Author Topic: New Guy, Old Trads  (Read 3226 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline BTNYC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2465
  • Reputation: +2796/-28
  • Gender: Male
New Guy, Old Trads
« Reply #30 on: August 06, 2015, 07:37:55 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Cosmos
    Quote from: Capt McQuigg
    Welcome aboard, Cosmos.

    You were in your early 20's when Vatican II took place.  What was the general attitude of your fellow parishioners when the Mass was changed?  

    How old were you when your parish started using Communion in the Hand?

    How did you discover the FSSP?



    Observably it was very subtle. I just did what I was told as regards to anything about my religion. To understand why, you need to live through the "Angela's Ashes" days of the early 50's. There was none of this liberal permissive free thinking that there is now.

    My first in-hand I recall, but it wasn't significant to me. When the changes were fed to us peacemeal, it would be hard to read that has a premonition of disaster. Again, I guess some would say that it and other changes were a part of the grand conspiracy, and perhaps that is true.  Back in the 70's I recall someone questioned the facing the congregation altar, and it was then that I felt the first indicators something was wrong as I agreed to the reasoning that we should face God, and He should not see our backs. Maybe wrong is not the word, but it was not UNLIKE the protestant churches I attended a few times.


    Cosmos is the same age as my mother, and what he describes sounds very famiiar to me - It sounds just like what my mother and aunts and uncles describe the changes being like - a veritable boiling of frogs if ever there was such a case.

    This also puts me in mind of a passage from The Great Sacrilege, where Fr. Wathen describes the insidious manner in which the Novus Ordo was implemented, and his prophetic description of how the children of that generation who watched the changes occur passively (that generation of children being my genertion, and most of us here on CI) would be better able to see the NO for what it is, not having been raised with the TLM, and therefore not "reading into" the NO what actually is not there...

    For the record, my mother (and one aunt) who actually now decry those changes and long for the days of the ubiquitous TLM, paradoxically are still unable to pull themselves entirely away from the NO. It's absolutely disheartening and maddening for me as a son, and I think Fr. Wathen perfectly describes the psychology behind this phenomenon as well in this passage:

    Quote from: Fr. James Wathen

    One can analyze the “New Mass” properly only by
    comparing it with that which its creators claim it is, the
    Mass of the Roman Rite. When Catholics now go to “mass,”
    their habit is to see what is not there. The reason is, they have all
    but forgotten the True Mass, and what they see is a resemblance of
    it. They read meanings into words which the words they hear
    do not say, while they fail to advert to what the words do say.
    In this way, the real objectives of the “vernacular movement”
    are realized. It does not occur to the faithful that their children,
    not having the mental background they do, are better able to
    see the thing as it is, for they see only what is there, and hear
    only the words which are spoken. The people do not wish to
    awaken to what has happened (and is still happening). They
    live in a fictitious world, and they resent any effort to jolt them
    out of it. Such an awakening would cause them a great
    problem, a great host of problems, every kind of friction,
    inconvenience, and readjustment. And it would impose such
    noisome burdens.

    While the True Mass was being withdrawn from them, the
    people watched and endured it helplessly, uncomprehendingly,
    resignedly. And all the while it was being done, they were being
    “re-educated”: on the one hand, while the True Mass was being
    hidden from view, erased from their memory, every kind of
    irreverent, pseudo-liturgical, and specious criticism was being
    made against it by their clerical indoctrinators; on the other
    hand, as the parts of the Replacement were being eased in,
    various and sundry equally implausible rationalizations were
    being pumped into their bewildered brains. Those who
    showed mistrust and suspicion or who raised objections were
    subjected to withering scorn. Even now, most Catholics are
    unaware of the immeasurable dissimilarity between the True
    Mass and its perfidious Plagiarism. They really think that the
    main differences are a change in language and the turning
    around of the altar. Three other factors contributed to their
    subversion. For one thing, the language of the “New Mass”
    sounds truly pious and prayerful. For another, everything
    about the “new religion” is decidedly easier, pleasanter,
    friendlier, more casual—and, at times, simply great fun! And
    most insidious of all is the argument that the changes are good
    if you like them. “If you like them!” This means you are
    praying better. If the new way makes you feel better, your
    worship is bound to be better. The one question never allowed
    was whether God approves of this “New Religion.” Of course,
    it does not matter, for “The People is Baal.”

    Offline Cosmos

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 12
    • Reputation: +14/-0
    New Guy, Old Trads
    « Reply #31 on: August 06, 2015, 11:14:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Nadir


    I have read all of Archbishop Lefebvre's papers to the community, and the story of the insurgent activity in the Vatican, such as the Masonic infiltration and such. I'm not sure if all that is true. Is there any citation of the validity of this, even from neutral upper ecclesial echelon.? If true, there should be some.


    What does this - neutral upper ecclesial echelon - mean? Just who did you have in mind.

     [/quote]

    Sorry for confusion. Like bystanders in a dispute, I thought there might be some neutral magesterium as observers/insiders, who through their correspondence to others could shed a detached point of view on the matter.
    The Truth either indicts or exonerates.


    Offline Nadir

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6324
    • Reputation: +3423/-213
    • Gender: Female
    New Guy, Old Trads
    « Reply #32 on: August 07, 2015, 03:42:23 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Cosmos
    Quote from: Cosmos


    I have read all of Archbishop Lefebvre's papers to the community, and the story of the insurgent activity in the Vatican, such as the Masonic infiltration and such. I'm not sure if all that is true. Is there any citation of the validity of this, even from neutral upper ecclesial echelon.? If true, there should be some.


    Quote from: Nadir
    What does this - neutral upper ecclesial echelon - mean? Just who did you have in mind.

     


    Sorry for confusion. Like bystanders in a dispute, I thought there might be some neutral magesterium as observers/insiders, who through their correspondence to others could shed a detached point of view on the matter.


    Well I guess we are all bystanders. It's just that not all bystanders are taking notice.

    There is not such thing as a neutral magisterium.

    As I said earlier, if you wait for today's regime to acknowledge and condemn the judeo-masonic influence in the Church, you might wait a while.

    However there are many trustworthy sources to confirm the infiltration of the Church by judeo-masonry. Jesus Himself told Padre Pio that he had singled out don Luigi Villa for fighting freemasonry in the Church. You can't have a higher recommendation than that. So if you want the truth on this subject, and it is crucial in understanding the state of the Church, you can't go past Fr Villa's writings.

    Others here I am sure have other suggestions. I would suggest also that you read
    Vicomte Leon de Poncins, Freemasonary and the Vatican
    You can buy it through Matthew by clicking the link on the home page:
    Click here to start your Amazon.com session so CathInfo gets credit!




    Offline BTNYC

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2465
    • Reputation: +2796/-28
    • Gender: Male
    New Guy, Old Trads
    « Reply #33 on: August 07, 2015, 08:00:43 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Nadir


    As I said earlier, if you wait for today's regime to acknowledge and condemn the judeo-masonic influence in the Church, you might wait a while.

    However there are many trustworthy sources to confirm the infiltration of the Church by judeo-masonry. Jesus Himself told Padre Pio that he had singled out don Luigi Villa for fighting freemasonry in the Church. You can't have a higher recommendation than that. So if you want the truth on this subject, and it is crucial in understanding the state of the Church, you can't go past Fr Villa's writings.



    I echo the endorsement of Fr. Villa's writings.

    The evidence for Masonic infiltration is overwhelming. There's Paul VI's famous "through some crack the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God," which testifies to this (though the "crack" which he seemed so mystified by was nothing less than the Council he brought to a close and all the damnable novelties he promulgated and / or allowed to flourish in its wake), as do the pope's actions against Bugnini when the latter was - by all credible accounts - revealed to be among the hundreds of high ranking clerical Masons.

    Plus we have the warnings of the Popes of old - they warned us of the diabolical religious indifferentism that is the Masons' hallmark - the very same religious indifferentism that the Novus Ordo sect now pushes and promotes.

    What more "proof" is needed to add 2 + 2 to come up with 4?

     

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