Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => The Sacred: Catholic Liturgy, Chant, Prayers => Topic started by: Irish_Catholic on November 12, 2017, 12:13:24 PM
-
I don't want this to expand into a general discussion about the wrongs of VII and the mis-direction of the church since then. What I would like are people's views on whether new thinking, new interpretations are always wrong, and if not what makes the difference between a new idea or re-interpretation of an old idea being acceptable, and it being anathema to a traditional Catholic?
I sometimes struggle with why I prefer the old ways. I would hate to think that it is for superficial reasons i.e. I like the 'ceremonial', I find it interesting whereas the NO Mass bores me! It has to be more fundamental than that, surely?
-
I don't want this to expand into a general discussion about the wrongs of VII and the mis-direction of the church since then. What I would like are people's views on whether new thinking, new interpretations are always wrong, and if not what makes the difference between a new idea or re-interpretation of an old idea being acceptable, and it being anathema to a traditional Catholic?
I sometimes struggle with why I prefer the old ways. I would hate to think that it is for superficial reasons i.e. I like the 'ceremonial', I find it interesting whereas the NO Mass bores me! It has to be more fundamental than that, surely?
When "new" would mean a substantial change of that which cannot, it is contradictory.
What are the basics of Logic?
(non) Contradiction.
Excluded middle.
Identity.
-
Jesus is the same today, yesterday and forever.
The true Mass is God centered whereas the new mass is people centered.
The Mass at the Mass rocks during Penal times in Ireland is the Latin Mass.
The Mass during Fatima wasn't novous ordo.
With technology new ways of evangizing.
-
I don't want this to expand into a general discussion about the wrongs of VII and the mis-direction of the church since then. What I would like are people's views on whether new thinking, new interpretations are always wrong, and if not what makes the difference between a new idea or re-interpretation of an old idea being acceptable, and it being anathema to a traditional Catholic?
I sometimes struggle with why I prefer the old ways. I would hate to think that it is for superficial reasons i.e. I like the 'ceremonial', I find it interesting whereas the NO Mass bores me! It has to be more fundamental than that, surely?
Since it is the Novus Ordo Mass which is heretical and Protestant-inspired, why are you struggling and perhaps feeling guilty for longing for what is true, right, correct, and the ancient form of worship?
Opus Dei and other groups are trying desperately to convert the masses over to the Apostate Vatican II New Church by telling people in confession that they are victims of scrupulosity when they think that New is Wrong, when they miss the sacredness that has vanished from the Novus Ordo Clown Masses, when they question the authority of the Pope to change the Mass, and/or when they feel something is wrong or even heretical with the Pope's latest heretical pronouncements that the God of Islam is the same God of love whom we worship, etc. He has proclaimed so many heresies lately.
NO! We do not worship the same God as do the Jєωs, the Muslims, and the Buddhists.
Our God is a Triune Godhead. Their god is the devil. Our God is the God in Genesis who said, "Let Us create man in Our Own Image." Our God is the God in Genesis who promised Abraham that He would send a redeemer, the Messiah, Christ our Savior and our God.
The Catholic faith is the unchanging faith which has always been taught by Christ and passed on by the Holy Apostles. It is the Holy Faith which is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow.
-
Any change whatever except from evil is the most dangerous of all things; (Plato)
It uis not just the Novus Ordo, many SSPX "trad" priests make changes to what they liked of the changes in the 20th century. For instance, incensing was always forbidden at all masses except a Solemn High Mass with Deacon and Subdeacon. How many priests today incense at Misa Cantata (Sung Mass), it was John XXIII who first allowed it. Another example is the many trad French priests who are forcing the Dialogue Mass upon English speaking countries they serve. In English speaking countries, the Dialogue Mass, a novelty of the 1920's never caught on. All changes
-
There is nothing new under the sun. What is 'new' was already out there under discussion in the past and what is 'new' will eventually be considered 'antiquated' by other bright 'new' thinkers.
-
Well, in all honesty “new” isn’t always bad. In 1917, the Fatima Prayer in the Rosary was “new” and certainly not bad.
But I digress. The Church is infallible, and it is also indefectable. What we believe, the Apostles believed. The True Mass IS St Peters liturgy, although, overtime there has been some development, largely in the calendar. The NO is a fabrication, a farce and a whole new liturgy, which is so Protestant it’s not Catholic. So there’s also a distinction between “new” and what has organically developed.
-
In the case of an unchanging Faith, new is alway bad, because new in the modern sense means change.
-
In the case of an unchanging Faith, new is alway bad, because new in the modern sense means change.
How about if someone in authority said we will now have masses said in the traditional way in Latin?
-
I don't want this to expand into a general discussion about the wrongs of VII and the mis-direction of the church since then. What I would like are people's views on whether new thinking, new interpretations are always wrong, and if not what makes the difference between a new idea or re-interpretation of an old idea being acceptable, and it being anathema to a traditional Catholic?
You are not allowed to interpret teachings of the Church, Catholics are to believe dogmas as they are once declared by the Church. These are absolute truths from Heaven, nobody has the right to interpret them in any way other than how the church says they are to be believed.
Also the development of doctrine is condemned. The truths of Faith do not change, if "reinterpretations" were okay, than the Catholic faith would have no meaning, because we could never be sure of what is true. Since new interpretations were arise with different people.