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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6

Author Topic: Where is +Vigano?  (Read 4015 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Marion

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1866
  • Reputation: +759/-1166
  • Gender: Male
  • sedem ablata
Re: Where is +Vigano?
« Reply #45 on: July 26, 2021, 02:35:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: ByzCat3000 on July 26, 2021, 01:58:19 PM
    I don't think Trent has in mind what we should think if what appears to be the hierarchy appears to promulgate a Protestantized Rite of mass.

    We don't need to think about what "Trent has in mind". The Canons mean what they say. And the Fathers give a context for the Canons.

    Quote from: Trent
    CHAPTER V.
    On the solemn ceremonies of the Sacrifice of the Mass.

    And whereas such is the nature of man, that, without external helps, he cannot easily be raised to the meditation of divine things; therefore has holy Mother Church instituted certain rites, to wit that certain things be pronounced in the mass in a low, and others in a louder, tone. She has likewise employed ceremonies, such as mystic benedictions, lights, incense, vestments, and many other things of this kind, derived from an apostolical discipline and tradition, whereby both the majesty of so great a sacrifice might be recommended, and the minds of the faithful be excited, by those visible signs of religion and piety, to the contemplation of those most sublime things which are hidden in this sacrifice.

    [...]

    CANON VII.--If any one saith, that the ceremonies, vestments, and outward signs, which the Catholic Church makes use of in the celebration of masses, are incentives to impiety, rather than offices of piety; let him be anathema.
    http://www.thecounciloftrent.com/ch22.htm




    Then there is an additional pertinent detail. The NO missal condemns a Canon of Trent:

    Quote from: Trent
    CANON IX.--If any one saith, that the rite of the Roman Church, according to which a part of the canon and the words of consecration are pronounced in a low tone, is to be condemned; [...]
    http://www.thecounciloftrent.com/ch22.htm


    The NO missal says that the nature of the canon requires that it be recited in a loud and clear voice such that everyone can hear it. This implies that the above Canon IX is against the nature of the canon and the words of consecration.

    Quote
    32. Natura partium “præsidentialium” exigit ut clara et elata voce proferantur et ab omnibus cuм attentione auscultentur. [...]
    http://media.musicasacra.com/books/latin_missal2002.pdf


    That's heresy. The NO missal is heretical.
    Logged
    That meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church. (Dei Filius)

    Offline forlorn

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2527
    • Reputation: +1041/-1106
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Where is +Vigano?
    « Reply #46 on: July 26, 2021, 02:37:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: ByzCat3000 on July 26, 2021, 01:58:19 PM
    I'm not persuaded this is how Trent is meant to be understood.  

    Trent is condemning the Protestant error that the vestments, ceremonies, etc. of the Catholic Church are harmful, in other words "we should go back to the primitive forms of doing things without vestments and ceremonies."

    I don't think Trent has in mind what we should think if what appears to be the hierarchy appears to promulgate a Protestantized Rite of mass.
    Condemnations of the NO are, if we take the NO to be a legitimate rite, still condemnations of the vestments, ceremonies, etc. of the Catholic Church.

    Trent didn't specify "Only Protestants are condemned if they call the ceremonies of the Church calls to impiety" or "Only those are condemned who call the Tridentine/Latin/Whatever Rite a call to impiety" or anything of that sort. It made a very general statement:

    Quote
    CANON IV.--If any one saith, that, by the sacrifice of the mass, a blasphemy is cast upon the most holy sacrifice of Christ consummated on the cross; or, that it is thereby derogated from; let him be anathema.

    CANON V.--If any one saith, that it is an imposture to celebrate masses in honour of the saints, and for obtaining their intercession with God, as the Church intends; let him be anathema.

    These two canons obviously apply to all Masses of the Church, otherwise Trent would be saying it's a-ok to call Eastern or Maronite Rite Masses blasphemous, which is ridiculous. Trent is clearly saying that the Masses of the Church and the ceremonies, vestments, etc. it uses to celebrate them cannot be blasphemous or calls to impiety. This is because the Church is the Body of Christ and the Ark of Noah. It exists to glorify God and save souls. The Church cannot institutionalise blasphemy or encourage souls to sin, or at least unwittingly partake in great sin, through its sacred liturgies and ceremonies. To do so would be a total defection and failure in Her mission.

    It is absurd to say that a true Mass of the Church could possibly be blasphemous, and it's not just 19th/20th century theologians saying that, but rather the dogma of an ecuмenical council. 
    Logged

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4806
    • Reputation: +2941/-682
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Where is +Vigano?
    « Reply #47 on: July 26, 2021, 02:38:12 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on July 26, 2021, 12:29:38 PM
    Then the NO Rite is not harmful.

    If Bergoglio is the pope and his “mass” isn’t harmful then why don’t you partake in it?
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline forlorn

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2527
    • Reputation: +1041/-1106
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Where is +Vigano?
    « Reply #48 on: July 26, 2021, 02:40:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Marion on July 26, 2021, 02:35:26 PM
    Then there is an additional pertinent detail. The NO missal condemns a Canon of Trent:
    http://www.thecounciloftrent.com/ch22.htm


    The NO missal says that the nature of the canon requires that it be recited in a loud and clear voice such that everyone can hear it. This implies that the above Canon is against the nature of the canon and the words of consecration.
    http://media.musicasacra.com/books/latin_missal2002.pdf


    That's heresy. The NO missal is heretical.
    Ok, hold on a second there. The NO Missal ordering it be recited in a loud voice is not a condemnation of the words of consecration being said in a low tone in the Tridentine Rite, or in any other rite that requires it. That's all that Trent anathemised--condemning the current practice of the Church in that matter. The post-Conciliar Church has continued to allow Latin Masses to say it in a low tone, so that canon has not been violated. Note that Trent didn't say it was heresy or blasphemy for it to be said in a loud tone either.
    Logged

    Offline Marion

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1866
    • Reputation: +759/-1166
    • Gender: Male
    • sedem ablata
    Re: Where is +Vigano?
    « Reply #49 on: July 26, 2021, 02:44:20 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: forlorn on July 26, 2021, 02:40:23 PM
    Ok, hold on a second there. The NO Missal ordering it be recited in a loud voice is not a condemnation of the words of consecration being said in a low tone in the Tridentine Rite, or in any other rite that requires it. That's all that Trent anathemised--condemning the current practice of the Church in that matter. The post-Conciliar Church has continued to allow Latin Masses to say it in a low tone, so that canon has not been violated. Note that Trent didn't say it was heresy or blasphemy for it to be said in a loud tone either.

    The NO missal doesn't just order to recite in a loud voice, it says that using a low tone is against the nature of the canon. Thus condemning more than 1000 years of practice as against the nature of the canon, as well as condemning the infallible Canon XI of Trent as advising against the nature of the canon.
    Logged
    That meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church. (Dei Filius)

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 15203
    • Reputation: +6241/-924
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Where is +Vigano?
    « Reply #50 on: July 26, 2021, 02:49:00 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Quo vadis Domine on July 26, 2021, 02:38:12 PM
    If Bergoglio is the pope and his “mass” isn’t harmful then why don’t you partake in it?
    He is the pope and the new jazz is harmful, which is why I do not partake in it. "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man."
    Logged
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4806
    • Reputation: +2941/-682
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Where is +Vigano?
    « Reply #51 on: July 26, 2021, 02:51:50 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on July 26, 2021, 02:49:00 PM
    He is the pope and the new jazz is harmful, which is why I do not partake in it. "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man."
    You just wrote that it WASN’T harmful. Which is it?
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 15203
    • Reputation: +6241/-924
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Where is +Vigano?
    « Reply #52 on: July 26, 2021, 02:52:24 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: forlorn on July 26, 2021, 02:37:11 PM
    These two canons obviously apply to all Masses of the Church...
    Agreed. The NO and it's jazz is not Catholic.
    Logged
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline forlorn

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2527
    • Reputation: +1041/-1106
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Where is +Vigano?
    « Reply #53 on: July 26, 2021, 02:52:36 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Marion on July 26, 2021, 02:44:20 PM
    The NO missal doesn't just order to recite in a loud voice, it says that using a low tone is against the nature of the canon. Thus condemning more than 1000 years of practice as against the nature of the canon, as well as condemning the infallible Canon XI of Trent as advising against the nature of the canon.

    Here's the official English translation:
    Quote
    32. The nature of the “presidential” texts demands that they be spoken in a loud and clear voice and that everyone listen with attention.[44] Thus, while the priest is speaking these texts, there should be no other prayers or singing, and the organ or other musical instruments should be silent.

    I'll admit my ignorance and admit I don't know what the term "presidential texts" means, but I'll take your word that it includes the words of consecration. This paragraph really only gives the author's opinion that these parts need to be read loud by their nature, and then orders it to be done that way in the missal. This contradicts Tridentine and ancient practice, I agree, but it doesn't say that anyone reading these same texts in a low tone is committing blasphemy, nor does it otherwise condemn them being read in a low tone in other missals(and indeed, the post-Conciliar Church has tolerated Indult Masses doing exactly that for decades now). So this view(that a loud tone is better than a low tone, but that a low tone is not blasphemous or whatever else) is not condemned by Trent.
    Logged

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 15203
    • Reputation: +6241/-924
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Where is +Vigano?
    « Reply #54 on: July 26, 2021, 02:53:29 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Quo vadis Domine on July 26, 2021, 02:51:50 PM
    You just wrote that it WASN’T harmful. Which is it?
    I was being devils advocate.
    Logged
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline forlorn

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2527
    • Reputation: +1041/-1106
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Where is +Vigano?
    « Reply #55 on: July 26, 2021, 02:54:39 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on July 26, 2021, 02:52:24 PM
    Agreed. The NO and it's jazz is not Catholic.
    Ok, but I quoted you here:

    Quote from: Stubborn on July 26, 2021, 12:00:10 PM
    The current pope means well, that's what the NO does to people who go there - even to popes.

    Consider for a moment that your the pope and no matter what, because of some infallibility introduced by theologians, i.e.  thanks to the protection of the Holy Ghost, you cannot impose a harmful Rite of Mass, or teach heresy.

    Imposing a prot service and preaching the NO religion where there's no more sin (unless you're a trad) only means more people get into heaven. Why wouldn't you do the same as he is doing?

    So do you or do you not believe that a Catholic Rite of Mass can be harmful? And if yes, then how do you resolve the Tridentine canons previously quoted?
    Logged

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 15203
    • Reputation: +6241/-924
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Where is +Vigano?
    « Reply #56 on: July 26, 2021, 03:02:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: forlorn on July 26, 2021, 02:54:39 PM
    Ok, but I quoted you here:

    So do you or do you not believe that a Catholic Rite of Mass can be harmful? And if yes, then how do you resolve the Tridentine canons previously quoted?
    I believe the current pope really means well, no one on earth can prove otherwise.

    The NO Rite has proven itself to be non anti-Catholic, it is a bit amazing to me that after 60 years of it and the destruction caused by it that so many still don't get that.

    What I was getting at, poster Hermes picked up right away, as he said:
    "Yes, I understand your perspective quite well. You are approaching this topic from an R&R mindset implicitly criticizing both the conservative Novus Ordo & Sedevacantist perspectives on ecclesiology".

    IOW, if the pope is divinely protected and cannot promulgate a harmful Rite, if this is a dogma or doctrine of the Church as so many believe, it isn't, but if it were, then the NO rite is infallibly safe.
    Logged
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4806
    • Reputation: +2941/-682
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Where is +Vigano?
    « Reply #57 on: July 26, 2021, 03:02:58 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on July 26, 2021, 02:53:29 PM
    I was being devils advocate.
    That’s not an answer....

    Oops.....I forgot.....it’s Stubborn.
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 15203
    • Reputation: +6241/-924
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Where is +Vigano?
    « Reply #58 on: July 26, 2021, 03:03:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Quo vadis Domine on July 26, 2021, 03:02:58 PM
    That’s not an answer....

    The NO Rite has proven itself to be non anti-Catholic, it is a bit amazing to me that after 60 years of it and the destruction caused by it that so many still don't get that.

    What I was getting at, poster Hermes picked up right away, as he said:
    "Yes, I understand your perspective quite well. You are approaching this topic from an R&R mindset implicitly criticizing both the conservative Novus Ordo & Sedevacantist perspectives on ecclesiology".

    IOW, if the pope is divinely protected and cannot promulgate a harmful Rite, if this is a dogma or doctrine of the Church as so many believe, it isn't, but if it were, then the NO rite is infallibly safe.
    Logged
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Marion

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1866
    • Reputation: +759/-1166
    • Gender: Male
    • sedem ablata
    Re: Where is +Vigano?
    « Reply #59 on: July 26, 2021, 03:11:55 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: forlorn on July 26, 2021, 02:52:36 PM
    I'll admit my ignorance and admit I don't know what the term "presidential texts" means, but I'll take your word that it includes the words of consecration. This paragraph really only gives the author's opinion that these parts need to be read loud by their nature, and then orders it to be done that way in the missal. This contradicts Tridentine and ancient practice, I agree, but it doesn't say that anyone reading these same texts in a low tone is committing blasphemy, nor does it otherwise condemn them being read in a low tone in other missals(and indeed, the post-Conciliar Church has tolerated Indult Masses doing exactly that for decades now). So this view(that a loud tone is better than a low tone, but that a low tone is not blasphemous or whatever else) is not condemned by Trent.

    By saying "against their nature", the NO missal says that pronouncing the words in a low tone is against ius divinum naturale, which implies that it is a sin of grave matter committed during the confection of a sacrament and hence to be condemned.

    The NO missal therefore on the one hand is condemned by Trent, and on the other hand condemns Trent and perennial Church practice.
    Logged
    That meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church. (Dei Filius)
    Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6
    « previous next »