Where Have All the FR Protestants Gone? [A Month Later]

drstevej

[sinkspur]

Face it, sinky, you're clinging to something that's slowly but surely being made obsolete.

See? You're Exhibit A of what I was talking about.

The Novus Ordo is not being made obsolete. As I said in my previous post, those who favor the Tridentine Mass should be provided the Tridentine Mass. Let a thousand flowers bloom in the Church.

far as I can tell, you are one of the few people who consistently shows disdain for the Latin mass and uses someone's attachment to it as the basis for accusations of sedevacantism, schism, etc.

Actually, I don't. I show disdain for those who use the Latin Mass to prove that they, somehow, are so damn much better than those of us who like a dignified Novus Ordo liturgy. After all, how could we possibly be good Catholics if we worship God in a language we can actually understand?

I accuse schismatics of being in schism because they are. Most of the schismatics say that the Novus Ordo is invalid, that it is Protestant, that it fosters dissent and even clerical abuse.The Novus Ordo is going nowhere, my friend. I just hope those of you want the Tridentine Liturgy get your wish.

You go to your Mass, I'll go to mine, and we'll meet at the parish picnic.

[Antoninus]

But, the NCR is the left equivalent of the WANDERER, which also has its share of columnists who gripe about the Church, from a different perspective.

From what I've seen, the Wanderer almost never gripes about Rome. It mostly gripes about the AmChurch and European liberals. That's quite a bit different than what NCR does...

[sinkspur]

And I don't see him having too many allies. To lump the rest of us in with his opinion is a tad intellectually dishonest, don't you think?

He's got plenty of allies, and more are coming on, almost literally every day. It's almost as if the religion forum on FR has become the place for the schismatics to be.

I made the distinction later, between schismatics and traditionalists.

Where you converge is 1) The Tridentine Liturgy 2) slamming the Novus Ordo, and, by extension, those who prefer it.

[drstevej]

***Seriously, anyone is free to post anything they want on the religion forum.***

Try posting the LDS temple ceremony. [I'll freep you the link if you need it.] Or try posting Brian David Mitchell's (the so-called Immanuel) Manifesto. It'll be yanked before you can say "Kolob."

[Pyro7480]

Thanks for the links. They were the same link, so I guess you were thinking along the same wavelengths. :-)

I went to the homepage of the organization that posted that article, and then found their purpose statement. These statements stuck out after I browsed the statement quickly.

TCR joins other Catholics loyal to the Holy Father and Church in opposing the neo-modernist revolution and its bitter manifestations, just as it opposes the others errors that affect and infect the modern world-- atheism, Communism, Socialism (old forms or new) the abortion epidemic, euthanasia, secular sex education, sodomy, radical feminism, syncretism, liturgical trendiness and kitsch, Integrist errors and all schismatic theology, etc.

We seek true liturgical renewal in the form of improvements to the Pauline, Novus Ordo liturgy, especially a restoring of the dignity and sense of the Sacred essential to Mass, restoring the contemplative and adorational dimensions to liturgy, including some of the Church's time honored Latin (See Cardinal Ratzinger's book, Spirit of the Liturgy, Ignatius Press).

We also seek a wide and generous application of the 1984 Indult for those orthodox priests and laypersons who are in full communion with the living magisterium and who desire it, seeking relief from neo-modernist abuses and anti-conciliar "personalized" liturgies which contradict the Roman Missal and Vatican II. We join Pope John Paul II in affirming, per the motu proprio Ecclesia Dei adflicta that:
"...it is necessary that all the Pastors and the other faithful have a new awareness, not only of the lawfulness but also of the richness for the Church of a diversity of charisms, traditions of spirituality and apostolate, which also constitutes the beauty of unity in variety: of that blended "harmony" which the earthly Church raises up to Heaven under the impulse of the Holy Spirit."

I couldn't have said it better myself. This is where I stand concerning the liturgical debate. This makes me a "traditionalist," by definition. Since I am faithful to the Pope's leadership of the Catholic Church, I am not a schismatic.

One last thing that I saw on the purpose statement was this quote, which I think is really good (it's by Chesterton, after all).

"Are we on the Left or the Right of the Church? We would much rather avoid those terms altogether. G.K. Chesterton once said: "The whole world is dividing itself into progressives and conservatives. The job of the progressives is to go on making mistakes. The job of the conservatives is to prevent those mistakes from being corrected."

[saradippity]

Interesting thread,the dwindling dialogue on religious threads should be a concern to all posters who are seeking to learn,convince,debate and/or inform others on matters concerning religion.

I am a Catholic,in union with the Pope and Magisterium,as defined by Tradition and grounded in Scripture.I have not attended the Tridentine mass in my diocese because the bishop has not permitted it and the Pope gives him the authority to allow or not to allow it.

I have taken issue with Sinkspur many times when he drops a line that has come to be accepted as if it were a "truth" or a "fact" but is not. In April,I said "Sinkspur says he is Catholic but he is not;he lies."

I thought it might kick off an interesting conversation on what it means to be Catholic and why it is wrong to claim to be what one cannot be,given the definition.I have been trying to connect it with the Letters to the Churches in Revelations:chaps:2 and 3.

This is what Sinkspur,who so bemoans the lack of Catholic posters who support the NO mass,and the rest of the post-Vatican worldview,posted to me on April 24,2003. "Your gibberish and mindless meanderings may impress some on this forum but they are at bottom your attempt to appear informed when you are clueless.-------You are a very good woman,but you are in over your head in theology and politics."

This was just the last in a series of like remarks,of course,I was so happy he called me a "good woman". I am sure that remark was to demonstrate the charity and compassion and pastoral care that he and his ilk are so proud they possess. Actually,the fact that I even post anymore probably proves his point,I guess,I am just too stupid and thick headed to know how clueless I am.

[sinkspur]

Sinkspur says he is Catholic but he is not;he lies."

Sara, don't play the victim when you say things like this about other Catholics.

[Antoninus]

The Novus Ordo is not being made obsolete.

Perhaps I was unclear. The NO as it has existed for the past 30 years ("do it yourself mass" as termed by Cardinal Arinze) is being made obsolete (God willing).

As I said in my previous post, those who favor the Tridentine Mass should be provided the Tridentine Mass. Let a thousand flowers bloom in the Church.

I agree that the Tridentine should be provided, but the "thousand flowers" thing is just so Cultural Revolution, don't you think?

Actually, I don't. I show disdain for those who use the Latin Mass to prove that they, somehow, are so damn much better than those of us who like a dignified Novus Ordo liturgy.

Yes, you do. The mere fact that you used to bash (and may still on occasion) anyone that expressed any sort of attachment to the Tridentine mass is proof enough for me. Indeed, that was why I first took notice of your posts. It seems that your opinion on the matter has matured and grown, however. If that's the case then Deo gratias!

After all, how could we possibly be good Catholics if we worship God in a language we can actually understand?

As I said, I usually attend a NO mass. I have no problem with it if it's celebrated with reverence. I simply find the Tridentine mass superior. If that makes me a "radical trad" in your mind, so be it.

I accuse schismatics of being in schism because they are.

You also said The RC forum now consists of the far right: schismatics, integrists, ultra-traditionalists, and even the odd sedevacantist.

Since I am Exhibit A, which category do I fall into?

Most of the schismatics say that the Novus Ordo is invalid, that it is Protestant, that it fosters dissent and even clerical abuse.

Please, aside from Ultima Ratio, who else says this? Name some names, won't you?

The Novus Ordo is going nowhere, my friend. I just hope those of you want the Tridentine Liturgy get your wish.

I don't want the NO to go anywhere. What I want is a more strict interpretation of the rubrics as laid down in the Vatican II documentation. It's the "do it yourself" mass I want gone. And I don't think I overstep my bounds when I say that most of the rest of the "trads" on FR agree with that sentiment.

You go to your Mass, I'll go to mine, and we'll meet at the parish picnic.

Right. You'd probably take a swing at me.... ;-)

[sinkspur]

Most of the schismatics say that the Novus Ordo is invalid, that it is Protestant, that it fosters dissent and even clerical abuse.

Please, aside from Ultima Ratio, who else says this? Name some names, won't you?

Aloysius, Maximillian, Land of the Irish, huskyboy.

[Pyro7480]

I'm glad you clarified the whole traditionalist vs. schismatic thing. Otherwise, naming just these people wouldn't be "everyone" on the Catholic forum.

[StAthanasiustheGreat]

I'll agree, that sadly the Novus Ordo isn't as reverential as it should be. That looks like it is going to change, and for that I am incredibly thankful. I agree the Tridetine Mass should be available more and more regularly, however, I think the most important factor is making the Novus Ordo more reverential since it will be better attended I believe than the Tridetine (for better or for worse).

On a comletely seperate note, is that correct Latin grammar in your tag line, I am a bit of a Latin student myself (struggling thru Latin 210-3, to complete my 6th year of Latin -- I darn thee Catullus). In Hoc Signo is right, well known, but should "vinces" be in the imperative "vince"?

[Antoninus]

Actually,the fact that I even post anymore probably proves his point,I guess,I am just too stupid and thick headed to know how clueless I am.

Ha, ha. Sinky can be vicious but at the same time, he can't stand it when someone else pokes him in the eye. I think I got called an "annoying little twerp" and other things much worse by him once. It doesn't bother me, though, and that's the key. In a forum such as this, it pays to have a duck's back. If you can't take the flames, don't post. And what's worse, don't post and then whine when people take issue with you.

[Antoninus]

In Hoc Signo is right, well known, but should "vinces" be in the imperative "vince"?

I always thought it was "By this sign, you will conquer." Second person, future tense. If this is wrong, please correct me.

[Antoninus]

Aloysius, Maximillian, Land of the Irish, huskyboy.

Dog gone it! Exhibit A doesn't even make the list! I guess I'll have to try harder.

[sinkspur]

What I want is a more strict interpretation of the rubrics as laid down in the Vatican II documentation. It's the "do it yourself" mass I want gone.

Well, I disagree here. I like the options provided by the current GIRM rubrics, which includes a variety of Eucharistic Prayers. I like the English liturgy; if somebody wants to sprinkle in some Latin on occasion, fine.

I also like the three-year cycle of Scripture readings.

I don't care for the administration of the sacrament of Baptism during Sunday liturgies, but I know which Masses to avoid where this is regularly done.

[StAthanasiustheGreat]

Maybe you are right, I am not sure, I always thought it was just "IN THIS SIGN, CONQUER." I could very well be wrong. You will Conquer sounds cool.

[TradicalRC]

"Radical trads"? The proper term is Tradical; I should know, I coined it.

[SoothingDave]

What I want is a more strict interpretation of the rubrics as laid down in the Vatican II documentation. It's the "do it yourself" mass I want gone.

Well, I disagree here. I like the options provided by the current GIRM rubrics, which includes a variety of Eucharistic Prayers. I like the English liturgy; if somebody wants to sprinkle in some Latin on occasion, fine.

Apples and oranges, Sinky. Apples and oranges.

If the priests in this country and the bishops would just say the Mass according to the GIRM, we would be in a fine state. No one is against legitimate options that are provided for in the rubrics.

What we abhor is the "make it up yourself" things that are allowed to happen.

Surely you can tell the difference between an authorized option to use Eucharistic prayers 1 or 2 or 3 or 4, and a bishop ripping out kneelers so people are discuoraged from doing what the rubrics say? Can you tell the difference between the legitimate option of doing the Confeitor or doing the Kyrie and the practice of the preist leaving words out of the Creed that he doesn't agree with?

SD

[ultima ratio]

"Most of the schismatics say that the Novus Ordo is invalid, that it is Protestant, that it fosters dissent and even clerical abuse."

When have I ever said the N.O. is invalid? I have said it is deficient, it is theologically Protestant, it is contrary to Trent. I have never said it is invalid.

Nor have I ever said the N.O. Mass fosters dissent--I have argued that the same spirit of modernism that concocted a Mass which actually suppresses Catholic dogma, is the cause of dissent and corruption. You need to distinguish the Mass from the movement which spawned it.

Your problem is you don't think clearly. Your confusion spills over in everything you say. Try being more accurate and perhaps people would take you more seriously. Yesterday you claimed Bishop Fellay accepted the notion he had been excommunicated by Rome. This was another howler on your part--totally wrong.

[drstevej]

Nice to see you use paragraphs. :-)