OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 27, 2014, 04:56:35 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Why the RCC isn't Orthodox  (Read 10365 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #45 on: November 06, 2003, 01:20:26 AM »

Wow I watch a movie for 3 hours and come back to the fireworks!

Great discussion, everyone! Let's keep it focused on the issues, though--I am seeing the beginnings of "drift" ;-)

Administratively yours,

anastasios ;-)
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
Jakub
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,747



« Reply #46 on: November 06, 2003, 01:24:38 AM »

Is'nt it peachy to debate in front of the good old PC with a good cup of your farvorite beverage and stimulate those under used slightly damaged brain cells ?

james
Logged

An old timer is a man who's had a lot of interesting experiences -- some of them true.

Grant me the senility to forget the people I never liked anyway, the good fortune to run into the ones I do, and the eyesight to tell the difference.
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #47 on: November 06, 2003, 06:12:25 AM »

Byzantino

I have to go back and check that quote from Florence.


Hypo

What about that other council father John XXIII?  I've heard he was well regarded by the East for all that he a bit of a papist.

CR
Logged
Byzantino
Me Ortodox
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 353


Orthodox Christian


« Reply #48 on: November 06, 2003, 07:52:52 AM »

Pope Bl. John XXIII is the paragon of Papacy.  If only he had lived longer.
Logged
prodromos
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,463

Sydney, Australia


« Reply #49 on: November 06, 2003, 08:26:29 AM »

I think the average life expectancy, once someone becomes Pope, is something like three years.

I'll have to check this again sometime.

John
Logged
Hypo-Ortho
Guest
« Reply #50 on: November 06, 2003, 12:38:53 PM »

Hypo

What about that other council father John XXIII?  I've heard he was well regarded by the East for all that he a bit of a papist.

CR

C-R, first of all, is it really necessary for you to continue to use the deprecatory term "papist" in reference to RC's?  You don't see me using it--if I did, you'd be all over me about it.

At any rate, Pope John XXIII was an affable figure and liked by all, but, affable as he was, he was not the spokesman for the Eastern Orthodox observers at Vatican II in the same manner as Cardinal Hakim, the Melkite Greek-Catholic Patriarch, although John did acknowledge the official observers' presence (including the Protestant observers).

Hypo-Ortho
Logged
LatinTrad
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 54


www.unavoce.org www.christendom.edu


« Reply #51 on: November 06, 2003, 02:06:22 PM »

I don't have time to write a post because I'm at work, so I'll just respond to a couple of Byzantino's points.

You are misunderstanding Florence on two points.  First of all, the unbaptized infants--Florence affirms the constant teaching that without baptism one cannot achieve salvation.  It does not say that unbaptized infants suffer eternal punishment.  Moreover, the tradition of the Church holds that salvation is possible--although by no means certain or probable--for those who are baptized in desire (in voto).  Feeneyites reject the latter possibility.

Secondly, regarding the "heretics and schismatics" et al:  That quote does not contradict Lumen Gentium--although the Church is a completely visible institution those who are invincibly ignorant (i.e. only materially, not formally schismatic) are united to her.  Re-read the quote from Florence carefully.

It is very frustrating because I wish I had time to respond to everything, but . . .


LatinTrad
Logged
Justinianus
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 255



« Reply #52 on: November 06, 2003, 02:18:12 PM »

Justianus

I don't get you.  The Arians were considered by both East and West as heretics therefore outside what was then an undivided Church therefore their council couldn't be ecumenical.  Though I guess EO's consider RC's as heretics so therefore our councils don't count as ecumenical.  Right?  

But then again the Patriarch of New Rome was at the Council of Florence and he signed off on everything.  So where does that leave the issue.  I know St Mark of Ephesus ran screaming from the council but the Patriarch went along with things which is a pity as Constantinople didn't get the expected military help they wanted.

Carpo-Rusyn

Sorry, the point I was trying to make was in my last sentence:

 "Councils outside the Orthodox Church can not be considered, even if the participants called it "ecumenical"

Florence is not considered ecumenical by the Orthodox, because it was rejected by the orthodox Church.  So bringing up Florence has no meaning to the Orthodox.

Some Orthodox consider Roman Catholics as heretics, while some do not.  As for me personnaly, I will remain silent for now on that question.

Logged

"If we truly think of Christ as our source of holiness, we shall refrain from anything wicked or impure in thought or act and thus show ourselves to be worthy bearers of his name.  For the quality of holiness is shown not by what we say but by what w
Justinianus
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 255



« Reply #53 on: November 06, 2003, 02:27:11 PM »

You are misunderstanding Florence on two points.  
LatinTrad

Why is Florence being brought up so often?  It is not an ecumenical council recognized by the Orthodox Church.  If we are going to discuss councils, we have to review those prior to 1054.  Discussing so called "ecumenical councils" held by the Roman Church are not relevant.  Smiley
Logged

"If we truly think of Christ as our source of holiness, we shall refrain from anything wicked or impure in thought or act and thus show ourselves to be worthy bearers of his name.  For the quality of holiness is shown not by what we say but by what w
LatinTrad
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 54


www.unavoce.org www.christendom.edu


« Reply #54 on: November 06, 2003, 04:55:46 PM »

I brought up Florence again in order to set the record straight, and because it was being discussed by others.

Even if you reject Florence, it should have some meaning to you--namely, to clarify the position of the Holy Catholic Church.

LatinTrad

Logged
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #55 on: November 06, 2003, 05:38:44 PM »

Hypo-Orthodox

You can feel free to call me a papist anytime.  You're right about Card. Hakim.

As far as the council of Florence...I forget how it got in.

I think the bottom line to all this is that the RCC isn't Orthodox.  Did we ever say we were?  You're EO we're RC maybe we'll unite someday but that's up to God.  We can all (or at least some of us) can pray for that.  But if we're not Orthodox why hasn't someone setup an Orthodox bishop of Rome?  

CR
Logged
LatinTrad
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 54


www.unavoce.org www.christendom.edu


« Reply #56 on: November 06, 2003, 05:41:37 PM »

Carpo, we ARE Orthodox!!

Orthodox means "correct opinion."


LatinTrad

-----------------------------------------

" . . . et pro omnibus orthodoxis, atque catholicae et apostolicae fidei cultoribus."  --The Roman Canon
Logged
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #57 on: November 06, 2003, 05:55:09 PM »

Latin Trad

I'm a little fried from work but doesn't orthodox mean right glory?  I do agree and feel appropriately orthodox as an RC.

CR
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #58 on: November 06, 2003, 06:16:52 PM »

orthodox= upright (or erect or upstanding) glory

Demetri
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Justinianus
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 255



« Reply #59 on: November 06, 2003, 06:26:01 PM »

I brought up Florence again in order to set the record straight, and because it was being discussed by others.

Even if you reject Florence, it should have some meaning to you--namely, to clarify the position of the Holy Catholic Church.

LatinTrad



Ok.  


 On another note, I appreciate your use of Latin.  I also admire the language and use it often in reading the Vulgate, the Church Fathers, and the great Roman classics.  It is too bad, the Holy Catholic Church embraced Protestantism and threw out the Tridentine Mass and added the guitars and folk singing.  I still listen to Gregorian Chants and am a great fan of Palestrina.  Even if the Papacy wanted to eliminate the Latin, the Tridentine Mass could have been translated to the vernacular instead of being replaced with the Novus Ordo. The Tridentine shows far more reverance to our Savior.
Logged

"If we truly think of Christ as our source of holiness, we shall refrain from anything wicked or impure in thought or act and thus show ourselves to be worthy bearers of his name.  For the quality of holiness is shown not by what we say but by what w
Justinianus
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 255



« Reply #60 on: November 06, 2003, 06:34:44 PM »

Latin Trad

I'm a little fried from work but doesn't orthodox mean right glory?  I do agree and feel appropriately orthodox as an RC.

CR

I feel appropriately catholic as an EO.  Grin
Logged

"If we truly think of Christ as our source of holiness, we shall refrain from anything wicked or impure in thought or act and thus show ourselves to be worthy bearers of his name.  For the quality of holiness is shown not by what we say but by what w
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #61 on: November 06, 2003, 06:47:18 PM »

I feel appropriately catholic as an EO.  Grin

Touche!

Demetri
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #62 on: November 06, 2003, 07:07:23 PM »

Justinianus

We didn't really embrace Protestantism or throw out the Tridentine mass.  The NO can be celebrated in Latin or the vernacular.  The Tridentine mass can be celebrated by an priest with permission of the ordinary who we hold to be a successor of the apostles.  As far as guitars and folk singing well....I agree some NO liturgies are painful but the NO can be quite well done.  Check out EWTN if you have cable they do the NO well.  I've been to both NO and Tridentine liturgies and I prefer the NO myself.  It's kind of tough to find aparish that does a good liturgy but whether the liturgy is done NO or TO in Latin or the vernacular whether to the accompaniment of guitars or a well trained schola the point is that Christ throught the words of the priest comes into our midst again.

Carpo-Rusyn

PS  You might have heard this one......What's the difference between a liturgist and a terrorist?

You can negotiate with a terrorist.
Logged
Justinianus
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 255



« Reply #63 on: November 06, 2003, 07:39:53 PM »

Yes, I have seen the Mass on EWTN.  I agree that it is done better than most.  Unfortunately, the Novus Ordo does vary from place to place and the attitude of the priest celebrating it.  Back when I was a Roman Catholic, I saw this especially. Since embracing eastern Christianity first as a Eastern Rite Catholic and later as an Orthodox, I have seen greater consistency and much more reverance.

Logged

"If we truly think of Christ as our source of holiness, we shall refrain from anything wicked or impure in thought or act and thus show ourselves to be worthy bearers of his name.  For the quality of holiness is shown not by what we say but by what w
Byzantino
Me Ortodox
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 353


Orthodox Christian


« Reply #64 on: November 06, 2003, 08:26:42 PM »

Hi LT Smiley

You said:

[First of all, the unbaptized infants--Florence affirms the constant teaching that without baptism one cannot achieve salvation.  It does not say that unbaptized infants suffer eternal punishment.]

I'm having difficulty reconciling your interpretation with the text because it does seem to implicitly condemn infants who die without baptism:

"But the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone."

According to the understanding of original sin in the medieval-era RCC, unbaptized infants still have original sin, no? Pope Pius V also issued strong exhortations against delaying baptism for infants on that very basis, in the Catechism of the Council of Trent:

"The faithful are earnestly to be exhorted to take care that their children be brought to the church, as soon as it can be done with safety, to receive solemn baptism. Since infant children have no other means of salvation except baptism, we may easily understand how grievously those persons sin who permit them to remain without the grace of the sacrament longer than necessity may require, particularly at an age so tender as to be exposed to numberless dangers of death."

Contextually it's a teaching in line with the Council of Carthage's (418 A.D.) decree on this matter:

"Canon 3. It has been decided likewise that if anyone says that for this reason the Lord said, 'In my Father's house there are many mansions': that it might be understood that in the kingdom of heaven there might be some middle place or some place anywhere where blessed infants live who departed from this life without baptism, without which they cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven, which is life eternal, let him be anathema. For when the Lord says: 'Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he shall not enter into the kingdom of God,' what Catholic would doubt that he will be the partner of the devil who has not deserved to be a coheir of Christ? For he who lacks the right will without doubt run into the left."

So as of yet i'm unconvinced by your arguments.

God bless! Smiley

P.S. What kind of work do you do?

« Last Edit: November 06, 2003, 08:29:56 PM by Byzantino » Logged
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #65 on: November 06, 2003, 09:07:00 PM »

Justinianus

I agree celebration of the NO varies depending upon the celebrant.  When I went from RC to EO I noticed the greater degree of reverence in EO priests in celebrating liturgy.  Now that I've returned to RC the sometime (and I have to emphasize the sometime) lack of reverence is disturbing.

CR
Logged
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #66 on: November 06, 2003, 09:40:27 PM »

I am Catholic....and a devout traditionalist....I am on my way to Orthodoxy so this means very little to me now, but I could never attend a NO mass, they are truly un-Catholic in my opinion, however I do believe they are valid.

Below I have included a few comon responses you will hear from Roman Catholic Latin Mass Traditionalists when asked why they refuse to attend the NO:

Because the New Mass is not an unequivocal Profession of Catholic faith (which the Traditional Mass is), it is ambiguous and Protestant. Therefore, since we pray as we believe, it follows that we cannot pray with the New Mass in Protestant fashion and still believe as Catholics!

Because the changes were not just slight ones but actually "deal with a fundamental renovation...a total change...a new creation" (Msgr. A. Bugnini, co-author of the New Mass).

Because the New Mass leads us to think "that truths...can be changed or ignored without infidelity to that sacred deposit of doctrine to which the Catholic Faith is bound forever."

Because the New Mass represents "a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent" which, in fixing the "canons," provided an "insurmountable barrier to any heresy against the integrity of the Mystery."  

Because in times of confusion such as now, we are guided by the words of Our Lord: "By their fruits you shall know them." Fruits of the New Mass are: 30% decrease in Sunday Mass in U.S. (NY Times 5/24/75), 43% decrease in France (Cardinal Marty), 50% decrease in Holland (NY Times 1/5/76).  

Because in less than seven years after the introduction of the New Mass, priests in the world decreased from 413,438 to 243,307 -- almost 50% (Holy See Statistics).

Because the New Mass confuses the REAL Presence of Christ in the Eucharist with His MYSTICAL Presence among us (proximating Protestant doctrine).

Because the New Mass blurs what ought to be a sharp difference between the HIERARCHIC Priesthood and the common priesthood of the people (as does Protestantism).

Because the New Mass favors the heretical theory that it is THE FAITH of the people and not THE WORDS OF THE PRIEST which makes Christ present in the Eucharist.  

Because the New Mass does away with the Confiteor of the priest, makes it collective with the people, thus promoting Luther's refusal to accept the Catholic teaching that the priest is judge, witness and intercessor with God.

Because the New Mass gives us to understand that the people concelebrate with the priest -- which is against Catholic theology!

Because six Protestant ministers collaborated in making up the New Mass (Drs. George, Jasper, Shepherd, Kunneth, Smith and Thurian).

Because just as Luther did away with the Offertory -- since it very clearly expressed the sacrificial, propitiatory character of the Mass -- so also the New Mass did away with it, reducing it to a simple Preparation of the Gifts.

Because enough Catholic theology has been removed that Protestants can, while keeping their antipathy for the true Roman Catholic Church, use the text of the New Mass without difficulty. Protestant minister Thurian said that a fruit of the New Mass "will perhaps be that non-Catholic communities will be able to celebrate the Lord's Supper using the same prayers as the Catholic Church." (La Croix 4/30/69).

Because the narrative manner of the Consecration in the New Mass infers that it is only a memorial and not a true sacrifice (Protestant thesis).  

Because the changes such as: table instead of altar, facing people instead of tabernacle, Communion in the hand, etc., emphasize Protestant doctrines (e.g. Mass is only a meal, priest is only apresident of the assembly, etc.).

Because Protestants themselves have said "the new Catholic Eucharistic Prayers have abandoned the false perspective of sacrifice offered to God." (La Croix 12/10/69).

Because the New Mass was made in accordance with the Protestant definition of the Mass: "The Lord's Supper or Mass is a sacred synaxis or assembly of the people of God which gathers together under the presidence of the priest to celebrate the memorial of the Lord" (Par. 7 Introd. to the New Missal, defining the New Mass, 4/6/69).

Because beautiful, familiar Catholic hymns which have inspired people for centuries have been thrown out and replaced with new hymns strongly Protestant in sentiment, further deepening the already distinct impression that one is no longer attending a Catholic function.    

Because Holy Mother Church canonized numerous English martyrs who were killed because they refused to participate at a Mass such as the New Mass!

Because Protestants who once converted to Catholicism are scandalized to see that the New Mass is the same as the one they attended as Protestants. One of them, Julian Green, asks, "Why did we convert?"

Because the traditional Mass has forged many saints. "Innumerable saints have been fed abundantly with the proper piety towards God by it..." (Pope Paul VI, Const. Apost. Missale Romanum)    

Because the New Mass has eliminated such things as: genuflections (only three remain), purifications of the priest's fingers in the chalice, preservation from all profane contact of the priest's fingers after Consecration, sacred altar stone and relics, three altar cloths (reduced to one), all of which "only serve to emphasize how outrageously faith in the dogma of the Real Presence is implicitly repudiated."*  

Because along with the New Mass goes also a new catechism, a new morality, new prayers, new ideas, a new calendar -- in one word, a New Church, a complete revolution from the old. "The liturgical reform...do not be deceived, this is where the revolution begins." (Msgr. Dwyer, Archbishop of Birmingham, spokesman of the Episcopal Synod.)  

Because the New Mass embodies numerous errors condemned dogmatically at the Council of Trent (Mass totally in vernacular, words of Consecration spoken aloud, etc. See Condemnation of Jansenist Synod of Pistoia), and errors condemned by Pope Pius XII (e.g. altar in form of a table. See Mediator Dei.)


Because the altar and tabernacle are now separated, thus marking a division between Christ in His-priest-and-Sacrifice-on-the-altar, from Christ in His Real Presence in the tabernacle, "two things that of their very nature must remain together." (Pope Pius XII)

Because the New Mass no longer constitutes a vertical worship from man to God, but instead a horizontal worship between man and man.

Because the New Mass, although appearing to conform to the dispositions of Vatican Council II, in reality opposes its instructions, since the Council declared its desire to conserve and promote the traditional rite.

Because the traditional Latin Mass of Pope St. Pius V has never been legally abrogated and therefore remains a true rite of the Catholic Church by which Catholics may fulfill their Sunday obligation.

Because Pope St. Pius V granted a perpetual indult, valid "for always," to celebrate the traditional Mass freely, licitly, without scruple of conscience, punishment, sentence or censure" (Papal Bull "Quo Primum").

Because Pope Paul VI, when promulgating the New Mass, himself declared, "The rite...by itself is NOT a dogmatic definition..." (11/19/69)

But as I said...the NO and the Tridentine Masses have little importance to me since I am on my way to Orthodoxy, I thought I'd just post this to give an idea of why exactly Latin Mass Catholics, such as myself, do not attend the NO.

Thanks and God bless

« Last Edit: November 06, 2003, 09:41:18 PM by Ben » Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #67 on: November 06, 2003, 09:48:27 PM »

Please all who read my last post realize I only posted it to explain why we Traditional Catholics don't attend the Novus Ordo Mass. I did not post it to attack Catholics who attend the Novus Ordo Mass or in some way to show that I am still attached to the Tridentine Latin Mass and am not ready to enter Orthodoxy. As I said the matter of which mass to celebrate in the RCC matters little to me, I am on my way to Orthodoxy, and the Lirturgy of St. John Chrysostom takes my breath away, let me know when Orthodoxy wants to introduce the Novus Ordo Mass , then I'll care ;-) hehe

God bless!
« Last Edit: November 06, 2003, 09:53:22 PM by Ben » Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Jakub
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,747



« Reply #68 on: November 06, 2003, 10:02:25 PM »

Ben ,

I don't think the "Old School" RC'S will be offended, can't speak for those NO'S.

james
Logged

An old timer is a man who's had a lot of interesting experiences -- some of them true.

Grant me the senility to forget the people I never liked anyway, the good fortune to run into the ones I do, and the eyesight to tell the difference.
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #69 on: November 06, 2003, 10:11:21 PM »

Ben
If it doesn't matter to you any longer than there's really no sense in responding. I would say that some of the things you wrote are not really accurate and don't represent RC doctrine or liturgical theology.  I could recommend some good books on the subject. But it doesn't matter to you so why get into it.

Carpo-Rusyn


Logged
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #70 on: November 06, 2003, 10:22:56 PM »

Carpo-Rusyn....

I posted that list from my old SSPX chapel bulliton, with the permition of my old priest, I don't agree with all that is on that list, however it represents the views of Traditional Catholics very well, I say this from the prespective of being involved in the Traditional Catholic movement.

God bless.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2003, 10:23:53 PM by Ben » Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #71 on: November 06, 2003, 10:26:48 PM »

This thread is a good example of new breed of conservitive Latin.  Re-writting RCC history as they go (i.e. Trent's and Florence's DOGMATIC decrees on the Filioque and unbaptized infants) for a new toned down version.  Same story when purgatory or indulgences are brought up...

This and the people that cling to the illusion of there at one time being some majestic undivided Church that we need to rebuild make honest discussion very hard...
Logged
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #72 on: November 06, 2003, 10:27:45 PM »

Ben

Sorry I can't let this go by.


You wrote:Because Holy Mother Church canonized numerous English martyrs who were killed because they refused to participate at a Mass such as the New Mass!

The English martyrs were martyred because they wouldn't submit to the royal supremacy.  They wouldn't conform to the Cof E.  They didn't see the Anglican communion service as a mass.  They were canonized by Holy Mother Chruch at an NO liturgy in Rome.

You wrote: Because Protestants who once converted to Catholicism are scandalized to see that the New Mass is the same as the one they attended as Protestants. One of them, Julian Green, asks, "Why did we convert?"

You cite one person.  If you have cable I would suggest you turn on EWTN each Monday night and you will see many Prots who converted and love the NO liturgy because it is the liturgy of Christ's Church.

You wrote: Because the traditional Mass has forged many saints. "Innumerable saints have been fed abundantly with the proper piety towards God by it..." (Pope Paul VI, Const. Apost. Missale Romanum)  

So the Church stopped producing saints after the liturgy changed?


I'm not trying to convince you to stay RCC or engage in a personal attack but come on.  Sometimes I think that the same people who today who object to the NO would've been objecting to the missal of Pius V.  I could see them saying "What?! We have to give up our liturgy according to the Sarum use or according to the Gallican use?"

Carpo-Rusyn  
Logged
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #73 on: November 06, 2003, 10:29:37 PM »

Carpo-Rusyn...

Please understand I didn't post that list to bash the new mass....if you attend the Novus Ordo Mass, I respect your choice. :-)
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #74 on: November 06, 2003, 10:33:08 PM »

Ben

I know you weren't bashing the NO.  I just can't believe some of the wrong info that is still floating around

Nektarios

What would you suggest to open honest dialogue

CR
Logged
Boswell
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 74

Bi, poly, trans and ex-Orthodox


« Reply #75 on: November 06, 2003, 10:41:15 PM »

From my perspective, many prominent former Prots who are now on the EWTN  circuit are former Evangelicals and such, not Anglo-Catholics or those who really care about traditional liturgy. And, quite frankly, that's the NO's problem-too many people have gotten used to mediocrity, even when its done well (extremely rare).

Logged
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #76 on: November 06, 2003, 10:48:15 PM »

Boswell

I don't know about that.  What about Fr George Rutler, former Anglo-Catholic rector of Good Shepherd, Rosemont.  Also Tom Howard who came into the RCC via ANglo-Catholicism.  Also there are quite a few Anglican-Use parishes that have been recieved by Rome.  There might even be more after the NH thing.  Also I don't think saying that Evangelicals aren't interested in traditional liturgy is fair.  Scott Hahn, a prominent former Evangelical wrote quite a nice book on the liturgy.  Also remember former Evangelical Fr Peter Gilquist who was part of a mass infusion of Evangelicals into the Antiochan archdiocese

CR
Logged
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #77 on: November 06, 2003, 11:23:16 PM »

Carpo-rusyn....

I am glad you understand I was not bashing the NO.

What exactly is floating around?

God bless!:-)
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #78 on: November 06, 2003, 11:57:58 PM »

Carpo Rusyn..

Remeber that list of "because...."s was not written by me. I said that I got it from my old SSPX chapel's bulliton and posted it with the permission from my old SSPX priest to show what traditional Catholics believe or think about the new mass. As I said I don't agree with the whole list, just most of it.

Just wanted to clarify.

God bless.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2003, 11:59:11 PM by Ben » Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
The young fogey
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,646


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #79 on: November 07, 2003, 12:48:19 AM »

The NO stinks - it was a mistake. And RCs can believe that, even while holding that in spite of everything it's valid.
Logged

Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #80 on: November 07, 2003, 01:13:59 AM »

I generally agreed with Serge that the NO should not have come into existence, but I limit my criticism really to two complaints about the NO: lack of incense and facing the people.  Other than that, the local NO Mass I sometimes attend with my wife is quite reverent and Godward--on All Souls' Day it was 1.30 hours!  I am sure there are other issues that bother Tridentine Catholics but I was never a Latin-Rite Catholic so I don't really get into the further points of the debates.

anastasios
« Last Edit: November 07, 2003, 01:14:36 AM by anastasios » Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #81 on: November 07, 2003, 01:46:51 AM »

Serge.....

I agree is does stink..but because it is valid I respect those who attend and serve it.

The NO is truly a protestant mass in my opinion. But I am not a expert on the issue. My biggest objections to the NO are as follows:

- Priest facing the people rather than symbolicaly towards God

- The lack of reverance for the eucharist. For example lay men and women can distribute communion, the people can recieve communion in the hand, people are no longer allowed to kneel when recieving communion, the tabernacle is seperated from the sanctuary and often shoved off to the side or even into a seperate room, priests often, I have noticed ,chew the host...etc.

- Traditional hyms are chucked out the window for modern style (rock /country/ contempary Christian) songs.

- Many powerful and inspiring prayers have been omitted or made optional.

These are just a few things that I find wrong with the NO....I just thank God Orthodoxy has stuck with a wonderful, deep, rich, and awsome litrugy!

God bless.

-
« Last Edit: November 07, 2003, 01:48:43 AM by Ben » Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Byzantino
Me Ortodox
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 353


Orthodox Christian


« Reply #82 on: November 07, 2003, 01:54:56 AM »

Ben,

This one really struck a chord:

Because in times of confusion such as now, we are guided by the words of Our Lord: "By their fruits you shall know them." Fruits of the New Mass are: 30% decrease in Sunday Mass in U.S. (NY Times 5/24/75), 43% decrease in France (Cardinal Marty), 50% decrease in Holland (NY Times 1/5/76).  
Logged
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #83 on: November 07, 2003, 06:18:56 AM »

Anastasios

There is talk that a new document from the Vatican to be released soon will approve facing God again.  As far as the incense.....we have incense at the NO I go to everytime there is a major feast, not as much as is used in an EO liturgy though.

I think that sometimes people think that asethetics trumps validity.

CR
Logged
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,404



« Reply #84 on: November 07, 2003, 06:34:32 PM »

Anastasios

There is talk that a new document from the Vatican to be released soon will approve facing God again.  As far as the incense.....we have incense at the NO I go to everytime there is a major feast, not as much as is used in an EO liturgy though.

I think that sometimes people think that asethetics trumps validity.

I don't have a Novus Ordo rituale-- do the rubrics actually specify which way the priest faces in these terms? The BCP rubrics do not; they specify that some acts are to done facing the people and others facing the table, but they don't dictate that these are the same direction.

As far as aesthetics versus validity, this discussion tends to presuppose the former trumping the latter because the aesthetics of the N-O mass are being used to denounce its validity. Conversely, particularly in the USA validity has trumped aesthetics in the RC church, to the latter's detriment.
Logged
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #85 on: November 07, 2003, 06:45:45 PM »

Keble

It's been awhile since I went through the General Instructions on the Roman Missal (GIRM)  but I think it's sort of similar to what you describe for the BCP.  There has also been a new edition of the GIRM released within the past year or two which I haven't had time to look at.

I agree with your point on aesthetics.  But you know the mass has been offered on the hoods of jeeps or in the trenches in wartime.  The mass has been offered in squalid prison cells with no vestments with the bread and wine in the palm of the priest's hand.  Shouldn't we look beyond the externals to the greater reality that is present.

Carpo-Rusyn

Carpo-Rusyn
Logged
SamB
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 784

Crates of araq for sale! *hic*


« Reply #86 on: November 07, 2003, 07:11:05 PM »

The N.O.'s primary and most overlooked problem as I see it, isn't its objective worth in comparison with other Missae, although it fails on that point in all cases, but the manner of its creation.  One who understands tradition properly realises that any liturgy created in the fashion the N.O. was, even were it to be objectively superior to the liturgy it replaces, would still have come to exist by improper and undesirable means by architects who could only have been cocky beyond belief.

In IC XC
Samer
Logged
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #87 on: November 07, 2003, 07:28:50 PM »

SamB

The NO was the product of a ecumenical council and approved by the Vicar of Christ it doesn't get anymore proper than that.  I think the pope and other council fathers had a pretty good grasp of tradition.  Sometimes I think some people (not you Sam) think that at Vatican2 the Holy Spirit was busy somewhere else and the council fathers were in league with Satan or drunk on chianti. Let's have a little faith in the promises Christ made.


You mention other missae, which were you referring to? Just curious.

Carpo-Rusyn
Logged
SamB
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 784

Crates of araq for sale! *hic*


« Reply #88 on: November 07, 2003, 11:48:20 PM »

The NO was the product of a ecumenical council and approved by the Vicar of Christ it doesn't get anymore proper than that.

Not so.  Vatican II never mandated the creation of a new Mass, and this can never be the intention of any legitimate or sane movement for liturgical reform, such as that which preceded the Council and sought to make apparently needed corrections.  As for legal procedures, they can not be the sole benchmark by which to guage the appropriateness of an unprecedented act of this sort.  The N.O. was a horrendous mistake in prudential judgement and, yes, a breach of traditional norms and understandings concerning liturgical formation.

Quote
I think the pope and other council fathers had a pretty good grasp of tradition.
 

One of the Fathers was Melchite Patriarch Maximus IV who warned against tinkering unnecessarily with the Liturgy.  His opinions on the idea of drawing up a new Mass would have been, needless to say, violently clear.

Quote
Sometimes I think some people (not you Sam) think that at Vatican2 the Holy Spirit was busy somewhere else and the council fathers were in league with Satan or drunk on chianti. Let's have a little faith in the promises Christ made.

Vatican II made very good on an essential point: the Catholic Church's attitudes and relations towards the East.  Other than in this golden nugget, the Council paved the way for the religious implosion in the Western Church.

Quote
You mention other missae, which were you referring to? Just curious.

The Tridentine Mass and undoubtedly all other liturgies in general.  

In IC XC
Samer
« Last Edit: November 07, 2003, 11:59:17 PM by SamB » Logged
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #89 on: November 08, 2003, 12:12:17 AM »

Sam

[The Tridentine Mass and undoubtedly all other liturgies in general]

Which other liturgies?  There are many other rites within the RCC.

[One of the Fathers was Melchite Patriarch Maximus IV who warned against tinkering unnecessarily with the Liturgy.  His opinions on the idea of drawing up a new Mass would have been, needless to say, violently clear]

The Melkite patriarch commenting on the Roman liturgy?! I'll have to look that one up.  A new mass wasn't really drawn up it was just get rid of the accretions that had crept in over the years and restoring the Roman rite in its simplicity.  The other thing is that even if one of the council fathers had made his will known in matters liturgical it was just one opinion the council father who was the pope exercised the final say.

[The N.O. was a horrendous mistake in prudential judgement and, yes, a breach of traditional norms and understandings concerning liturgical formation.]

Could you cite some of the breached norms?  

[Vatican II made very good on an essential point: the Catholic Church's attitudes and relations towards the East.  Other than in this golden nugget, the Council paved the way for the religious implosion in the Western Church.]

There's areligious implosion in the Western Church?  So how come there are more RCs (and the numbers are growing) than EOs.  If there was an implosion certainly the numbers should be dropping off.  And what is a "religious implosion"?


Carpo-Rusyn

Logged
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.122 seconds with 72 queries.