My experience at the NO
#71
(01-26-2012, 10:55 PM)Dewi Wrote: There seems to be a lot of people on this forum these days who like the NO. Kind of strange. How about you NO lovers switch over to a forum called "Fish Eaters or Some Other Act of Penance, Sort of Traditional Catholic Forum".  Just a suggestion.

Nobody on this thread said anything about liking the NO.  Personally, I think it is fundamentally flawed and should be abrogated. I suspect that they all, like me, would go to a TLM if it were available.  Some trads think that the NO is better than nothing, while others disagree.

(Oddly enough, "people think that nothing is better than the NO" is not the opposite.  ??? )
Reply
#72
(01-26-2012, 10:55 PM)Dewi Wrote: There seems to be a lot of people on this forum these days who like the NO. Kind of strange. How about you NO lovers switch over to a forum called "Fish Eaters or Some Other Act of Penance, Sort of Traditional Catholic Forum".  Just a suggestion.

I don't think there are any people here who LIKE the NO. There are those of us here that don't like the NO, but realize that as long as the priest isn't a flaming heretic preaching heresy from the pulpit and allowing serious grave abuses that effect the matter, form, or intent of the Priest then it is a valid and licit Catholic Mass. Thus being the case, some of us feel it's acceptable, and most likely even necessary to attend the NO Mass to fulfill ones Sunday and Holy Day obligation. I am not going to absolutely say that someone who stays home from Mass on Sundays and Holy Days because there is no TLM is absolutely in mortal sin, but they are going against the authority of the Holy Father the Pope. That said, I have posted about a lot of NO Masses I have been to that have had serious abuses and priests preaching heresies from the pulpit and I would never under any circumstances save for funerals or weddings go to a Mass there, maybe someone is living in an area where all the NO Masses around them are filled with serious grave abuses or heretic priests. If that's the case, I could understand someone not going to a Mass like this.

I bet if you asked anyone who defends going to the NO out of necessity they would tell you like I would that we would rather see the NO brought to its extinction and have the TLM as the exclusive rite of the Western Latin Church, but until that happens, we are still obliged to follow the Pope and the authority of the Church.

Reply
#73
(01-26-2012, 11:12 PM)Petertherock Wrote: I bet if you asked anyone who defends going to the NO out of necessity they would tell you like I would that we would rather see the NO brought to its extinction and have the TLM as the exclusive rite of the Western Latin Church, but until that happens, we are still obliged to follow the Pope and the authority of the Church.
I agree.
We are obliged only when he speaks Ex-Cathedra.

I am not arguing your point. Just reminding you a fact.
:)
Reply
#74
(01-26-2012, 11:19 PM)GottmitunsAlex Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 11:12 PM)Petertherock Wrote: I bet if you asked anyone who defends going to the NO out of necessity they would tell you like I would that we would rather see the NO brought to its extinction and have the TLM as the exclusive rite of the Western Latin Church, but until that happens, we are still obliged to follow the Pope and the authority of the Church.
I agree.
We are obliged only when he speaks Ex-Cathedra.

That's not true at all.  If it was, we would only be required to believe in the assumption and the immaculate conception.  Everything else would be fair game. 
More Catholic Discussion: http://thetradforum.com/

Go thy ways, old Jack;
die when thou wilt, if manhood, good manhood, be
not forgot upon the face of the earth, then am I a
shotten herring. There live not three good men
unhanged in England; and one of them is fat and
grows old: God help the while! a bad world, I say.
I would I were a weaver; I could sing psalms or any
thing. A plague of all cowards, I say still.
Reply
#75
(01-26-2012, 11:22 PM)Mithrandylan Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 11:19 PM)GottmitunsAlex Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 11:12 PM)Petertherock Wrote: I bet if you asked anyone who defends going to the NO out of necessity they would tell you like I would that we would rather see the NO brought to its extinction and have the TLM as the exclusive rite of the Western Latin Church, but until that happens, we are still obliged to follow the Pope and the authority of the Church.
I agree.
We are obliged only when he speaks Ex-Cathedra.
Remember I am referring to what I have highlighted in bold above. (speaking specifically about the Pope) I know about Authority of the Church.

That's not true at all.  If it was, there would only be two articles of faith.
So if the Pope speaks his personal opinion, you would take that as an article of faith?
Reply
#76
(01-26-2012, 11:19 PM)GottmitunsAlex Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 11:12 PM)Petertherock Wrote: I bet if you asked anyone who defends going to the NO out of necessity they would tell you like I would that we would rather see the NO brought to its extinction and have the TLM as the exclusive rite of the Western Latin Church, but until that happens, we are still obliged to follow the Pope and the authority of the Church.
I agree.
We are obliged only when he speaks Ex-Cathedra.

I am not arguing your point. Just reminding you a fact.
:)

That view was condemned by Pius IX. Even when not speaking infallibly the Pope recieves divine guidance and we are expected to assent to his public teachings on faith and morals and his disciplinary actions.
Reply
#77
(01-26-2012, 11:26 PM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 11:19 PM)GottmitunsAlex Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 11:12 PM)Petertherock Wrote: I bet if you asked anyone who defends going to the NO out of necessity they would tell you like I would that we would rather see the NO brought to its extinction and have the TLM as the exclusive rite of the Western Latin Church, but until that happens, we are still obliged to follow the Pope and the authority of the Church.
I agree.
We are obliged only when he speaks Ex-Cathedra.

I am not arguing your point. Just reminding you a fact.
:)

That view was condemned by Pius IX. Even when not speaking infallibly the Pope recieves divine guidance and we are expected to assent to his public teachings on faith and morals and his disciplinary actions.
That is Ex-Cathedra. you only forgot the part when he speaks to the Whole Church. but your close.
Reply
#78
(01-26-2012, 11:28 PM)GottmitunsAlex Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 11:26 PM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 11:19 PM)GottmitunsAlex Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 11:12 PM)Petertherock Wrote: I bet if you asked anyone who defends going to the NO out of necessity they would tell you like I would that we would rather see the NO brought to its extinction and have the TLM as the exclusive rite of the Western Latin Church, but until that happens, we are still obliged to follow the Pope and the authority of the Church.
I agree.
We are obliged only when he speaks Ex-Cathedra.

I am not arguing your point. Just reminding you a fact.
:)

That view was condemned by Pius IX. Even when not speaking infallibly the Pope recieves divine guidance and we are expected to assent to his public teachings on faith and morals and his disciplinary actions.
That is Ex-Cathedra. you only forgot the part when he speaks to the Whole Church. but your close.

He does not have to speak to the whole church for you to be required to give assent.  Saint Pius V in promulgating the TLM was only speaking to the Latin Rite.  That doesn't mean you could ignore his papal bull suppressing all masses less than 200 years old in the Latin rite. 

Here is Father Cekeda's handy guide to what you as a Catholic are required to believe:

Quote:
I. You must believe the teachings of both the solemn and the universal ordinary magisterium of the Church (Vatican I).

A. General Principle:

• “Further, by divine and Catholic faith, all those things must be believed which are contained in the written word of God and in tradition, and those which are proposed by the Church, either in a solemn pronouncement or in her ordinary and universal teaching power [magisterium], to be believed as divinely revealed.” Vatican Council I, Dogmatic Constitution on the Faith (1870), DZ 1792. (Doc A)

B. The Code of Canon Law imposes the same obligation. (canon 1323.1). (Doc B)

C. Therefore, you must believe by divine and Catholic faith those things:

1. Contained in Scripture or Tradition, AND

2. Proposed for belief as divinely revealed by the Church’s authority, either through:

a. Solemn pronouncements (by ecumenical councils, or popes ex cathedra) OR

b. Universal ordinary magisterium (teaching of the bishops together with the pope, either in council, or spread throughout the world.)

D. This is not “optional,” or “a matter of opinion.”

• Defines the object of faith — what you are obliged to believe

• de fide definita.. Infallible, unchangeable, solemn pronouncement.


II. You must also subject yourself to the Holy See’s doctrinal decisions and to other forms of doctrine commonly held as theological truths and conclusions. (Pius IX).

A. General Principle.

• “But, since it is a matter of that subjection by which in conscience all those Catholics are bound who work in the speculative sciences, in order that they may bring new advantage to the Church by their writings, on that account, then, the men of that same convention should realize that it is not sufficient for learned Catholics to accept and revere the aforesaid dogmas of the Church, but that it is also necessary to subject themselves to the decisions pertaining to doctrine which are issued by the Pontifical Congregations, and also to those forms of doctrine which are held by the common and constant consent of Catholics as theological truths and conclusions, so certain that opinions opposed to these same forms of doctrine, although they cannot be called heretical, nevertheless deserve some theological censure.” Tuas Libenter (1863), DZ 1684. (Doc C)

B. You must therefore adhere to the following:

1. Doctrinal decisions of Vatican Congregations (e.g., the Holy Office)

2. Forms of doctrine held as:

a. Theological truths and conclusions.

b. So certain that opposition merits some theological censure short of “heresy.”

III. You must reject these condemned positions on this issue:

A. Catholics are obliged to believe only those matters infallibly proposed as dogmas. (condemned by Pius IX).

• “And so all and each evil opinion and doctrine individually mentioned in this letter, by Our Apostolic authority We reject, proscribe, and condemn: and We wish and command that they be considered as absolutely rejected, proscribed and condemned by all the sons of the Catholic Church…”

“22. The obligation by which Catholic teachers and writers are absolutely bound is restricted to those matters only which are proposed by the infallible judgement of the Church, to be believed by all as dogmas of the faith.” Condemned proposition. Encyclical Quanta Cura and Syllabus of Errors (1864), DZ 1699, 1722. (Doc E)

B. Encyclicals do not demand assent, because popes are not exercising their supreme power. (condemned by Pius XII).

[color=red]• “It is not to be thought that what is set down in Encyclical Letters does not demand assent in itself, because in these the popes do not exercise the supreme powers of their magisterium. For these matters are taught by the ordinary magisterium, regarding which the following is pertinent ‘He who heareth you, heareth me.’; and usually what is set forth and inculcated in Encyclical Letters, already pertains to Catholic doctrine.” Humani Generis (1950), DZ 2313. (Doc F) 
Reply
#79
Chill Someone1776. I was specifically referring to the part about the Pope. I know about The authority of the Magesterium of the Church's teachings.
Thanks for the info anyways!
:)
Reply
#80
(01-26-2012, 11:32 PM)Someone1776 Wrote: Here is Father Cekeda's handy guide to what you as a Catholic are required to believe:

Quote:
I. You must believe the teachings of both the solemn and the universal ordinary magisterium of the Church (Vatican I).

A. General Principle:

• “Further, by divine and Catholic faith, all those things must be believed which are contained in the written word of God and in tradition, and those which are proposed by the Church, either in a solemn pronouncement or in her ordinary and universal teaching power [magisterium], to be believed as divinely revealed.” Vatican Council I, Dogmatic Constitution on the Faith (1870), DZ 1792. (Doc A)

B. The Code of Canon Law imposes the same obligation. (canon 1323.1). (Doc B)

C. Therefore, you must believe by divine and Catholic faith those things:

1. Contained in Scripture or Tradition, AND

2. Proposed for belief as divinely revealed by the Church’s authority, either through:

a. Solemn pronouncements (by ecumenical councils, or popes ex cathedra) OR

b. Universal ordinary magisterium (teaching of the bishops together with the pope, either in council, or spread throughout the world.)

D. This is not “optional,” or “a matter of opinion.”

• Defines the object of faith — what you are obliged to believe

• de fide definita.. Infallible, unchangeable, solemn pronouncement.


II. You must also subject yourself to the Holy See’s doctrinal decisions and to other forms of doctrine commonly held as theological truths and conclusions. (Pius IX).

A. General Principle.

• “But, since it is a matter of that subjection by which in conscience all those Catholics are bound who work in the speculative sciences, in order that they may bring new advantage to the Church by their writings, on that account, then, the men of that same convention should realize that it is not sufficient for learned Catholics to accept and revere the aforesaid dogmas of the Church, but that it is also necessary to subject themselves to the decisions pertaining to doctrine which are issued by the Pontifical Congregations, and also to those forms of doctrine which are held by the common and constant consent of Catholics as theological truths and conclusions, so certain that opinions opposed to these same forms of doctrine, although they cannot be called heretical, nevertheless deserve some theological censure.” Tuas Libenter (1863), DZ 1684. (Doc C)

B. You must therefore adhere to the following:

1. Doctrinal decisions of Vatican Congregations (e.g., the Holy Office)

2. Forms of doctrine held as:

a. Theological truths and conclusions.

b. So certain that opposition merits some theological censure short of “heresy.”

III. You must reject these condemned positions on this issue:

A. Catholics are obliged to believe only those matters infallibly proposed as dogmas. (condemned by Pius IX).

• “And so all and each evil opinion and doctrine individually mentioned in this letter, by Our Apostolic authority We reject, proscribe, and condemn: and We wish and command that they be considered as absolutely rejected, proscribed and condemned by all the sons of the Catholic Church…”

“22. The obligation by which Catholic teachers and writers are absolutely bound is restricted to those matters only which are proposed by the infallible judgement of the Church, to be believed by all as dogmas of the faith.” Condemned proposition. Encyclical Quanta Cura and Syllabus of Errors (1864), DZ 1699, 1722. (Doc E)

B. Encyclicals do not demand assent, because popes are not exercising their supreme power. (condemned by Pius XII).

[color=red]• “It is not to be thought that what is set down in Encyclical Letters does not demand assent in itself, because in these the popes do not exercise the supreme powers of their magisterium. For these matters are taught by the ordinary magisterium, regarding which the following is pertinent ‘He who heareth you, heareth me.’; and usually what is set forth and inculcated in Encyclical Letters, already pertains to Catholic doctrine.” Humani Generis (1950), DZ 2313. (Doc F) 
I am no theologian, but don't you think under C-2a There are too many OR's?
I mean, shouldn't they be AND's?

Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)