TRADITIONIS CUSTODES

[Credo in Deum]

1 hour ago, Peace said:

Well it ain't like all the holy men of in the Church celebrate the TLM and all the sex-perverts love the NO. You look deep enough I'm sure you'll find plenty of evil among men practicing both forms of the Mass. I mean it ain't like the Church was free of bad priests before Vatican 2.

I do find it kind of odd how the sexual abuse scandal is used to malign the current powers-that-be but when you had the more conservative popes and clergy in power, you didn't see the same folks holding them to the fire over the issue. It does somewhat lead me to believe that the sex-abuse scandal is being used as a political tool of sorts by trads to attack "liberals".

It seems some just want to have their head in the sand and can't see that the Church has been on the decline and that this decline has been put in the express lane after Vat II.   No one's saying bad men didn't exist prior to Vat II but the decline after Vat II and the absolute hatred of everything the Church had done prior to 1960's should be some indication that whatever was holding the bad at bay prior to Vat II had left or relaxed itself.  

 

I believe God permitted Vat II to happen so we could see just how rotten and corrupt the prelates have become.  The Council has showed us that in spades! 

Edited September 9, 2021 by Credo in Deum

[Peace]

39 minutes ago, Credo in Deum said:

It seems some just want to have their head in the sand and can't see that the Church has been on the decline and that this decline has been put in the express lane after Vat II.   No one's saying bad men didn't exist prior to Vat II but the decline after Vat II and the absolute hatred of everything the Church had done prior to 1960's should be some indication that whatever was holding the bad at bay prior to Vat II had left or relaxed itself. 

That's nice but ya'll know plenty well I don't buy all of that "well in the good old days when things were better" Jazz.

[Credo in Deum]

2 minutes ago, Peace said:

That's nice but ya'll know plenty well I don't buy all of that "well in the good old days when things were better" Jazz.

Great because that's not what I said.

 

[Luigi]

When the Church was at its worst in terms of the morality of prelates - popes with kept women on the side, and children (some of whom became popes in their own rights), and standing armies, and war campaigns against divine-right kings - all Masses were celebrated in Latin, with Gregorian chant, priests facing the altar, incense in censors, bells at the elevations, the whole nine yards.

The form of the Mass having anything to do with the sanctity of the priests or the people is extremely tenuous at best. 

Edited September 9, 2021 by Luigi

[Peace]

Just now, Credo in Deum said:

Great because that's not what I said.

Well you said that the Church has been in decline since V2. That means that the pre-V2 Church was better does it not?

1 minute ago, Luigi said:

When the Church was at its worst in terms of the morality of prelates - popes with kept women on the side, and children (some of whom became popes in their own rights), and standing armies, and war campaigns against divine-right kings - all Masses were celebrated in Latin, with Gregorian chant, priests facing the altar, incense in censors, bells at the elevations, the whole nine yards.

The form of the Mass having anything to do with the sanctity of the priests or the people is extremely tenuous at best. 

Sanity has finally entered into the discussion.

[Credo in Deum]

Just now, Peace said:

Well you said that the Church has been in decline since V2. That means that the pre-V2 Church was better does it not?

That's actually not what I said....I said the Church has been in a decline and that it was put in the express lane after Vat II. 

The decline started with the Advent of Free Masons and the enlightenment.  

[Peace]

1 minute ago, Credo in Deum said:

That's actually not what I said....I said the Church has been in a decline and that it was put in the express lane after Vat II. 

The decline started with the Advent of Free Masons and the enlightenment.  

OK fair enough. Perhaps I misunderstood the point you wanted to make there.

[Luigi]

Another perspective that supports the same contention is that none of the saints (chant a litany to yourself and write down every name prior to about 540 AD) - declared to be saints by the Church! - celebrated The Traditional Latin Mass, sang in Gregorian chant (until the pontificate of Gregory the Great, which started in Anno Dominum 540), faced the altar, rang bells at the elevations, etc. And yet these people are considered "holy" by both traditionalists and everyone else.

The form of the Mass having anything to do with the sanctity of the priests or the people is extremely tenuous at best. 

Edited September 9, 2021 by Luigi

[KnightofChrist]

“The more holy and pleasing to God a priest is, the more acceptable are his prayers and oblations; and the greater his devotion, the greater the benefit to be derived from his Mass. For just as other good works performed by a pious man gain merit in proportion to the zeal and devotion with which they are performed, so Holy Mass is more or less profitable both to the priest who says it and to the persons for whom it is said, according as it is celebrated with more or less fervor” - Cardinal Bona

[Luigi]

3 hours ago, KnightofChrist said:

“The more holy and pleasing to God a priest is, the more acceptable are his prayers and oblations; and the greater his devotion, the greater the benefit to be derived from his Mass. For just as other good works performed by a pious man gain merit in proportion to the zeal and devotion with which they are performed, so Holy Mass is more or less profitable both to the priest who says it and to the persons for whom it is said, according as it is celebrated with more or less fervor” - Cardinal Bona

I agree with this completely. But the language of the Mass doesn't express or guarantee holiness; the orientation of the priest doesn't express or guarantee holiness; none of the externals express or guarantee holiness. Holiness happens on the inside. 

[KnightofChrist]

8 hours ago, Luigi said:

I agree with this completely. But the language of the Mass doesn't express or guarantee holiness; the orientation of the priest doesn't express or guarantee holiness; none of the externals express or guarantee holiness. Holiness happens on the inside. 

How many of the externals at Mass don't express or guarantee holiness? I'm not sure none of the externals express holiness, or that we can separate the internal from the external. Otherwise we wouldn't need the Mass if we are good on the inside. 

 

 

 

[Peace]

8 hours ago, Luigi said:

I agree with this completely. But the language of the Mass doesn't express or guarantee holiness; the orientation of the priest doesn't express or guarantee holiness; none of the externals express or guarantee holiness. Holiness happens on the inside. 

Sure it does.

If the priest uses incense and speaks in a Gregorian manner that means he is trying harder. This makes him more holy. Thus, we get to heaven faster with the TLM because it has more incense and TLM priests are more holy. The current bishops hate the church and want to slow down all of our paths to heaven, so they are banning the TLM and forcing everyone to attend the NO instead.

Or so the story goes apparently.

[Nunsuch]

18 minutes ago, Peace said:

Sure it does.

If the priest uses incense and speaks in a Gregorian manner that means he is trying harder. This makes him more holy. Thus, we get to heaven faster with the TLM because it has more incense and TLM priests are more holy. The current bishops hate the church and want to slow down all of our paths to heaven, so they are banning the TLM and forcing everyone to attend the NO instead.

Or so the story goes apparently.

Don't forget the Illuminati ("Free masons" and "the enlightenment")

[Luigi]

8 hours ago, KnightofChrist said:

How many of the externals at Mass don't express or guarantee holiness? I'm not sure none of the externals express holiness, or that we can separate the internal from the external. Otherwise we wouldn't need the Mass if we are good on the inside. 

 

 

 

We DO need the Mass. I never said or implied that we don't need MASS. I said the Mass being in Latin doesn't make it holier than a Mass in English or any other vernacular language. I said that the direction the priest faces doesn't make a Mass more or less holy. I said that the presence or absence of incense and bells doesn't make a Mass more or less holy. 

We DO need Mass. We need to be respectful of the Mass at the Mass and open ourselves to God's Word and sacrament. 

I've attended Mass in St. Peter's Basilica in Rome. It was hard for me to maintain a respectful and open-to-God attitude because of all the Catholic tourists walking around. I've attended High Mass at Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris on a Sunday morning. It was hard for me to maintain a respectful and open-to-God attitude because of the hundreds of non-Catholic tourists walking up and down the aisles taking  flash photographs of "Catholics at Prayer."

I've also attended Mass on the side of a state highway in Kentucky, under a picnic pavilion, with semis rolling by kicking up dust and ruckus - but the people had come from all over the county to the nearest/only Mass that was available to them; they were all there because they wanted to be there, to hear the Word and receive the sacrament. I've attended Mass sitting on the bank of river on a Saturday evening after a day of canoeing - it was pious, and peaceful, and beautiful, and moving. (A lady camped just downstream - I seriously doubt she was Catholic - sang O Holy Night during communion; it wasn't terribly appropriate, but it was beautiful and she was contributing what she could to the sanctity of the event.) I've attended Mass in my grandmother's living room with all thirteen of her children, their spouses (except for the three religious), and most of my 39 cousins, on the anniversary of my grandfather's death. Everyone was respectful, open to the Word of God and the Eucharist - there were no mosaics, no stained glass, no organ, no statues (other that what Grandma always had on her mantelpiece - and a picture of my grandfather who died when he was 51 and left her with all those children), no incense, no bells, no Latin. It was infinitely "holier" than what I experienced at St. Peter's or at Notre Dame. 

Yes, the priest should wear vestments; yes, there should be candles; yes, there should be music; yes, people should dress respectfully; yes.. and yes... and yes... BUT the single most important factor contributing to the holiness of a Mass (other than the ritual itself) is the attitude of those in attendance. 

[KnightofChrist]

@Luigi I believe we basically agree, to enough of a degree.  I was replying more to an absolute, "none of the externals express or guarantee holiness."

Edited September 10, 2021 by KnightofChrist