Quote from: trickster

Honestly guys.  I keep getting called a troll, so at least I deserve an explanation of what that is :)  

Trickster
Bruce Ferguson

Masons are told to study the sagas as they reach a certain degree.
Royal Arch Masons are obsessed with bridges in fact they make pictures of their degrees as steps forming a bridge with Templar degrees on the other side.
Troll of course contains their signature 'twin' mark (their "two Johns" etc) & is associated with Norse mythology in the saga and a bridge!

Remember Holland WW2 failure in Arnhem against Tanks + 'key' Bridge?

TOTALLY lost me glaston :)  Perhaps you can simplify for me?

trickster
bruce ferguson

PED:

 

Quote

I do not include new people to the forum in this, who are asking honest questions and engaging in robust debate (as long as there is no blasphemy or other insult to the Father).

Yeah, like trans-dressing men wearing horns and pretending to be nuns. Surely  no one on a trad Catholic forum would take that to be blasphemy. Just a bunch of close buddies having fun.

And, of course, the best way to deal with a pagan, Islam, or Protestant is to talk to them and learn what you are missing.  The Catholic Church didn't get everything right, ya know?

Lighthouse, what is your point?  Are you against novus ordo catholics talking to traditional catholics?  We have the same history and heritage. I was baptized in 1957 and the last time i checked that was before the Vatican, i even recieved communion prior to the changes in the Vatican.  Why would you separate yourself from me?  I don't separate my brothers and sisters in the old order church (guess that is the opposite of new order church).

The best way to deal with a pagan, etc., you are absolutely right and that is to listen to them!  The church of old did exactly that in the 1600s at the Salinas Missions in New Mexico as an example.  The best tool for evangelization and to offer people the message of Our Lord Jesus is to put it in terms that are culturally and socially sensible.  Talking to pagans, protestants and even novus ordo catholics is also about building trust which creates an openess and love to actuallly hear and understand.. and that is the point of conversion.  

If I am misunderstanding your intent (i.e if you are just being sarcastic in a humourous way I apologize for my understanding)...but your comments are confusing.  (and I thought I'm supposed to be the trickster :)



Bruce

I can name at lease one troll on this forum. Poche. He is not really liked
on other forums and would like to see him leave.
For example that ridiculous article he copied and pasted claiming that
Pope Pius XII supported the establishment of Israel.  
How mad can you get.

I think Poche is one of our crosses to bear.  But there may be a glimmer of hope for him--what other ardent NOer spends so much time with trads...

Trickster,

The Novus Ordo church follows Christ in word but has officially declared other religions to also be from God and also to contain the means of salvation.  See Lumen Gentium 16 and almost all of the writings of John Paul II and the public statements of Pope Francis XVI.  There are also the instances of post-Vatican II popes engaging in public worship with other religions (Assisi I, II, III and others) and there are previous popes who condemned this behavior for  your everyday Catholic - much less a Pope - see Pope Pius IX's encyclical "Mortalium Animos")

Our Lord made it clear by saying that He was the Truth, the Way and the Light and that no one came to the Father except through Him.  There are also dozens of quotes from the New Testament and Traditional Catholoc docuмents attesting to this belief.  In fact, it is believed by Catholics (who embrace EENS) that there is no salvation outside of the Church.  In short, it's a one way street.  If you feel at this time in your spiritual development that "every body kinda has a grasp on the truth in their own way" then keep reading and studying.  Pray on the issue.  It's a one way street and not the Arizona heat which comes from all directions and goes in all directions.  

Our Lord told the apostles that the god of the gentiles are devils, so what are we supposed to think when John Paul II writes of his respect for followers of these religions?

You're a bright guy, Bruce.  You're well read and capable of thinking things through so if you say you see nothing to the contrary than I might think you're not playing straight with us.  However, it could be that you've done very little reading on the topic so I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt.

Hey, study the issue as a complete agnostic.  See if the pre-Vatican II church differs from the post-Vatican II church in it's "praxis" and in it's prayers and in the approach toward other religions.  Then look at the sociological data differences between post- and pre- for church attendance, family size, marriage data, and views on religion.  

While studying the issue, visit pre- and post- churches for Mass.  Talk to the priest as someone who is seeking.  Ask the questions while you are there.  

Quote from: OHCA

Quote from: RomanCatholic1953

I can name at lease one troll on this forum. Poche. He is not really liked
on other forums and would like to see him leave.
For example that ridiculous article he copied and pasted claiming that
Pope Pius XII supported the establishment of Israel.  
How mad can you get.

I think Poche is one of our crosses to bear.  But there may be a glimmer of hope for him--what other ardent NOer spends so much time with trads...

Hi OHCA, I am also Novus Ordo..haven't heard anything that would convince me tha that the post-Vatican II church is diabolic or whateer. . .

"Pope" kissing filthy koran; fag masses; clown masses; "who am I to judge;" "proselytizing is solemn nonsense;" communion in the hand; global view that one religion is as good as another; watered-down warnings of hell - or no warnings - or hell doesn't exist--depending on the "presider;" etc.

The traditional masses of early Christians were Communion in the hand and domestic language.

Latin and Communion on the tongue came in during the middle ages, centuries after Jesus resurrection.

61. The same reasoning holds in the case of some persons who are bent on the restoration of all the ancient rites and ceremonies indiscriminately. The liturgy of the early ages is most certainly worthy of all veneration. But ancient usage must not be esteemed more suitable and proper, either in its own right or in its significance for later times and new situations, on the simple ground that it carries the savor and aroma of antiquity. The more recent liturgical rites likewise deserve reverence and respect. They, too, owe their inspiration to the Holy Spirit, who assists the Church in every age even to the consummation of the world. They are equally the resources used by the majestic Spouse of Jesus Christ to promote and procure the sanctity of man.
 
63. Clearly no sincere Catholic can refuse to accept the formulation of Christian doctrine more recently elaborated and proclaimed as dogmas by the Church, under the inspiration and guidance of the Holy Spirit with abundant fruit for souls, because it pleases him to hark back to the old formulas. No more can any Catholic in his right senses repudiate existing legislation of the Church to revert to prescriptions based on the earliest sources of canon law. Just as obviously unwise and mistaken is the zeal of one who in matters liturgical would go back to the rites and usage of antiquity, discarding the new patterns introduced by disposition of divine Providence to meet the changes of circuмstances and situation.

Pope Pius XII, Mediator Dei

And Communion in the hand was not to be more reverent, it was to prevent abuse of the Host.

Is this a typo?

Communion in the hand prevents abuse of the Host?

Explain, please.

Is this a typo?

Yes, it was a typo and should have read 'Communion on the tongue".

Thank you for pointing out the error.