Author Topic: THE NEW HYBRID MASS -- ROUGH DRAFT (Read 4838 times)

holysoulsacademy · « **Reply #15 on:** April 26, 2014, 09:14:25 PM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

.

Note:

Solidus, please do not read this.

Thank you.

It is a matter of record that Bishop Fellay and his various sympathizers and helpers have been instigating adjustments in their liturgical practices, at a very subtle and gradual pace, so as to not be too noticeable. And furthermore, when these things are noticed and opposed, there are consequences. Sometimes a priest is suddenly transferred for no good reason, or a parishioner is refused the sacraments, or else told he cannot attend this particular chapel. Imagine having the job as a bouncer at your church. I have known men who have had to do that job, and they did not appreciate it. There is a difference between that and the office of Porter, in the traditional sense. An usher does a task that is an outgrowth of the Porter level of minor orders.

..........Get ready to hear Fellay and his cronies have a good word to say about this.........

Apparently someone mistakenly extracted "hate" from this warning. We already know that there has been, and there continues to be, an abiding intention to assimilate the SSPX into the mainstream Newchurch. The current 'excuse' is that from the 'inside' the Society would be much better able to help the modernist Romans to reform themselves and become more traditional. If you don't believe me when I warn you that this will not happen, maybe you'd believe the more wise words of Archbishop Lefebvre. For one, the SSPX doesn't have to 'change' anything to be on the 'inside' because the SSPX is already inside the Church. The SSPX has never left. It's the Conciliar and modernist Romans who have left.

But it's the abiding push toward the prospect of becoming somehow 'recognized' or 'normalized' that the current leadership uses to advance their subtle agenda. They're afraid of being too obvious. In 1994 when +F was first elected, he was extremely subtle. He hid his agenda very well. I saw him give a 3-hour conference just a few years later (I was present for the WHOLE THING) in which he described the recognition or normalization of the SSPX as a kind of "luscious plum" (his exact words, I assure you!) that is most appealing to behold. Does that sound familiar at all to you? How about the Book of Genesis, chapter three, verse six?

"And the woman saw that the tree was good to eat, and fair to the eyes, and delightful to behold : and she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat..."

There is absolutely no doubt, and I am not making it up, that for the past 20 years, +F has been expressing his GREAT DESIRE to achieve an accord with Rome. Please pardon me for going to the logical extreme, and saying the obvious, it has always been for him an obsession.

I am not saying that it's bad to want to be normalized with the One True Church, but the problem is, Rome, in its current condition, is not acting like that, and ask any sedevacantist, some of whom are on this forum, and they will immediately assure you that therefore, the post-conciliar Romans are not in the Church of Christ. They might even quote Vat.II to prove their point (LG 8).

Just as +F has made no secret of his constant drift toward eventual normalization, he has likewise not abstained from daring to use doctrine as a poker chip on the craps table of negotiations with Rome. Sorry if my language is shocking to your ears. And Solidus, you're not supposed to be reading this, so you're disobedient!! But this has to be said by someone. Doctrine is not a play-toy. Doctrine cannot be bargained with. Because doctrine is non-negotiable. If you don't understand that, then there is your problem, right there.

SINCE IT IS TRUE that +F has dared to bargain using doctrine as a thing that can be compromised, and SINCE IT IS TRUE that he has said that if ABL had seen the NovusOrdo performed so well as +F saw it done that ABL would "never have taken the step he did," and SINCE IT IS TRUE that +F has gone to the extent of introducing various innovations in his liturgical practices as if accommodation with Newchurch doings is something somehow attractive or desirable, it's not any kind of leap, really, to expect that he or his friends will have something positive to say about the way that the Newcanonization liturgy is being conducted tomorrow, Quasimodo Sunday, will be something commendable, in some manner.

Mark my words. They WILL have good things to say about the Newcanonizations (they won't use THAT term, though), even if they have already gone on record denouncing the fact that the Newcanonizations are taking place at all. These proceedings are being broadcast for the first time by the Vatican in high definition, 3-D live streaming video, to all the world. This is another first. I could make a list of all the firsts, if you want one. Do you want a list?

Therefore, I am not just making it up when I say the following:

..........Get ready to hear Fellay and his cronies have a good word to say about this.........

The reason they will most assuredly have a good word to say about this is, there are a number of things about "this" that are commendable, that is, if you only look at individual, narrow things. I could make a list. Do you want a list?

But the reason I say they're going to have a good word to say about it is, they been tending to have good words to say about just about everything these two recent popes have done for the past 9 years since JPII passed away on April Fools' Day, I mean, the day after that. (Maybe.)

If you need a list of that, I can help you out there, too. Therefore, anyone who says that my warning constitutes some kind of 'hatred' is just fooling himself. This is just the plain truth, and if you don't like the truth, then that's not my doing, is it?

.

What is most troubling with comments very similar to those of Solidus is their blindness when it comes to Bp. Fellay.

They would call people like you Neil as spewing and fomenting hatred.

Meanwhile you have a Bishop who has sacrificed so much of the faithful, because of his grandiose desires of going down in history as the one that "brought Tradition back to the Church".

He is so busy with running the Society and finding ways to make this agreement happen, that he has no time to attend to the needs of the faithful who have placed their souls in his hands.

In the Society they always speak about our utmost individual obligation and responsibility of fulfilling the DUTIES OF ONE'S STATE IN LIFE, yet the Bishop has not the time to come to the Faithful to administer the Sacraments, THE DUTY OF HIS STATE IN LIFE THAT HE WAS ORDAINED TO DO!

What else could he possibly be occupying his time with?

That is why the Archbishop never wanted any of the Bishops to be Superior General, lest it distracts and takes them away from the TRUE DUTY OF THEIR STATE IN LIFE.

IllyricumSacrum · « **Reply #16 on:** April 26, 2014, 09:35:37 PM »

wasn't there already a 'hybrid' mass?
the very, very short-lived '64 missal.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #17 on:** April 27, 2014, 04:25:34 AM »

.

How about an example from the facts of history?

~ Here is +Fellay in his not-too-distant infamous AFD, regarding Vat.II:

4. The entire tradition of Catholic Faith must be the criterion and guide in understanding the teaching of the Second Vatican Council, which, in turn, enlightens - in other words deepens and subsequently makes explicit - certain aspects of the life and doctrine of the Church implicitly present within itself or not yet conceptually formulated(8).

(8) For example, like the teaching on the sacraments and the episcopacy in Lumen Gentium, no. 21.

[Note: LG 21 is one of the most poisonous parts of Vat.II]

~ And here he is just a couple of weeks ago, on Palm Sunday, 2014:

Pope John XXIII’s opening speech (October 11, 1962) and his allocution to the Sacred College on December 23, 1962, obviously attribute to Vatican Council II a very particular, so-called “pastoral” intention, by which the Magisterium is supposed to “express the Faith of the Church according to the modalities of investigation and literary formulation of modern thought.”

In the event the implications are not obvious, allow me to make an observation. In the former quote, the abominable AFD (which he says he has 'withdrawn' but he has not abjured and he has not refuted, and it still hangs heavy on the wall where it was first erected two years ago albeit hidden from view for an entire year -- a fact he has never bothered to explain in any way whatsoever), +Fellay clearly says that we should all revere the august words of LG 21, for they exemplify the abiding principle to which he alludes as something beneficial to the Church, that some implicit doctrine and aspects of [Christian] life are not yet conceptually formulated.

However, only one year after this deplorable Declaration came to light, he is singing quite a different tune, for in his critical mention of the M.R.S. and later allocution of John XXIII, as if the conceptual formulation of doctrine is suddenly something that should not be written with the modalities of investigation of modern thought.

What is the possible connection between these things? First it's just fine to defer to LG 21, and then later it's not fine at all to defer to LG 21? And we're supposed to be okay with that? Just because he says so? Or, do the Menzingen-denizens reserve the exclusive right to determine when it is okay, and when it is NOT okay to defer to LG 21?

This is an insult to your intelligence.

.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #18 on:** April 27, 2014, 04:35:53 AM »

Quote from: IllyricuмSacrum

wasn't there already a 'hybrid' mass?
the very, very short-lived '64 missal.

That's a good point, IllyricuмSacrum. It looks like the Newconanization Libretto for today's proceedings is not too far removed from that. But the Introit is going to be in Latin, whereas your page shows it in English (vernacular).

This further affirms my expectations that the new hybrid will be an even greater concession given to traditionalists, so as to reset much more closely to the 1962 missal of John XXIII (after all he's going to be a "saint" now!) than this 1964 hybrid was.

Remember, by 1964, "St." John was already judged (cf. Jn. xvi. 11).

At this point, I fully expect that the new hybrid missal will have only the Epistle, Gradual and Gospel in the vernacular, and they'll likely offer an OPTION for having a first reading, responsorial Psalm and second reading instead of the Epistle. When there is a Tract or Sequence, it could well be given in Latin, too, as this Victimae paschali laudes will be today.

.

BlackIrish · « **Reply #19 on:** April 27, 2014, 10:02:33 AM »

Quote from: soulguard

O come on.

You are using your own posts as a source of reference.

You are an inestimable joke neil obstat, and I cant stand you.
If it was not for the resistance internet phenomenon giving upstarts a cause to attack the SSPX, whom they ought to be grateful to, then you would have nothing to do, except perhaps ridicule jews along the lines of some pseudo Catholic form of nαzιsm.

As Father Rostand use to say: Hell-oooooooooo

Where are all the thought police now, shouting crys of charity, meanie, etc. etc.?

Oh, I know, you're all out celebrating the novus malodourous saints!

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #20 on:** April 28, 2014, 05:48:47 PM »

Quote from: BlackIrish

Quote from: soulguard
O come on.

You are using your own posts as a source of reference.

You are an inestimable joke neil obstat, and I cant stand you.
If it was not for the resistance internet phenomenon giving upstarts a cause to attack the SSPX, whom they ought to be grateful to, then you would have nothing to do, except perhaps ridicule jews along the lines of some pseudo Catholic form of nαzιsm.

As Father Rostand use to say: Hell-oooooooooo

Where are all the thought police now, shouting crys of charity, meanie, etc. etc.?

Oh, I know, you're all out celebrating the novus malodourous saints!

Perhaps I should be ashamed of myself for daring to t-h-i-n-k. Imagine the temerity of moving from a minor proposition to a conclusion! What impudence! What gall!

That post reminded me of some of the hate mail that John Vennari printed in the current Catholic Family News:

Quote

You Dumb @#&! It's @#&!'s like you who have kept the Church in the dark ages. What makes you think you "know" religion better than the Pope?
[In my case perhaps they would say Bishop Fellay!]

You're Mean! Why the mean-spiritedness? I send my kids to Catholic School and would be honored to have Pope Francis teach them about love, charity, and mercy. What could possibly be wrong with that?

You Should Run For Pope! -- or are you not qualified? You sound like CNN, just what the world needs. Be careful about combining pilitics with the church. Our Countries fore fathers [sic] made sure there was separation between church and state.
[They did??? -- and that's where, in the Constitution??? -- and how many 'Countries' do we have?]

You Were Born in the Wrong Century! It astounds me that in the modern world people like you still exist. Bergoglio has forgotten more about the message of Christ than you'll ever know! Are you a member of the Sanhedrin? The Sadducees? Which type of Pharisee are you? It is the spirit of the law that is important, not the letter, and the spirit of the law is ecuмenical. Do you recognize your hubris? Are you capable? I hope you figure it out. Grow up. God bless Pope Francis. May he truly bring Christ's bride into the modern world.

Maybe in my case he would say, "God bless Bishop Fellay. May he truly bring the SSPX into the bosom of the Catholic Church in the modern world."

Oh! There's more!

Quote

Moron! You must be one step shy of a moron [wait... oh, nevermind] if you believe this Pope hasn't done better for the church than any Pope in a 1000 years. Actually, you are seeing that the general public is tired of being railroaded by controlling dogma. Anything that has been contrived since Yeshua walked on this earth has been for the benefit of the controllers not the people. Yeshua taught a simple message of love and obedience to Abba [note - that's not Allah]. There is no need to decipher what was taught, it was a simple message that relieved us of the dogmatic trappings of the ruling classes. All I can say is when it is over I will be laughing down at you.

.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #21 on:** April 28, 2014, 06:34:45 PM »

.

You should run for Pope! ... Be careful about combining pilitics with the church.

Typo!!

... Be careful about combining politics with the church.

.

BlackIrish · « **Reply #22 on:** April 29, 2014, 04:30:01 PM »

Oh “patron saint” of mine, do not despair . . . G.K. Chesterton to the rescue with his crystal clear logic:

Religious liberty might be supposed to mean that everybody is free to discuss religion. In practice it means that hardly anybody is allowed to mention it.

It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.

I know, I know . . . even the devil can quote Chesterton!

Standing alone, the quotes have their own value, but they are mildly applicable to this forum, too.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #23 on:** April 30, 2014, 10:31:45 AM »

Quote from: BlackIrish

Oh “patron saint” of mine, do not despair . . . G.K. Chesterton to the rescue with his crystal clear logic:

Religious liberty might be supposed to mean that everybody is free to discuss religion. In practice it means that hardly anybody is allowed to mention it.

It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.

I know, I know . . . even the devil can quote Chesterton!

Standing alone, the quotes have their own value, but they are mildly applicable to this forum, too.

Even the devil can quote Chesterton! HAHAHAHAHAHA

(You'd better watch out - even the devil can quote BlackIrish!)

.

PerEvangelicaDicta · « **Reply #24 on:** April 30, 2014, 11:16:44 AM »

Quote from: BlackIrish

Quote from: soulguard
O come on.

You are using your own posts as a source of reference.

You are an inestimable joke neil obstat, and I cant stand you.
If it was not for the resistance internet phenomenon giving upstarts a cause to attack the SSPX, whom they ought to be grateful to, then you would have nothing to do, except perhaps ridicule jews along the lines of some pseudo Catholic form of nαzιsm.

As Father Rostand use to say: Hell-oooooooooo

Where are all the thought police now, shouting crys of charity, meanie, etc. etc.?

Oh, I know, you're all out celebrating the novus malodourous saints!

Good point.
I've applauded SG for a few of the threads he started on charity toward each other on the forum. Very inspired.
And then, this comment re: Neil Obstat. It's incongruous, but don't we all struggle likewise?

My problem with those who post personal comments is that they often don't refute the facts stated. Neil O provided detail re: hybrid Mass a'comin', and 2 people attacked him personally. I'm more interested in factual refutation.
1) Please stick to facts. It makes reading much more efficient and much less stressful.
2) Please write to your fellow Catholic with the knowledge that He is standing right there. Remember, we are held accountable for every uncharitable act, and rewarded for every act of humility.

How does it look in the light of eternity?

PerEvangelicaDicta · « **Reply #25 on:** April 30, 2014, 11:18:20 AM »

Quote

(You'd better watch out - even the devil can quote BlackIrish!)

Yikes. I quoted BlackIrish.

BlackIrish · « **Reply #26 on:** April 30, 2014, 11:35:49 AM »

Quote from: PerEvangelicaDicta

Quote from: BlackIrish
Quote from: soulguard
O come on.

You are using your own posts as a source of reference.

You are an inestimable joke neil obstat, and I cant stand you.
If it was not for the resistance internet phenomenon giving upstarts a cause to attack the SSPX, whom they ought to be grateful to, then you would have nothing to do, except perhaps ridicule jews along the lines of some pseudo Catholic form of nαzιsm.

As Father Rostand use to say: Hell-oooooooooo

Where are all the thought police now, shouting crys of charity, meanie, etc. etc.?

Oh, I know, you're all out celebrating the novus malodourous saints!

Good point.
I've applauded SG for a few of the threads he started on charity toward each other on the forum. Very inspired.
And then, this comment re: Neil Obstat. It's incongruous, but don't we all struggle likewise?

My problem with those who post personal comments is that they often don't refute the facts stated. Neil O provided detail re: hybrid Mass a'comin', and 2 people attacked him personally. I'm more interested in factual refutation.
1) Please stick to facts. It makes reading much more efficient and much less stressful.
2) Please write to your fellow Catholic with the knowledge that He is standing right there. Remember, we are held accountable for every uncharitable act, and rewarded for every act of humility.

How does it look in the light of eternity?

Don't quote me PED . . . you made some good points; however, that was not the only attack by SG on some forum members.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #27 on:** May 01, 2014, 03:42:24 AM »

.

In case anyone thinks that I made up this idea that a new hybrid Mass is on the way, at the risk of being obvious, I'm going to be obvious: I DID NOT MAKE IT UP.

There have been subtle clues rolling around for years now, and like another poster here said, this was the plan from the start, before the Newmass was let out of its cage. Benedict XVI, erstwhile Father Ratzinger (he was consecrated a Newbishop after the debut of the Newmass) tried at the time to slow things down but his plan was not followed. The Revolutionaries pushed ahead full throttle. After years of problems and the upstart of the Resistance (at that time ABL and the SSPX was called, 'THE RESISTANCE'), the pushy competition started to look less impressive. Finally, Ratzinger got the last laugh, so to speak, by being elected Pontiff. And his election was largely because the cardinals all agreed that he had been correct when he had said that the changes after 1970 should have been gradually brought in over 10 years, instead of all at once.

Therefore, WHAT WE SAW SUNDAY was one of the MANY STEPS that Ratzinger had wanted to take in 1969 and subsequent years. But it's taken until now to get his following together. I wouldn't at all be surprised if he was praying intently at the Newcanonization ceremony for the popularity of this first-of-its kind amalgamation of TLM and NewAge post-Modernism that we saw by way of technology.

If a few million Catholics could only wake up and see this deception, his prayers (if this was his prayers) would not be answered the way he'd like them to be.

.

soulguard · « **Reply #28 on:** May 01, 2014, 03:44:30 PM »

Quote from: PerEvangelicaDicta

Quote from: BlackIrish
Quote from: soulguard
O come on.

You are using your own posts as a source of reference.

You are an inestimable joke neil obstat, and I cant stand you.
If it was not for the resistance internet phenomenon giving upstarts a cause to attack the SSPX, whom they ought to be grateful to, then you would have nothing to do, except perhaps ridicule jews along the lines of some pseudo Catholic form of nαzιsm.

As Father Rostand use to say: Hell-oooooooooo

Where are all the thought police now, shouting crys of charity, meanie, etc. etc.?

Oh, I know, you're all out celebrating the novus malodourous saints!

Good point.
I've applauded SG for a few of the threads he started on charity toward each other on the forum. Very inspired.
And then, this comment re: Neil Obstat. It's incongruous, but don't we all struggle likewise?

My problem with those who post personal comments is that they often don't refute the facts stated. Neil O provided detail re: hybrid Mass a'comin', and 2 people attacked him personally. I'm more interested in factual refutation.
1) Please stick to facts. It makes reading much more efficient and much less stressful.
2) Please write to your fellow Catholic with the knowledge that He is standing right there. Remember, we are held accountable for every uncharitable act, and rewarded for every act of humility.

How does it look in the light of eternity?

I have called him out many times on his lies and outrageous insults against traditional groups.
Him and trolls like blackirish ( btw there is no such thing as a black "Irish") ridicule the SSPX like demons. Thanks to people like neil obstat, I want nothing to do with the resistance, and I know for a fact that anyone who I get to read this forum will think the same.

We are not all within your little bubble world of BS philosophy from neil obstat.
I object to your praise of him, and your rebuke of me and the other honest poster who says what I also think. Yet I wont call neil obstat any names because God watches me, but I will speak the truth as I see it. If he is right then he will provide proof of what he says, but like I said, referencing your own posts as evidence is not good enough and is simply VAIN.
so he should expect a back lash.

BlackIrish · « **Reply #29 on:** May 01, 2014, 04:53:48 PM »

Quote from: soulguard

Quote from: PerEvangelicaDicta
Quote from: BlackIrish
Quote from: soulguard
O come on.

You are using your own posts as a source of reference.

You are an inestimable joke neil obstat, and I cant stand you.
If it was not for the resistance internet phenomenon giving upstarts a cause to attack the SSPX, whom they ought to be grateful to, then you would have nothing to do, except perhaps ridicule jews along the lines of some pseudo Catholic form of nαzιsm.

As Father Rostand use to say: Hell-oooooooooo

Where are all the thought police now, shouting crys of charity, meanie, etc. etc.?

Oh, I know, you're all out celebrating the novus malodourous saints!

Good point.
I've applauded SG for a few of the threads he started on charity toward each other on the forum. Very inspired.
And then, this comment re: Neil Obstat. It's incongruous, but don't we all struggle likewise?

My problem with those who post personal comments is that they often don't refute the facts stated. Neil O provided detail re: hybrid Mass a'comin', and 2 people attacked him personally. I'm more interested in factual refutation.
1) Please stick to facts. It makes reading much more efficient and much less stressful.
2) Please write to your fellow Catholic with the knowledge that He is standing right there. Remember, we are held accountable for every uncharitable act, and rewarded for every act of humility.

How does it look in the light of eternity?

I have called him out many times on his lies and outrageous insults against traditional groups.
Him and trolls like blackirish ( btw there is no such thing as a black "Irish") ridicule the SSPX like demons. Thanks to people like neil obstat, I want nothing to do with the resistance, and I know for a fact that anyone who I get to read this forum will think the same.

We are not all within your little bubble world of BS philosophy from neil obstat.
I object to your praise of him, and your rebuke of me and the other honest poster who says what I also think. Yet I wont call neil obstat any names because God watches me, but I will speak the truth as I see it. If he is right then he will provide proof of what he says, but like I said, referencing your own posts as evidence is not good enough and is simply VAIN.
so he should expect a back lash.

We all suffer from some degree of vanity, soulguard.

Also, there is such a thing/people as Black Irish - they are a mix of Norman and Celt. The most extreme features being jet black hair (Norman) and very fair skin (Celt), which is my combination. Part of my ancestry is from Country Wexford, Ireland - http://www.irishtimes.com/ancestor/browse/counties/leinster/index_wd.htm

I have not seen any dishonesty in the postings of NO, only the ponderings of a person concerned with his Faith. You, on the other hand, seem to ride over the lines of the narrow road. To be honest, I am not clear where you stand in terms of your Faith. :scratchchin: