The Next Pope & the Latin Mass ..

[J Michael]

Come on Catholics, you know Choy is right about the pre-Trent vaccum. Sure, you can find stuff, but that's not what's popular. I watch EWTN, I keep up with Catholicism, I've seen enough to know that everything post-Trent is emphasized (actually, the newer something is in Catholicism the more it is emphasized). For instance, the immaculate conception. Even if it was "always believed," or was merely revealed, the obsession with it in modern Catholicism is insane. One only need look as far as events like Pope Pius IX rededicating the church of St. James the Great to "Mary, Queen of the World" to realize this. It is very obvious, and I feel like the Catholics in this thread are deceiving themselves if they are arguing otherwise. Lourdes, Fatima, the immaculate heart. It is one thing to accept these things, but the absolute obsession with them today over all other tradition in the Catholic Church is undeniable.

I don't know anyone obsessed with these apparitions. In fact, most Catholics I know around my age think we should focus in the faith and not private revelations.

Well, I've known some Catholics who are "obessesed" with them, so I can confirm that such people do exist.

I'm sure they do. But they don't really exist in the circle of people I know, and I think it's much rarer than Izzy suggests.

There are people in all walks of life, who practice every faith under the sun who obsess about some aspect of that faith.  To broadly paint all who practice that faith with the same brush as the tiny minority of that faith that obsesses about something is just plain ridiculous.  With respect to Catholicism, some of the obsessions that Isa pictures are not even approved by the Church, so I wouldn't really count those at all.  The Catholic Church holds no monopoly on fanatics--not even close.

[J Michael]

Come on Catholics, you know Choy is right about the pre-Trent vaccum. Sure, you can find stuff, but that's not what's popular. I watch EWTN, I keep up with Catholicism, I've seen enough to know that everything post-Trent is emphasized (actually, the newer something is in Catholicism the more it is emphasized). For instance, the immaculate conception. Even if it was "always believed," or was merely revealed, the obsession with it in modern Catholicism is insane. One only need look as far as events like Pope Pius IX rededicating the church of St. James the Great to "Mary, Queen of the World" to realize this. It is very obvious, and I feel like the Catholics in this thread are deceiving themselves if they are arguing otherwise. Lourdes, Fatima, the immaculate heart. It is one thing to accept these things, but the absolute obsession with them today over all other tradition in the Catholic Church is undeniable.

No, he's not.  What exists out in the world is not at all limited to that which is currently "popular".  What's popular today may well not be so tomorrow.

And there is no "absolute obsession with them today over all other tradition in the Catholic Church.", except perhaps amongst a (vocal) minority of Catholics.  What planet do you live on  ?  So, yes, it is deniable  .

[Peter J]

Come on Catholics, you know Choy is right about the pre-Trent vaccum. Sure, you can find stuff, but that's not what's popular. I watch EWTN, I keep up with Catholicism, I've seen enough to know that everything post-Trent is emphasized (actually, the newer something is in Catholicism the more it is emphasized). For instance, the immaculate conception. Even if it was "always believed," or was merely revealed, the obsession with it in modern Catholicism is insane. One only need look as far as events like Pope Pius IX rededicating the church of St. James the Great to "Mary, Queen of the World" to realize this. It is very obvious, and I feel like the Catholics in this thread are deceiving themselves if they are arguing otherwise. Lourdes, Fatima, the immaculate heart. It is one thing to accept these things, but the absolute obsession with them today over all other tradition in the Catholic Church is undeniable.

I don't know anyone obsessed with these apparitions. In fact, most Catholics I know around my age think we should focus in the faith and not private revelations.

Well, I've known some Catholics who are "obessesed" with them, so I can confirm that such people do exist.

I'm sure they do. But they don't really exist in the circle of people I know, and I think it's much rarer than Izzy suggests.

That's pretty much what I was thinking.

[Cyrillic]

What about all the Fathers whom Aquinas references?

Quite often when he quotes the Greek fathers the quoted texts are either interpolations or paraphrases. At least, that's the impression I got from reading his Contra Errores Graecorum.

I'd ask you to substantiate your claim, based on your "impression", but I'm (most unfortunately and ashamedly) so unfamiliar with St. Thomas' writings that it probably wouldn't mean much to me.  Papist, on the other, seems to have more than just a passing familiarity with him and his writings, so I'm sure he'd be able to understand your references and citations. 

Here's the work. The quotes of the Greek fathers come with talking balloons. Many quotes "cannot be found" are of Pseudo-Saint x or come from spurious works, such as St. Athanasius' elusive discourse on the Council of Nicaea, which I still haven't been able to find.

Well....hmm....okay.  I think I'll defer to Papist on this matter.  I have neither the time, the brain power, or readily available eyesight left to read, compare/contrast, analyze the material in your link.  Maybe, if and when I start suffering severely from insomnia, I'll try to tackle that  .  Maybe.  But don't count on it.

Ah, okay. It seems he has his hands full with Isa, though 

[Peter J]

100 years ago my friend their were no debates about two men marrying.  I like to give people the benefit of the doubt who are trying to do their best, harsh judgement won't help me on judgement day.

Yet homosexual behavior was accepted by society even in the First Millennium.  The fact that it was mentioned so often in the Bible, both at the time of Moses and at the writings of St. Paul point to the fact that such activity exists in the time, and it is the problem.  They can't address a problem that doesn't exist, so the fact that they are addressing it means it does exist.

And you're just looking at one problem.  There are other problems back then.  They don't have abortion the way we do it today, but at certain points in history infanticide was done liberally.

I was listening to this talk by Frederica Matthews-Greene on AFR where she pointed out that the sexual liberation started much, much earlier than we thought, even on movies.  While today the glorification of sex is about "consenting unmarried adults", back in the 20s and 30s it was about secret affairs of married men, it was adultery.  Yes, our problems today are different, but that doesn't mean they are worse.  They have other problems in different magnitudes back then.

What societies accepted Homosexuality?  I know the pagan greeks accepted pedastry but I am only aware of their being one homosexual pseudo marriage in antiquity and that was on of Nero's.

I said homosexuality, not homosexual marriage.  I never said anything about marriage. 

I was a little puzzled by that part of domNoah's post too.

[Peter J]

All of the College of Cardinal electors were appointed by either Pope Benedict XVI or Pope John Paul II.  Both popes were committed to the holiness of the Tridentine Mass.  I doubt that the next pope will retreat on their actions to promote regular parish celebration of the Tridentine Mass.

It is counter to the unity of the Roman Church to have two parallel Liturgies running side-by-side.  It only makes those heretic schismatics continue their charades and pretend to be part of the Church when they think everyone else outside of their delusional group as "invalid" and "heretic".

I think I misunderstood this statement initially. It sounded to me like a criticism that would apply even to the existence of the Roman Rite, Mozarabic Rite, Ambrosian Rite, etc in the Latin Church.

But based on later statements, I guess your objection is just to multiple side-by-side rites in the same diocese?

(Perhaps you could also clarify what you mean by "the Roman Church".)

[J Michael]

What about all the Fathers whom Aquinas references?

Quite often when he quotes the Greek fathers the quoted texts are either interpolations or paraphrases. At least, that's the impression I got from reading his Contra Errores Graecorum.

I'd ask you to substantiate your claim, based on your "impression", but I'm (most unfortunately and ashamedly) so unfamiliar with St. Thomas' writings that it probably wouldn't mean much to me.  Papist, on the other, seems to have more than just a passing familiarity with him and his writings, so I'm sure he'd be able to understand your references and citations. 

Here's the work. The quotes of the Greek fathers come with talking balloons. Many quotes "cannot be found" are of Pseudo-Saint x or come from spurious works, such as St. Athanasius' elusive discourse on the Council of Nicaea, which I still haven't been able to find.

Well....hmm....okay.  I think I'll defer to Papist on this matter.  I have neither the time, the brain power, or readily available eyesight left to read, compare/contrast, analyze the material in your link.  Maybe, if and when I start suffering severely from insomnia, I'll try to tackle that  .  Maybe.  But don't count on it.

Ah, okay. It seems he has his hands full with Isa, though 

Boys will be boys, won't they? 

[choy]

All of the College of Cardinal electors were appointed by either Pope Benedict XVI or Pope John Paul II.  Both popes were committed to the holiness of the Tridentine Mass.  I doubt that the next pope will retreat on their actions to promote regular parish celebration of the Tridentine Mass.

It is counter to the unity of the Roman Church to have two parallel Liturgies running side-by-side.  It only makes those heretic schismatics continue their charades and pretend to be part of the Church when they think everyone else outside of their delusional group as "invalid" and "heretic".

I think I misunderstood this statement initially. It sounded to me like a criticism that would apply even to the existence of the Roman Rite, Mozarabic Rite, Ambrosian Rite, etc in the Latin Church.

But based on later statements, I guess your objection is just to multiple side-by-side rites in the same diocese?

(Perhaps you could also clarify what you mean by "the Roman Church".)

Roman Church means the Church of Rome, and those under her jurisdiction (Pastor Aeternus aside) and celebrates the Roman Rite.

Yes, people under the same bishop should celebrate the same Rite.  I know there are issues with overlapping jurisdiction in many places, but that issue aside, if you are under the same bishop you should be able to go to any of his parishes and have the same Liturgy.  At least on the same day.  I even commented some time ago over at CAF that the OF can become some sort of "Low Mass" for "Ordinary Time" and the EF can be the "High Mass" for special Liturgical seasons like Advent, Lent, Easter, Solemnities, etc.  But it should be uniform across all.

[Papist]

All of the College of Cardinal electors were appointed by either Pope Benedict XVI or Pope John Paul II.  Both popes were committed to the holiness of the Tridentine Mass.  I doubt that the next pope will retreat on their actions to promote regular parish celebration of the Tridentine Mass.

It is counter to the unity of the Roman Church to have two parallel Liturgies running side-by-side.  It only makes those heretic schismatics continue their charades and pretend to be part of the Church when they think everyone else outside of their delusional group as "invalid" and "heretic".

I think I misunderstood this statement initially. It sounded to me like a criticism that would apply even to the existence of the Roman Rite, Mozarabic Rite, Ambrosian Rite, etc in the Latin Church.

But based on later statements, I guess your objection is just to multiple side-by-side rites in the same diocese?

(Perhaps you could also clarify what you mean by "the Roman Church".)

Roman Church means the Church of Rome, and those under her jurisdiction (Pastor Aeternus aside) and celebrates the Roman Rite.

Yes, people under the same bishop should celebrate the same Rite.  I know there are issues with overlapping jurisdiction in many places, but that issue aside, if you are under the same bishop you should be able to go to any of his parishes and have the same Liturgy.  At least on the same day.  I even commented some time ago over at CAF that the OF can become some sort of "Low Mass" for "Ordinary Time" and the EF can be the "High Mass" for special Liturgical seasons like Advent, Lent, Easter, Solemnities, etc.  But it should be uniform across all.

Thus declares Choy 

[choy]

All of the College of Cardinal electors were appointed by either Pope Benedict XVI or Pope John Paul II.  Both popes were committed to the holiness of the Tridentine Mass.  I doubt that the next pope will retreat on their actions to promote regular parish celebration of the Tridentine Mass.

It is counter to the unity of the Roman Church to have two parallel Liturgies running side-by-side.  It only makes those heretic schismatics continue their charades and pretend to be part of the Church when they think everyone else outside of their delusional group as "invalid" and "heretic".

I think I misunderstood this statement initially. It sounded to me like a criticism that would apply even to the existence of the Roman Rite, Mozarabic Rite, Ambrosian Rite, etc in the Latin Church.

But based on later statements, I guess your objection is just to multiple side-by-side rites in the same diocese?

(Perhaps you could also clarify what you mean by "the Roman Church".)

Roman Church means the Church of Rome, and those under her jurisdiction (Pastor Aeternus aside) and celebrates the Roman Rite.

Yes, people under the same bishop should celebrate the same Rite.  I know there are issues with overlapping jurisdiction in many places, but that issue aside, if you are under the same bishop you should be able to go to any of his parishes and have the same Liturgy.  At least on the same day.  I even commented some time ago over at CAF that the OF can become some sort of "Low Mass" for "Ordinary Time" and the EF can be the "High Mass" for special Liturgical seasons like Advent, Lent, Easter, Solemnities, etc.  But it should be uniform across all.

Thus declares Choy 

Are you happy with the situation that there are two factions within the Roman Church with a majority wouldn't even mix with each other and are even suspicious of each other?

[Papist]

All of the College of Cardinal electors were appointed by either Pope Benedict XVI or Pope John Paul II.  Both popes were committed to the holiness of the Tridentine Mass.  I doubt that the next pope will retreat on their actions to promote regular parish celebration of the Tridentine Mass.

It is counter to the unity of the Roman Church to have two parallel Liturgies running side-by-side.  It only makes those heretic schismatics continue their charades and pretend to be part of the Church when they think everyone else outside of their delusional group as "invalid" and "heretic".

I think I misunderstood this statement initially. It sounded to me like a criticism that would apply even to the existence of the Roman Rite, Mozarabic Rite, Ambrosian Rite, etc in the Latin Church.

But based on later statements, I guess your objection is just to multiple side-by-side rites in the same diocese?

(Perhaps you could also clarify what you mean by "the Roman Church".)

Roman Church means the Church of Rome, and those under her jurisdiction (Pastor Aeternus aside) and celebrates the Roman Rite.

Yes, people under the same bishop should celebrate the same Rite.  I know there are issues with overlapping jurisdiction in many places, but that issue aside, if you are under the same bishop you should be able to go to any of his parishes and have the same Liturgy.  At least on the same day.  I even commented some time ago over at CAF that the OF can become some sort of "Low Mass" for "Ordinary Time" and the EF can be the "High Mass" for special Liturgical seasons like Advent, Lent, Easter, Solemnities, etc.  But it should be uniform across all.

Thus declares Choy 

Are you happy with the situation that there are two factions within the Roman Church with a majority wouldn't even mix with each other and are even suspicious of each other?

No, but that does not mean that they have to use the same mass to fix the problem. First, everyone should have access to the TLM if they want to attend it. Second, the NO needs to celebrated properly. When it finally is celebrated properly, I think quite a few of these problems with disappear.

[choy]

No, but that does not mean that they have to use the same mass to fix the problem. First, everyone should have access to the TLM if they want to attend it. Second, the NO needs to celebrated properly. When it finally is celebrated properly, I think quite a few of these problems with disappear.

If the TLM is celebrated by all parishes at the same time in prescribed times of the year, then all Catholics have access to it.

[Papist]

No, but that does not mean that they have to use the same mass to fix the problem. First, everyone should have access to the TLM if they want to attend it. Second, the NO needs to celebrated properly. When it finally is celebrated properly, I think quite a few of these problems with disappear.

If the TLM is celebrated by all parishes at the same time in prescribed times of the year, then all Catholics have access to it.

Things aren't always that simple. Why are you being so legalistic about this? Didn't you leave us "romanists" behind because we were too legalistic? We have two liturgies. Call it "economia" if you so desire.

[choy]

No, but that does not mean that they have to use the same mass to fix the problem. First, everyone should have access to the TLM if they want to attend it. Second, the NO needs to celebrated properly. When it finally is celebrated properly, I think quite a few of these problems with disappear.

If the TLM is celebrated by all parishes at the same time in prescribed times of the year, then all Catholics have access to it.

Things aren't always that simple. Why are you being so legalistic about this? Didn't you leave us "romanists" behind because we were too legalistic? We have two liturgies. Call it "economia" if you so desire.

Is it wrong to hope that Rome resolves her issues?  I still consider the Roman Catholic Church to be my "mother in faith", and the Orthodox Church as my "bride".  I have grown up and left my mother to be with my wife, but my mother will always be my mother who nurtured me and prepared me to be where I am today in my faith.

[brastaseptim]

It is counter to the unity of the Roman Church to have two parallel Liturgies running side-by-side.  It only makes those heretic schismatics continue their charades and pretend to be part of the Church when they think everyone else outside of their delusional group as "invalid" and "heretic".

Considering we actually have FOUR rites within the Latin Church right now... Ambrosian. Mozarabic, Roman, Anglican-use (revised form of the old Sarum rite, for the most part), I don't think so. Liturgical diversity is a nice thing- it makes things less boring, and it's more traditional than having a single, one-size fits all liturgy. And especially considering there are a total of THREE Liturgies in the  Byzantine Rite alone- St. John Chrysostom, St. Basil, and St. James.

[Michał Kalina]

Yes, people under the same bishop should celebrate the same Rite.  I know there are issues with overlapping jurisdiction in many places, but that issue aside, if you are under the same bishop you should be able to go to any of his parishes and have the same Liturgy.  At least on the same day.  I even commented some time ago over at CAF that the OF can become some sort of "Low Mass" for "Ordinary Time" and the EF can be the "High Mass" for special Liturgical seasons like Advent, Lent, Easter, Solemnities, etc.  But it should be uniform across all.

We do not need Papism within the Church.

[Papist]

It is counter to the unity of the Roman Church to have two parallel Liturgies running side-by-side.  It only makes those heretic schismatics continue their charades and pretend to be part of the Church when they think everyone else outside of their delusional group as "invalid" and "heretic".

Considering we actually have FOUR rites within the Latin Church right now... Ambrosian. Mozarabic, Roman, Anglican-use (revised form of the old Sarum rite, for the most part), I don't think so. Liturgical diversity is a nice thing- it makes things less boring, and it's more traditional than having a single, one-size fits all liturgy. And especially considering there are a total of THREE Liturgies in the  Byzantine Rite alone- St. John Chrysostom, St. Basil, and St. James.

^ This
We also have the Dominican rite.

[TheTrisagion]

No, but that does not mean that they have to use the same mass to fix the problem. First, everyone should have access to the TLM if they want to attend it. Second, the NO needs to celebrated properly. When it finally is celebrated properly, I think quite a few of these problems with disappear.

If the TLM is celebrated by all parishes at the same time in prescribed times of the year, then all Catholics have access to it.

Things aren't always that simple. Why are you being so legalistic about this? Didn't you leave us "romanists" behind because we were too legalistic? We have two liturgies. Call it "economia" if you so desire.

Is it wrong to hope that Rome resolves her issues?  I still consider the Roman Catholic Church to be my "mother in faith", and the Orthodox Church as my "bride".  I have grown up and left my mother to be with my wife, but my mother will always be my mother who nurtured me and prepared me to be where I am today in my faith.

Hello, Jesus! 

[brastaseptim]

Yes, people under the same bishop should celebrate the same Rite.  I know there are issues with overlapping jurisdiction in many places, but that issue aside, if you are under the same bishop you should be able to go to any of his parishes and have the same Liturgy.  At least on the same day.  I even commented some time ago over at CAF that the OF can become some sort of "Low Mass" for "Ordinary Time" and the EF can be the "High Mass" for special Liturgical seasons like Advent, Lent, Easter, Solemnities, etc.  But it should be uniform across all.

We do not need Papism within the Church.

How lucky- because the Orthodox Church has no Papism already. In fact, nobody has Papism but the churches in communion with Rome.

[username!]

That's it. I'm going to Latin Mass this Sunday.

Finally a post that is to the point!

[choy]

Yes, people under the same bishop should celebrate the same Rite.  I know there are issues with overlapping jurisdiction in many places, but that issue aside, if you are under the same bishop you should be able to go to any of his parishes and have the same Liturgy.  At least on the same day.  I even commented some time ago over at CAF that the OF can become some sort of "Low Mass" for "Ordinary Time" and the EF can be the "High Mass" for special Liturgical seasons like Advent, Lent, Easter, Solemnities, etc.  But it should be uniform across all.

We do not need Papism within the Church.

I never said that was the solution.

[choy]

No, but that does not mean that they have to use the same mass to fix the problem. First, everyone should have access to the TLM if they want to attend it. Second, the NO needs to celebrated properly. When it finally is celebrated properly, I think quite a few of these problems with disappear.

If the TLM is celebrated by all parishes at the same time in prescribed times of the year, then all Catholics have access to it.

Things aren't always that simple. Why are you being so legalistic about this? Didn't you leave us "romanists" behind because we were too legalistic? We have two liturgies. Call it "economia" if you so desire.

Is it wrong to hope that Rome resolves her issues?  I still consider the Roman Catholic Church to be my "mother in faith", and the Orthodox Church as my "bride".  I have grown up and left my mother to be with my wife, but my mother will always be my mother who nurtured me and prepared me to be where I am today in my faith.

Hello, Jesus! 

LOL!  I don't mean it that way, of course.  Mine is more of an analogy.

[Peter J]

(Perhaps you could also clarify what you mean by "the Roman Church".)

Roman Church means the Church of Rome, and those under her jurisdiction (Pastor Aeternus aside) and celebrates the Roman Rite.

That really isn't "a church".

I'm not saying that would be a bad thing -- in that case, presumably the Mozarabic Rite, the Bragan Rite, the Ambrosian Rite etc would each correspond to a separate church -- but it's no good pretending things that really aren't.

[choy]

(Perhaps you could also clarify what you mean by "the Roman Church".)

Roman Church means the Church of Rome, and those under her jurisdiction (Pastor Aeternus aside) and celebrates the Roman Rite.

That really isn't "a church".

I'm not saying that would be a bad thing -- in that case, presumably the Mozarabic Rite, the Bragan Rite, the Ambrosian Rite etc would each correspond to a separate church -- but it's no good pretending things that really aren't.

The Pope is the Bishop of Rome, so it is the Roman Church.  The Pope isn't the Bishop of Latin.

[qawe]

As an OO, I advocate intradiocesan liturgical conformity and interdiocesan liturgical diversity.  I thus partially agree with both choy and Papist.

The dominance of the Byzantine Rite in the EO Church is not the way it always was - diversity is a good thing.

[Gebre Menfes Kidus]

AFAIR it's the first time Charles Martel is discussing theology instead of homosexuality. This needs a celebration.

It would be nice if people would just address the issues of the particular discussion at hand rather than resorting to ridicule and mockery. If you want to refute his views and opinions about homosexuality, then go to his comments on whatever thread discusses that issue and make your points. But stuff like you did here is cheap, unproductive, and small minded.


Selam

[Father H]

All of the College of Cardinal electors were appointed by either Pope Benedict XVI or Pope John Paul II.  Both popes were committed to the holiness of the Tridentine Mass.  I doubt that the next pope will retreat on their actions to promote regular parish celebration of the Tridentine Mass.

It is counter to the unity of the Roman Church to have two parallel Liturgies running side-by-side.  It only makes those heretic schismatics continue their charades and pretend to be part of the Church when they think everyone else outside of their delusional group as "invalid" and "heretic".

Your new church classifies all Latins as "heretic schismatics." why single out the sspx?

It's a position I held as a Roman Catholic and as an Ukrainian Catholic.  Why change now?

Hmmm ... hopefully your plan isn't to be one of those Orthodox who constantly have their fingers in the Catholic "pie". I think we have enough of that already with podkarpatska and ialmisry. 

Let me get this straight.  So you are, as an RC, posting on an Orthodox forum thus putting your fingers in the Orthodox "pie" by criticising an Orthodox Christian for having their finger in the "Catholic pie" by responding to RC claims posted on an Orthodox forum.

                    

[Gebre Menfes Kidus]

All of the College of Cardinal electors were appointed by either Pope Benedict XVI or Pope John Paul II.  Both popes were committed to the holiness of the Tridentine Mass.  I doubt that the next pope will retreat on their actions to promote regular parish celebration of the Tridentine Mass.

It is counter to the unity of the Roman Church to have two parallel Liturgies running side-by-side.  It only makes those heretic schismatics continue their charades and pretend to be part of the Church when they think everyone else outside of their delusional group as "invalid" and "heretic".

Your new church classifies all Latins as "heretic schismatics." why single out the sspx?

It's a position I held as a Roman Catholic and as an Ukrainian Catholic.  Why change now?

Hmmm ... hopefully your plan isn't to be one of those Orthodox who constantly have their fingers in the Catholic "pie". I think we have enough of that already with podkarpatska and ialmisry.  

Let me get this straight.  So you are, as an RC, posting on an Orthodox forum thus putting your fingers in the Orthodox "pie" by criticising an Orthodox Christian for having their finger in the "Catholic pie" by responding to RC claims posted on an Orthodox forum.

                   

comment removed

[choy]

All of the College of Cardinal electors were appointed by either Pope Benedict XVI or Pope John Paul II.  Both popes were committed to the holiness of the Tridentine Mass.  I doubt that the next pope will retreat on their actions to promote regular parish celebration of the Tridentine Mass.

It is counter to the unity of the Roman Church to have two parallel Liturgies running side-by-side.  It only makes those heretic schismatics continue their charades and pretend to be part of the Church when they think everyone else outside of their delusional group as "invalid" and "heretic".

Your new church classifies all Latins as "heretic schismatics." why single out the sspx?

It's a position I held as a Roman Catholic and as an Ukrainian Catholic.  Why change now?

Hmmm ... hopefully your plan isn't to be one of those Orthodox who constantly have their fingers in the Catholic "pie". I think we have enough of that already with podkarpatska and ialmisry. 

Let me get this straight.  So you are, as an RC, posting on an Orthodox forum thus putting your fingers in the Orthodox "pie" by criticising an Orthodox Christian for having their finger in the "Catholic pie" by responding to RC claims posted on an Orthodox forum.

                    

Just to be clear, Peter J is an EC, not RC.  I know the Orthodox are fond of saying that RCs and ECs are the same thing, but as a former EC myself, those who are ECs do not see themselves as the same as RCs.

[Peter J]

All of the College of Cardinal electors were appointed by either Pope Benedict XVI or Pope John Paul II.  Both popes were committed to the holiness of the Tridentine Mass.  I doubt that the next pope will retreat on their actions to promote regular parish celebration of the Tridentine Mass.

It is counter to the unity of the Roman Church to have two parallel Liturgies running side-by-side.  It only makes those heretic schismatics continue their charades and pretend to be part of the Church when they think everyone else outside of their delusional group as "invalid" and "heretic".

Your new church classifies all Latins as "heretic schismatics." why single out the sspx?

It's a position I held as a Roman Catholic and as an Ukrainian Catholic.  Why change now?

Hmmm ... hopefully your plan isn't to be one of those Orthodox who constantly have their fingers in the Catholic "pie". I think we have enough of that already with podkarpatska and ialmisry. 

Let me get this straight.  So you are, as an RC, posting on an Orthodox forum thus putting your fingers in the Orthodox "pie" by criticising an Orthodox Christian for having their finger in the "Catholic pie" by responding to RC claims posted on an Orthodox forum.

                    

Hi Father H. You're entitled to your opinion of course, but I don't believe that I've been 'putting [my] fingers in the Orthodox "pie" ' in my participation on this forum. (If I have, or if I've offended you in general, I apologize.  ) For the sake of comparison, I would recommend that you read podkarpatska's comments about Catholics in posts 29-68 of this thread.

[Papist]

All of the College of Cardinal electors were appointed by either Pope Benedict XVI or Pope John Paul II.  Both popes were committed to the holiness of the Tridentine Mass.  I doubt that the next pope will retreat on their actions to promote regular parish celebration of the Tridentine Mass.

It is counter to the unity of the Roman Church to have two parallel Liturgies running side-by-side.  It only makes those heretic schismatics continue their charades and pretend to be part of the Church when they think everyone else outside of their delusional group as "invalid" and "heretic".

Your new church classifies all Latins as "heretic schismatics." why single out the sspx?

It's a position I held as a Roman Catholic and as an Ukrainian Catholic.  Why change now?

Hmmm ... hopefully your plan isn't to be one of those Orthodox who constantly have their fingers in the Catholic "pie". I think we have enough of that already with podkarpatska and ialmisry. 

Let me get this straight.  So you are, as an RC, posting on an Orthodox forum thus putting your fingers in the Orthodox "pie" by criticising an Orthodox Christian for having their finger in the "Catholic pie" by responding to RC claims posted on an Orthodox forum.

                    

Most of the time Catholics here are responding to Catholic news or correcting Izzy's misconceptions and distortions of Catholicism. 

[ialmisry]

All of the College of Cardinal electors were appointed by either Pope Benedict XVI or Pope John Paul II.  Both popes were committed to the holiness of the Tridentine Mass.  I doubt that the next pope will retreat on their actions to promote regular parish celebration of the Tridentine Mass.

It is counter to the unity of the Roman Church to have two parallel Liturgies running side-by-side.  It only makes those heretic schismatics continue their charades and pretend to be part of the Church when they think everyone else outside of their delusional group as "invalid" and "heretic".

Your new church classifies all Latins as "heretic schismatics." why single out the sspx?

It's a position I held as a Roman Catholic and as an Ukrainian Catholic.  Why change now?

Hmmm ... hopefully your plan isn't to be one of those Orthodox who constantly have their fingers in the Catholic "pie". I think we have enough of that already with podkarpatska and ialmisry.  

Let me get this straight.  So you are, as an RC, posting on an Orthodox forum thus putting your fingers in the Orthodox "pie" by criticising an Orthodox Christian for having their finger in the "Catholic pie" by responding to RC claims posted on an Orthodox forum.

                   

Most of the time Catholics here are responding to Catholic news or correcting Izzy's

whose?

misconceptions and distortions of Catholicism.  

IOW, they're doing this:

Is he saying "Izzy!"?

"podkarpatska and ialmisry": someone here can't distinguish between the gentle touch and a sledge hammer.

[Papist]

IOW, they're doing this:

The only reason we have to do this is because your distortions are the like some one scratching a chalkbord.

[Peter J]

Oddly enough, your touch of humor seems to have cheered me up a bit.    

But anyhow

"podkarpatska and ialmisry": someone here can't distinguish between the gentle touch and a sledge hammer.

I think a jackhammer is a better imagine for you than a sledge hammer. You know, kind of a steady da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da, as opposed to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BOOM!

[Papist]

Oddly enough, your touch of humor seems to have cheered me up a bit.    

But anyhow

"podkarpatska and ialmisry": someone here can't distinguish between the gentle touch and a sledge hammer.

I think a jackhammer is a better imagine for you than a sledge hammer. You know, kind of a steady da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da, as opposed to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BOOM!

I always thought it was a bit more of high-pitched we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we

[Cyrillic]

This thread has become childish indeed.

Wait, scrap that. It hasn't become childish but was so from its conception.

[ialmisry]

IOW, they're doing this:

The only reason we have to do this is because your distortions are the like some one scratching a chalkbord.

Truth one doesn't want to hear always rings unpleasant.

[ialmisry]

This thread has become childish indeed.

Wait, scrap that. It hasn't become childish but was so from its conception.

An argument for contraception.

[Peter J]

Oddly enough, your touch of humor seems to have cheered me up a bit.    

But anyhow

"podkarpatska and ialmisry": someone here can't distinguish between the gentle touch and a sledge hammer.

I think a jackhammer is a better imagine for you than a sledge hammer. You know, kind of a steady da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da, as opposed to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BOOM!

I always thought it was a bit more of high-pitched we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we-we

Whoa, where do you buy your jackhammers?

[Peter J]

Truth one doesn't want to hear always rings unpleasant.

Fair enough.

But on the other hand, not everything that rings unpleasant is truth.

(I just realized that I probably just set myself up for something.    )

[Cyrillic]

This thread has become childish indeed.

Wait, scrap that. It hasn't become childish but was so from its conception.

An argument for contraception.

Ehh... it appears to be so.

 

[Papist]

IOW, they're doing this:

The only reason we have to do this is because your distortions are the like some one scratching a chalkbord.

Truth one doesn't want to hear always rings unpleasant.

You must know this from experience. How painful is it to you?

[Papist]

This thread has become childish indeed.

Wait, scrap that. It hasn't become childish but was so from its conception.

An argument for contraception.

Onansim.

[Cyrillic]

This thread has become childish indeed.

Wait, scrap that. It hasn't become childish but was so from its conception.

An argument for contraception.

Onansim.

I certainly hope that this thread won't turn in a debate about Onan because that's one of the few things that could make this thread even worse 

[ialmisry]

IOW, they're doing this:

The only reason we have to do this is because your distortions are the like some one scratching a chalkbord.

Truth one doesn't want to hear always rings unpleasant.

You must know this from experience. How painful is it to you?

When I left Lutheranism, not painful at all.  The balm of Orthodoxy heals all wounds.

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Orthodox-Other Christian Discussion > Orthodox-Catholic Discussion (Moderator: username!) > Topic: The Next Pope & the Latin Mass ..