Author Topic: Bp. Williamson controversy about emotional woman and Novus Ordo Mass  (Read 31565 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline katholikos

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 87
  • Reputation: +90/-0
    • View Profile
Note from the Moderator:

It is not known to those who merely watched the video, but the woman who "asked if she could attend the Novus Ordo" was actually on the point of tears she was so emotional. She insisted that she had found a priest who was reverent and devout, and she was morally certain that the Blessed Sacrament was being confected during the Masses she attended.

That is the background for the Bishop's answer.

The controversy surrounding his response touches on the most basic elements of the Crisis in the Church: The status of the New Mass, etc. which is why sedevacantists attack +Williamson for his answer. Sedevacantists have been attacking +Williamson for the past 40 years -- what else is new?
Trads have been disagreeing about the Novus Ordo Mass for 45 years now.

Also -- the controversy and arguments surrounding +W's statement are PROOF of what he talked about during the rest of his conference: namely, that Authority and Truth have been divorced, and it is causing confusion among the Faithful. Please listen to the REST of his conference -- it was very good. So was his sermon during Confirmations.

His conference on Authority and Truth was very good, and is being buried by all this controversy about one lady's request for a dispensation to attend the Novus Ordo. We are letting Sedevacantists direct and frame the debate. I have to say, that is a loss for Tradition.





Please do not post any more trash from the bitter zeal-filled, angry Sedevacantists at Novus Ordo Watch.

They waste their God-given time trolling the Vatican looking for the 5,244,094th piece of evidence that "Yes, there is a Crisis in the Church" hoping to eventually find the Holy Grail or "straw that broke the camel's back" which will cause 99% of Trads to fall over like dominoes into Sedevacantism.

Like the devil, they operate on the maxims of "Misery loves company" and "Better to destroy than to build up."


Quote
Bp. Williamson was asked if one could go to the New Mass if it's reverent, etc.

Offline MaterDominici

  • Owner's Wife
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4385
  • Reputation: +3256/-20
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Bp. Williamson controversy about emotional woman and Novus Ordo Mass
« Reply #1 on: July 20, 2015, 07:26:38 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • No point in commenting unless you've listened to the whole thing ... he revisits the topic multiple times.

    "If I could only make the faithful sing the Kyrie, the Gloria, the Credo, the Sanctus and the Agnus Dei ... that would be to me the finest triumph sacred music could have, for it is in really taking part in the liturgy that the faithful will preserve their devotion. I would take the Tantum Ergo


    Offline katholikos

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 87
    • Reputation: +90/-0
      • View Profile
    Bp. Williamson controversy about emotional woman and Novus Ordo Mass
    « Reply #2 on: July 20, 2015, 07:38:12 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • OK, so are you saying that I need to listen to over an hour more of this to understand it better? I'm afraid to.

    Offline MaterDominici

    • Owner's Wife
    • Administrator
    • *****
    • Posts: 4385
    • Reputation: +3256/-20
    • Gender: Female
      • View Profile
    Bp. Williamson controversy about emotional woman and Novus Ordo Mass
    « Reply #3 on: July 20, 2015, 07:41:21 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: katholikos
    OK, so are you saying that I need to listen to over an hour more of this to understand it better? I'm afraid to.


    I would. It's not 2 hours. You can skip ahead to the Q&A. I just wouldn't trust any version other than the original if you really want to know what he said and didn't say.
    "If I could only make the faithful sing the Kyrie, the Gloria, the Credo, the Sanctus and the Agnus Dei ... that would be to me the finest triumph sacred music could have, for it is in really taking part in the liturgy that the faithful will preserve their devotion. I would take the Tantum Ergo

    Offline CathMomof7

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1033
    • Reputation: +1258/-10
    • Gender: Female
      • View Profile
    Bp. Williamson controversy about emotional woman and Novus Ordo Mass
    « Reply #4 on: July 20, 2015, 08:20:15 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I listened to the original.  Honestly, I thought he was being wishy-washy at first, but then he began to talk about it in terms of SSPX.  Much of what he said seemed, to me, like he didn't want to hurt the lady's feelings.  He did a lot of Archbishop Levebre says......  But very little yes or no.
    He seemed to be using the opportunity to tell people that they did not necessarily  have to stop going to SSPX Masses because the situation wasn't all that bad, yet.  With that I agree.  With the former regarding Novus Ordo, I do not.

    At first I thought it odd that an SSPX goer would even go to Novus Ordo, but I have experienced this myself with several people I know.  I found this very peculiar at first, but then I realized that these people simply have a preference for the "Latin" Mass and most don't really see that much difference as long as the "New Mass" is reverent or they believe the priests have "proper intentions."

    When I asked the same question when I attended SSPX, I was told basically this:  "The Mass is food.  Novus Ordo is still food---it's like junk food, but still food, and still nourishes you.  SSPX is better food."  Yes, this is what I was told by a priest and by several lay people.  I am quite certain I stood in amazement at this analogy.

    As for me, I will never step foot inside a NO Mass again, unless I have to go for someones funeral or possibly a baptism.  I doubt I would even go for a wedding.

    My husband and I have taken this matter up with our own priest.  He believes that, considering the situation and the magnitude of this crisis, that Our Lord gives us graces to make it through with limited access to the Sacraments.  He knows the situation, and thus, in His Love and Mercy, He provides for us.   We are only able to get to Mass once or twice a month.  The times we are home, we read the Mass and pray our Rosary.  






    Offline Matthew

    • Forum Owner
    • Administrator
    • *****
    • Posts: 20412
    • Reputation: +18038/-48
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Bp. Williamson controversy about emotional woman and Novus Ordo Mass
    « Reply #5 on: July 20, 2015, 09:09:34 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The fact of the matter is, the general rule "Avoid the Novus Ordo" still stands, and Bishop Williamson wasn't making any change to that policy. Just ONE of his caveats (you have to be aware of scandalizing others, who might watch you enter the Novus Ordo church, especially knowing you're a serious Catholic/Trad) would disqualify the majority of his listeners. Then anyone with kids can forget it, lest they learn a new religion instead of Catholicism. You can't receive communion in the hand. You also have to work to find a priest who wants to still be Catholic.

    "BUT WHY BOTHER THEN?" you shout. "JUST ROUND IT UP ALREADY AND SAY 100%"

    But if 100% isn't the truth, then it isn't the truth and he would be distorting/simplifying to say so. I'm sorry if some people can't tolerate any EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE. (I think he should have used that phrase, since that's basically what he was saying.)

    A priest is responsible for every soul -- even weak, ignorant, emotional ones. Some people (new to Tradition) benefit from the Indult -- but eventually as they come to learn more about Tradition and the Crisis in the Church, there eventually comes a time to move on. The Indult is only good on the way up (from Novus Ordo land) -- not on the way down (from real Traditionalism).

    It's easy for us laymen to be hard nosed. But a priest is responsible for each soul that he causes to give up or go to Hell. If an "exception" presents itself in his confessional or asks him for advice, it behooves him to recognize that.
    In other words, he has a grace of state that NONE OF US laymen has.

    We are Trad because we want to keep the Faith. If someone lives far from any Latin Mass but they manage to cobble together another "battle plan" to keep the Faith, involving much prayer, meditation, reading classic Catholic books, watching sermons online, finding a decent priest/N.O. Mass, etc. who are we to judge? Seriously. You'd have that person do something that goes against his conscience. You'd tell them that you know better what's good for them than THEY THEMSELVES do. Even if they feel themselves slipping and decide they need the company of other Catholics, etc. you'd have them follow your "no-exception principles" instead. "You can't heal that man, it's the Sabbath!" Talk about hubris.

    We all complain about the SSPX telling parishioners to not attend the Masses of Resistant priests -- but what's the difference? Sectarianism is sectarianism. When you start bossing around your parishioners, serving as their conscience, you have a problem. That's what a cult does. You can teach them, but in the end if they feel safer with their Faith at a different Trad chapel, then they should follow their conscience and the priest shouldn't try to stop them. His job is to take care of HIS flock. If someone leaves because they believe it would be good for them, the priest should be happy for them that they found a better situation! One lifeboat is as good as another. If you threaten anyone who "tries to get in another lifeboat" with being thrown overboard, etc. then it's obvious your motives are somewhat selfish -- something beyond mere saving people from drowning. They could do that in any lifeboat. And today's Trads could keep the Faith in any Traditional chapel -- not just the ones from your group. But how many will admit this?

    I think that's what Bishop Williamson has going for him -- although completely rational himself, he still has a heart. He hasn't forgotten charity and compassion. He hasn't forgotten the basics of Catholicism, or the big picture. One can see that he truly cares for souls. He hasn't lost himself in the clouds, or in the rarefied heights of an ivory tower, filled with bitter zeal towards all those who aren't part of his group. He hasn't let his principles and ideals blind him to charity and compassion.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase! It costs you nothing extra.

    - Matthew

    Offline MaterDominici

    • Owner's Wife
    • Administrator
    • *****
    • Posts: 4385
    • Reputation: +3256/-20
    • Gender: Female
      • View Profile
    Bp. Williamson controversy about emotional woman and Novus Ordo Mass
    « Reply #6 on: July 21, 2015, 12:10:31 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • There's not a very strong probability of someone actually meeting all of the Bishop's qualifications.

    For example, I don't remember *exactly* what Bp Williamson said, but one comment that stood out for me was that he was only saying you could possibly go if you had that one-in-a-thousand N.O. priest who actually practices real Catholicism. He made reference to how those priests quickly find themselves out of favor with their bishop and relocated to the middle of nowhere. Fr. Rodriguez came to my mind. There was a period of time during which he was a good N.O. priest and I wouldn't say those attending his Masses received no benefit, but of course, he soon insisted upon the TLM and got relocated out to the TX desert and then sent on sabbatical.


    While I don't disagree with BpW, I don't see where giving this sort of advice to a group is beneficial. That person attending the N.O. probably doesn't have this perfect situation, but rather simply fails to see the dangers all around them.
    "If I could only make the faithful sing the Kyrie, the Gloria, the Credo, the Sanctus and the Agnus Dei ... that would be to me the finest triumph sacred music could have, for it is in really taking part in the liturgy that the faithful will preserve their devotion. I would take the Tantum Ergo

    Offline PapalSupremacy

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 115
    • Reputation: +89/-0
      • View Profile
    Bp. Williamson controversy about emotional woman and Novus Ordo Mass
    « Reply #7 on: July 21, 2015, 07:49:26 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Like it or not, Bp. Williamson's arguments do not pass the test of Catholic principles, as you can see below.

    This is a crucial sentence in Bp. Williamson's talk:

    "I would not say every single person must stay away from every single NO Mass."

    So the question is why does a person need to stay away from any NO Mass in the first place - is it because of the substance or because of the accidents? The Traditional Catholic response is because of the substance (the NO is poison, it harms the faith, it doesn't express the Catholic Theology of the Mass, it is defective because of its omissions, even in its Latin form and said reverently etc.), and not merely because of the accidents not necessarily present in the rite itself (e.g. altar girls, Communion in the hand, lay extraordinary ministers of Communion, tables instead of altars, the priest turning his back on the Most Blessed Sacrament in the Tabernacle etc.). But if the NO Mass is defective and harmful in its substance (i.e. even when said reverently and in the most conservative Latin form), then it is not a Catholic rite of Mass, since the Catholic Church is unable to promulgate defective and harmful rites of the sacraments. And no Catholic is allowed to assist at non-Catholic rites (except in a civil capacity at funerals and weddings), and this is something that not even a pope can dispense from (popes have in extremely rare occasions permitted communicatio in sacris with heretics and schismatics to certain Catholics, but it was always Mass said in a Catholic rite, one of the Eastern rites).

    Furthermore, to quote from the N.O.W. analysis:
    "Did you notice what he left out? God. He did not think to ask whether the New Mass is pleasing to God. That is all that matters. Holy Mass isn't about us. It's about God. It's the worship of the Most Holy Trinity, not a spiritual pick-me-up."

    Indeed, because of all the defects present in the substance of the NO Mass, I believe all of us would agree that it cannot be pleasing to God, even when said reverently. This means that to participate in it, even if it is said in the most reverent manner, is to partipate in an act of offending God, which we must never do, even though our intentions and the intentions of the priest might be of the best possible kind.

    Therefore, since the NO Mass is not a Catholic rite and is not pleasing to God, if Bp. Williamson's sentence was based on Catholic principles, it should have said: "Every single person must stay away from every single NO Mass."
    But it did not say that.

    If we try to find the principles behind what it did say, what we would come up with is that the NO Mass is not always harmful and defective and that it can sometimes be pleasing to God, which actually means that it is not defective and harmful in substance, but only because of the accidents. And just as the late Michael Davies (traditionalist author and longtime president of the "Una Voce" Indult organization) we would then have to conclude that the NO Mass, at least in its most conservative form, is a Catholic rite. There goes our resistance to the Conciliar Revolution.

    Therefore, Bp. Williamson's response is either against Catholic principles, or it is subjectivist (in the sense of nevermind the principles, just do what you think is right).
    Both is troubling.
    He that reigneth on high, to whom is given all power in heaven and earth, has committed One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, outside of which there is no salvation, to one alone upon earth, namely to Peter, the first of the apostles, and to Peter's


    Offline Matthew

    • Forum Owner
    • Administrator
    • *****
    • Posts: 20412
    • Reputation: +18038/-48
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Bp. Williamson controversy about emotional woman and Novus Ordo Mass
    « Reply #8 on: July 21, 2015, 08:01:01 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • That figures, that Novus Ordo Watch -- in their angry, bitter sedevacantist zeal -- would presume to think for God.

    Bishop Williamson has a touch more humility (quite a bit more actually), so that he doesn't presume to speak for God personally.

    The Novus Ordo is defective; that is it's main problem.

    But even if it is defective and should be avoided, it doesn't change the fact that some people in this modern world are bags of dripping emotion and they might snap or leave the Faith if they can't go to some kind of Mass. Especially if they managed to find a reverent Novus Ordo like the infamous lady who asked the question to Bishop Williamson.

    Yes, they should try to become more rational. They shouldn't be so  emotional. They should be more objective and less subjective. But how are you going to force them? As I said before, a priest doesn't have the luxury of "smashing" people unless he absolutely has to (i.e., "sorry, you can't get a divorce, I don't care how unhappy you are.")

    Which brings up the key point of this discussion:

    It all comes down to whether the Novus Ordo is intrinsically evil, like a Black Mass. If it's intrinsically evil, it can never do any good. Some emotional, simplistic sedevacantists believe this.

    And you see, if the Novus Ordo is intrinsically evil, then how could a pope institute "the Black Mass" (worshiping the devil) for the whole of the Catholic world? "He must not be pope" they say. See, it's a bunch of sedevacantist nonsense.

    And how could all the bishops of Vatican II sign on to something that was INTRINSICALLY evil?

    The Archbishop and his progeny believe the Novus Ordo is gravely defective, and missing a lot of good, which has caused countless evils over the past 45 years. But it's not JUST the Novus Ordo, but the training that surrounds it. The changes to the priests -- how they act, how they believe. That's why +ABL started a seminary to train priests the old way. It's the spirit that came out of Vatican II that did much of the damage; not just the Novus Ordo Mass.

    A whole booklet or even book could be written on this. If the Novus Ordo was intrinsically evil, then how could ANY Catholics, even one or two, still be Catholic after attending it for 45 years? But I assure you there are still some who seem to have the Faith. But that's because they are finding supplements to all the defects in the new "spirit" and new sacraments, such as classic Catholic books. And they might have got lucky with their priest(s), who aren't always all on the same page. Some are more liberal than others. A few are actually quite conservative and take their priesthood seriously. They are not anywhere close to the majority, but they do exist.

    But the Novus Ordo Mass is not intrinsically evil, like abortion or birth control.

    Just because something isn't intrinsically evil, doesn't mean it's good or that you can't have a general rule to avoid it.

    We can see the results of the Novus Ordo -- we have 45 years of history to look at. Almost every young man leaves the Faith after about age 15.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase! It costs you nothing extra.

    - Matthew

    Offline Matthew

    • Forum Owner
    • Administrator
    • *****
    • Posts: 20412
    • Reputation: +18038/-48
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Bp. Williamson controversy about emotional woman and Novus Ordo Mass
    « Reply #9 on: July 21, 2015, 08:19:19 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • And, ironically, these emotional Sedevacantists who hate the Novus Ordo (usually because they used to be in it themselves...they are turned off by it, hate it, feel bad that they were part of it even for a while, etc.) are of the same pedigree as the emotional lady who asked Bishop Williamson the question -- for permission to attend the Novus Ordo.

    They have a VISCERAL disgust for the Novus Ordo.

    Some of them are better than others at coming up with reasons (theology, dogma) to back up their feelings.

    But, in the end, they go too far because emotions are a powerful thing. They are certainly not precise. Emotions are ham-fisted.

    I'll admit, I am repulsed by the service as well. As a life-long Trad, there is no part of me that is comfortable at such a service. I FEEL exactly the same as I do at a Lutheran service. It feels kind of weird that there are some Catholic elements in it though...

    But anyhow, that's just my FEELINGS. My reason tells me a bit more, and I try to listen to reason more than my feelings and emotions.

    Just because Matthew FEELS the same at a Novus Ordo and a Lutheran service, doesn't mean that they are objectively the same theologically!  

    I feel the same when someone speaks Tagalog to me as I do when someone speaks Russian to me. Does that mean those languages are the same?

    What, are my feelings some kind of universal standard? Or is Catholic doctrine and dogma the universal standard?
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase! It costs you nothing extra.

    - Matthew

    Offline Centroamerica

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2312
    • Reputation: +1421/-68
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Bp. Williamson controversy about emotional woman and Novus Ordo Mass
    « Reply #10 on: July 21, 2015, 08:21:56 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Archbishop Lefebvre

    What should I do? I am told: "You must obey. You are disobedient. You do not have the right to continue doing what you are doing, for you divide the Church."

    What is a law? What is a decree? What obliges to obedience? A law, Leo XIII says, is the ordering of reason to the common good, but not towards the common evil. This is so obvious that if a rule is ordered towards an evil, then it is no longer a law. Leo XIII said this explicitly in his encyclical "Libertas." A law, which is not for the common good, is not a law. Consequently one is not obliged to obey it.

    Many canon lawyers at Rome say that Bugnini's Mass is not a law. There was no law for the New Mass. It is simply an authorization, or a permit. Let us accept, for argument's sake, that there was a law, which came from Rome, an ordering of reason to the common good and not to the common evil. But the New Mass is in the process of destroying the Church, of destroying the Faith. It's obvious. The Archbishop of Montreal, Archbishop Grgoire, in a letter, which was published, was very courageous. He is one of the rare bishops who dared write a letter in which he denounced the evils of which the Church of Montreal is suffering. "We are greatly saddened to see parishes abandoned by a great number of the faithful. We attribute this, in great part, to the liturgical reform." He had the courage to say it.
    We conclude logically that religion can give an efficacious and truly realistic answer to the great modern problems only if it is a religion that is profoundly lived, not simply a superficial and cheap religion made up of some vocal prayers and some cerem


    Offline PapalSupremacy

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 115
    • Reputation: +89/-0
      • View Profile
    Bp. Williamson controversy about emotional woman and Novus Ordo Mass
    « Reply #11 on: July 21, 2015, 08:24:17 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Matthew,

    They do not presume to think for God, they are merely applying Catholic principles to come to a conclusion. In fact, the NO Mass is intrinsically evil, and this was also taught by the Old SSPX:

    Quote
    "Now, even if one wanted to contest the heretical elements of the New Mass, the sole refusal to profess Catholic dogmas quintessential to the Mass renders the new liturgy deficient. It is like a captain who refuses to provide his shipmen with a proper diet. They soon become sick with scurvy due, not so much to direct poison, as from vitamin deficiency. Such is the New Mass. At best, it provides a deficient spiritual diet to the faithful. The correct definition of evil—lack of a due good—clearly shows that the New Mass is evil in and of itself regardless of the circumstances. It is not evil by positive profession of heresy. It is evil by lacking what Catholic dogma should profess: the True Sacrifice, the Real Presence, the ministerial priesthood. This deficiency had already been denounced by Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci months before the New Mass was promulgated"
    (http://sspx.org/en/new-mass-legit)


    Quote
    If it's intrinsically evil, it can never do any good


    When it is valid, it is still the Sacrifice of Calvary made present on the altar, so graces can come from it, and probably do to those in ignorance. But having received the grace to know the truth of God's Holy Religion we cannot be excused like they are.

    Some people being emotional rather than rational is no excuse to resort to subjectivism. This only perpetuates their disordered way of thinking and acting. The charitable thing to do is to show them in a rational way where they are wrong and what is the correct action based on the correct principles.
    He that reigneth on high, to whom is given all power in heaven and earth, has committed One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, outside of which there is no salvation, to one alone upon earth, namely to Peter, the first of the apostles, and to Peter's

    Offline Matthew

    • Forum Owner
    • Administrator
    • *****
    • Posts: 20412
    • Reputation: +18038/-48
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Bp. Williamson controversy about emotional woman and Novus Ordo Mass
    « Reply #12 on: July 21, 2015, 08:27:08 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I'm seeing some parallels here.

    Boston, KY has a visceral disgust for the SSPX, so they declare that SSPX Masses must be avoided without exception, and they actually will fervently criticize anyone who doesn't agree with them on this "red light" position.

    Novus Ordo Watch (and other bitter zeal sedevacantists) has a visceral disgust for the Novus Ordo, so they declare that the Novus Ordo Mass is invalid, the pope is "not the pope" (again, because they are viscerally turned off by him), and the Novus Ordo Mass is intrinsically evil, and must be avoided in 100% (not just 99.99%) of cases. And they will fervently criticize anyone who doesn't agree with them on this slightly-exaggerated position.

    We must reject error as part of our job of keeping the Faith. But if we exaggerate this or that truth, we distort it and we replace one error with another! We must be careful and prudent as we try to navigate these confusing times.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase! It costs you nothing extra.

    - Matthew

    Offline Centroamerica

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2312
    • Reputation: +1421/-68
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Bp. Williamson controversy about emotional woman and Novus Ordo Mass
    « Reply #13 on: July 21, 2015, 08:29:38 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Regarding the New Mass: "...it is in itself a danger to the faith and is intrinsically evil...I am denying what Mr Davies says you can't: that the New Mass is an official Mass of the Catholic Church"; that is, he positively affirms that the New Mass is NOT an official Mass of the Catholic Church. (Fr James Peek, Holy Cross Seminary Bulletin, July 3, 1996 and Faith of Our Fathers Newsletter of the SSPX No. 56, Sep.-Dec. 1996.), and

    "For Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX the new mass is intrinsically evil and therefore to be totally rejected." (Fr. Jean Violette, Faith of Our Fathers Newsletter of the SSPX No. 56, Sep.-Dec. 1996.), and

    "...when I said the Novus Ordo is intrinsically evil...what is meant is that the New Mass, as it was published in 1969, objectively, taken in itself, regardless of the priest, and not only the abuses which followed, is bad, is evil." (Fr Jean Violette, Letter to Faithful, October 1996), and


    "Personally, I don't believe in discussions which would not deal with the heart of the matter: with Vatican II, with the new Mass, intrinsically evil as we always said in Tradition, with the new code of Canon Law, which introduces the new Vatican II ecclesiology in the legislation of the Church." [Abbe Benoit de Jorna, Superior of the St. Pius X Seminary in Econe, Interview with Giovanni Pelli, May 15, 2001], and

    We conclude logically that religion can give an efficacious and truly realistic answer to the great modern problems only if it is a religion that is profoundly lived, not simply a superficial and cheap religion made up of some vocal prayers and some cerem

    Offline Matthew

    • Forum Owner
    • Administrator
    • *****
    • Posts: 20412
    • Reputation: +18038/-48
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Bp. Williamson controversy about emotional woman and Novus Ordo Mass
    « Reply #14 on: July 21, 2015, 08:33:26 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: PapalSupremacy
    Matthew,

    They do not presume to think for God, they are merely applying Catholic principles to come to a conclusion. In fact, the NO Mass is intrinsically evil, and this was also taught by the Old SSPX:

    Quote
    "Now, even if one wanted to contest the heretical elements of the New Mass, the sole refusal to profess Catholic dogmas quintessential to the Mass renders the new liturgy deficient. It is like a captain who refuses to provide his shipmen with a proper diet. They soon become sick with scurvy due, not so much to direct poison, as from vitamin deficiency. Such is the New Mass. At best, it provides a deficient spiritual diet to the faithful. The correct definition of evil—lack of a due good—clearly shows that the New Mass is evil in and of itself regardless of the circumstances. It is not evil by positive profession of heresy. It is evil by lacking what Catholic dogma should profess: the True Sacrifice, the Real Presence, the ministerial priesthood. This deficiency had already been denounced by Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci months before the New Mass was promulgated"
    (http://sspx.org/en/new-mass-legit)


    Quote
    If it's intrinsically evil, it can never do any good


    When it is valid, it is still the Sacrifice of Calvary made present on the altar, so graces can come from it, and probably do to those in ignorance. But having received the grace to know the truth of God's Holy Religion we cannot be excused like they are.

    Some people being emotional rather than rational is no excuse to resort to subjectivism. This only perpetuates their disordered way of thinking and acting. The charitable thing to do is to show them in a rational way where they are wrong and what is the correct action based on the correct principles.


    Do you know what intrinsically evil even means? I tried to explain it. It's when there is something in its essence that is positive evil, such that there is no circumstance which could justify it. Abortion, for example. Or birth control. Or blasphemy.

    I never said the Novus Ordo isn't evil. Evil is a privation of good. Evil basically means defective. The SSPX quote was saying that the New Mass ITSELF was evil, not just the accidents like liturgical dancers or bad music. They never used the word "intrinsically evil" and there's a reason for that.

    But I'll excuse you because you might not have studied at a seminary, or formed the habits of precise thought that one learns there.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase! It costs you nothing extra.

    - Matthew

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 
    Powered by SMFPacks WYSIWYG Editor