FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums
Tornielli: “Peace” agreement reached between Vatican and Lefebvrians - Printable Version

+- FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Church (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Forum: Catholicism (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Tornielli: “Peace” agreement reached between Vatican and Lefebvrians (/showthread.php?tid=48895)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28


Re: Tornielli: “Peace” agreement reached between Vatican and Lefebvrians - Stubborn - 09-21-2011

(09-21-2011, 06:44 AM)Adelbrecht Wrote:
(09-21-2011, 06:34 AM)Stubborn Wrote: I have never heard of them.
Link?
Oh dear, I'm using the same avatar as you do. Guess I'll have to change it to avoid confusion... :)

Oh yes, a link. [url=http://"https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Priestly_Society_of_Saint_Josaphat"]Wikipedia[/url]

There are links to pictures of Mgr. Fellay and Mgr. Williamson ordaining for the society.

No problem with your avatar but I can't get link to work.


Re: Tornielli: “Peace” agreement reached between Vatican and Lefebvrians - John_77 - 09-21-2011

(09-21-2011, 06:48 AM)Stubborn Wrote:
(09-21-2011, 06:44 AM)Adelbrecht Wrote:
(09-21-2011, 06:34 AM)Stubborn Wrote: I have never heard of them.
Link?
Oh dear, I'm using the same avatar as you do. Guess I'll have to change it to avoid confusion... :)

Oh yes, a link. [url=http://"https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Priestly_Society_of_Saint_Josaphat"]Wikipedia[/url]

There are links to pictures of Mgr. Fellay and Mgr. Williamson ordaining for the society.
No problem with your avatar but I can't get link to work.

I did something wrong. My bad.

This should work now:Wikipedia



Re: Tornielli: “Peace” agreement reached between Vatican and Lefebvrians - Stubborn - 09-21-2011

Well seems to me nothing would change........I am still in the camp that says SSPX will not sign or join the NO.


Re: Tornielli: “Peace” agreement reached between Vatican and Lefebvrians - Josué - 09-21-2011

(09-21-2011, 07:04 AM)Stubborn Wrote: Well seems to me nothing would change........I am still in the camp that says SSPX will not sign or join the NO.

That's because you're stubborn.




Re: Tornielli: “Peace” agreement reached between Vatican and Lefebvrians - Stubborn - 09-21-2011

(09-21-2011, 07:06 AM)Josué Wrote:
(09-21-2011, 07:04 AM)Stubborn Wrote: Well seems to me nothing would change........I am still in the camp that says SSPX will not sign or join the NO.

That's because you're stubborn.

Aside from that, the SSPX are against modernism no matter who is infected with it. In this case, it's the NO.


Re: Tornielli: “Peace” agreement reached between Vatican and Lefebvrians - John_77 - 09-21-2011

(09-21-2011, 07:04 AM)Stubborn Wrote: Well seems to me nothing would change........I am still in the camp that says SSPX will not sign or join the NO.
Well, IF they were to sign, I guess it wouldn't be that swell for the Priestly Society of Saint Josaphat. They won't have bishops to ordain anymore, and I guess they'll never be able to rejoin the Church without compromising their position.

To be honest, I can't say that I support their liturgical latinisations, but on the other hand, I son't see a problem with the rosary or the adoration of the blessed sacrament, because they're not part of the normal liturgy. Individuals can still say the rosary, so that isn't a problem. I don't see why Eucharistic Adoration can't be allowed in Eastern Catholic churches, as long as the true Eastern traditions don't disappear.


Re: Tornielli: “Peace” agreement reached between Vatican and Lefebvrians - Nic - 09-21-2011

(09-19-2011, 06:37 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(09-19-2011, 06:31 PM)devotedknuckles Wrote: lVB claims he NO was a Protestant bastard mass. Indojbt bishop Felly had. A plm with that take

As I recall the actual quote, he said it was "protestantized"  i.e. made more similar to a protestant service.  This does not mean the same thing as being protestant.  We can see the same word formation when people say that a man is feminized.  They are claiming that his behaviour has become more like a woman's.  They are not saying that he has literally turned into a woman.  He is still a man.  Similarly, the NO Mass is still a Catholic Mass.

Protestant or "Protestantized," the simple fact remains that it is the clear position of the SSPX that we should NOT attend the N.O. Mass - this is something that you simply cannot deny or weasel around.  This is not due to its validity, but due to its sacrilege and its faulty foundation that is most clearly not rooted in the Faith.  Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi.  This law absolutely speaks volumes concerning the simple fact that the New Mass doesn't teach traditional Catholicism - therefore, albeit possibly valid, it is not a Catholic Mass because a Catholic Mass has to teach the Faith.  The utter magnitude of the modern crisis we are going through is because people claiming Catholicism have been duped - they have been told that this New Mass is Catholic.  We have seen the outcome with our own eyes.  If this Mass taught the Faith then we wouldn't see the statistics that we do.

Therefore, it doesn't matter one bit if modern "Rome" calls this Mass Catholic or the "Ordinary Form" because we can clearly see otherwise.  The all-time Tradition of the Church fervently condemns the New Mass and I am 100% confident that the New Mass will be condemned by a future Magesterium.  Just like people 30 years ago who believed with all of their hearts that the Latin Mass was not suspended, those same people didn't need "Rome" to tell them otherwise - they already knew it from Tradition.  I don't need "Rome" to tell me that the New Mass is condemned, although one day they surely will (unless Christ returns beforehand).




Re: Tornielli: “Peace” agreement reached between Vatican and Lefebvrians - Nic - 09-21-2011

(09-19-2011, 06:23 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(09-19-2011, 10:56 AM)Nic Wrote:
(09-15-2011, 05:22 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(09-15-2011, 05:19 PM)dan hunter Wrote:
(09-15-2011, 05:13 PM)JayneK Wrote: Bishop Fellay speaks in a measured way, without hyperbole or polemics.  I admire this about him.
It probably reflects the way his mind works.
He is a genuine Catholic.

If the Society is regularized, I will probably being having much more to do with them.  I consider Bishop Fellay's leadership to be one of the positive aspects of the SSPX.

...but you disagree with their blatant stance against the New Mass.  How can you consider +Fellay's leadership good and "have much more to do with them" when they denounce the Protestant Mass that you constantly defend?

The Novus Ordo Mass is not Protestant and I would be very surprised if Bishop Fellay claimed it were.  I recognize many genuine problems with the NO, but I object to exaggerations of these problems. That is my so-called "defense" of the NO.

Your defense of the N.O. is quite documented on this forum.  Anyone who claims to be a "trad" and attends the New Mass defends it - they have to defend their reasoning for attending it, don't they?

...are you surprised that the official position of the SSPX is that nobody should attend the New Mass?  I have seen this on every website, book and article the SSPX has out and I have heard it from every SSPX priest that I have spoken with.  This is most DEFINITELY the position of +Fellay since he is the superior of the society.  Now, let's use a bit of common sense here:  if +Fellay thought the New Mass was Catholic, then why is a superior of a society that fervently states that we should not attend it telling them not to?  If it is a Catholic Mass, which means it teaches the Faith thoroughly (not because it just so happens to be a rite of Mass that the post-conciliar hierarchy, which is greatly modernist, allows within the Church), then why in the world does the SSPX tell its proponents never to attend it?  Hmmm.

And just for the sake of discussion, answer me this:  If tomorrow the Pope allowed the Lutheran "Mass" within the Church with no changes or very little changes, only slapping the title "Catholic" on it, would that Mass be Catholic although it effectively teaches a different religion?

If your answer is no, then why do you think that a Mass that is essentially Thomas Cranmer's rite - a Mass devised by committee consisting of 6 Protestants and an alleged Freemason - is Catholic?  Just because a hierarchy that just so happens to be thoroughly infected with heresy allows a rite of Mass within the Church does NOT make it Catholic - not at all.


Re: Tornielli: “Peace” agreement reached between Vatican and Lefebvrians - crusaderfortruth3372 - 09-21-2011

(09-21-2011, 09:30 AM)Nic Wrote:
(09-19-2011, 06:37 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(09-19-2011, 06:31 PM)devotedknuckles Wrote: lVB claims he NO was a Protestant bastard mass. Indojbt bishop Felly had. A plm with that take

As I recall the actual quote, he said it was "protestantized"  i.e. made more similar to a protestant service.  This does not mean the same thing as being protestant.  We can see the same word formation when people say that a man is feminized.  They are claiming that his behaviour has become more like a woman's.  They are not saying that he has literally turned into a woman.  He is still a man.  Similarly, the NO Mass is still a Catholic Mass.

Protestant or "Protestantized," the simple fact remains that it is the clear position of the SSPX that we should NOT attend the N.O. Mass - this is something that you simply cannot deny or weasel around.  This is not due to its validity, but due to its sacrilege and its faulty foundation that is most clearly not rooted in the Faith.  Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi.  This law absolutely speaks volumes concerning the simple fact that the New Mass doesn't teach traditional Catholicism - therefore, albeit possibly valid, it is not a Catholic Mass because a Catholic Mass has to teach the Faith.  The utter magnitude of the modern crisis we are going through is because people claiming Catholicism have been duped - they have been told that this New Mass is Catholic.  We have seen the outcome with our own eyes.  If this Mass taught the Faith then we wouldn't see the statistics that we do.

Therefore, it doesn't matter one bit if modern "Rome" calls this Mass Catholic or the "Ordinary Form" because we can clearly see otherwise.  The all-time Tradition of the Church fervently condemns the New Mass and I am 100% confident that the New Mass will be condemned by a future Magesterium.  Just like people 30 years ago who believed with all of their hearts that the Latin Mass was not suspended, those same people didn't need "Rome" to tell them otherwise - they already knew it from Tradition.  I don't need "Rome" to tell me that the New Mass is condemned, although one day they surely will (unless Christ returns beforehand).


This!!

Great post!


Re: Tornielli: “Peace” agreement reached between Vatican and Lefebvrians - JayneK - 09-21-2011

(09-21-2011, 06:22 AM)INPEFESS Wrote:
(09-20-2011, 03:22 PM)JayneK Wrote: I agree with you that the wording of the original version was not good Catholic theology.  However, I disagree that the revised version is wrong.  Many different things are happening at the Mass.  It is not uncatholic to say that it is a gathering of the people of God.  It is uncatholic when this is the only thing said to the exclusion of all else.

It is antithetical to Catholicism to subordinate--or make merely complementary--the purpose of the Mass, as infallibly defined by the Council of Trent, to a novel, ecumenical purpose.

The Holy Ghost of the Catholic religion doesn't change His mind about what the purpose of the Mass is.

If the first was by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, by whose inspiration is the second? The "wisdom of Man" (Paul VI), no doubt.

The Mass is extremely rich in meaning.  Expanding on what was said at Trent to include other traditional ideas on the Mass is perfectly reasonable and orthodox.  The current edition of the GIRM does not seem to me to be subordinating the purpose as defined by Trent to other ideas or to be introducing change.  On the contrary it emphasizes the unchanging nature of the Catholic Mass and our understanding of it.