Council of Trent dilemna

[ggreg]

Based on the following anathema of the Council of Trent,.

      “If anyone says that the ceremonies, vestments and outward signs, which the Catholic Church uses in the celebration of Masses, are incentives to impiety rather than the service of piety: let him be anathema.”

     But most of us here would agree that the New Mass is one huge incentive to impiety.  NO priests and NO churches all around the world are hugely impious as are many of the congregation directly as a result of the novus ordo and the changes made after V2.

So are we anathema for calling it like we see it?

[Scipio_a]

Wouldn't that be the pot and the kettle since it is their entire philosophy that what came before the Springtime was an impedimnet...Even my good NO pal is GLAD money is not spent on church buildings...LOL


Besides...the council had no idea of the NO...can you imagine?


I would say that line you quote shows the NO for what it is...anathema

[ggreg]

But if that is the case then we have a contradiction don't we.  Because the NO is the major rite of the Catholic Church said in 99% of Churches around the world and by the last five Popes.

[CatholicThurifer]

The Novus Ordo and all that came with it are innovations, so how can they even qualify as "ceremonies, vestments and outward signs"?

[ggreg]

If they are not, then what is?

[CatholicThurifer]

Hmmmmm well maybe my answer doesn't cut it.

[Valz]

So are we anathema for calling it like we see it?

If you say that the NO properly celebrated (not its abuses) is invalid, evil or whatever, then yes. However, there is nothing wrong with seeing the NO much less conductive to piety and as providing far less protection of the Sacrament, expressing far less it's meaning than the TLM and to prefer the TLM on these grounds and to be vocal in it's favor and "push" for it.


Valz

[Credo]

NO priests and NO churches all around the world are hugely impious as are many of the congregation directly as a result of the novus ordo and the changes made after V2.

Really? Sure there are impious people at the Mass of Paul VI, but don't think that such folk are absent from the TLM too. We're all at different stages in our walk with the Lord. Some folk don't take the Mass are seriously as they should, but that's not the fault of Mass. At the "Novus Ordo" parishes around here all I see are little old men who say their Rosary and their Office early in the mornings. Granted, I generally do not attend Sunday worship at the Mass of Paul VI. As such, I am sheltered from whatever hootenanny there might be. Nevertheless, I believe your thesis is too much of a generalization and simplification.

[neel]

Wouldn't that be the pot and the kettle since it is their entire philosophy that what came before the Springtime was an impedimnet...Even my good NO pal is GLAD money is not spent on church buildings...LOL


Besides...the council had no idea of the NO...can you imagine?


I would say that line you quote shows the NO for what it is...anathema

It doesn't matter if the canon came before the NO was made.  That canon is still in force, ergo, one falls under that anathema unless they carefully qualify their statements against the NO.

[SaintSebastian]

This canon is a general statement, primarily aimed at certain Calvinists who were very austere and iconoclastic for lack of a better term. They argued that outward expressions of worship like ritual, bodily motions (ie sign of the Cross), using special things and materials, etc., etc. were not worshiping God "in spirit," as Christ says we should. I don't think it can really be used for defending or attacking the novus Ordo or the traditional Mass.

[ggreg]

Really? Sure there are impious people at the Mass of Paul VI, but don't think that such folk are absent from the TLM too.

I haven't seen many.  What would be the point of being impious at a TLM where you are going out of your way to be there?  Besides the canon doesn't talk about the laity.  It says that the vestments, outward signs and ceremonies would never be "incentives to impiety rather than the service of piety".  It is hard to say that the vestments, outward signs and ceremonies of the NO don't incentivize to a lost of piety because it is patently the case that they DO.  Tradition in Action has several filing cabinets full of photographs of impiety after 40 years of Novus Ordos.  How many can you Google of impiety at a TLM?

It is almost impossible to say that the vestments, outward signs and ceremonies of the Tridentine Mass do incentivize impiety because the reverse is true.  Just how intellectually dis-honest do you want to get on this thread trying to make a counter to that?  You might as well say now and save everyone a lot of time.

If you don't think that the NO leads to impiety then this is a non-issue because the Canon still holds good and there is no dilemna.  Please clear the decks for Trads who will at least concede that it does lead to impiety and therefore try to resolve it.

[NonSumDignus]

Out of a lack of the TLM outside of Sunday, I attend a NO during the week. But I would certainly not call it an "incentice to impiety"; Communion is received kneeling and on the tongue exclusively, Roman Canon I is used exclusively, the vestments wouldn't look out of place at a TLM, and the altar servers even use cloth to handle sacred vessels. The priest is also as solidly orthodox as they come.

It's hard to be anti-NO when the ones you attend are just plain abuse-free.

[ggreg]

Wouldn't you say that this is the exception rather than the rule?

If you walk into an average US Catholic Church today, Australian, French, Italian, Spanish, Irish, African, Chinese Patriotic are they going to be as solidly Orthodox?

If not, then why be a Traditionalist on Sundays?  Smells and Bells?  Personal choice?

[Credo]

I haven't seen many.

It's hard to spot daydreaming. In my occupational position I am around traditional Catholic students day in and day out. I often ask them Monday morning what the sermon was about, only to get blank stares in return.

What would be the point of being impious at a TLM where you are going out of your way to be there?

What's the point of going to Mass period and being impious? I don't know, but people do it.

Tradition in Action has several filing cabinets full of photographs of impiety after 40 years of Novus Ordos.

Tradition in Action is a joke. Many of those photos are misleading. For instance, the photo of Jo. Paul II (of happy memory) in front of a "Satanic" upsidedown cross is in reality a cross in tribute to S. Peter. The photos of "Clown Masses" may well have been Anglican services.

The most flagrant case in point of inaccuracy is TIAs outrage over, "Pope Ratzinger under the rainbow flag" (http://www.traditioninaction.org/RevolutionPhotos/A280rcratzRainbow.htm). They correctly point out that, "Even though the rainbow is a well-known symbol of the homosexual movement," yet they neglect to note that God beat the degenerates to the symbol, "I will set my bow in the clouds, and it shall be the sign of a covenant between me, and between the earth. And when I shall cover the sky with clouds, my bow shall appear in the clouds" (Gn 9:13-14).

[devotedknuckles]

Tia is a jole but that doesn't mean what we r saying re the NO isn't true
Credo
I can go to NO liturgical dance every two weeks in toronto done by the speritans. I can go to a NO laser show put on by the assumptionist every week in this town.
But let's just dismiss that after all the no is so called valid.
See many have been complaining about the turn of the furom these days. But its all this modernist trash that's a change
This is a TRAD forum!
Seems to be getting the waste o catholic wankers
Sip