Author Topic: Could the British Prime Minister be a Daily Rosary Saying, Tridentine Mass fan? (Read 4238 times)

Jaynek · « **Reply #15 on:** January 17, 2019, 06:41:37 AM »

Sorry Nadir. I meant to upvote your post but my finger slipped.
I guess I was all thumbs on the thumbs up.

Banezian · « **Reply #16 on:** January 17, 2019, 10:36:53 AM »

Quote from: Nadir on January 17, 2019, 06:30:11 AM

If you read the article you will find that he was married with a novus ordo mass in latin so it seems he might be a smells and bells man. He likes the Tridentine, but he's happy enough with the other.
.
IT is certainly inadvisable for a Catholic to marry an anglican, the Church frowns on Catholics marrying heretics, and as for a Catholic marrying in Canterbury cathedral well that would be a disgrace (if it were true).
.
Banezian, you classify yourself as traditional, but like many traditionalists you do not know the Catholic Faith well.
.
My impressions have been gained in the same way I gain impressions of any other posters, i.e. by your posts.
.
Though I must say I have been overly harsh and incharitable and for this I apologise.

So it seems you made the statement because I said I was fine with Mogg marrying an Anglican. You could have asked me to explain what I meant before making such a statement
My personal position when it comes to mixed marriages is a realistic one. There are very, very few traditional Christians in the modern world( let alone Traditional Catholics) That being the case, mixed marriage must be a serious consideration today. It’s sad that it’s gotten to that point, but that is the reality. If it were 1900 or even 1950, I would not say what I said, as there would have been plenty of Traditional Catholics. It’s 2019 though, and we must take the reality into account. Mogg has 6 children with his Anglican wife. How many N. O Catholic women would be willing to have that many children?
I’ve had a great amount of experience with Novus Ordo Catholics. Speaking personally as a young single man, I would absolutely marry a Traditional Orthodox or a Traditional Protestant(Anglican/Lutheran) before I thought about marrying an N. O Catholic.
I most certainly do not approve of Mogg getting married at Canterbury Cathedral or with an N. O Mass.
You claim I don’t know the Catholic Faith. This is probably because of my position on BOD. I follow Garrigou-Lagrange on this point, and I’ll take his position over the views of Cathinfo armchair theologians any day

ggreg · « **Reply #17 on:** January 17, 2019, 10:53:11 AM »

Quote from: Maria Regina on January 16, 2019, 12:33:38 PM

Genocide caused by deliberately tainted and bio-engineered mandated vaccines, abortion, and radicalized Muslim honor-killings, beheadings, and crucifixions are still taking place today. From what I have read in the British underground news, Muslims continue to kill and rape daily in the UK.

deliberately tainted and bio-engineered mandated vaccines

Not proven

abortion

Not genocide. Murder by the mother and spread across all ethnic groups.

radicalized Muslim honor-killings

Not genocide either except perhaps in ISIS controlled territory. Lasted a short period of time.

From what I have read in the British underground news, Muslims continue to kill and rape daily in the UK.

You need to read more objective opinions then. They certainly are not killing daily. That is nonsense.

I'd reckon you are more likely to be killed or raped by an illegal immigrant or negro in the USA than the UK. London is perhaps an exception to that rule. But in most English towns rapes are rare and Muslims are rare too. There are maybe a dozen or so hotspots where they collect together such as Luton, Bradford and various parts of London like the Isle of Dogs and west London. The rape victims tend to be girls with mental health issues or from broken families. They are not kidnapping and raping white girls walking home from grammar schools. They are grooming and raping neglected children who are usually inserting themselves into the Muslim's company (hanging around in Kebab shops) because their own family lives are broken.

Because London Airport is surrounded by Indian and Muslim immigrant areas visitors to the UK can easily get the impression that the UK is choc full of such people. But in my town for example only about 1 in 100 people are Muslims, if that. My son has 2 in his academic year from 220 students.

Same is true of London. It is a non-English city and completely different than the London I grew up in.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #18 on:** January 17, 2019, 11:40:38 AM »

What does it mean to be a "traditional Christian" vs. a "traditional Catholic"? There's no such thing as a traditional Christian except for a Traditional Catholic.

If you can't find a Traditional Catholic spouse, then at least go with a conservative Novus Ordo type who still has the faith and believes the same core things as what the Church teaches on faith and morals. There's much less a divide there. At least you both profess the Catholic faith ... vs. marrying a heretic.

Not that this man is a Traditional Catholic. Surely he could have found a conservative Novus Ordo wife. But she is worth lots of money and seems to have ties with nobility.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #19 on:** January 17, 2019, 11:42:52 AM »

While the man seems to be very strong on Catholic morals, and he would be far preferable to any other politician out there, I do suspect that his inclinations toward the Tridentine Mass may be simply a function of his overall foppish tendencies ... so, as someone else said, a smells and bells man.

Banezian · « **Reply #20 on:** January 17, 2019, 02:58:01 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on January 17, 2019, 11:40:38 AM

What does it mean to be a "traditional Christian" vs. a "traditional Catholic"? There's no such thing as a traditional Christian except for a Traditional Catholic.

If you can't find a Traditional Catholic spouse, then at least go with a conservative Novus Ordo type who still has the faith and believes the same core things as what the Church teaches on faith and morals. There's much less a divide there. At least you both profess the Catholic faith ... vs. marrying a heretic.

Not that this man is a Traditional Catholic. Surely he could have found a conservative Novus Ordo wife. But she is worth lots of money and seems to have ties with nobility.

When I speak of a “traditional Christian” I mean a woman who is culturally traditional and believes what all Christians have believed throughou the ages. “Conservative” Novus Ordo women worship JPII. They’ll tell you that one doesn’t need to believe in Christ to be saved and that we worship the same God as Jєωs ( thry think the Old Covenant is still valid) Thry call themselves “JPII Feminists” They don’t dress or act like women. 100 years ago, these women would not have been accepted in any Christian circles( let alone Catholic) No decent/pious Orthodox or Anglican/Lutheran(and I mean the most traditional among them ) is like that. They do not worship the Jєωs nor will they say one can be saved without Christ. Certainly even traditional Protestants are in grave error on several points, but I’m closer to traditional Orth9dox than I am to any Novus Ordo. Outside of papal primacy, Traditional Orthodox don’t disagree with us on much anything substantial ( when one really gets into the technical aspects of theological questions)

Nadir · « **Reply #21 on:** January 17, 2019, 04:07:28 PM »

Quote from: Banezian on January 16, 2019, 06:09:02 PM

Mogg is married to an Anglican.( they were married at Canterbury Cathedral) I don’t see anything wrong with it myself, but that might make you folks think less of him.

Married to an anglican in Canterbury Cathedral means married outside the Church. Whether or not what you claim above is true, you are giving a lot away about yourself which would point in the direction of ignorance of the mind of the Church.
That you don't see anything wrong with that (marrying a heretic in the Anglican church) shows you have a poor knowledge of the Catholic Faith.

Banezian · « **Reply #22 on:** January 17, 2019, 04:17:37 PM »

Quote from: Nadir on January 17, 2019, 04:07:28 PM

Married to an anglican in Canterbury Cathedral means married outside the Church. Whether or not what you claim above is true, you are giving a lot away about yourself which would point in the direction of ignorance of the mind of the Church.
That you don't see anything wrong with that (marrying a heretic in the Anglican church) shows you have a poor knowledge of the Catholic Faith.

Did you bother to read my last post? I said I DO NOT approve of him marrying in Canterbury Cathedral. That was wrong. As I have also said, mixed marriages are not ideal but they must be accepted in the modern world. Please, read what I write before attacking me

ggreg · « **Reply #23 on:** January 17, 2019, 06:18:52 PM »

Never let perfect be the enemy of good.

Nadir · « **Reply #24 on:** January 18, 2019, 01:37:30 AM »

Quote from: Banezian on January 17, 2019, 02:58:01 PM

When I speak of a “traditional Christian” I mean a woman who is culturally traditional and believes what all Christians have believed throughou the ages. “Conservative” Novus Ordo women worship JPII. They’ll tell you that one doesn’t need to believe in Christ to be saved and that we worship the same God as Jєωs ( thry think the Old Covenant is still valid) Thry call themselves “JPII Feminists” They don’t dress or act like women. 100 years ago, these women would not have been accepted in any Christian circles( let alone Catholic) No decent/pious Orthodox or Anglican/Lutheran(and I mean the most traditional among them ) is like that. They do not worship the Jєωs nor will they say one can be saved without Christ. Certainly even traditional Protestants are in grave error on several points, but I’m closer to traditional Orth9dox than I am to any Novus Ordo. Outside of papal primacy, Traditional Orthodox don’t disagree with us on much anything substantial ( when one really gets into the technical aspects of theological questions)

Here is your last post. Nothing there about said non-approval.
.
Also you need to brush up on "Orthodoxy".
.
Do you cosider the Immaculate Conception something substantial?
How about Purgatory? Original sin? The Filioque? The indissolubility of marriage? The Church councils?

Banezian · « **Reply #25 on:** January 18, 2019, 04:15:12 AM »

Quote from: Nadir on January 18, 2019, 01:37:30 AM

Here is your last post. Nothing there about said non-approval.
.
Also you need to brush up on "Orthodoxy".
.
Do you cosider the Immaculate Conception something substantial?
How about Purgatory? Original sin? The Filioque? The indissolubility of marriage? The Church councils?

I meant my post on Mogg and Canterbury Cathedral. If you bother to look, I say
“I most certainly do not approve of Mogg getting married at Canterbury Cathedral or with an N. O Mass. ”

Also your latest post shows you know very little about Orthodoxy. Typical claims made about Orthodoxy by Trads who don’t actualy know any Orthodox. Here are some corrections

1. The Orthodox do not deny the Immaculate Conception. They view Mary as “All Pure” They just say it isn’t needed, because their understanding of Original Sin is not Augustinian. No serious Orthodox would ever say that Mary was a sinner in any way.
2. The Orthodox do not deny Purgatory. They just have serious issues with the Medieval understanding of Purgatory( as do I) The Orthodox are not like Protestants. They do believe that there is a state after death and before Heaven for some, but they refuse to speculate about it. Trent says that we can not know the nature of Purgatory, so no disagreement there.
3. As far as Original Sin is concerned, the Orthodox follow the Eastern Fathers instead of Augustine. They will say that we are left with the effects of Original Sin after the fall, but they dislike speaking of “guilt” when it comes to Original Sin. Even so, some Orthodox theologians will say that we are guilty of Adam’s sin only by analogy, and that’s essentially what the Church teaches( we certainly aren’t personally guilty of Adam’s own sin) the Catholic Encyclopedia article on Original Sin goes into the technical aspects of the Church’s teaching.
4. The Filioque is a very, very complex topic to get into. It’s not even worth discussing if you haven’t had at least some formal study of theology. The problem the Orthodox seem to have is not so much with the teaching itself, but with the fact that it was added to the Creed. Say what you will, but the Church has more or less conceded this by allowing Eastern Catholics not to say the Filioque in the Creed.
5. Traditionalist Orthodox view marriage more or less the same way as Catholics. A “divorce” for them would be the equivalent of an anullment in the Catholic Church. Traditional Orthodox bishops would only allow them in extreme situations.

Remember, I specifically said Traditional Orthodox. They have their liberals, but so does the Church. If you want an educated Catholic prospective on Orthodoxy, I’d recommend the work of Fr. Aidan Nichols O. P
http://www.christendom-awake.org/pages/anichols/orthodox.html

Last Tradhican · « **Reply #26 on:** January 18, 2019, 06:52:17 AM »

Quote from: Banezian on January 18, 2019, 04:15:12 AM

I meant my post on Mogg and Canterbury Cathedral. If you bother to look, I say
“I most certainly do not approve of Mogg getting married at Canterbury Cathedral or with an N. O Mass. ”

Also your latest post shows you know very little about Orthodoxy. Typical claims made about Orthodoxy by Trads who don’t actualy know any Orthodox. Here are some corrections

1. The Orthodox do not deny the Immaculate Conception. They view Mary as “All Pure” They just say it isn’t needed, because their understanding of Original Sin is not Augustinian. No serious Orthodox would ever say that Mary was a sinner in any way.
2. The Orthodox do not deny Purgatory. They just have serious issues with the Medieval understanding of Purgatory( as do I) The Orthodox are not like Protestants. They do believe that there is a state after death and before Heaven for some, but they refuse to speculate about it. Trent says that we can not know the nature of Purgatory, so no disagreement there.
3. As far as Original Sin is concerned, the Orthodox follow the Eastern Fathers instead of Augustine. They will say that we are left with the effects of Original Sin after the fall, but they dislike speaking of “guilt” when it comes to Original Sin. Even so, some Orthodox theologians will say that we are guilty of Adam’s sin only by analogy, and that’s essentially what the Church teaches( we certainly aren’t personally guilty of Adam’s own sin) the Catholic Encyclopedia article on Original Sin goes into the technical aspects of the Church’s teaching.
4. The Filioque is a very, very complex topic to get into. It’s not even worth discussing if you haven’t had at least some formal study of theology. The problem the Orthodox seem to have is not so much with the teaching itself, but with the fact that it was added to the Creed. Say what you will, but the Church has more or less conceded this by allowing Eastern Catholics not to say the Filioque in the Creed.
5. Traditionalist Orthodox view marriage more or less the same way as Catholics. A “divorce” for them would be the equivalent of an anullment in the Catholic Church. Traditional Orthodox bishops would only allow them in extreme situations.

Remember, I specifically said Traditional Orthodox. They have their liberals, but so does the Church. If you want an educated Catholic prospective on Orthodoxy, I’d recommend the work of Fr. Aidan Nichols O. P
http://www.christendom-awake.org/pages/anichols/orthodox.html

The more you write the more you prove that you are not Catholic. For good reason your reputation vote score is strongly negative.

forlorn · « **Reply #27 on:** January 18, 2019, 08:44:10 AM »

Quote from: Banezian on January 18, 2019, 04:15:12 AM

I meant my post on Mogg and Canterbury Cathedral. If you bother to look, I say
“I most certainly do not approve of Mogg getting married at Canterbury Cathedral or with an N. O Mass. ”

Also your latest post shows you know very little about Orthodoxy. Typical claims made about Orthodoxy by Trads who don’t actualy know any Orthodox. Here are some corrections

1. The Orthodox do not deny the Immaculate Conception. They view Mary as “All Pure” They just say it isn’t needed, because their understanding of Original Sin is not Augustinian. No serious Orthodox would ever say that Mary was a sinner in any way.
2. The Orthodox do not deny Purgatory. They just have serious issues with the Medieval understanding of Purgatory( as do I) The Orthodox are not like Protestants. They do believe that there is a state after death and before Heaven for some, but they refuse to speculate about it. Trent says that we can not know the nature of Purgatory, so no disagreement there.
3. As far as Original Sin is concerned, the Orthodox follow the Eastern Fathers instead of Augustine. They will say that we are left with the effects of Original Sin after the fall, but they dislike speaking of “guilt” when it comes to Original Sin. Even so, some Orthodox theologians will say that we are guilty of Adam’s sin only by analogy, and that’s essentially what the Church teaches( we certainly aren’t personally guilty of Adam’s own sin) the Catholic Encyclopedia article on Original Sin goes into the technical aspects of the Church’s teaching.
4. The Filioque is a very, very complex topic to get into. It’s not even worth discussing if you haven’t had at least some formal study of theology. The problem the Orthodox seem to have is not so much with the teaching itself, but with the fact that it was added to the Creed. Say what you will, but the Church has more or less conceded this by allowing Eastern Catholics not to say the Filioque in the Creed.
5. Traditionalist Orthodox view marriage more or less the same way as Catholics. A “divorce” for them would be the equivalent of an anullment in the Catholic Church. Traditional Orthodox bishops would only allow them in extreme situations.

Remember, I specifically said Traditional Orthodox. They have their liberals, but so does the Church. If you want an educated Catholic prospective on Orthodoxy, I’d recommend the work of Fr. Aidan Nichols O. P
http://www.christendom-awake.org/pages/anichols/orthodox.html

That's all well and good, but isn't it Church teaching that the Orthodox and all other schismatics are damned?

Banezian · « **Reply #28 on:** January 18, 2019, 01:54:29 PM »

Quote from: forlorn on January 18, 2019, 08:44:10 AM

That's all well and good, but isn't it Church teaching that the Orthodox and all other schismatics are damned?

No. There are various understandings on EENS. Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange says
“Theologians in general are inclined to fill out what Scripture and tradition tell us by distinguishing the means of salvation given to Catholics from those that are given men of good will beyond the borders of the Church. …If we are treating of all Christians, of all who have been baptized, Catholic, schismatic, Protestant, it is more probable, theologians generally say, that the great number is saved. First, the number of infants who die in the state of grace before reaching the age of reason is very great. Secondly, many Protestants, being today in good faith, can be reconciled to God by an act of contrition, particularly in danger of death. Thirdly, schismatics can receive a valid absolution.”

Banezian · « **Reply #29 on:** January 18, 2019, 01:57:08 PM »

Quote from: Last Tradhican on January 18, 2019, 06:52:17 AM

The more you write the more you prove that you are not Catholic. For good reason your reputation vote score is strongly negative.

No friend, my reputation is low because I’m not a shallow nut like many on here.

Author Topic: Could the British Prime Minister be a Daily Rosary Saying, Tridentine Mass fan? (Read 4238 times)

Jaynek

Re: Could the British Prime Minister be a Daily Rosary Saying, Tridentine Mass fan?

Banezian

Re: Could the British Prime Minister be a Daily Rosary Saying, Tridentine Mass fan?

ggreg

Re: Could the British Prime Minister be a Daily Rosary Saying, Tridentine Mass fan?

Ladislaus

Re: Could the British Prime Minister be a Daily Rosary Saying, Tridentine Mass fan?

Ladislaus

Re: Could the British Prime Minister be a Daily Rosary Saying, Tridentine Mass fan?

Banezian

Re: Could the British Prime Minister be a Daily Rosary Saying, Tridentine Mass fan?

Nadir

Re: Could the British Prime Minister be a Daily Rosary Saying, Tridentine Mass fan?

Banezian

Re: Could the British Prime Minister be a Daily Rosary Saying, Tridentine Mass fan?

ggreg

Re: Could the British Prime Minister be a Daily Rosary Saying, Tridentine Mass fan?

Nadir

Re: Could the British Prime Minister be a Daily Rosary Saying, Tridentine Mass fan?

Banezian

Re: Could the British Prime Minister be a Daily Rosary Saying, Tridentine Mass fan?

Last Tradhican

Re: Could the British Prime Minister be a Daily Rosary Saying, Tridentine Mass fan?

forlorn

Re: Could the British Prime Minister be a Daily Rosary Saying, Tridentine Mass fan?

Banezian

Re: Could the British Prime Minister be a Daily Rosary Saying, Tridentine Mass fan?

Banezian

Re: Could the British Prime Minister be a Daily Rosary Saying, Tridentine Mass fan?