Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free
A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for discussion related to learning about the faith (Catechetics), defense of the Faith (Apologetics), the Liturgy and canon law, motivated by a desire to grow closer to Christ or to bring someone else closer.

Saint Augustine of Hippo is considered on of the greatest Christian thinkers of all time and the Doctor of the Church.
Learn More: Saint Augustine

Oct 24th 2013 new
The way I see it, the "changes" of the 1960s were almost designed to fuel traditionalist offshoots. The Benedictine, Jesuit and diocesan liturgists controlled important posts in the Church bureaucracy, from which they rammed liturgical "reform" down people's throats.

Having said that, I think BXVI's effort to bring the SSPX back into the Church was a good idea.
LOCKED
Oct 24th 2013 new
(quote) ED-20630 said: I agree Bernard.

But then what about #1258, #1259, #1260 and #1261? Are those accepted too, or does SSPX just have a selective (cafeteria-like) catechism when it comes to Catholic teaching of Baptism?

Ed
they believe whatever the Traditional teaching is I guess. SSPX.ORG
LOCKED
Oct 24th 2013 new

I am not a member of the SSPX but the terminology I have read/heard is that they are loyal to Eternal Rome. In particular they are against the revolution of changing the Holy Mass during the 1960s. Father Calvin Goodwin (FFSP- Ex Novus Ordo priest) is very good at articulating the evolution of the Mass- small changes over many centuries adding to, or enhancing the Mass, not detracting from its majesty.

The politically correct comment in the Forums is that the Novus Ordo Mass is equal to (ie not better or worse) the Tridentine Mass. If that is the case why would you replace something with something EQUAL rather than something BETTER? I am yet to hear a decent argument supporting that.

LOCKED
Oct 24th 2013 new
(quote) Gabor-19025 said:

I am not a member of the SSPX but the terminology I have read/heard is that they are loyal to Eternal Rome. In particular they are against the revolution of changing the Holy Mass during the 1960s. Father Calvin Goodwin (FFSP- Ex Novus Ordo priest) is very good at articulating the evolution of the Mass- small changes over many centuries adding to, or enhancing the Mass, not detracting from its majesty.

The politically correct comment in the Forums is that the Novus Ordo Mass is equal to (ie not better or worse) the Tridentine Mass. If that is the case why would you replace something with something EQUAL rather than something BETTER? I am yet to hear a decent argument supporting that.


Session 7, Canon 13 of the Dogmatic Council of Trent clearly states:

"If any one saith, that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church, wont to be used in the solemn administration of the sacraments, may be contemned, or without sin be omitted at pleasure by the ministers, or be changed, by whomsoever pastor of the churches, into other new ones; let him be anathema"
LOCKED
Oct 24th 2013 new
(quote) Bernard-2709 said: they believe whatever the Traditional teaching is I guess. SSPX.ORG
The more I hear about SSPX....

The seem like a team of players that wants to join the local baseball league. However...
> They want to use paddles instead of bats.
> They want to use a baseball circle instead of a baseball diamond.
> They prefer 5 bases instead of 3.
> They don't like foul balls, so they plan to just ignore them.
They are upset that the officials of the baseball league won't let them play in the league. After all, the team wants to play baseball with everyone else, they just insist on a few changes.

Why would the league officials not tell the team to take their balls and paddles and go start their own league. They can call it anything that they wish (paddle-ball, circle-ball, 5-base-ball, whatever). Just don't call it baseball since they aren't playing by the same rules and it would just confuse all the fans that just want to attend a real baseball game.

Ed
LOCKED
Oct 25th 2013 new
(quote) Sean-851370 said: The way I see it, the "changes" of the 1960s were almost designed to fuel traditionalist offshoots. The Benedictine, Jesuit and diocesan liturgists controlled important posts in the Church bureaucracy, from which they rammed liturgical "reform" down people's throats.

Having said that, I think BXVI's effort to bring the SSPX back into the Church was a good idea.
Perhaps we are now witnessing a final take-over of the Catholic Church by the Jesuits. The rumor I've heard shhh is that there is a Jesuit in the top spot at the Vatican. eyepopping eyepopping They (those darn Jesuits) have probably been planning for a take-over by Francis for the past 50+ years. They have probably been grooming Francis (for the position) in secret all these years. Maybe they also rigged the college of Cardinals somehow so that they would surely vote him in to office. Now were probably all doooooomed. laughing laughing laughing

I guess I just have a low tolerance for most such devious or heavy-handed schemes and stories.

Ed
LOCKED
Oct 25th 2013 new
(quote) ED-20630 said: Perhaps we are now witnessing a final take-over of the Catholic Church by the Jesuits. The rumor I've heard is that there is a Jesuit in the top spot at the Vatican. They (those darn Jesuits) have probably been planning for a take-over by Francis for the past 50+ years. They have probably been grooming Francis (for the position) in secret all these years. Maybe they also rigged the college of Cardinals somehow so that they would surely vote him in to office. Now were probably all doooooomed.

I guess I just have a low tolerance for most such devious or heavy-handed schemes and stories.

Ed
You're not the only one.
LOCKED
Oct 25th 2013 new
(quote) Gabor-19025 said: Paul,

In under 5 minutes I could post 10-15 links of Novus Ordo Masses that are gravely abused. I would be interested if you could post 1 link of an abuse in a TLM? I would be interested in reviewing that footage.

Unlike you, I don't waste my time looking for abuses of anything.

Unfortunately, for my entire time as an altar boy in grammar school I had to serve the Masses of a priest who irreverently said his low masses in15 minutes. Even His Sunday High Mass with sermon rarely exceeded a half hour and then only because of the time the choir took to sing.

Abuses have always and will always exist both in the Church and in society at large. Why burden yourself with all the gripping. Concentrate on your own salvation and stop worrying about others over whom you have no control.
LOCKED
Oct 25th 2013 new
(quote) Bernard-2709 said: http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a1.htm

VI. THE NECESSITY OF BAPTISM

1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation.60 He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them.61 Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament.62 The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are "reborn of water and the Spirit." God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.

Man is constrained by the Sacraments. God isn't.

The very section of the Catechism you are quoting specifies you are wrong.

You constant harping on a narrow view of what the Church teaches leaves you with the inability to explain away why an all merciful and just God would creates people, throughout history, who have never heard of Him and never have (had) a chance to be Baptized which according to your vierw means he created specifically and purposely to go to hell.
LOCKED
Oct 25th 2013 new
(quote) Sean-851370 said: The way I see it, the "changes" of the 1960s were almost designed to fuel traditionalist offshoots. The Benedictine, Jesuit and diocesan liturgists controlled important posts in the Church bureaucracy, from which they rammed liturgical "reform" down people's throats.

Having said that, I think BXVI's effort to bring the SSPX back into the Church was a good idea.
Be sure that you also note the fact that in trying to bring them back he never even considered compromising Church teaching to do so.
This topic has been automatically locked due to size. Any further discussion can be continued in a new topic.
LOCKED
Posts 191 - 200 of 200