Author Topic: Eleison Comments - Distinguish, Discriminate  (Read 10002 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Matthew

  • Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 20713
  • Reputation: +18319/-65
  • Gender: Male
Eleison Comments - Distinguish, Discriminate
« on: December 17, 2016, 08:46:35 AM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
  • Number CDXCII (492)

    Distinguish, Discriminate

    When all is truth, I cannot pick and choose,
    But lies mixed in with truth I must refuse.

    If the evidence, apparently serious, for Eucharistic miracles taking place within the Novus Ordo Mass (NOM) is to be believed – and such miracles may even be happening frequently, one of the latest seeming to come from Legnica, also in Poland (see here) on Christmas Day of 2013 – then indeed some of us may need to do some rethinking. Here is how one reader put it: “God cannot contradict himself, so his miracles cannot contradict his Church’s teaching. But the NOM does depart from essential Catholic doctrine on the Mass. Therefore either the miracles are false or the NOM is from God, in which case what is the justification for Traditionalists clinging to Tradition? For if the NOM at the heart of the Newchurch is confirmed by miracles, then the Newchurch is also confirmed by God, and the Newpopes, and I have to obey them. I cannot pick and choose, can I?” Yes, you can, and not only you can, but you must, in order to fulfil your absolute duty to keep the Faith.

    That is because another name for what you call “picking and choosing” is “distinguishing.” All of us need to distinguish all day long. That is common sense, and that is what St Thomas Aquinas does from beginning to end of his miraculous Summa Theologiae. Let us take a closer look at our friend’s argument.

    The basic bone of contention is the NOM. The NOM is a rite of Mass, a book of hundreds if not a thousand pages, containing many things. From a Catholic standpoint the rite as a whole is unquestionably bad, because it radically changes the concept of the Mass from being a propitiatory sacrifice centred on God to being a community meal centred on man. As such, since most Catholics live their religion by attending Mass, then when its concept changes, their religion in effect changes. That is why the NOM is the principal destroyer of the t rue Church, and the main engine of the Newchurch. That is why the NOM as a whole is not only bad, but very bad indeed.

    But that does not mean that all its parts, as parts, are bad. As parts, some are still Catholic because they had to be, in order to deceive the mass of priests when the NOM was introduced in 1969, that it was not essentially different from the Tridentine rite of Mass, especially in the Consecration. Otherwise they would have refused it, and it could not have done its work of destroying the Church. So the NOM is, as to its parts, part good and part bad, while as a whole, it is ambiguous, treacherous, a crooked piece of work.

    However, as for men, “to the pure all things are pure” ( Titus I, 15), and so to inn ocent souls not yet aware of its intrinsic danger for the Faith, it can by its Consecration and good parts, still give grace and spiritual nourishment, especially when these are less strangled by a priest making the ambiguities as Catholic as possible. And as for God, he “writes straight with crooked lines,” says the proverb, and so the bad parts of the NOM need not stop him from working miracles with the Catholic parts to nourish the innocent and to warn the guilty.

    Therefore on the one hand the NOM as a whole is very bad, and Traditionalists are absolutely necessary to the Church to witness to its badness, and to make available a true Mass for when souls wake up to the NOM’s badness, as they do at different times and different speeds, so that such souls can keep the Faith and last out the crisis. On the other hand the NOM is in parts still good enough to nourish innocent souls and to enable God to work miracles, also for souls’ nourishment or for their warning. God is not thereby confirming either the NOM as a whole, or the Newchurch as a whole, or the Newpopes as a whole, but he is relying on me to use my brain and the Faith which he gave me to discern good from bad. He wants no mindless robots in his glorious Heaven!

    Kyrie eleison.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 20713
    • Reputation: +18319/-65
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison Comments - Distinguish, Discriminate
    « Reply #1 on: December 17, 2016, 08:47:56 AM »
  • Thanks!4
  • No Thanks!0
  • Unfortunately there are plenty of men today whose minds are mush, who seem to have lost the ability to make distinctions at all. Sad.

    It should be obvious to anyone with common sense that most "bad" things have good elements in them. The Novus Ordo is only bad taken as a whole -- the new priesthood (with its worldly training), the congregation that surrounds you, the protestant ambiance (which is often borderline iconoclastic towards beauty and images) the ambiguities, the novelties, the abuses, the poor translations, the many SINS OF OMISSION (for example, downplaying the sacrificial aspect, almost never mentioning the poor souls or purgatory, or the Blessed Virgin Mary)

    Bonum ex integra causa
    Malum ex quocumque defectu

    A thing is good if ALL of its parts are good.
    A thing is evil if it has ANY defect.

    If the Novus Ordo had nothing Catholic in it, then who would They have managed to deceive? That is a very good question.

    Instead, they plod along on their path of attacking Bishop Williamson constantly and ruthlessly, out of a misplaced loyalty to a given priest (Fr. Pfeiffer) or a given position (sedevacantism, home aloneism).

    For those who think we shouldn't make any distinctions -- Just remember, many Novus Ordo priests pray the Rosary and worship Jesus Christ as well. Shall we toss out that baby along with the foul Novus Ordo bathwater? That is to say, shall we stop doing EVERYTHING the Novus Ordo priests do, because we assume they are pure evil?

    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!


    Offline OldMerry

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 239
    • Reputation: +196/-39
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison Comments - Distinguish, Discriminate
    « Reply #2 on: December 17, 2016, 09:06:40 AM »
  • Thanks!10
  • No Thanks!3
  • This is THE MASS we are talking about.  Is it not supposed to be ALL GOOD?

    Some people don't seem to be  Catholic enough to know when ABSOLUTES are required - as with the True Mass.  Quo Primum and its Missale Romanum are the absolutes with the Mass. What do you think Pius V efforts and concerns were??  Read the document.

    Otherwise - why are we traditional?  And why are you people who are soft on the Novus Ordo traditional?  Go on though - go to it since you are eager to find some that are "alright" to attend.  It is condemned by Pius X as Modernism, it is illegal by Quo Primum.  But go on - and let Our Lord have some bathwater.  

    Make Our Lady proud.  

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 20713
    • Reputation: +18319/-65
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison Comments - Distinguish, Discriminate
    « Reply #3 on: December 17, 2016, 09:14:07 AM »
  • Thanks!6
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Merry
    This is THE MASS we are talking about.  Is it not supposed to be ALL GOOD?

    Some people don't seem to be  Catholic enough to know when ABSOLUTES are required - like with the True Mass.  Quo Primum and its Missale Romanum are the absolutes with the Mass.

    Otherwise - why are we traditional?  Why are you people who are soft on the Novus Ordo traditional?  Go on though - go to it since you are eager to find some that are "alright" to attend.  It is condemned by Pius X as Modernism, it is illegal by Quo Primum.  But go on - and let Our Lord have some bathwater.  

    Make Our Lady proud.  


    Bonum ex integra causa
    Malum ex quocumque defectu

    A thing is good if ALL of its parts are good.
    A thing is evil if it has ANY defect.

    The Novus Ordo is defective, and thus one SHOULDN'T attend it. But some people are in unique circumstances, or they are simple and don't understand the Crisis. NOTE: All Traditional Catholics can forget about that loophole. We all know full well how damaging the Novus Ordo is for souls. We have been taught all about the dangers and defects of the Novus Ordo -- the famous "Leading Catholic Indicators" which are discussed here:
    http://www.catholicapologetics.info/modernproblems/vatican2/statistics.htm

    We can't claim ignorance. That is why Bishop Williamson or any other good SSPX priest doesn't give TRADITIONAL CATHOLICS the advice to attend the Novus Ordo Mass.

    I'll go a step further. We need to WAKE UP as many of those slumbering Novus Ordo Catholics as possible. Because "God always forgives, man sometimes forgives, NATURE NEVER FORGIVES." When you place yourself in a worldly, Modernist milieu, you have a 99% chance of losing the Faith. Just like if you try to swim across the Mississippi River, you will likely drown. It's the inescapable law of nature.

    Oh yes, Bishop Williamson has been talking theoretically about acknowledging miracles that took place in the Novus Ordo, and he gave some very public advice to an older, emotional woman -- who was certainly no Thomas Aquinas, to be charitable -- that she could attend the Novus Ordo. But A) she wasn't a Trad and B) she was obviously inclined to go, or she wouldn't have asked him for "permission".

    When a priest is asked for permission to go to the Novus Ordo, that is a clear sign the person isn't a Trad to begin with, and therefore doesn't "get it". The priest will believe that for them, it's better to keep the Faith AT ALL COSTS than to adhere to some "zero tolerance" policy on the N.O.M. and have them lose the Faith. After all, if they're asking to attend the Novus Ordo, they are clearly weak, needy and desperate (like a starving person reaching for a rat, and asking if he can eat it FUR AND ALL without cooking it first)

    Which is more important: the Mass, or the Faith?

    Answer: the Faith.
    The Mass exists for the Faith, and not the Faith for the Mass.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 20713
    • Reputation: +18319/-65
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison Comments - Distinguish, Discriminate
    « Reply #4 on: December 17, 2016, 09:20:56 AM »
  • Thanks!4
  • No Thanks!0
  • We are all Trads, and none of us LIKE the Novus Ordo. Most of us would choose to  stay home rather than attend it (myself included).

    But which of us can truly say what God thinks of the Novus Ordo Mass -- or even speak with 100% certainty about its validity? No one.

    Sure, we need to avoid it -- but that doesn't mean we can pontificate about the specifics of how bad it is, or in what circumstances.

    All we know with THAT kind of certainty is that:

    1. The Catholic Faith is the one true religion, founded by God Himself.
    2. We must each save our eternal souls, crisis or no crisis.
    3. The Catholic Mass is the largest source of grace there is -- being the sacrifice of Jesus Christ Himself.
    4. The Tridentine Mass has been canonized as good and holy FOR ALL TIME and can always be used by both priests and faithful without scruple.
    5. The Novus Ordo Mass -- even the official promulgated version, in Latin -- has clear defects and problems, and is therefore DOUBTFUL.
    6. If that weren't enough, we have the evidence of 50 years of APOSTASY (there is no other accurate word for it) by the mass of Catholics who went along with the Novus Ordo Mass.
    7. Our Lord taught, "By their fruits you shall know them."
    8. Catholic theology teaches that one may never choose a doubtful means over a certain means.

    That is my line of reasoning why I will never attend the Novus Ordo, no matter what.
    I am plenty hard on the Novus Ordo, but for all the RIGHT reasons. Not because they have cooties, or because they don't make me FEEL right. Nor do I refrain because my cult leader tells me to, or out of peer pressure from other Trads.

    So let's remember our priorities, and keep sight of the big picture.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!


    Offline TKGS

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4219
    • Reputation: +3606/-198
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison Comments - Distinguish, Discriminate
    « Reply #5 on: December 17, 2016, 09:23:31 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Merry
    Otherwise - why are we traditional?  And why are you people who are soft on the Novus Ordo traditional?  


    A great number of people are "traditional" simply because they like the "smells and bells of the traditional liturgies.  They are not "traditional" because they think the Catholic Faith is immutable.

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 20713
    • Reputation: +18319/-65
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison Comments - Distinguish, Discriminate
    « Reply #6 on: December 17, 2016, 09:25:54 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • I am not "soft" on the Novus Ordo.

    As St. Thomas Aquinas said, "It is proper to the wise man to distinguish."

    So, to use St. Thomas Aquinas' favorite phrase, "Distinguo." (I distinguish.)

    Apparently you are not capable of distinguishing.

    Ergo...
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline JPaul

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3554
    • Reputation: +3503/-214
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison Comments - Distinguish, Discriminate
    « Reply #7 on: December 17, 2016, 09:29:29 AM »
  • Thanks!10
  • No Thanks!3
  • Quote
    That is why the NOM as a whole is not only bad, but very bad indeed.
    But that does not mean that all its parts, as parts, are bad.


    Very bad! with good parts? Good parts are entirely irrelevant in a matter of the supreme sacrament. Anything which can be classified as very bad surrounding it should be avoided and rejected in accordance with Catholic teaching.

    Two  obvious points here, the Bishop in these Novus Ordo apologia, never factors into his speculations the definite question of priestly ordinations and bishops. They make such speculations even less supportable. And secondly, Distinquish and discriminate, what he is suggesting here is that theologically untrained faithful should rummage through the infamous poisoned cake and find some relatively untainted crumbs by which to nourish their souls.
    Common sense and Catholic teaching tell you that to do so, is to place your soul and salvation in danger and to participate in a forbidden doubtful sacrament.


    Quote
    With the holy, thou wilt be holy; and with the innocent man thou wilt be innocent. [27] And with the elect thou wilt be elect: and with the perverse thou wilt be perverted.


    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 20713
    • Reputation: +18319/-65
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison Comments - Distinguish, Discriminate
    « Reply #8 on: December 17, 2016, 09:33:43 AM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
  • If there's one criticism that could be leveled against the good Bishop it would be this:

    There are far too many people with minds trained enough to grasp what he is saying -- who are able to avoid jumping to false conclusions about what he is saying.

    JPaul is certainly not a stupid man (far from it), but even HE doesn't get it. It was his post that inspired me to write the above.

    Bishop Williamson is a truth loving, wise philosopher in a world where most peoples minds barely function. CathInfo is better than most, but we're all still products of the modern world.

    Eleison Comments like this one are going to go over the heads of about 99.9% of people in general, and at least 75% of Trads who are willing to listen to him!

    I suppose he has to try to teach us. I don't know what I would do in his case. It must be extremely frustrating -- like trying to teach a man to walk again in physical therapy. Only the most patient need apply!

    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline JPaul

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3554
    • Reputation: +3503/-214
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison Comments - Distinguish, Discriminate
    « Reply #9 on: December 17, 2016, 09:40:33 AM »
  • Thanks!7
  • No Thanks!3
  • Merry
    Quote
    Some people don't seem to be  Catholic enough to know when ABSOLUTES are required - as with the True Mass.


    HE agrees with you............

    +Williamson,
    Quote
    When all is truth, I cannot pick and choose,
    But lies mixed in with truth I must refuse.



    Would that had stopped there.    :scratchchin:

    We know by divine faith that the true Mass IS all truth, the other is not. Go no further!

    Offline OldMerry

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 239
    • Reputation: +196/-39
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison Comments - Distinguish, Discriminate
    « Reply #10 on: December 17, 2016, 10:35:03 AM »
  • Thanks!7
  • No Thanks!3
  • Quote from: Matthew
    I am not "soft" on the Novus Ordo.

    As St. Thomas Aquinas said, "It is proper to the wise man to distinguish."

    So, to use St. Thomas Aquinas' favorite phrase, "Distinguo." (I distinguish.)

    Apparently you are not capable of distinguishing.

    Ergo...


    Duh.  Again, the point being, the Mass is NOT something to "distinguish" about!  For almost 400 years the Roman Rite had ONLY the Tridentine Latin Mass.  THEN came in a interloper, a sacrilegious "competitor," a lawbreaker,  an enemy to subvert and destroy.  Never before seen were TWO concurrent Masses in this way.  And we were told this new sinful thing was to replace the True Mass.  We were to take it and like it, nay - love it! The Communist, Jewish, Masonic hierarchy was going to squelch the True Mass - and when we say True Mass, think:  OUR LORD!!  Kick Him in the Face with this insulting, rule-busting New Mass. This awful, unworthy "sacrifice."  Separate Him from us once and for all, with this changing of the essential Mass. Enough of it was gone wrong to threaten what it takes for a sacrament to "happen" - attack and revise form and matter, first one way then another. Novelty on novelty was ok too.  But even the basic, "conservative" Novus Ordo is RADICAL! Anyone with Catholic eyes to see can't miss that.

    It seems that if a person is a convert, or was not born in, at the latest, the 50's, growing up with the Tridentine Mass in one's parish for years before the tsunami of the Vat. II new mass hit   - that it too often seems one does not see the forest for the trees.  Such a one has been used to integrated sacrilege, or compromise, or a non-pure, unorthodox existence.  One is used to a world of "blend."  Maybe there are cradle trads of the post-Vat II era who "get it right," and some other honest souls of integrity, who have been of correct good will vision about it all.  But it surely is a shame and a wonder when Catholic sense and sacramental theology cannot be understood aright, especially by those who claim to have a personal, essential spiritual interest or RESPONSIBILITY to do so!  The grace is there for them for the asking.

    (And without this grace of God, there go I, and I still may not persevere.  So pray for me.)

    Sadly it seems, anyone who does not see the New Mass for what it is, does not really realize what the True Mass is - what Almighty God's Holy Sacrifice is.  

    Cain was rejected for less.  
     


    Offline Matto

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5266
    • Reputation: +2846/-83
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison Comments - Distinguish, Discriminate
    « Reply #11 on: December 17, 2016, 10:39:45 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • There seems to be a few Eucharistic miracles in the Novus Ordo. In each case the host turned red and then they sent it to scientists and the scientists said the red part of the host seemed to be human flesh and blood. There seems to me to be several possibilities. First, the people involved are lying. Second, the miracles are deceptions of Satan meant to fool the elect. Third, they are true miracles from God. I myself believe they are either miracles from God or false miracles from Satan. We all know Satan is very powerful and can work wonders so just because something seems miraculous it doesn't mean it is from God. But it seems that Bishop Williamson is assuming that these wonders come from God.

    Offline Cantarella

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5945
    • Reputation: +3621/-203
    • Gender: Female
    Eleison Comments - Distinguish, Discriminate
    « Reply #12 on: December 17, 2016, 10:55:15 AM »
  • Thanks!9
  • No Thanks!3
  • What good to Tradition can possibly come from these ambivalent comments, Bishop Williamson?

    I wonder why he is persisting in doing this, precisely in these times of intense confusion.
    If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism and thus twists into some metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ" Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit" (Jn 3:5) let him be anathema.

    Offline OldMerry

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 239
    • Reputation: +196/-39
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison Comments - Distinguish, Discriminate
    « Reply #13 on: December 17, 2016, 11:00:05 AM »
  • Thanks!4
  • No Thanks!3
  • Quote from: Cantarella
    What good to Tradition can possibly come from these ambivalent comments, Bishop Williamson?

    I wonder why he is persisting on doing this.


    Indeed.  The issue just stays sticky on his fingers and he just keeps playing with it. When I saw this EC title I thought, "Here we go again." He is not at peace.

    So he comes back for another try and just keeps digging a deeper hole for himself.    


    Offline Cantarella

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5945
    • Reputation: +3621/-203
    • Gender: Female
    Eleison Comments - Distinguish, Discriminate
    « Reply #14 on: December 17, 2016, 11:14:40 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!3
  • How is it possible that a rite approved and put forward by the Roman Catholic Church is partially bad?. It cannot be. Either the rite itself is all good, or it is not Catholic rite at all. That means, in reality, the Church did not promulgate it nor does it use it. We cannot have it both ways. We cannot say that a rite approved by Holy Mother Church is intrinsically evil, invalid, or partially bad.

    Quote from: Council of Trent, Canon 7
    If anyone says that the ceremonies, vestments, and outward signs which the Catholic Church uses in the celebration of masses, are incentives to impiety rather than stimulants to piety, let him be anathema.
    If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism and thus twists into some metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ" Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit" (Jn 3:5) let him be anathema.

     

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