Author Topic: A Letter to Bp. Faure (Read 18047 times)

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #60 on:** September 02, 2015, 11:39:47 AM »

Quote from: hollingsworth

... But before doing that, though, he might have to set himself straight first. Just saying....

:roll-laugh1: . . . .

. . . . :shocked: . . . .

.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #61 on:** September 02, 2015, 12:04:42 PM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis

I think the good Bishop gets caught up too much (as we all can) between the theological theory and the practical effects. In "theory" one can go to a N.O. mass and get some good out of it. But in practice, even if you were going to the most "conservative N.O." mass available, there's problems associated with it - like, communion in the hand, immodest dress of others in attendance, irreverent activities of the congregation, mistakes in the rubrics, etc.

The point is, in theory the N.O. could be valid, but in practice, is that all that matters? Of course not! One has to take in all the circuмstances surrounding the Mass, AND all the effects that your attendance would cause. If you don't separate these 2 ideas, then you sound like a highly confused individual.

That's why, in my opinion, in the face of all the doubts, problems, and circuмstances surrounding the N.O. mass, the answer should simply be: STAY AWAY. No ifs, ands, or buts. Some have tried for the last 40 years to fit the square peg in the round hole, but it's not going to happen. The N.O. mass isn't Catholic. Let's quit trying to find a way to make it so.

Let me provide an example of what +W is trying to do with his words here.

St. Charles Borromeo Catholic Church in North Hollywood, CA, is the retirement abode of Roger Cardinal Mahony. Just before he moved in, permanently, there was an extensive renovation that did some obvious improvements, kept the overall architectural theme intact, added some new features and REMOVED THE COMMUNION RAIL. (That railing in marble, exotic hardwood and wrought iron would cost about $50,000 to re-install.)

I could go on for pages about the details.

However, my point in all this is, that I met my brother-in-law quite by accident at a restaurant the other day and we had a nice chat, during which I invited him to come to Mass at our weekly-rented venue in Northridge, about 5 blocks from his current place of residence. He assured me that he is "a fallen-away Catholic," and the only place he ever goes to church anymore is St. Charles Borromeo, N.H., because it's Bob Hope's parish and he loves the whole scene there because it's so beautiful; he just loves that church. (Even if it's about 8 miles away from his residence!)

The point is, my brother-in-law probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a Novus Ordo liturgy at St. Charles and a Traditional Latin Mass at some other venue, except perhaps all the Latin, but he probably wouldn't be paying much attention to the words spoken anyway. He'd be rubber-necking all over the place, staring at the interior appointments and decorator details, and probably at any females within eyesight.

Now, if I were to forbid or prevent him from going to St. Charles in some way, would I be doing him any good for his faith? Or, if I were to encourage him to show up at St. Charles from time to time, would that rather help his faith more than the former idea?

Bishop Williamson is a pastor of souls, as best he can (without any ordinary jurisdiction), and as such when he says some things he has in mind not only people like YOU and ME, but people like my brother-in-law.

Do you see what I mean?

.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #62 on:** September 02, 2015, 12:14:24 PM »

Quote from: J.Paul

Quote from: Neil Obstat
Quote from: J.Paul
Neil Obstat,
Quote from: Page 7

There are cases where even the Novus Ordo Mass can be attended with an effect of building one's Faith instead of losing it. That's almost heresy within Tradition. But that's what I think. But I hope it's clear that I don't therefore say the Novus Ordo Mass is good, the new religion is good, all Novus Ordo priests are good. That's obviously not the case. Generally it's a tremendous danger, because the new religion is very seductive. It's very soft and sweet and sticky and it's easy to go with it an lose the Catholic Faith.

But exceptionally, if you're watching and praying, even there you may find the grace of God. If you do, make use of it in order to sanctify your soul... Therefore I will not say every single person must stay away from every single Novus Ordo Mass. If they can trust their own judgment that attending this N.O. Mass will do more good than harm spiritually, ...[shrug]... But there's no doubt that it does more harm than good spiritually, there's no doubt about that. It's a rite designed to undermine Catholics' Faith and to turn their belief away from God and towards man.

I am sure that is not lost on you that objectively, these statements and the thinking behind them are self contradictory and very dangerous as they can confuse and misdirect Catholic souls seeking sound counsel.

Thank you, J.Paul.

It is the difficulty of the aspect of duplicity that one might find in these statements that bothers me. It is at least representative of a half-step toward ambiguity, and we all know that ambiguity was the hallmark of Vat.II.

I have found that it's not easy to quote and/or explain it well to someone else. It is very easy to go beyond what +W actually said and to say that "the Novus Ordo is all right at least sometimes," as I did above -- but he didn't really say that, did he?

When Benedict XVI came out with his hermeneutic of continuity screed, the first thing that came to mind was the lecture I heard on ancient philosophy where it was explained in no uncertain terms that all of the sound thinkers of the distant past agreed wholeheartedly that it is essential and utterly basic to sanity in thought that the distinction between what is and what is not be kept intact; for the moment one dares to say that something can be A and at the same time not A, all grip on reality is lost and sound thinking becomes utterly ruined.

.

Thank You, Neil Obstat.
Well you make a good point. It is the concept of something being at once one thing and at the same time another that unsettled me. It is impossible if one considers that something to be an objective truth.
But if subjective considerations enter into one's thinking while stating such truths then such dual minded ideas can make some kind of sense to that person.

The SSPX has existed with this duality from its inception sometimes being here and sometimes being there but here the Bishop is presenting these opposing ideas together at the same time and the contradiction presents itself like a finger in the eye.

Frankly, I certainly do not think the Bishop meant it to sound quite the way it sounds, but there it is. You cannot say what he says without what that implies or makes possible being exposed.

Quote

for the moment one dares to say that something can be A and at the same time not A, all grip on reality is lost and sound thinking becomes utterly ruined.

Precisely!

I'm very glad to hear you and I are on the same page with this.

It's a bit difficult to grasp the significance of the principle since it seems so unlikely according to every day experience like working or paying bills or grocery shopping or gardening or going to a party or entertaining friends or even going to Mass. But the principle of non-contradiction is utterly foundational to all sanity in thought.

Entire empires can rise or fall with adherence or denial of this one axiom.

.

hollingsworth · « **Reply #63 on:** September 02, 2015, 01:51:33 PM »

Neil O. :

Quote

Now, if I were to forbid or prevent him (my brother in law) from going to St. Charles in some way, would I be doing him any good for his faith? Or, if I were to encourage him to show up at St. Charles from time to time, would that rather help his faith more than the former idea?

Bishop Williamson is a pastor of souls, as best he can (without any ordinary jurisdiction), and as such when he says some things he has in mind not only people like YOU and ME, but people like my brother-in-law.

Do you see what I mean?

Neil can think outside the box. That is good and necessary in this case. And he probably puts his finger on the reason Bp. Williamson spoke as he did to the woman, who wondered about attendance at a NO Mass. Thank you, Neil. I think your brother-in-law anecdote might get through to at least some of the people on this forum.

JPaul · « **Reply #64 on:** September 02, 2015, 03:12:24 PM »

Neil Obstat,

Quote

Entire empires can rise or fall with adherence or denial of this one axiom.

Why an entire Religion and Church could rise or fall........................