OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 01, 2014, 10:27:29 PM *
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  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Grounding-breaking moves by Pope Benedict XVI  (Read 1569 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #45 on: February 14, 2013, 08:04:21 PM »

choy, i said i don't speak latin! (even though i did study it a bit at school)
so what is summorum pontificum?
and why is it groundbreaking?
(my school latin was related to the love affair between dido and aeneas, nothing papal going on there.)

and is opus dei the same as sspx? (i still don't know what sspx stands for).
if not, which one of them is (supposed to be) taking over the world as part of the illuminati?
why do conspiracy theorists believe in aliens and still expect us to take them seriously?
(ok, u can ignore that last question, just in my mind it's related to the others, but you will probably consider it off topic).
sorry, for all the questions, shall i start a new thread on 'mabsoota's great catholic confusion'?

I guess it is all in line with the topic.

Summorum Pontificum is an exercise in universal ordinary jurisdiction.  It basically told all bishops that they need to allow for the celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass whether they like to or not.  This is much to the delight of traditionalists.  Also it has created factions within the Roman Catholic Church of those who prefer the Latin Mass exclusively and those who won't even think about the Latin Mass and prefer the OF mostly because it is in a language they can understand.

The SSPX is the traditionalist group that called for the return of the Traditional Latin Mass.  Though their fight for this restoration is marred by conflict with the Vatican and local bishops.  Its founder, Archbishop Lefebvre, was excommunicated for violating Vatican canons on consecrating new bishops.  He consecrated new bishops that would continue his fight but the Pope never approved of the consecrations.  The Opus Dei is a completely different group with a completely different story.

SSPX stands for Society of St. Pius X.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2013, 08:04:41 PM by choy » Logged
brastaseptim
Protopsáltis
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 944


From BBC Louisiana to you, here's the morning news


« Reply #46 on: February 14, 2013, 08:10:05 PM »

Opus Dei is not the same as SSPX- Opus Dei is a personal prelature in union with Rome. SSPX is a heretical schismatic group that believes the Pauline Mass is invalid, even though it's actually closer to any one of the Eastern Rite Liturgies. (Ektenia of the Faithful/General Intercessions, Bringing of Gifts/Great Entrance, procession with Gospel, clear Epiclesis, etc.)
Logged

BBC news certified; The Guardian rejected; OC.net approved.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #47 on: February 14, 2013, 11:15:39 PM »

dear username, please post a link and tell me what page to start reading (sorry, i can't bear to wade through 15 pages of 50 posts each...)
the little comments so far are very useful.

for what it's worth, i think the main (?only) good thing about vatican 2 was changing the mass into a language the people speak.
saying you are 'traditionalist', yet insisting 99% people worship in a foreign language (latin) seems to me to be missing the point of all the church missionaries of the first 1,000 years!

Not to be a pain, but Latin was used for hundreds of years in much of Western Europe, and over the years, mutated into the Romance languages. (French, Spanish, Italian, etc.) So, there was a time when it was not too far removed from the public who heard the Mass. Also, they used to teach Latin in Catholic school, at least in North America. That's all I wanted to throw in. I'll go back in the box now.  Lips Sealed

Indeed. In other words, Latin used to be the vernacular.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Online Online

Faith: Non-Chalcedonian Chalcedonian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,474



« Reply #48 on: February 15, 2013, 12:25:10 AM »

dear username, please post a link and tell me what page to start reading (sorry, i can't bear to wade through 15 pages of 50 posts each...)
the little comments so far are very useful.

for what it's worth, i think the main (?only) good thing about vatican 2 was changing the mass into a language the people speak.
saying you are 'traditionalist', yet insisting 99% people worship in a foreign language (latin) seems to me to be missing the point of all the church missionaries of the first 1,000 years!

Not to be a pain, but Latin was used for hundreds of years in much of Western Europe, and over the years, mutated into the Romance languages. (French, Spanish, Italian, etc.) So, there was a time when it was not too far removed from the public who heard the Mass. Also, they used to teach Latin in Catholic school, at least in North America. That's all I wanted to throw in. I'll go back in the box now.  Lips Sealed

Indeed. In other words, Latin used to be the vernacular.

I saw a conversation about this topic just today on Facebook.

Really it seems that some of the Eastern churches are little different - using archaic, sometimes unintelligible to the layperson, languages for liturgy.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2013, 12:25:26 AM by Nephi » Logged
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 13,643


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #49 on: February 15, 2013, 12:30:49 AM »

dear username, please post a link and tell me what page to start reading (sorry, i can't bear to wade through 15 pages of 50 posts each...)
the little comments so far are very useful.

for what it's worth, i think the main (?only) good thing about vatican 2 was changing the mass into a language the people speak.
saying you are 'traditionalist', yet insisting 99% people worship in a foreign language (latin) seems to me to be missing the point of all the church missionaries of the first 1,000 years!

Not to be a pain, but Latin was used for hundreds of years in much of Western Europe, and over the years, mutated into the Romance languages. (French, Spanish, Italian, etc.) So, there was a time when it was not too far removed from the public who heard the Mass. Also, they used to teach Latin in Catholic school, at least in North America. That's all I wanted to throw in. I'll go back in the box now.  Lips Sealed

Latin was fine when they were confined to Western Europe.  But do you expect the Asians and Africans to learn a totally foreign language?  At least South Americans adopted Spanish (and Portugese for Brazil) which are those Romance Languages.  There is already a lot to learn about the faith as it is, why complicate it further with having people learn a new language?

Well, true. Smiley It is better to have the language be something that is directly useful, so people can understand what they hear and do. I still keep a few Latin books for fun, though. Smiley
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #50 on: February 15, 2013, 09:08:01 AM »

Opus Dei is not the same as SSPX- Opus Dei is a personal prelature in union with Rome. SSPX is a heretical schismatic group that believes the Pauline Mass is invalid, even though it's actually closer to any one of the Eastern Rite Liturgies. (Ektenia of the Faithful/General Intercessions, Bringing of Gifts/Great Entrance, procession with Gospel, clear Epiclesis, etc.)

Okay, perhaps you can take a break from comments on the SSPX from now on--at least until you do a simple Google search to see that the SSPX does not consider the Pauline Mass to be invalid. In fact, the local SSPX chapel in my hometown has a priest who was ordained according to the new rite before joining them, and he was not re-ordained. A laywoman complained to the pastor about that, and the pastor ordered her to receive communion from that particular priest or she couldn't receive communion at all.

Believing the new Mass to have been a terrible idea (something that I also hold to) and considering it invalid are two completely different things.

As for your accusations of heresy and schism, prove them or withdraw them.

Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #51 on: February 15, 2013, 09:13:19 AM »

As for the original topic, here are some of Pope Benedict's watershed moments:

-visit to the Phanar in 2006

-Summorum Pontificum

-his Regensburg speech on faith and reason

-his speech at Westminster Hall in London

-his abdication

-his overhauling of bishops' appointments

-his Jesus of Nazareth trilogy

-his reforms of the Legionaries of Christ and the Leadership Conference of Women Religious

-his overseeing of corrected vernacular translations of the Mass

-his returning papal liturgies to being the model they used to be: leading the liturgical restoration by example

Logged
brastaseptim
Protopsáltis
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 944


From BBC Louisiana to you, here's the morning news


« Reply #52 on: February 15, 2013, 09:20:19 AM »

Opus Dei is not the same as SSPX- Opus Dei is a personal prelature in union with Rome. SSPX is a heretical schismatic group that believes the Pauline Mass is invalid, even though it's actually closer to any one of the Eastern Rite Liturgies. (Ektenia of the Faithful/General Intercessions, Bringing of Gifts/Great Entrance, procession with Gospel, clear Epiclesis, etc.)

Okay, perhaps you can take a break from comments on the SSPX from now on--at least until you do a simple Google search to see that the SSPX does not consider the Pauline Mass to be invalid. In fact, the local SSPX chapel in my hometown has a priest who was ordained according to the new rite before joining them, and he was not re-ordained. A laywoman complained to the pastor about that, and the pastor ordered her to receive communion from that particular priest or she couldn't receive communion at all.

Believing the new Mass to have been a terrible idea (something that I also hold to) and considering it invalid are two completely different things.

As for your accusations of heresy and schism, prove them or withdraw them.



Forgive me- all my research consisted only of talking to people who are actually part of the SSPX in my area or on the internet. And as for the internet- the internet is not reliable either, because it seems just about everyone tries their hardest to paint every new rite since Vatican II invalid. Sorry, but that's been my experience with the SSPX- yours may have been different, since you are a Traditional Catholic. As for schism- They're certainly not in union with Rome yet, so they must be separated from Rome. As for heresy- denying the validity of a properly promulgated liturgy of the Church IS heretical. Thinking any liturgy which has Christ present upon the altar as a "terrible idea" seems absurd to me.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2013, 09:22:18 AM by brastaseptim » Logged

BBC news certified; The Guardian rejected; OC.net approved.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #53 on: February 15, 2013, 11:28:43 AM »

SSPX is a heretical schismatic group that believes the Pauline Mass is invalid,

I'm not as knowledgeble about the SSPX as lubeltri, but I too recognize that this ^^ is a load of <insert picture of baloney>.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,148


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #54 on: February 15, 2013, 12:09:54 PM »

SSPX is a heretical schismatic group that believes the Pauline Mass is invalid,

I'm not as knowledgeble about the SSPX as lubeltri, but I too recognize that this ^^ is a load of <insert picture of baloney>.

There  Grin!
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
James2
Mr.
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: skeptic
Posts: 750



« Reply #55 on: February 15, 2013, 01:07:30 PM »

As for the original topic, here are some of Pope Benedict's watershed moments:

-visit to the Phanar in 2006

-Summorum Pontificum

-his Regensburg speech on faith and reason

-his speech at Westminster Hall in London

-his abdication

-his overhauling of bishops' appointments

-his Jesus of Nazareth trilogy

-his reforms of the Legionaries of Christ and the Leadership Conference of Women Religious

-his overseeing of corrected vernacular translations of the Mass

-his returning papal liturgies to being the model they used to be: leading the liturgical restoration by example



Anglicanorum coetibus is another.
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,192


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #56 on: February 22, 2013, 05:02:30 PM »

I agree with what others have said here. Most of the SSPXers with whom I have discussed the new mass, all agree that it is still a valid mass. There are probably a few looney toones out there who think otherwise, but for the most part, SSPXers really just want a return to reverence and orthodoxy.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
brastaseptim
Protopsáltis
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 944


From BBC Louisiana to you, here's the morning news


« Reply #57 on: February 22, 2013, 06:09:49 PM »

Then why don't they have a problem with the priests, rather than the mass itself? The actual liturgy seems more traditional, and has more byzantine elements, than the Tridentine Mass- including an explicit epiclesis. I've been to a Tridentine Mass- and though I studied two years of Latin, it's difficult for me to connect to what being said when it's in a language that is certainly not my first. Even though I don't know it as well, I would prefer to muddle my way through following loudly chanted and clearly enunciated Greek than inaudibly muttered Latin. I know why the SSPX has their opinion- and I tend to agree with it somewhat on the subject of bad liturgy. However, I don't regard the liturgy itself as a mistake as much as the general attitude towards it after the Second Vatican Council. For example, in the Roman Catholic Cathedral here in Baton Rouge, the church is devoid of stauary (or even icons), is barely decorated, there's no visible tabernacle, and is painted an unsightly beige colour. Seriously, no tabernacle! For goodness sakes, the rubrics do say in a "prominent" place, not tucked away in some tiny back chapel. And they certainly require at least candles to be on the altar! But I'm ranting...
Logged

BBC news certified; The Guardian rejected; OC.net approved.
JoeS2
OC.net guru
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Catholic by choice
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,129


St. Mark Defender of the true Faith (old CAF guy)


« Reply #58 on: February 22, 2013, 06:32:03 PM »

Then why don't they have a problem with the priests, rather than the mass itself? The actual liturgy seems more traditional, and has more byzantine elements, than the Tridentine Mass- including an explicit epiclesis. I've been to a Tridentine Mass- and though I studied two years of Latin, it's difficult for me to connect to what being said when it's in a language that is certainly not my first. Even though I don't know it as well, I would prefer to muddle my way through following loudly chanted and clearly enunciated Greek than inaudibly muttered Latin. I know why the SSPX has their opinion- and I tend to agree with it somewhat on the subject of bad liturgy. However, I don't regard the liturgy itself as a mistake as much as the general attitude towards it after the Second Vatican Council. For example, in the Roman Catholic Cathedral here in Baton Rouge, the church is devoid of stauary (or even icons), is barely decorated, there's no visible tabernacle, and is painted an unsightly beige colour. Seriously, no tabernacle! For goodness sakes, the rubrics do say in a "prominent" place, not tucked away in some tiny back chapel. And they certainly require at least candles to be on the altar! But I'm ranting...

Almost a Protestantizing of the Roman Catholic Naves and Altar......A sanitized area of worship much like a Congregationalist meeting hall...
Logged
brastaseptim
Protopsáltis
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 944


From BBC Louisiana to you, here's the morning news


« Reply #59 on: February 22, 2013, 06:42:46 PM »

I know, and I find it ridiculous. The irony? You go to New Orleans, and it's a perfect Cathedral- St. Louis. In fact, you go to just about any parish church besides the Baton Rouge cathedral, including the Roman Catholic one I attend unless I can make my way to New orleans for Divine Liturgy, and the priests at least follow the rubrics. There are exceptions, of course- but most of that is in the more liberal parishes. Oh, some priests just shouldn't have power over a decorating commitee at all! As a grizzled Latin-Rite priest once told me, "There's Traditional, there's Liberal, and there's just poor taste."
Logged

BBC news certified; The Guardian rejected; OC.net approved.
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,601


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #60 on: February 22, 2013, 06:44:36 PM »

SSPX is a heretical schismatic group that believes the Pauline Mass is invalid,

I'm not as knowledgeble about the SSPX as lubeltri, but I too recognize that this ^^ is a load of <insert picture of baloney>.

There  Grin!

You are making me so hungry for a baloney sandwich. And it is FRIDAY.

I appreciate Pope Benedict for helping to restore some sanity back in the Liturgy.
Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #61 on: February 22, 2013, 08:39:14 PM »

You are making me so hungry for a baloney sandwich. And it is FRIDAY.

I appreciate Pope Benedict for helping to restore some sanity back in the Liturgy.

Next Friday you are free to have a baloney sandwich.
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,192


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #62 on: February 22, 2013, 09:28:03 PM »

Then why don't they have a problem with the priests, rather than the mass itself? The actual liturgy seems more traditional, and has more byzantine elements, than the Tridentine Mass- including an explicit epiclesis. I've been to a Tridentine Mass- and though I studied two years of Latin, it's difficult for me to connect to what being said when it's in a language that is certainly not my first. Even though I don't know it as well, I would prefer to muddle my way through following loudly chanted and clearly enunciated Greek than inaudibly muttered Latin. I know why the SSPX has their opinion- and I tend to agree with it somewhat on the subject of bad liturgy. However, I don't regard the liturgy itself as a mistake as much as the general attitude towards it after the Second Vatican Council. For example, in the Roman Catholic Cathedral here in Baton Rouge, the church is devoid of stauary (or even icons), is barely decorated, there's no visible tabernacle, and is painted an unsightly beige colour. Seriously, no tabernacle! For goodness sakes, the rubrics do say in a "prominent" place, not tucked away in some tiny back chapel. And they certainly require at least candles to be on the altar! But I'm ranting...
They have a problem with the mass because they feel it is just a watered down version of the TLM. Personally, I have no problem with the NO, as long as it is celebrated reverently, with sacred music.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
brastaseptim
Protopsáltis
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 944


From BBC Louisiana to you, here's the morning news


« Reply #63 on: February 22, 2013, 10:44:05 PM »

Then why don't they have a problem with the priests, rather than the mass itself? The actual liturgy seems more traditional, and has more byzantine elements, than the Tridentine Mass- including an explicit epiclesis. I've been to a Tridentine Mass- and though I studied two years of Latin, it's difficult for me to connect to what being said when it's in a language that is certainly not my first. Even though I don't know it as well, I would prefer to muddle my way through following loudly chanted and clearly enunciated Greek than inaudibly muttered Latin. I know why the SSPX has their opinion- and I tend to agree with it somewhat on the subject of bad liturgy. However, I don't regard the liturgy itself as a mistake as much as the general attitude towards it after the Second Vatican Council. For example, in the Roman Catholic Cathedral here in Baton Rouge, the church is devoid of stauary (or even icons), is barely decorated, there's no visible tabernacle, and is painted an unsightly beige colour. Seriously, no tabernacle! For goodness sakes, the rubrics do say in a "prominent" place, not tucked away in some tiny back chapel. And they certainly require at least candles to be on the altar! But I'm ranting...
They have a problem with the mass because they feel it is just a watered down version of the TLM. Personally, I have no problem with the NO, as long as it is celebrated reverently, with sacred music.

Sadly, it's the "celebrated reverently", and the especially "with sacred music" that is commonly ignored. I'm the assistant cantor at one local Latin parish, and a chorister at another- I know sacred music has gone down the tubes- thank you, Marty Haugen. If I am told to sing "On Eagle's Wings" at one more Requiem Mass, I'm going to snap!
Logged

BBC news certified; The Guardian rejected; OC.net approved.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,192


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #64 on: February 23, 2013, 12:54:37 PM »

Then why don't they have a problem with the priests, rather than the mass itself? The actual liturgy seems more traditional, and has more byzantine elements, than the Tridentine Mass- including an explicit epiclesis. I've been to a Tridentine Mass- and though I studied two years of Latin, it's difficult for me to connect to what being said when it's in a language that is certainly not my first. Even though I don't know it as well, I would prefer to muddle my way through following loudly chanted and clearly enunciated Greek than inaudibly muttered Latin. I know why the SSPX has their opinion- and I tend to agree with it somewhat on the subject of bad liturgy. However, I don't regard the liturgy itself as a mistake as much as the general attitude towards it after the Second Vatican Council. For example, in the Roman Catholic Cathedral here in Baton Rouge, the church is devoid of stauary (or even icons), is barely decorated, there's no visible tabernacle, and is painted an unsightly beige colour. Seriously, no tabernacle! For goodness sakes, the rubrics do say in a "prominent" place, not tucked away in some tiny back chapel. And they certainly require at least candles to be on the altar! But I'm ranting...
They have a problem with the mass because they feel it is just a watered down version of the TLM. Personally, I have no problem with the NO, as long as it is celebrated reverently, with sacred music.

Sadly, it's the "celebrated reverently", and the especially "with sacred music" that is commonly ignored. I'm the assistant cantor at one local Latin parish, and a chorister at another- I know sacred music has gone down the tubes- thank you, Marty Haugen. If I am told to sing "On Eagle's Wings" at one more Requiem Mass, I'm going to snap!

Agreed. I really hope the next Pope has the courage to continue Pope Benedict's reform of the Roman liturgy.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
JoeS2
OC.net guru
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Catholic by choice
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,129


St. Mark Defender of the true Faith (old CAF guy)


« Reply #65 on: February 23, 2013, 07:07:30 PM »

Sadly, it's the "celebrated reverently", and the especially "with sacred music" that is commonly ignored. I'm the assistant cantor at one local Latin parish, and a chorister at another- I know sacred music has gone down the tubes- thank you, Marty Haugen. If I am told to sing "On Eagle's Wings" at one more Requiem Mass, I'm going to snap!

Agreed. I really hope the next Pope has the courage to continue Pope Benedict's reform of the Roman liturgy.

Faith of our Fathers, and A Mighty Fortress is Our Lord did it for me many years ago......
Logged
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #66 on: February 23, 2013, 08:03:03 PM »

I agree with what others have said here. Most of the SSPXers with whom I have discussed the new mass, all agree that it is still a valid mass. There are probably a few looney toones out there who think otherwise, but for the most part, SSPXers really just want a return to reverence and orthodoxy.

Really?  I know of an actual event from last year where a diocesan seminar on the Latin Mass was held, and the two local SSPX priest came over to distribute pamphlets that call the Pauline Mass and everything in the Roman Catholic Church post Vatican II as invalid.

I personally know an ultra-trad SSPX member whom me and another friend of his were guiding him towards the Eastern Catholic Church.  Eventually he told me that ECs are nothing more than the epitome of the Ecumenist problem of the Catholic Church where the Orthodox who should become Roman Catholics are allowed to keep their rites and be in communion with Rome.  And he'll never associate himself with the Orthodox who are schismatics and are going to hell for not being in communion with Rome.
Logged
brastaseptim
Protopsáltis
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 944


From BBC Louisiana to you, here's the morning news


« Reply #67 on: February 23, 2013, 08:26:19 PM »

I agree with what others have said here. Most of the SSPXers with whom I have discussed the new mass, all agree that it is still a valid mass. There are probably a few looney toones out there who think otherwise, but for the most part, SSPXers really just want a return to reverence and orthodoxy.

Really?  I know of an actual event from last year where a diocesan seminar on the Latin Mass was held, and the two local SSPX priest came over to distribute pamphlets that call the Pauline Mass and everything in the Roman Catholic Church post Vatican II as invalid.

I personally know an ultra-trad SSPX member whom me and another friend of his were guiding him towards the Eastern Catholic Church.  Eventually he told me that ECs are nothing more than the epitome of the Ecumenist problem of the Catholic Church where the Orthodox who should become Roman Catholics are allowed to keep their rites and be in communion with Rome.  And he'll never associate himself with the Orthodox who are schismatics and are going to hell for not being in communion with Rome.

I suppose he's of the opinion that the Tridentine Roman Rite is the best and only liturgy that should be celebrated, calling others heretical or invalid? See, I told you people these kind of traddies existed!
Logged

BBC news certified; The Guardian rejected; OC.net approved.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #68 on: February 23, 2013, 08:29:04 PM »

Eventually he told me that ECs are nothing more than the epitome of the Ecumenist problem of the Catholic Church where the Orthodox who should become Roman Catholics are allowed to keep their rites and be in communion with Rome.  

That's also my definition of ecumenism: Orthodox coming into communion with Rome while keeping their rites. Wink
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
brastaseptim
Protopsáltis
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 944


From BBC Louisiana to you, here's the morning news


« Reply #69 on: February 23, 2013, 08:34:02 PM »

And speaking as an Eastern Catholic, letting Orthodox coming into Rome keep their rites is the best idea the Latins have had on the subject- I mean, otherwise the ancient rites would only be practiced by the Orthodox, and completely cut off any Eastern influences within the Church. We're unfortunately neither fish nor fowl in the Church, sometimes- the ultra traditionalist Latins want us to adopt their rite and are suspicious of us being heretics, while the Orthodox view us schismatics and, at worst, as a woman from the Genuine Orthodox Church once told me, "A traitor to Christ." O course that's not the general consensus, but it is what I've experienced since changing rites from Roman to Byzantine.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2013, 08:35:14 PM by brastaseptim » Logged

BBC news certified; The Guardian rejected; OC.net approved.
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #70 on: February 23, 2013, 08:44:50 PM »

I suppose he's of the opinion that the Tridentine Roman Rite is the best and only liturgy that should be celebrated, calling others heretical or invalid? See, I told you people these kind of traddies existed!

Yup.

And for the brief moment he had a flirtation with Orthodoxy, he wanted to join the Old Believers.  So, go figure the type of mind this man has.
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #71 on: February 23, 2013, 09:31:26 PM »

Eventually he told me that ECs are nothing more than the epitome of the Ecumenist problem of the Catholic Church where the Orthodox who should become Roman Catholics are allowed to keep their rites and be in communion with Rome. 

That's also my definition of ecumenism: Orthodox coming into communion with Rome while keeping their rites. Wink

P.S. I'm assuming that it was clear that I was being facetious there.

while the Orthodox view us schismatics and, at worst, as a woman from the Genuine Orthodox Church once told me, "A traitor to Christ."

Well, I've never bought into the idea that converting from one church or denomination to another constitutes apostasy. But what's more, your friend/acquaintance and a lot of other Orthodox completely miss the fact that most Eastern Catholics are cradle Catholic, not ex-Orthodox.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
brastaseptim
Protopsáltis
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 944


From BBC Louisiana to you, here's the morning news


« Reply #72 on: February 23, 2013, 09:45:10 PM »

Eventually he told me that ECs are nothing more than the epitome of the Ecumenist problem of the Catholic Church where the Orthodox who should become Roman Catholics are allowed to keep their rites and be in communion with Rome. 

That's also my definition of ecumenism: Orthodox coming into communion with Rome while keeping their rites. Wink

P.S. I'm assuming that it was clear that I was being facetious there.

while the Orthodox view us schismatics and, at worst, as a woman from the Genuine Orthodox Church once told me, "A traitor to Christ."

Well, I've never bought into the idea that converting from one church or denomination to another constitutes apostasy. But what's more, your friend/acquaintance and a lot of other Orthodox completely miss the fact that most Eastern Catholics are cradle Catholic, not ex-Orthodox.

Including myself, as a cradle Catholic. However, this particular acquaintance really didn't care when I tried to explained tha I was a born Catholic, and went into a rant about how the New Calendarist Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Catholics, Roman Catholics, and everyone else but her own church were going to burn. Note she was part of the "Genuine Orthodox Church in America," and anything with genuine in the name tends to be uncanonical.
Logged

BBC news certified; The Guardian rejected; OC.net approved.
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #73 on: February 23, 2013, 09:57:59 PM »

And speaking as an Eastern Catholic, letting Orthodox coming into Rome keep their rites is the best idea the Latins have had on the subject- I mean, otherwise the ancient rites would only be practiced by the Orthodox, and completely cut off any Eastern influences within the Church. We're unfortunately neither fish nor fowl in the Church, sometimes- the ultra traditionalist Latins want us to adopt their rite and are suspicious of us being heretics, while the Orthodox view us schismatics and, at worst, as a woman from the Genuine Orthodox Church once told me, "A traitor to Christ." O course that's not the general consensus, but it is what I've experienced since changing rites from Roman to Byzantine.

Definitely there are Orthodox out there who see ECs as abominations.  It is really hard being EC.  I said once that being EC is "being both Catholic and Orthodox, and neither at the same time."

I also have my own story about bad treatment by my previous RC parish (called me a "non-practicing Catholic" after I became EC).  Ignorance and hate all around.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2013, 09:58:58 PM by choy » Logged
brastaseptim
Protopsáltis
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 944


From BBC Louisiana to you, here's the morning news


« Reply #74 on: February 23, 2013, 10:11:46 PM »

And speaking as an Eastern Catholic, letting Orthodox coming into Rome keep their rites is the best idea the Latins have had on the subject- I mean, otherwise the ancient rites would only be practiced by the Orthodox, and completely cut off any Eastern influences within the Church. We're unfortunately neither fish nor fowl in the Church, sometimes- the ultra traditionalist Latins want us to adopt their rite and are suspicious of us being heretics, while the Orthodox view us schismatics and, at worst, as a woman from the Genuine Orthodox Church once told me, "A traitor to Christ." O course that's not the general consensus, but it is what I've experienced since changing rites from Roman to Byzantine.

Definitely there are Orthodox out there who see ECs as abominations.  It is really hard being EC.  I said once that being EC is "being both Catholic and Orthodox, and neither at the same time."

I also have my own story about bad treatment by my previous RC parish (called me a "non-practicing Catholic" after I became EC).  Ignorance and hate all around.

And that statement is very true. My old RC parish didn't do that- mostly because I still attend it somewhat, since my Byzantine parish is an hour and a half away. And because I'm one of the only three members of their choir. However, I had to explain to my old priest that I was not converting to Orthodoxy, which was surprising because I didn't even know he knew Orthodoxy existed. However, when explaining why I make the sign of the cross backwards and bow with my hand touching the ground before the tabernacle in Roman Catholics churches while on holiday gets annoying.
Logged

BBC news certified; The Guardian rejected; OC.net approved.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,148


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #75 on: February 25, 2013, 11:13:15 AM »

And speaking as an Eastern Catholic, letting Orthodox coming into Rome keep their rites is the best idea the Latins have had on the subject- I mean, otherwise the ancient rites would only be practiced by the Orthodox, and completely cut off any Eastern influences within the Church. We're unfortunately neither fish nor fowl in the Church, sometimes- the ultra traditionalist Latins want us to adopt their rite and are suspicious of us being heretics, while the Orthodox view us schismatics and, at worst, as a woman from the Genuine Orthodox Church once told me, "A traitor to Christ." O course that's not the general consensus, but it is what I've experienced since changing rites from Roman to Byzantine.

Definitely there are Orthodox out there who see ECs as abominations.  It is really hard being EC.  I said once that being EC is "being both Catholic and Orthodox, and neither at the same time."

I also have my own story about bad treatment by my previous RC parish (called me a "non-practicing Catholic" after I became EC).  Ignorance and hate all around.

And that statement is very true. My old RC parish didn't do that- mostly because I still attend it somewhat, since my Byzantine parish is an hour and a half away. And because I'm one of the only three members of their choir. However, I had to explain to my old priest that I was not converting to Orthodoxy, which was surprising because I didn't even know he knew Orthodoxy existed. However, when explaining why I make the sign of the cross backwards and bow with my hand touching the ground before the tabernacle in Roman Catholics churches while on holiday gets annoying.

No one at the RC parish we attend has ever questioned our odd behavior  Grin.  Maybe they don't notice or maybe they don't care.  Dunno.  Hey, you could look at it as an opportunity to more fully and deeply catechize your Catholic brothers and sisters rather than as an onerous task  Wink.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2013, 11:13:49 AM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,192


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #76 on: February 25, 2013, 11:45:52 AM »

I agree with what others have said here. Most of the SSPXers with whom I have discussed the new mass, all agree that it is still a valid mass. There are probably a few looney toones out there who think otherwise, but for the most part, SSPXers really just want a return to reverence and orthodoxy.

Really?  I know of an actual event from last year where a diocesan seminar on the Latin Mass was held, and the two local SSPX priest came over to distribute pamphlets that call the Pauline Mass and everything in the Roman Catholic Church post Vatican II as invalid.

I personally know an ultra-trad SSPX member whom me and another friend of his were guiding him towards the Eastern Catholic Church.  Eventually he told me that ECs are nothing more than the epitome of the Ecumenist problem of the Catholic Church where the Orthodox who should become Roman Catholics are allowed to keep their rites and be in communion with Rome.  And he'll never associate himself with the Orthodox who are schismatics and are going to hell for not being in communion with Rome.
Did he criticize the new mass, or call it invalid? Can you cite a passage in which these pamphlets called the new mass invalid?
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2  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 0.132 seconds with 60 queries.