC: “In dubio revocatio legis praexistentis non praesumitur, sed leges posteriores ad priores trahendae sunt et his, quantum fieri potest, conciliandae”. For all practical purposes this means that if the Old Mass has lost its privileged position, it nevertheless continues to exist and the faithful have a right to it.

    Secondly, the Constitution Missale Romanum did not explicitly abolish (as the law required) the immemorial and universal custom on which, before Quo Primum (and later together with it), rested the Old Mass. Therefore it continues to exist although it is perhaps no longer protected by a written law. This was noted by scholars, but even then no supplementary law was passed to abolish that custom.

    Archbishop Annibale Bugnini, whom Paul VI put in charge of the post-conciliar liturgical reform, wanted to obtain an explicit ruling to the effect that the Novus Ordo Missae of 1970 abrogates the Old Mass, so that the latter would be suppressed de jure. To apply for such a ruling to the Pontifical Commission for the Interpretation of Conciliar Documents, he needed permission from the Cardinal Secretary of State. On 10 June 1974 the Secretary of State refused to give the requested permission on the grounds that such an attempt would be seen as “casting odium on the liturgical tradition” (A. Bugnini, The Reform of the Liturgy 1948-1975, Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1990, p. 300-301).

    The Indult Quattuor Abhinc Annos of Pope John Paul II (1984)

    On 3 October 1984, Pope John Paul II promulgated the Indult Quattuor abhinc annos in which he allowed bishops to grant the Old Mass to those faithful who would request it. An indult is a measure by which somebody invested with authority in the Church can grant, in order to favour the salvation of souls (which is the purpose of canon law, before which all laws must bow), an exception to the law (derogation); it is akin to dispensation, but with a wider scope.

    An indult, therefore, presupposes the existence of a law which has to be relaxed, in our case a law which had forbidden or abolished the Old Mass. As we have seen, such a law does not exist, and therefore in this case, strictly speaking, “indult” is a misnomer, since the faithful even today have a right to the Old Mass on the basis of the non-abolished immemorial custom.

    The Commissio Cardinalitia of 1986

    In 1986 Pope John Paul II appointed a commission of nine cardinals to examine the legal status of the Old Mass. The commission consisted of Agostino Cardinal Casaroli, Bernard Cardinal Gantin, Paul Augustin Cardinal Mayer, Antonio Cardinal Innocenti, Silvio Cardinal Oddi, Petro Cardinal Palazzini, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Alfons Cardinal Stickler and Jozef Cardinal Tomko and it was instructed to examine whether the New Rite of Mass promulgated by Pope Paul VI abrogated the Old Rite, and whether a bishop can prohibit his priests from celebrating the Old Mass.

    The commission met in December 1986. Eight of nine cardinals answered that the New Mass had not abrogated the Old Mass. The nine cardinals unanimously determined that Pope Paul VI never gave the bishops the authority to forbid priest from celebrating Mass according to the Missal of St Pius V. The commission judged the conditions for the 1984 indult too restrictive and proposed their relaxation. These conclusions served as functional guidelines for the Commission Ecclesia Dei, but they were never promulgated.


    In this context, it should be noted that the Holy See does recognize the right of the priest to celebrate the traditional Mass; this is borne out by the fact that whenever priests are unjustly suspended for celebrating the Old Mass against the will of their bishops, the Roman Curia always nullifies the penalty whenever the cases are appealed. It is the present jurisprudence of the Church that, upon appeal, any suspension that an Ordinary attempts to inflict on a priest for celebrating the Old Mass against the will of the bishop is automatically nullified.

    The Motu Proprio Ecclesia Dei Adflicta of Pope John Paul II (1988)

    On 2 July 1988 Pope John Paul II promulgated his Motu Proprio Ecclesia Dei in which he expressed his will to guarantee respect for the rightful aspirations of those attached to the Latin liturgical tradition, and in order to achieve this aim he established the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei.

    In a letter to the Ecclesia Dei Society of Australia dated 11 May 1990 Cardinal Mayer gives an authoritative interpretation of the Motu Proprio. The President of the Ecclesia Dei Commission criticizes the Congregation for Divine Worship for sabotaging the Pope’s intentions, and then proceeds to explain the privilege granted by Ecclesia Dei while at the same time suggesting that the old Mass was never really abolished:

    It should be noted that the somewhat pejorative language of Quattuor abhinc annos with regard to “the problem of priests and faithful holding to the so-called Tridentine Mass” was completely avoided in the Apostolic Letter Ecclesia Dei. In the latter document issued by the Supreme Pontiff himself reference is simply made to “those Catholic faithful who feel attached to some previous liturgical and disciplinary forms of the Latin tradition” (5, c) and “those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition” (6, c). It would seem unduly prejudicial to continue referring to allusions in the earlier document of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments which have been superseded by a papal Motu Proprio.

    Cardinal Medina on the Third Editio Typica of the Missal of Paul VI (2002)

    Cardinal Medina Estévez, Prefect Emeritus of the Congregation for Divine Worship writes in a letter of 21 May 2004:

    I reaffirm my personal opinion that the abrogation of the Missal of St Pius V is not proven and I can add that the decree that I signed promulgating the third typical edition of the Roman Missal does not contain any clause that abrogates the ancient form of the Roman Rite. (…) And I can also add that the absence of any abrogation clause whatsoever did not happen by chance, nor as it caused by inadvertence, but was intentional.

    An English version of this letter is published in Mass of Ages, November 2005, p. 28.

    The present Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, was himself involved in the Commission; I should like to end with a quotation from his book God and the World (published originally in German in the year 2000):

    For fostering a true consciousness in liturgical matters, it is also important that the proscription against the form of liturgy in valid use up to 1970 should be lifted. Anyone who nowadays advocates the continuing existence of this liturgy or takes part in it is treated like a leper; all tolerance ends here. There has never been anything like this in history; in doing this we are despising and proscribing the Church’s whole past. How can one trust her present if things are that way? I must say, quite openly, that I don’t understand why so any of my episcopal brethren have to a great extent submitted to this rule of intolerance, which for no apparent reason is opposed to making the necessary inner reconciliations within the Church.

    J. Ratzinger, God and the World: A Conversation with Peter Seewald,San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2002, 416.

    Bibliography by Uwe Michael lang

    – Neri Capponi, “Bishops against the Pope: The Motu Proprio ‘Ecclesia Dei’ and the Extension of the Indult”, in The Latin Mass, Winter 1996

    – Georg May, Die alte und die neue Messe. Die Rechtslage hinsichtlich des Ordo Missae, 4. durchgesehene und durch ein Register ergänzte Auflage, Sankt Augustin: Richarz, 1991

    2. THE ‘RENOVATIO’ OF THE ROMAN MISSAL

    1. The Ordo Missae and the Institutio generalis Missalis Romani promulgated with the Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum of Paul VI, constitute – as the said document itself states - a “renovatio” of the Roman Missal promulgated by St. Pius V by decree of the Council of Trent in 1570, and in fact the Constitution praises the Missal for the fruits of evangelisation and holiness gained in four centuries by both priests and faithful.

    Pope Pius XII – the Constitution recalls– noted the need for revision and enrichment, calling for a revision of the Ordo of Holy Week; thence “huiusmodi Missalis Romani renovatio nequaquam ex improvviso inducta putanda est”. Even the Roman Missal of 1570 was the result of comparison and revision of ancients manuscripts and liturgical fonts, including eastern fonts, brought again into the light.

    With regard to the rites of the Ordo Missae the Constitution states: “probe servata eorum substantia, simpliciores facti sunt”. Furthermore it says the Missal was revised introducing, in addtion to the venerable patrimony of the Roman Liturgy, new norms for celebration.

    2. Despite some perplexity provoked by certain modern language versions, the “renovatio” of the other parts of the Missal is part of the physiological process of formation of liturgical books beginning with the ancient Roman Sacramentaries and eastern Euchologies of which, as we know, there were various editions, although one never abrogated the other. If the Gregorian Sacramentary and the Missal of St Pius V, for example, had been abrogated, how could one have drawn from them for the “renovatio”? Novus simply means the latest, ulterior development, not something different. Precisely because of coherent progress, the Missal is the tool of a degree of liturgical unity, in which there exist “legitimas varietates et aptationes”(cfr Sacrosanctum Concilium, n 38-40).

    Now, everyone knows that the new Ordo contains no few variants; indeed in the Editio Typica of 2000 they are even more numerous and are indicated, for example, with terms such as “vel” and “ pro opportunitate”. So it happens that on the one hand, some use these variants to distort, defer or even omit certain parts; on the other, there are those who prefer to use always the same eucharistic prayer and formulas. So, why should we wonder that some ask to use only the Roman Canon, certain prefaces and the ritual structures of the Roman Missal in the 1962 Edition issued by Pope John XXIII, and erroneously referred to as the “Tridentine rite”?

    Therefore Vatican II operated in the context of tradition and in tradition is set the legitimacy of the Ordo of Paul VI which is not in opposition to that of his predecessor, it never has been. So, no liturgical book or part of it has been abrogated, unless it contained errors: which happened precisely for the Institutio generalis Missalis Romani in 1969 when it had just been published and which Paul VI suspended for certain doctrinal ‘inaccuracies' and then had published again in May 1970 with amendments made at paragraph 7.

    3. Everyone is called to acknowledge the Missal as an eloquent expression of Church Tradition: it is senseless to de-legitimate anything of the old rite - it would be like severing the roots - from which the new comes, revealing the fecundity of the old. John Paul II recalled that “in the Roman Missal of St Pius V, as in many Easter Liturgies, there are beautiful prayers with which the priest expresses a most profound sense of humility and reverence before the holy mysteries: those prayers reveal the very substance of the Liturgy”( 21 September 2001).

    Not to mention the criteria of reciprocal generosity and mercy which should exist in the Church, following the Lord's example. Precisely this was the sense of an Indult issued by John Paul II on 3 October 1984 to celebrate Mass according to the Roman Missal of 1962 and now the Motu Proprio of Benedict XVI; this does not discredit the Liturgical Renewal as such but concern for the unity of the Church prevails 1. Because rather any hardening of positions, for the Liturgy must be valid the principle of Ecclesia semper reformanda, with the wise balance of nova et vetera taught by the Gospel

    We can conclude with an important text of the then Cardinal Ratzinger, who gave a conference on 24 October 1998 for pilgrims who had come to celebrate the 10th anniversary of Motu Proprio Ecclesia Dei issued by John Paul II:

    “The Council did not reform (in the sense of re-invent) the liturgical books, it ordered their revision and issued certain basic norms for that revision. In the first place the Council gave a definition of the Liturgy, and this definition is the term of comparison for every liturgical celebration. Whoever overlooks these norms or puts aside the normae generales found at paragraphs 34 - 36 of the Constitutio De Sacra Liturgia (SC), is certainly guilty of disobedience towards the Council! It is in the light of these criteria that liturgical celebrations must be assessed, whether they follow the old books or the new ones. It is good to recall here that Cardinal Newman observed that throughout her history the Church never abolished or banned orthodox forms of liturgy, something which would have been quite alien to the ecclesial spirit. An orthodox liturgy, that is, one which reveals the true faith, is never a compilation of various ceremonies, performed according to pragmatic criteria, constructed in a positivistic and arbitrary manner, today in such a way, tomorrow in another. Orthodox forms of a rite are a living reality, born of a dialogue of love between the Church and her Spouse. They are the expression of the Church's life and have nourished faith, prayer and true life of generations and in specific forms they incarnate both God's initiative and man's response. These rites can come to an end if those who used them in a particular epoch die, or if the living conditions of those people should change. The Church authority has the power to define and limit the use of such rites in the different historical situations, but she can never simply ban them! So the Council ordered the reform of the Liturgical Books but it did not ban the previous ones” (Notiziario 126-127 di UNA VOCE)...
    Do make Acts of Consecration to the Twin Hearts, Spiritual Offerings of the Precious Blood of Jesus in Union with the Holy Mass, like in St. Gertrude's Chaplet, along with Spiritual Communions at least every hour. The Saints say Spiritual Communions are a way to quickly advance to Union with God.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 17129
    • Reputation: +9518/-4101
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What should be Tradition's path in the next 10-20 years?
    « Reply #1 on: March 18, 2019, 07:59:43 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
  • XavierSem, you are a schismatic for having no motive of conscience to remain outside of full communion with the Church.

    Have a nice day.


    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4127
    • Reputation: +2562/-1192
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What should be Tradition's path in the next 10-20 years?
    « Reply #2 on: March 18, 2019, 09:32:05 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    A recent report from Rorate showed there are currently around 5,000 (and possibly as many as 7,000) Priests worldwide who - thanks to the SSPX, to Archbishop Lefebvre and also to His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI - offer the Traditional Mass.
    The latin mass owes no thanks to Cardinal Ratzinger or later, when he was Pope Benedict.  The "motu" issued by Pope Benedict is nothing more than an expansion of the 80s indult, where those who attend a latin mass "under new-rome" accept the heretical V2 council's errors and the sacrilegious and false novus ordo service as catholic. 


    Quote
    All Traditional Orders (the SSPX, FSSP, ICK, other groups etc) put together would perhaps be 1/7th of that 2nd number. Thanks to Summorum Pontificum and Universae Ecclesiae, a large number of diocesan Clergy and future Seminarians have begun to offer or at least are learning to offer the Mass of the Ages and of Tradition canonized and codified by Pope St. Pius V.
    It's a nice, sentimental thought to think that these priests are keeping alive a tradition, but if they continue to say the novus ordo, they are still poisoning themselves with error and anti-council of Trent theology.  The pure, unblemished, complete Faith is more important than the Mass!

    Quote
    Prior to his election, the Pope had written, "I am of the opinion, to be sure, that the old rite should be granted much more generously to all those who desire it. It is impossible to see what could be dangerous or unacceptable about that. A community is calling its very being into question when it suddenly declares that what until now was its holiest and highest possession is strictly forbidden and when it makes the longing for it seem downright indecent." Thanks to Bp. Fellay's and the other Society Bishops and Priests' persistent insistence, we had SP and UE.
    So the pope only wants to offer the True mass to those who desire it?  What about all the other catholics?  Don't they need the True Mass as well?  What hypocrisy and lies, spewed by the V2-loving Benedict.  May he convert before he dies, because I shudder to think of his eternal judgement for all of his support of the novelties and irreverences of V2.

    Quote
    Although it was wrongly and falsely claimed the True Mass was "forbidden" and good and holy Priests were unjustly persecuted, it was in fact always good and just to continue the traditional Mass, as even Pope Benedict XVI later acknowledged. That is proven by the fact that (1) The freemason apostate infiltrator Bugnini tried to get a decree that the Tridentine Mass was "forbidden", but this was refused because this would be "casting odium on the liturgical Tradition" (2) A commission of 9 Cardinals unanimously determined no Bishop could lawfully prohibit his Priests from offering the Tradition Mass and (3) (from the article below) "It is the present jurisprudence of the Church that, upon appeal, any suspension that an Ordinary attempts to inflict on a Priest for celebrating the Old Mass against the will of the bishop is automatically nullified."
    Wait, so you're saying that Quo Primum always allowed the True Mass to be said and that new-rome and Paul VI, JPII and Benedict (Card Ratzinger) lied to millions of Traditional Catholics for 50 years?  (yes and yes).  But then above, you praise +Fellay and the sspx for helping us to get SP and UE, which "allowed" the latin mass?  That's contradictory.  The SP and UE are unnecessary, as Quo Primum is and always has been, in force as law.  The SP and UE are an expansion of the indult laws of the 80s and are contrary to Quo Primum, therefore illegal and sinful.

    Quote
    Although the New Mass cannot be per se invalid, the Old Mass is vastly superior and remains the law of the Church per Quo Primum.
    The new mass can most certainly be invalid (for a number of reasons).  Go read the Ottaviani intervention.


    Quote
    What do you think is the best path for Tradition going forward, and what do you think must be the goal to work toward by 2035-2040, say? By that time, imho, Tradition should aim to have at least 20-25,000 Priests around the world directly from traditional orders, affiliated with about 100,000 Priests directly from the dioceses who are orthodox Catholics and offer the TLM.
    You could get 100% of all priests in the world to say the latin mass but if they continue to say the novus ordo and if they continue to accept the heresies of Modernism via V2, then their Faith is corrupted and their masses are not pleasing to God.  The pure, unblemished, complete Faith is more important than the Mass!

    Quote
    Is there a better path to pursue? 
    Yes, a return to the complete, 100% orthodox Faith.  A complete, 100% rejection of V2 and the new mass.  A complete, 100% return to fighting Modernism and Freemasonry, and preaching on the Holy Rosary, as did Pope St Pius X.  Every priest/bishop/catholic must publically take the Oath Against Modernism, preach against the errors of Protestantism, Freemasonry and Naturalism/Relativism/Atheism.  Every catholic couple must renew their marriage vows once a year.  Every diocese must promote public reparations to Our Lord and Our Lady through the 9 First Fridays and the 5 First Saturdays.  Every diocese must have public processions and public benedictions in reparation for the blasphemies and insults offered to Our Lord and His Holy Face.  Every diocese must have public rosary processions and promote the ArchConfraternity of the Rosary as a means to virtue.

    In summary, just return to the basics.

    Offline XavierSem

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1255
    • Reputation: +75/-121
    • Gender: Male
    • Immaculate Heart of Mary, May Your Triumph Come!
    Re: What should be Tradition's path in the next 10-20 years?
    « Reply #3 on: March 19, 2019, 05:01:26 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!2
  • XavierSem, you are a schismatic for having no motive of conscience to remain outside of full communion with the Church.

    Have a nice day.
    Sigh. Ladislaus, you clearly lack the Peace God wants you to have! So I again forgive you your name-calling and urge you to know and experience that peace for yourself by one good confession of the sin of sedevacantism and returning to full communion with the Church.
    Quote from: Pax Vobis
    The latin mass owes no thanks to Cardinal Ratzinger or later, when he was Pope Benedict.
    Really, no thanks at all? Thanks to God and also to His Vicar. The SSPX offered a Te Deum after Summorum Pontificum. Your words are that of an ungrateful son who's been badly misled on the duty of Catholic children toward the Holy Father and toward the Bishops. After Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop Fellay, His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI deserves very great credit. It was a grace from God that was released in the Month of the Precious Blood and came to us on the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross.

    There was infiltration and so many other things in the 60s that caused confusion. After SP, the injustice is largely corrected.

    Sedevacantism is a mortal sin (even in its variants like sedeprivationist absurdities) and you too should confess it and return.

    Quote
    the heretical V2 council

    If Vatican II was heretical, then the whole Catholic Church defected and disappeared at that moment, which is itself heretical to believe. It is false and the only thing true is that Vatican II was non-infallible, unlike all other previous Councils, as Pope Benedict XVI has confirmed.

    Pope Bl. Pius IX could have been describing men like you when H.H. said, "Incredibly, they boldly affirm that the Roman Pontiff and all the bishops, the priests and the people conjoined with him in the unity of faith and communion fell into heresy when they approved and professed the definitions of the Ecumenical Vatican Council. Therefore they deny also the indefectibility of the Church and blasphemously declare that it has perished throughout the world ... “The Church cries to her Spouse: Why do certain men withdrawing from me murmur against me? Why do these lost men claim that I have perished? Announce to me the length of my days, how long I will be in this world? Tell me on account of those who say: it was and is no longer; on account of those who say: the scriptures have been fulfilled, all nations have believed, but the Church has apostatized and perished from all nations. And He announced and the voice was not vain. What did He announce? ‘Behold I am with you all days even to the consummation of the world.’ Moved by your voices and your false opinions, it asked of God that He announce to it the length of its days and it found that God said ‘Behold I am with you all days even to the consummation of the world.’ Here you will say: He spoke about us; we are as we will be until the end of the world. Christ Himself is asked; He says ‘and this gospel will be preached in the whole world, in testimony to all nations, and then will come the end.’ Therefore the Church will be among all nations until the end of the world."

    Cardinal Ottaviani did not believe what you think he believed: His Eminence also said, “I have rejoiced profoundly to read the Discourse by the Holy Father on the question of the new Ordo Missae, and especially the doctrinal precisions contained in his discourses at the public Audiences of November 19 and 26, after which I believe, no can any longer be genuinely scandalized." and "The Beauty of the Church is equally resplendent in the variety of the liturgical rites which enrich her divine cult-when they are legitimate and conform to the faith. Precisely the legitimacy of their origin protects and guards them against infiltration of errors. . . .The purity and unity of faith is in this manner also upheld by the supreme magisterium of the Pope through the liturgical laws." Go read why Pope Pius XII in Mediator Dei said, "Certainly the loving Mother is spotless in the Sacraments". The Lord tells you even wicked men don't give stones to children who beg bread. You believe in a mother who deliberately and willingly poisons her own children who beg her for the Bread of Life.

    A new rite only acquires liturgical stability after around 200 years, as Quo Primum also said. The New Rite has only been around 50 years now. It will likely be gone in another 50 years. It's perfectly legitimate to promote the TLM as superior to the NO. Whatever is permitted by Indult by the Catholic Church, i.e. by the Pope and the Bishops in communion with him, is legitimate. It's not legitimate to say the New Mass is invalid, or is a Black Mass. That is both false and also denies Church indefectibility. Because of the infiltration which is a documented fact and which Our Lady spoke of in Akita etc, it wasn't carried out in perfect freedom. Now, finally,

    Read your Pope St. Pius X Catechism:
    Quote
    "5 Q. What is the form of the sacrament of the Eucharist?
    A. The form of the sacrament of the Eucharist consists of the words used by Jesus Christ Himself: "This is My Body: This is My Blood ... 

    ...62 Q. How should every Catholic act towards the Pope? A. Every Catholic must acknowledge the Pope as Father, Pastor, and Universal Teacher, and be united with him in mind and heart.63 Q. After the Pope, who are they who by Divine appointment are to be most venerated in the Church?
    A. After the Pope, those who by Divine appointment are to be most venerated in the Church are the Bishops." 

    I've cited to you Archbishop Lefebvre before in proof that Cardinal Mindszenty used to say Holy Mass in prison sometimes with little more than the Words of Consecration and without doubt, His Grace Archbishop Lefebvre said, that was a valid Sacrament and Sacrifice. When prayers are omitted, validity is not affected, but the grace received is less; that is what sacramental theology teaches and that is the true opinion on the new rites. It has been proven by many Priests, including Fr. Jean Michel Gleize, citing Archbishop Lefebvre and others. And if you disagree with them, why do you disagree with Bp. Williamson also? Are you, Pax Vobis, the Shepherd of the Church? The last Catholic?

    "These are the words of a wise man, the words of a man who pays attention to what he says.  Abp. Lefebvre also said:  “I never denied that these Masses said faithfully according to the Novus Ordo were valid;  nor did I ever say that they were heretical or blasphemous.”[2]  Careful, therefore!  Let us be firm, but let us not be simplistic.  The bad tendencies become more or less encrusted on the life of the Church, yet we cannot say that there are always and everywhere new institutions completely foreign to the Church." http://fsspx.news/en/content/23757

    See also this article originally from DICI: http://tradicat.blogspot.com/2013/11/dici-can-one-speak-of-conciliar-church.html
    Do make Acts of Consecration to the Twin Hearts, Spiritual Offerings of the Precious Blood of Jesus in Union with the Holy Mass, like in St. Gertrude's Chaplet, along with Spiritual Communions at least every hour. The Saints say Spiritual Communions are a way to quickly advance to Union with God.

    Offline JezusDeKoning

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2569
    • Reputation: +883/-870
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What should be Tradition's path in the next 10-20 years?
    « Reply #4 on: March 19, 2019, 06:54:13 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!2
  • Sedevacantism is a mortal sin? So a Catholic who has been faithful to the Church forever, but believes that the current popes are invalid is damned. 

    I don't believe that personally, but dogmatic sedeplenism is absolutely wrong. No one has formally declared or not if they are popes. It is not "is Mary sinless" levels of dogma, Xavier. It is an opinion.
    Tío Samuel, ven pa 'aca


    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4127
    • Reputation: +2562/-1192
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What should be Tradition's path in the next 10-20 years?
    « Reply #5 on: March 19, 2019, 10:09:27 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Quote
    Really, no thanks at all? Thanks to God and also to His Vicar. The SSPX offered a Te Deum after Summorum Pontificum. Your words are that of an ungrateful son who's been badly misled on the duty of Catholic children toward the Holy Father and toward the Bishops.

    You miss the point completely.  Either Quo Primum is still law or it isn't.  +Benedict said that Quo Primum is still law and this law allows the latin mass in perpetuity.  +Benedict said that the latin mass was not outlawed and "thus always permitted".  Most Trads knew that Quo Primum was still law way back in the 60s when the new mass came about - that's why they became Trads.  That means that there is no reason for "SP" to exist.  We don't need "SP" to give us an allowance that Quo Primum already gives.

    What +Benedict should have done is issue an apology for all the bishops who lied to entire Catholic world for 50 years when they told everyone that the True Mass is outlawed.  Instead, he gave us more contradiction and said that Quo Primum is still in force, then issued "SP" which ignores Quo Primum completely.  +Benedict promotes the new mass, he promotes the indult, he hands out communion in the hand.  He is not a friend of Tradition or Orthodoxy.  Let's pray he converts.

    Quote
    If Vatican II was heretical, then the whole Catholic Church defected and disappeared at that moment, which is itself heretical to believe. It is false and the only thing true is that Vatican II was non-infallible, unlike all other previous Councils, as Pope Benedict XVI has confirmed.

    V2 was not-infallible, meaning it is fallible, meaning it could contain error, meaning it could contain heresy.  If a fallible council contains error, this is not a defection of the Church.  Fallibility, by definition, means that error can happen.  The pope is not protected from error unless he follows the 4 requirements and defines doctrine.  V2 didn't define doctrine, therefore it's not protected from error.  V2 must not be accepted to the same degree that other doctrinal councils have to be.

    Quote
    Cardinal Ottaviani did not believe what you think he believed:
    It doesn't matter what he believes; what matters are facts.  Ottaviani wasn't the only theologian who wrote his Intervention; there were a group of top theologians who explained that the new mass is 1) a new theology which is contrary to the doctrines of Trent, 2) it's consecration can be positively doubted in its validity, 3) it's liturgy is protestant and anti-catholic.  The facts which the Intervention document presents have not changed.  The new mass has not been updated to improve upon the defects which were listed.  So, the problems still exist, the facts remain, regardless of if Ottaviani later accepted the new mass or not.

    Secondly, the new mass is not a requirement to get to heaven.  No V2 pope has EVER imposed a command that a catholic must accept it.  Therefore, because it is not a requirement on the Latin Church, therefore it is not a "received and approved" rite, therefore it can contain error and its illicitness and immorality has nothing to do with the Church's indefectibility, nor papal infallibility.
    Quote
    Cardinal Mindszenty used to say Holy Mass in prison sometimes with little more than the Words of Consecration and without doubt, His Grace Archbishop Lefebvre said, that was a valid Sacrament and Sacrifice. When prayers are omitted, validity is not affected, but the grace received is less; that is what sacramental theology teaches and that is the true opinion on the new rites.
    1.  A priest saying a shortened version of the Mass, under extreme duress in a prison setting, is not even in the same universe of comparison to the new mass, which teaches a new theology, protestantizes the liturgy and changed the consecration formula.  The new mass' purpose is to be anti-Trent, to minimize the sacrificial aspect, to be acceptable to people of all "faiths".  Go read what the V2 theologians say about the new mass.  They are heretics who hate the mass, bar none.  And they don't hide their hatred of Truth or the Faith.  You just have to be open to the fact that the new mass is an abomination.

    +ABL is not infallible nor is his theological opinion 100% trustworthy.  It is wrong to say that ALL new masses are invalid.  It is wrong to say that ALL are valid.  No one can know if it's valid or not - because the new rites are dependent upon the minister's PRIVATE intention, which no one can know.  And even if they are all valid, they are still illicit and sinful because they violate Quo Primum's commands that ONLY it's missal can be used.  New masses are also immoral because their theology is protestantized and anti-Trent.  This means that by attending, one will lose their understanding of the Faith, even if gradually, which is more important than the mass.

    Offline B from A

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 512
    • Reputation: +364/-81
    • Gender: Female
    Re: What should be Tradition's path in the next 10-20 years?
    « Reply #6 on: March 19, 2019, 10:54:23 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2

  • Quote
    +ABL is not infallible nor is his theological opinion 100% trustworthy.  It is wrong to say that ALL new masses are invalid.  It is wrong to say that ALL are valid.  No one can know if it's valid or not - ...
    .
    +ABL never said the Novus Ordo Mass is valid.  He said it might be or might not be, and that "fewer and fewer" are as time goes on.  

     Archbishop Lefebvre:
    Quote
    ... These New Masses are not only incapable of fulfilling our Sunday obligation, but are such that we must apply to them the canonical rules which the Church customarily applies to communicatio in sacris with Orthodox Churches and Protestant sects.


    Must one conclude further that all these Masses are invalid? As long as the essential conditions for validity are present (matter, form, intention, and a validly ordained priest), I do not see how one can affirm this.


    ...It is clear, however, that fewer and fewer Masses are valid these days, ...


    Quote
    It must be understood immediately that we do not hold to the absurd idea that if the New Mass is valid, we are then free to assist at it. The Church has always forbidden the faithful to assist at the Masses of heretics and schismatics, even when they are valid. It is clear that no one can assist at sacrilegious Masses or at Masses which endanger our faith.

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4127
    • Reputation: +2562/-1192
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What should be Tradition's path in the next 10-20 years?
    « Reply #7 on: March 19, 2019, 11:04:37 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • If you read the quote of +ABL that Xavier posted, yes he did.  +ABL flip-flopped very much on this issue (and I don't blame him, for the validity question is complicated).  Yet, as he and many others have concluded, even if you grant that 100% of novus ordo masses are valid, this does not mean they are moral, legal and pleasing to God.  So the question of validity is largely irrelevant.


    Offline B from A

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 512
    • Reputation: +364/-81
    • Gender: Female
    Re: What should be Tradition's path in the next 10-20 years?
    « Reply #8 on: March 19, 2019, 11:20:35 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2
  •  So the question of validity is largely irrelevant.
    Agreed on this ^ point, but I was replying to this specifically: 
    "+ABL is not infallible nor is his theological opinion 100% trustworthy.  It is wrong to say that ALL new masses are invalid.  It is wrong to say that ALL are valid.  No one can know if it's valid or not"
    which was speaking of validity.  

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4127
    • Reputation: +2562/-1192
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What should be Tradition's path in the next 10-20 years?
    « Reply #9 on: March 19, 2019, 12:14:12 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Last paragraph of Xavier's last post, he posted a quote from +ABL.

    Quote
    "These are the words of a wise man, the words of a man who pays attention to what he says.  Abp. Lefebvre also said:  “I never denied that these Masses said faithfully according to the Novus Ordo were valid;  nor did I ever say that they were heretical or blasphemous.”[2]  Careful, therefore!  Let us be firm, but let us not be simplistic.  The bad tendencies become more or less encrusted on the life of the Church, yet we cannot say that there are always and everywhere new institutions completely foreign to the Church." http://fsspx.news/en/content/23757

    See also this article originally from DICI: http://tradicat.blogspot.com/2013/11/dici-can-one-speak-of-conciliar-church.html

    Offline XavierSem

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1255
    • Reputation: +75/-121
    • Gender: Male
    • Immaculate Heart of Mary, May Your Triumph Come!
    Re: What should be Tradition's path in the next 10-20 years?
    « Reply #10 on: March 21, 2019, 01:24:13 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Correct, except it was not Xavier who wrote that article; but Fr. Jean Michel Gleize, Seminary Professor of Ecclesiology at Econe. My opinion is nothing and could be mistaken, but Fr. Gleize's teaching, with many proofs from authorities, has great weight. This is why I cannot understand the exaggerated claims of some in the Resistance who don't want to modify some rigorist positions that have been shown to be mistaken upon deeper study by clearly learned and holy Priests. Archbishop Lefebvre is right and I will defend His Grace's teaching below. But some articles from liturgy guy Brian Williams' site first showing how the right approach is already bearing fruits. 

    See https://liturgyguy.com/2013/10/23/return-of-the-seminarians/ also https://liturgyguy.com/2019/02/24/national-survey-results-what-we-learned-about-latin-mass-attendees/

    "It is interesting to see where many of our seminarians are coming from by taking a closer look at which dioceses are fostering vocations to the priesthood.

    The Diocese of Lincoln, Nebraska

    Currently the diocese has 47 young men in seminary despite having only 134 parishes and less than 98,000 Catholics. The Diocese of Lincoln has long been recognized (on a per capita basis) as a leader in producing vocations to the priesthood.

    For over 20 years Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz created an oasis of orthodoxy in the heartland of America. The diocese is known for its refusal to permit girls to serve at the altar, a strong support of the Traditional Latin Mass, many Catholic schools (including 6 high schools), multiple religious orders, as well as being home to the North American Seminary for the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter (FSSP). The success of Lincoln continues following the installation in 2012 of its ninth bishop, the Most Reverend James D. Conley. Which brings us to the next success story.

    The Diocese of Wichita, Kansas

    Currently Wichita has an astounding 59 young men in seminary ... In addition, the Diocese of Arlington has made the Extraordinary Form of the Mass more widely available to the faithful. Currently there are 12 parishes which offer the Latin Mass on a regular basis ...

    Immediately following the release of Summorum Pontificum by Pope Benedict XVI in 2007, Bishop Jugis sent several priests to learn how to offer the Mass in the Extraordinary Form. In addition, many of our current seminarians are being taught how to offer both forms of the Roman Rite. As our liturgical heritage is rediscovered, and the traditional and sacred beauty of the Church is presented to the faithful, we are experiencing a significant increase in vocations."

    If we take the right steps now, put an end to the unnecessary infighting, work together in unity and truth, founded on the right principles, with love for God and each other, I believe we will see greater victories in the next 2 or 3 decades than we can perhaps even dream of now.

    Pax Vobis, you are wrong, and Cardinal Ottaviani, Archbishop Lefebvre and now Bishop Fellay (and Bishop Williamson!) and Fr. Jean Michel Gleize are right. Answer this first: how can the Church, which the Magisterium has ever taught is a loving Mother spotless in Her sacraments, give Her children or even universally permit that Her children be given what, in your opinion, amounts to poison and sacrilege? The answer is that what you believe is absolutely wrong, heretical to believe, entirely impossible and prevented by indefectibility.

    The New Mass is an inferior form of the Mass that the Church was forced to use without perfect freedom. It is not sinful but has less grace.

    By the very fact that the entire Roman Rite Hierarchy has been using this Mass for almost 50 years, it clearly follows that it cannot be such.

    Also, have you ever really read the New Mass texts for yourself? Have you ever seen the New Mass offered in Latin versus Deum? One problem is the alternatives allowed, the 4 so-called Eucharistic prayers. But "EP 1" is only the Roman Canon. Also, the other "EPs", though they never should have been introduced into our Mass, are nevertheless from the East, and thus they will never ever be actually heretical.

    The New Mass will likely not exist anymore some 50 years from now, but since its been used for 50 years now, it cannot be called heretical.

    See https://lms.org.uk/missals This prayer is from the Canon in the New Mass, when "EP1" is followed: "To you, therefore, most merciful Father, we make humble prayer and petition through Jesus Christ, your Son, our Lord: that you accept and bless ✠ these gifts, these offerings, these holy and unblemished sacrifices, which we offer you firstly for your holy catholic Church. Be pleased to grant her peace, to guard, unite and govern her throughout the whole world, together with your servant N. our Pope and N. our Bishop, and all those who, holding to the truth, hand on the catholic and apostolic faith."

    And http://catholic-resources.org/ChurchDocs/RM3-EP1-4.htm these are sample excerpts from "EP 3 and EP 4" - "Therefore, O Lord, we celebrate the memorial of the saving Passion of your Son, his wondrous Resurrection and Ascension into heaven, and as we look forward to his second coming, we offer you in thanksgiving this holy and living sacrifice. Look, we pray, upon the oblation of your Church, and, recognizing the sacrificial Victim by whose death you willed to reconcile us to yourself, grant that we, who are nourished by the Body and Blood of your Son and filled with his Holy Spirit, may become one body, one spirit in Christ."

    And "Therefore, O Lord, as we now celebrate the memorial of our redemption, we remember Christ’s death and his descent to the realm of the dead; we proclaim his Resurrection and his Ascension to your right hand; and as we await his coming in glory, we offer you his Body and Blood, the sacrifice acceptable to you which brings salvation to the whole world ...Look, O Lord, upon the Sacrifice which you yourself have provided for your Church, and grant in your loving kindness to all who partake of this one Bread and one Chalice that, gathered into one body by the Holy Spirit, they may truly become a living sacrifice in Christ to the praise of your glory."

    These are from the East and they will never be heretical. If you wish to continue exaggerating without studying the Truth, it's up to you.

    As Fr. Gleize so rightly says, some people want to be emotional and simplistic. The Society is as firm as ever and strong in Truth, but not in unnecessary exaggeration and also in outright falsehoods like saying the New Mass is a Black Mass or is heretical etc.
    Do make Acts of Consecration to the Twin Hearts, Spiritual Offerings of the Precious Blood of Jesus in Union with the Holy Mass, like in St. Gertrude's Chaplet, along with Spiritual Communions at least every hour. The Saints say Spiritual Communions are a way to quickly advance to Union with God.


    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4127
    • Reputation: +2562/-1192
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What should be Tradition's path in the next 10-20 years?
    « Reply #11 on: March 21, 2019, 08:36:39 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    Archbishop Lefebvre is right and I will defend His Grace's teaching below.
    +ABL is correct regarding the validity of the new mass, when he says (paraphrasing his many, many comments on the issue): "I don't know".  And his conclusion is correct, because no one knows.  It depends on the individual priest, on his seminary training, on the canon prayers said.  It's very doubtful and canon law says it's a sin to attend a doubtful mass.  Ergo, you cannot go to the new mass.

    You cherry-pick one quote of his and run with it like it's gospel, while ignoring his other quotes.  That's not honest.
    ---
    Your view of the growth of the latin mass is very myopic.  You can point out growth in Nebraska and Kansas but what all the other areas where the True Liturgy is being slowly shut down?  More cherry-picking by you.

    See the below site for Ecclesia Dei.  In the US/Canada area, there are 615 churches where the latin mass used to be offered (I copied their site into a spreadsheet and counted).  I say "used to be" because many of these sites are no longer participating in the Old Liturgy.  Of the 615 churches listed, 84 have discontinued the latin mass.  That's 13.6%!  No small number.  

    So to argue that the True Mass is growing, is not true.  The facts show that in some places it is and some it is declining.  
    http://www.ecclesiadei.org/masses.cfm

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16