JayneK
Gold Fish
Gender: 
Personality type: INTJ
Posts: 14,361
|
|
« Reply #290 on: April 25, 2012, 12:36:PM » |
|
If we were bound to never replace the TLM, Pius XII could not have said that the pope has the authority to introduce new rites. I really don't see how the claims you make here have anything to do with the passage you quoted. It was talking about the doctrines promulgated at Trent and did not even mention the Mass. You are placing your own interpretations into and beyond that which is constant Catholic teaching. The TLM, being Divine, is unchangable..........which is why it was replaced and not changed. Which is also why a new and error prone rite was created, albeit without the protection from the Holy Ghost. When Pius XII writes "The sacred liturgy does, in fact, include divine as well as human elements." he is talking about the TLM. This is not my interpretation. That is the plain obvious meaning of the sentence. I cannot think of any other way to understand it. Some parts (elements) of the Mass are divine and therefore unchangeable while other parts of the Mass are human and therefore changeable. This is the constant teaching of the Church, which why there have been changes to the Mass throughout her history. Your views on this have no relation to Church teaching that I can see. There is no teaching that the Holy Ghost wants the TLM for all time. This is your idea. You are attributing your personal opinions to the Holy Ghost in spite of clear Church teaching to the contrary. Don't you get how seriously wrong that is? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
ADORABLE Saviour, consider my many wants, and grant me those graces which Thou knowest I stand in need of to do Thy will in all things.
|
|
|
Stubborn
Member
Gender: 
Posts: 5,017
|
|
« Reply #291 on: April 25, 2012, 02:12:PM » |
|
If we were bound to never replace the TLM, Pius XII could not have said that the pope has the authority to introduce new rites. I really don't see how the claims you make here have anything to do with the passage you quoted. It was talking about the doctrines promulgated at Trent and did not even mention the Mass. You are placing your own interpretations into and beyond that which is constant Catholic teaching. The TLM, being Divine, is unchangable..........which is why it was replaced and not changed. Which is also why a new and error prone rite was created, albeit without the protection from the Holy Ghost. When Pius XII writes "The sacred liturgy does, in fact, include divine as well as human elements." he is talking about the TLM. This is not my interpretation. That is the plain obvious meaning of the sentence. I cannot think of any other way to understand it. Some parts (elements) of the Mass are divine and therefore unchangeable while other parts of the Mass are human and therefore changeable. This is the constant teaching of the Church, which why there have been changes to the Mass throughout her history. Your views on this have no relation to Church teaching that I can see. There is no teaching that the Holy Ghost wants the TLM for all time. This is your idea. You are attributing your personal opinions to the Holy Ghost in spite of clear Church teaching to the contrary. Don't you get how seriously wrong that is? You do not understand infallibility whatsoever if you do not understand that it's judgements and decrees are for eternity. No pope has the authority to take away that which God, via the Council's proclaimed protection of the Holy Ghost deemed worthy, let alone replace it with something even you agree is inferior. No need to continue further until you reply with the things I asked from you three times now and you have not even acknowledged................................ 1) Will you site any other event in the history of the Church that is protected from error by the Holy Ghost which has expired or was otherwise only temporary? 2) You are stuck on wrong is right if the pope says wrong is right - where can you site an example of that from anywhere in the history of the Church - please site the source where you find that teaching. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
It is the Mass that matters.
But because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold, not hot, I will begin to vomit thee out of my mouth. -Apocalypse 3:16
|
|
|
JayneK
Gold Fish
Gender:
Personality type: INTJ
Posts: 14,361
|
|
« Reply #292 on: April 25, 2012, 04:35:PM » |
|
You do not understand infallibility whatsoever if you do not understand that it's judgements and decrees are for eternity. No pope has the authority to take away that which God, via the Council's proclaimed protection of the Holy Ghost deemed worthy, let alone replace it with something even you agree is inferior.
No need to continue further until you reply with the things I asked from you three times now and you have not even acknowledged................................
1) Will you site any other event in the history of the Church that is protected from error by the Holy Ghost which has expired or was otherwise only temporary? both
Your question does not make sense. The Mass is not an infallible statement. It is something that has both changeable and unchangeable elements. Why don't you believe what Pius XII said about it? 2) You are stuck on wrong is right if the pope says wrong is right - where can you site an example of that from anywhere in the history of the Church - please site the source where you find that teaching.
This is not a real question. It is a straw man argument i.e. it attributes a position to me that I do not hold. I said (quoting Mediator Dei) that the pope has the authority to change the Mass or even introduce a new one. He even has the authority to introduce a Mass that you do not like. You claiming that the Holy Ghost does not want him to, does not make it so. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
ADORABLE Saviour, consider my many wants, and grant me those graces which Thou knowest I stand in need of to do Thy will in all things.
|
|
|
JMartyr
Member
Gender:
Posts: 1,609
|
|
« Reply #293 on: April 25, 2012, 07:29:PM » |
|
“I am worried by the Blessed Virgin's messages to Lucy of Fatima. This persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide of altering the Faith, IN HER LITURGY, her theology and her soul..." future Pius XII
The faith is altered in the New Mass.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
" When I think that we are in the building of the Holy Office, the outstanding witness of Tradition and defender of the Catholic Faith, I cannot help thinking that I am on my own territory and that it is I whom you call ' the traditionalist' who should be judging you." - quote from Archbishop Lefebvre when questioned by the CDF
"Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer are the two great saints of the modern Church. Once this catastrophe ends they will be instantly canonized." - Father Malachi Martin
|
|
|
Phillipus Iacobus
Blue Fish
Gender:
Posts: 11,297
|
|
« Reply #294 on: April 26, 2012, 10:01:AM » |
|
In regards to the liturgy and the Church: The liturgy does not create dogmas, but it expresses dogmas because in her manner of praising God or praying to Him the Church expresses what and how and according to what concepts God wants to be publicly worshipped….[so] the Church cannot permit that things should be said in the liturgy in her name that are contrary to what she herself holds or believes.
The New Mass is either Catholic or non-Catholic. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
DrBombay
Quintessential Heckler
Member
Gender:
Location: Undisclosed
Posts: 9,700
|
|
« Reply #295 on: April 26, 2012, 10:34:AM » |
|
In regards to the liturgy and the Church: The liturgy does not create dogmas, but it expresses dogmas because in her manner of praising God or praying to Him the Church expresses what and how and according to what concepts God wants to be publicly worshipped….[so] the Church cannot permit that things should be said in the liturgy in her name that are contrary to what she herself holds or believes.
The New Mass is either Catholic or non-Catholic. Catholic! What do I win? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.
|
|
|
GottmitunsAlex
"As the head of the Church, I cannot answer you otherwise. The Jews have not recognized Our Lord; therefore we cannot recognize the Jewish people." Pope St. Pius X
Gold Fish
Gender:
Personality type: Rational
Posts: 3,905
Hochmeister / Magister generalis
|
|
« Reply #296 on: April 26, 2012, 10:37:AM » |
|
Never thought about it before. Makes one wonder why marriages performed in the NO rite do not last. (Compared to marriages performed within the correct rite. The TLM)
The statistics are interesting. In 1968 there were in the U.S. a total of 338 annulments. In 1992 there were no less than 59,030, that is one hundred and seventy-five times as many. (These are 1997 stats. One can only imagine what the numbers are right now)  My parents were married in 1960 (TLM obviously), they had 16 children. My parents are still together. I can't say the same for my married siblings. Now that I think about it, the more the NO mass comes to mind.... :( |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: April 26, 2012, 12:14:PM by GottmitunsAlex »
|
Logged
|
"Nothing is more miserable than those people who never failed to attack their own salvation. When there was need to observe the Law, they trampled it under foot. Now that the Law has ceased to bind, they obstinately strive to observe it. What could be more pitiable that those who provoke God not only by transgressing the Law but also by keeping it? But at any rate the Jews say that they, too, adore God. God forbid that I say that. No Jew adores God! Who say so? The Son of God say so. For he said: "If you were to know my Father, you would also know me. But you neither know me nor do you know my Father". Could I produce a witness more trustworthy than the Son of God?" St. John Chrysostom Sunday Homily
|
|
|
Phillipus Iacobus
Blue Fish
Gender:
Posts: 11,297
|
|
« Reply #297 on: April 26, 2012, 10:37:AM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Dellery
Banned for snarkiness, overly rigorist posts, lack of respect for other posters, general nastiness
Member
Gender:
Posts: 172
|
|
« Reply #298 on: April 26, 2012, 11:14:AM » |
|
In regards to the liturgy and the Church: The liturgy does not create dogmas, but it expresses dogmas because in her manner of praising God or praying to Him the Church expresses what and how and according to what concepts God wants to be publicly worshipped….[so] the Church cannot permit that things should be said in the liturgy in her name that are contrary to what she herself holds or believes.
The New Mass is either Catholic or non-Catholic. Catholic! What do I win? Can you kindly show me where the Church holds or believes that two covenants now exist? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
INPEFESS
Please remember me in your rosary intentions.
Member
Gender:
Personality type: Mostly melancholic
Posts: 10,836
† "If anyone love Me, he will keep My word." †
|
|
« Reply #299 on: April 26, 2012, 03:01:PM » |
|
You're being petty. The heretical Good Friday prayer is contained within the new rite, so in other words, the new rite contains heresy.
This means that the NO is not free from error, and therefore not Catholic.
We can also see how the Holy Spirit has protected the old rite from this dual covenant heresy, a protection that conspicuously was not afforded the new rite.
In a certain sense, I agree. Pius XII, in his encyclical on the liturgy, Mediator Dei, which is an exercise of the ordinary magisterium, taught that Catholic liturgy must conform to the decrees respecting faith issued by the supreme teaching authority of the Church. A liturgy--whether it be the Divine Office, the Sacraments, the Holy Week rites, or the Mass itself--that does not conform to these decrees (by error, heterodoxy, or heresy) cannot be Catholic liturgy, for it is inconceivable that such an error could be promulgated by the Church under the promised protection of the Holy Ghost. We must face the facts, as uncomfortable as they may be. This argument seems to be that there is a questionable prayer that is used once a year and therefore the pope is not the pope and the Church is not the Church. And people who are not convinced by this, just are too uncomfortable to face facts. Well, I guess there is no way to counter that, since any attempt to do so just proves that I am not willing to face facts.  There are some who aren't convinced by anything. I don't believe that there is any evidence that could convince you that you are wrong. There isn't any evidence that can't be impugned by someone who doesn't want to face it. I can do the same thing to the the very authenticity to the Church, but this would be wrong, since the overwhelming evidence is in favor of the Church's claim to authority. That I could make a case against it isn't a deficiency of evidence; this is a deficiency of the person not willing to consider it. There are premises and conclusions. Stating that the evidence is difficult to face is not a premise, so you cannot counter is as though it were an unfalsifiable claim. Atheists argue that the claim that God exists is an unfalsifiable claim. If you continuously show them, using various methods, the philosophical proof for God's existence and they repeatedly and reflexively reject it, you might know that they are unwilling to face the facts; but then they could say the same thing to you that you have said to me: "I guess there is no way to counter that, since any attempt to do so just proves that I am not willing to face facts. " But that is not a counter argument. That is simply a statement that says "I disagree." By the way, I would just like to point out that the eyeroll emoticon gives the impression of extreme arrogance, condescension, and intellectual superiority when used in serious discussions. It is difficult to want to debate with someone who thinks so little of others' view. It is difficult to appear sincere while using it, so it is simply a discouragement from continuing meaningful discussion. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: April 26, 2012, 03:06:PM by INPEFESS »
|
Logged
|
I n N omine P atris, E t F ilii, E t S piritus S ancti "The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative magisterium" (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, no. 9, June 29, 1896). “Wherefore, brethren, labour the more, that by good works you may make sure your calling and election. For doing these things, you shall not sin at any time” (2 Peter 1:10).
|
|
|
|
