FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: hating on Fisheaters
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
Vox said that considers Fisheaters as dangerous in terms of fidelity to the Church. 

One thing that CatholicCulture cites can be found in one of the Fisheater's resource pages.  I will post it below.  But I wish to ask:

Do clerics in the Church consider it a sin to have disdain for the Novus Ordo Mass?

If so, is it put into writing somewhere that we are supposed to just love love love the Novus Ordo Mass?

Here is what said:

Quote:"The site as a whole implicitly and explicitly rejects the Ordinary Form (Novus Ordo) Mass. "

From the Introduction:

In this section, I focus solely on the traditional Latin Mass based on the Missal of 1962 which is used by most traditional priests (including the F.S.S.P. and the S.S.P.X.). After much study, I've come to the conclusion that, validity issues aside, the "Novus Ordo Mass" is tragically flawed, something my instincts and "common sense" have told me since I was a child. The very name of this Mass – "Novus Ordo," i.e., "New Order" – should make anyone with a true Catholic nature cringe, and its effects are so incredibly sad it almost hurts to think about it. It has turned out to be a "New Mass" for a "New Religion" – and that religion is "not Catholic enough."

The "Novus Ordo," whether offered in English or Latin, is a violent break with Tradition, directly responsible,  in part, for the great loss of faith which followed its publication. "Lex credendi legem statuat supplicandi" – let the rule of belief determine the rule of prayer" is the rule of liturgy – but the prayers of the Novus Ordo, designed to make Protestants comfortable with the Mass, express Protestant belief not by what it says, but by what it fails to say – that is, by its omissions – and serve to lead us to believe as Protestants in that it practically nullifies the experience of the realities of the Sacrifice and the priesthood. The Novus Ordo – not so much for what it is inherently, but for what it  isn't, for what it  lacks – appears as the "Mass of Cain," arrogantly bringing his own works to God; the ancient Mass is the "Mass of Abel," who humbly offered God a sacrifice – a lamb that prefigured the Passover lamb which, in turn, prefigured the Lamb Who takes away the sins of the world, Whose offering of Himself to us is eternal.

The stripping away of the signs and symbols of the Mystery, the eradication of the poetic, the intentional blurring of the line between the ordained and common priesthoods, music that ranges from the banal to the offensive, the total ignoring of Gregorian chant, the failure to retain our sacred language, the "busy-ness," the dearth of silence, and, most of all, the almost total lack of emphasis on the Sacrifice – to not be offended by these things, especially after having studied the purpose of the Mass and our worship's relationship to our belief, is to be either ignorant of or ill-willed toward the Catholic Faith.
I was looking for more reviews on Fisheaters, and I found this negative one. 


Tonight, I do not have the words.  I'll just present what I find.  This is from 2009.

Quote:What I Hate About Fisheaters

One of the things I hate about Fisheaters is how good they often are: if they weren't, I could just write them off and move on. I'm reminded of Christ's words to the church in Laodicea in Revelation 3:15-16, "I know your works; I know that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either cold or hot. So, because you are lukewarm, neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth." They're so good in some areas that I want to just add them on the RSS feed on the right. For one thing, this Challenge section is just unparalleled. Anyone who takes the time to go through each question will come out with a pretty good idea of why the Church believes as she does, and may well come out Catholic.

But then they mix in things which make me dread reading the site, like a good number of the links on this page, which are more about attacking any Catholics who aren't Traditional or Sedevacantist Catholics. Catholic Culture does really helpful website reviews, and comes away seemingly frustrated that they can't rely on Fisheaters.

In yesterday's post, I linked to their page on dispensationalism with a Fish Eaters caveat to keep a grain of salt ready. After reading the page I linked to much more closely, let me be much more specific. I would ignore the following parts of the page:
•There are lots of really anti-Zionist parts of the page. I'm aware that there are really anti-Semitic elements within the hyper-Traditionalist wing of the Catholic Church (see: Bob Sungenis, Bp. Williamson, etc.), and that attacks on the "Zionists" are often just the politically correct form of modern anti-Semitism. That said, there's lots to be concerned about within Zionism as a movement, both in principle, and in particular, in practice. My problem with Christian Zionism is its attempt to find a basis in Scripture which just isn't there - I wasn't meaning to make any grand point one way or another about the prudence of the Jews having their own ethno-religious state. I linked to the page in spite of that, but then realized how prevelant it was in parts. For example:
•"The Politics of this Heretical Theology" is light on Scripture and heavy on "helping Israel is destroying the US." Personally, I think that even if one doesn't ascribe to Christian Zionism, there are legitimate reasons to want to support Israel. But I also think that it's an argument pretty far afield from what is good about this page.
•"What does the Torah say?" is an attempt to use the Torah against Zionism by having rabbis say it, instead.
•"But -- the return of the Jews to Palestine is so miraculous! The very existence of the Jews is miraculous!" This section makes a decent point, I guess, but does it with such snark that it's sort of worthless. And this part seems particularly insane: "The return of Jews to Palestine? No miracle of God, but the fruits of Lionel Rothschild's arrangements with England's Lord Balfour -- an arrangement ultimately paid for by the blood of German-Jewish innocents sold out by their Zionist leaders (see "Jews Not Zionists" and "Neturei Kartei" links above)." Generally, anything which blames the Rothschilds sets off the "Blame the Imagined Cabal" alarm.
•The "Further Reading" section starts out with a link to the Society of St. Pius X, with no warning about that group's status within Catholicism right now. It ends with a link for which FE gives this bizarre description: "Judaism is not the religion of the Old Testament, but the formalized belief system of the Pharisees, which arose in Babylon with the commitment of the formerly oral “tradition of the elders." I generally don't trust anything on the list, giving how it begins and ends.

So basically, the latter half of the article is untrustworthy. I've thought about just removing the link, but there are some things in the first half which I think are presented so well, I'll just trust readers not to come out paranoid anti-Semites. Some really good parts of the page:
1.The claim that God chose the Jewish people, as an ethnic group, to the exclusion of all other ethnic groups, is both an offensive view of God and an anti-Biblical one.
2.Jesus came to create a spiritual Kingdom, not an earthly one - and that was His goal all along (John 18:36, Matthew 25:34, John 12:25-27). This clamoring for the state of Israel as the earthly Zion is us failing to get Jesus' point... again.
3.The Kingdom of God was taking from those Jews who were unfaithful, and the Gentiles were ingrafted in. This is parabled out at length in Matthew 21:33-46, and made more explicit by Paul in Romans 11:16-21.
4."The Church is Israel." This whole section on the link is great.
5.Salvation for the Jews comes the same way as salvation for everyone else (Romans 11:23)- by giving up our stubbornness for God, and letting Him control things.
Nothing is more pompous than Catholic Culture claiming to be able to rate Catholic websites based upon " fidelity to the Magisterium" the way they do; as if a PHd gives Dr. Jeffery Mirus the authority to decide what is part of the " magisterium" and what isn't.  I guess that's what he gets his six figure income for doing, for rating websites fidelity.

As for some of those reviews of this place, it seems like many of them were done years ago when this forum was quite a wild and acrimonious place. It's much quieter and tamer now than it was only a few years ago when there were a lot of very angry rad trads, insanely erudite and articulate sedevacantists and some serious mudslinging on the boards.

One thing I love about this place is how we are pretty much given the opportunity to openly discuss things. I imagine many on this board, both now and in the past, have just been honest about how they bought and felt about all the happenings in the Church. To certain folks like the ones that run Catholic Culture this openess and frank criticism of much of the Conciliar paradigm is anathema. As far as they are concerned folks like us go too far.

This should not come as a surprise to anyone here. The Neo-cons and the progressives will do their utmost to stop the return to  traditional Catholic practice. One cannot be immersed in the Traditional Mass and not realize that things went disastrously wrong following Vatican 2. Heck, the E.F. and a copy of Pascendi can refute every novelty coming out of the Council. They know that. Post a traditional thread on some of the usual suspect blogs, and watch how quickly the defenders jump on you. They realize how quickly this can open eyes. And I would suggest that if nothing else, the current situation with the Synod of the Family, and the errors that are coming to light from it's supporters are awakening Catholics to the realization that something stinks! I just read this today from the Archbold Bros. posted on the Register:

Now even an EWTN owned publication is allowing contributors to wave the storm warning flag.
Keep praying and fasting y'all!
Well, to be fair we all have to recognize some sites out there who claim to be in line with unbroken tradition but that are completely not—sedevacantist stuff, crypto-Anglican stuff and whatnot.

And you know, for a pure, virginal soul coming out of NO land its not like FE doesn't have some stuff that could shock (even though what might shock one might be just the truth). But then again, who would want to be such a sell out as to not be offensive to any group whatsoever?

Unfortunately, sites like CatholicCulture can be used as a weapon to discredit people. I've seen people on forums like CAF say well that site is rated this on CatholicCulture, I wouldn't trust them. Any information you post as a reference from such a site will be given no credence in an argument because apparently CatholicCulture is the know all.
Quote:Do clerics in the Church consider it a sin to have disdain for the Novus Ordo Mass?

If so, is it put into writing somewhere that we are supposed to just love love love the Novus Ordo Mass?
(02-13-2015, 03:36 PM)LaramieHirsch Wrote: [ -> ]
Quote:Do clerics in the Church consider it a sin to have disdain for the Novus Ordo Mass?

If so, is it put into writing somewhere that we are supposed to just love love love the Novus Ordo Mass?
Depends on which cleric you ask. One cleric I've heard of, who has gone by several names, most popularly Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger and Pope Benedict XVI, said this about the Novus Ordo (and he has never retracted this statement):

Quote:What happened after the Council . . . in the place of ‘liturgy as the fruit of development’ came fabricated liturgy. We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over centuries, and replaced it—as in a manufacturing process—with a fabrication, a banal on-the-spot product.

It's hard to argue that such a statement reveals much affection for the Novus Ordo liturgy as Novus Ordo.

Nowhere are we obliged to "love" it although you may have to clarify what you mean by "love."
As for, we do have to realize that in an internet age, an age of mass production and consumerism, it will be very difficult to appreciate the subtle balance of universal and local, especially for the Catholic faith, which has always been international, essentially and historically. The two factors come together to form an easy mold, especially in an age of globalization, of Westernization. It shouldn't come as a surprise that the standard Novus Ordo majority opinion has become the basic constituent of Catholicism on the internet since most of these internet websites will have the standard NO majority as their primary audience. In this way, a website like Fish Eaters literally becomes a cog in the machine because it serves as a corrective to the overemphasis towards universalization to the detriment of what is local or legitimately different (even if not local, which seems to be a dying possibility in our technologically connected world).
The French Language Catholic forums dn't put much stock in any of the English language Catholic forums as they are not officially sponsered by Catholic institutions and they are not moderated by official representatives of the Catholic Church.
Pages: 1 2