Replies

I.C.E.L.’s changes amounted to true devastation

This is a powerful testimony. As Fr. Somerville himself points out, this information has long been available to anyone who takes the time to investigate a topic so essential to the salvation of your immortal soul.

Clearly, I.C.E.L. has written a new prayer.

Even if you are convinced of the validity of the Novus Ordo, when you attend Mass in the vernacular, you are participating in a travesty of even this new service. THE PRAYERS ARE NOT THE SAME.

I have come to know with respect and admiration many traditional Catholics. These, being persons who have decided to return to pre-Vatican II Catholic Mass and Liturgy, and being distinct from “conservative” Catholics (those trying to retouch and improve the Novus Ordo Mass and Sacraments of post-Vatican II), these Traditionals, I say, have taught me a grave lesson. These demonstrated cumulatively, in both scholarly and popular fashion, that the Second Vatican Council was early commandeered and manipulated and infected by modernist, liberalist, and protestantizing persons and ideas.

"Conservative" Catholics (aka "neo-Catholics") are part of the problem, not part of the solution. They are not defending the 2000-year tradition of the Church. Instead they are institutionalizing abuses and corruptions.

Such a litany of defects suggests that many modern Masses are sacrilegious, and some could well be invalid. They certainly are less Catholic, and less apt to sustain Catholic Faith.

For the good of your soul, ATTEND THE LATIN MASS. You are gambling with all eternity otherwise.

It is FOR THE FAITH that I am renouncing my association with I.C.E.L. and the changes in the Liturgy. It is FOR THE FAITH that one must recover Catholic liturgical tradition.

Let's please dispense with all the hackneyed accusations of "schismatic" and "heretic." It is clear that Fr. Somerville is devoted to the Catholic Faith. Let's address the substance of his arguments. Your destiny for all eternity is riding on it. As Fr. Somerville said:

You, who must know that only the true Faith can save you, that eternal salvation depends on holy and grace-filled sacraments as preserved under Christ by His faithful Church.

These demonstrated cumulatively, in both scholarly and popular fashion, that the Second Vatican Council was early commandeered and manipulated and infected by modernist, liberalist, and protestantizing persons and ideas.

This is where I go bonkers. Does this mean that they (SSPX & Fr. Somerville) believe that Vatican II was abandoned by the Holy Spirit and therefore is null and void? Where exactly does this thinking leave us?

Let's please dispense with all the hackneyed accusations of "schismatic" and "heretic."Let's not. They are useful to identify schismatics and heretics. We have a duty to warn others of spiritual danger and the internet is fertile ground for spawning private judgement Magisteriums that folks, like yourself, stupidly consider worthwhile reading.

Let it be noted the so-called traditionalists NEVER Post a defense of an Ecuemnical Council or the Pope. They ALWAYS attack legitimate Divinely-constituted authority. Some Tradition (if you are a So. Baptist)<>

Should we also have avoided all those hackneyed accusations of "schismatic" and "heretic" against Luther. After all, he was a virulent hater of the papacy, didn't that make him a good Catholic in SSPX's book?

I'm looking for a good opportunity to dispense with all of those hackeyed accusations that McGovern was at the least a communist sympathizer, that Willie Sutton robbed banks, that Johnny Appleseed was a boon to the creation of apple orchards, that the sun rises in the East and that disrespect and insolence are to be discouraged among actual Catholics. Valid opportunities in all cases are few and far between.

I also note the repulsively presumptuous abuse of the prefix "neo" yet again. We have in politics isolationist Simon Legrees who imagine themselves the real conservatives and attack the real thing as "neo-conservatives" and now we have schismatics imagining themselves Catholic who abuse that overused prefix by dismissing actual Catholics in communion with the Holy See as something called "neo-Catholics." It is in such cocoons of abused vocabulary, in each case, that politically or spiritually carcinogenic fantasies must be protected lest they be blown away by cold cruel reality and/or common sense as the case may be.

Clearly, I.C.E.L. has written a new prayer.
Even if you are convinced of the validity of the Novus Ordo, when you attend Mass in the vernacular, you are participating in a travesty of even this new service. THE PRAYERS ARE NOT THE SAME.

Rather disingenuous of you. He commented on the ICEl translation, not the Novus Ordo itself. There is a difference and you are aware of it. Critiques of ICEL are not always valid critiques of the Latin Typical edition.

For the good of your soul, ATTEND THE LATIN MASS. You are gambling with all eternity otherwise.

LOL. Your gambling with all eternity if you attend anything but the Latin Mass? Do you take yourself seriously? I hope not, but suspect otherwise.

"Conservative" Catholics (aka "neo-Catholics")

You whine about being called schismatic, and ask us to stop this, but you seem dead set on name calling your self. If you are going to do it, you have no cause to complain when we do as well. Anything else is hypocrisy.

are part of the problem, not part of the solution. They are not defending the 2000-year tradition of the Church. Instead they are institutionalizing abuses and corruptions.

So much better to schism? By the way, I’m not institutionalizing anything. I am worshiping our Lord.

Let's please dispense with all the hackneyed accusations of "schismatic" and "heretic."

Disingenuous as well, given that the article raises these very issues. In this one he seems to hint that the SSPX is not schismatic, but a year earlier he said they were:

It includes the regretfully now-schismatic Society of St. Pius X, begun by the late Archbishop Lefebvre of France. It is one million strong, with 500 priests and about four bishops. The faithful counterforce to this is the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, with over 50 priests, many vocations, and rapid growth in many countries, despite hostility by many bishops who see it as divisive.

. It seems Fr. Somerville can’t really make up his mind on this issue. He cites Ratzinger for the opinion that they aren’t, but I’ve never seen this quote. Regardless, schism is very much an issue for these people, and those labels, when accurately applied to groups like the SSPX, are important.

patent +AMDG

My question to this subject is; at what time did the Church cease to be The Church? If a priest can say mass and not actually believe in the Real Presence and that mass is valid, according to the Catecism, then even these flawed liturgies are valid. Reform the liturgy if you like because there is need of reform, but it is our hearts that need reforming. There IS a crisis of faith in the Church in America but it is nothing compared to the crisis that will come if we ignore the Truth of the Real Presence in every mass. It appears that you are going against the Pope in this and that is not Catholic in the least.

I'm sure that there are valid, logically valid, reasons to debate the liturgy. Folks will do it forever. The liturgy will change. It is a given. It has always changed, except for a *brief* period, by church standards of time.

There are good arguments to keep on changing it. But these are not good reasons to reject the Church or its magisterium.