TRADITIONIS CUSTODES

[KnightofChrist]

2 hours ago, chrysostom said:

There are entire reams of argumentation and actual decision-making which connects two things together which, in my mind, simply ought not to be connected.

1. Whether or not TLM can be said

2. Whether or not people who attend TLM are behaving badly

I don't know whose idea it was to connect 1. to 2. but it has always felt extremely inappropriate to me. This sort of thing is the real instrumentalisation of an ancient, venerable, and beloved liturgy which is a spiritual home for so many.

It is reminiscent of my elementary grade school years, when the teacher punished the whole class because one or two students acted up in class. 

[Peace]

9 hours ago, Nihil Obstat said:

Honestly my sympathy for them is much more conflicted than you probably even realize. Am I sympathetic towards them? Yes, I have never hidden that. But my sympathy for them, such as it is, has always been highly qualified.

I have no unified theory of traditionalism, and if you watch you will see me criticize traditionalists as a whole very harshly. I do not especially like most traditionalists. Despite being one.

I wonder if you noticed or find it as interesting as I do: I entered this thread by blaming trads for this situation because we are not holy and virtuous and only after that did I take a shot at the progressivist curia who hate the traditional Mass. And yet now here I am shoehorned into defending the SSPX from charges of schism?

And that, in a strange sort of way, represents my own feelings about the Society.

That's fair enough. I thought your point about holiness was a good one, although I think that is not just a trad issue. It's an issue for everyone in the Church I think.

As for the SSPX I think its possible to find points of agreement with them, but its a slippery slope and overall I think they are doing more harm than good (just my opinion of course).

[KnightofChrist]

"It is not to be excluded that I will enter history as the one who split the Catholic Church.” - Pope Francis, according to Walter Mayr, Der Spiegel, Source: Inside the Vatican

Also note July 16th, 1054, with the excommunication of the Patriarch of Constantinople, was the historical start date of the Great Schism. 967 years to the day of the release of Traditionis Custodes.

[Peace]

8 hours ago, Ice_nine said:

in 1970? No, I would not. And also, not in the North if you want to wind the clock back a little further.

Well if we wind it back a bit further your husband (of the same race naturally) could beat you for disobedience. Have fun with that.

8 hours ago, Ice_nine said:

Just because slavery is no longer legal, even though it still exists, is not proof of moral progress in general. We kill thousands of pre-born children, screw anything we feel like, have drag queen story hours at the public library. We're a bunch of fat, cowardly addicts and mindless consumers.

We're contemptible in our own special way <3.

Stop trying to see the glass half full

No, I am looking at the world objectively now in comparison to times past. I think you are being overly nostalgic and optimistic about "the good old days". If you hopped into Dr. Emmett Brown's time machine and ported back in time just a few hundred years, you'd be praying a thousand Hail Marys every day to come back to this terrible world that you complain about.

First, worldwide rampant slavery is "kind of a big deal". But that's just the tip of the iceberg. As for murder, we have abortions today and that is certainly terrible. You don't think people back then tried to do the same or that the numbers would not have been as high if they had modern technology? Ever hear of infanticide? Beyond that, just try to make it to the end of your life back then without getting murdered, raped, maimed, or tortured. People in times past were savage, and it was a savage world. The murder and crime rates hundreds of years ago were 10 times higher than what they are today. You had all types of notorious gangs that terrorized communities, alcoholism and drunken brawls were rampant, most people walked around with weapons. What we call "domestic violence" today was "proper disciplining of one's wife" then. Let's not even talk about all of these brutal wars and widespread oppression, colonization, genocides, etc. Huge wealth disparities and poverty, a general "dog-eat-dog" or "every man for himself" type of attitude. Hardly any social services whatsoever. It can hardly even be said that the intrinsic value of the individual human life was a widely accepted idea then.

As for fornication and things like that - you can read about all types of scandalous sexual activity starting from the early Church right there in the New Testament. You think people back in the day weren't knocking boots outside of wedlock, not doing all sort of sordid activities? That people down through history have just been a bunch of saints who sat around reading the Bible all day? Everybody walked around with chastity belts on?

Who is really seeing the "glass half full" here?

2 hours ago, Ash Wednesday said:

I knew that a rollback on Summorum Pontificum was coming, but this was actually harsher than what I had expected or would have liked to have seen. I'm leaving it with the hands of time and the hands of God, though. The TLM survived before 2007 and it will survive after this. It would be interesting to see how the topic is approached when there are no generations left that would have any bias or opinions about the TLM and life before or after Vatican II.  

Why it is so important to folks that the TLM survive though? I guess that is the thing that I really have trouble understanding. I think there have been many rites or forms of the Mass throughout Christian history that were once celebrated, but that are no longer celebrated, or only rarely celebrated, after changes were made. I think the TLM is great and all, but I just don't see what is so special about it (in comparison to other forms) that causes people to think that it is something that must survive until our Lord returns to judge the Earth, whereas other forms of the Mass aren't treated with the same respect.

Exactly what it is it about the TLM that makes it so special in comparison to other forms? I've been to the TLM enough times. It's great, but I just don't get the obsession that some people seem to have with it I guess. . .

[Peace]

2 hours ago, KnightofChrist said:

I've sympathized with the SSPX for 20+ years now. Still Catholic, still believe the Pope is the Pope, even when he does bad things, even wicked things. I still believe Vatican II was an actual Church Council, still believe the NO is a valid Mass in which our Blessed Lord comes down from heaven in the Holy Eucharist. 

I've never doubted that. Why the sympathy for SSPX though? I mean, there are things that I can agree with them on (such as the need to correct various liturgical abuses). But overall they seem to be a group that does more harm to souls than good.

2 hours ago, KnightofChrist said:

The SSPX are not without faults, but not the boogie men people make them out to be. 

I can just state the objective truth about them:

The SSPX is a schismatic group that leads their flock and other Catholics down the path of damnation by encouraging them to skip Mass when no TLM is available, violating the third commandment.

That's pretty bad in my book. I don't need to call them a boogeyman.

[Ash Wednesday]

15 minutes ago, Peace said:

Why it is so important to folks that the TLM survive though? I guess that is the thing that I really have trouble understanding. I think there have been many rites or forms of the Mass throughout Christian history that were once celebrated, but that are no longer celebrated, or only rarely celebrated, after changes were made. I think the TLM is great and all, but I just don't see what is so special about it (in comparison to other forms) that causes people to think that it is something that must survive until our Lord returns to judge the Earth, whereas other forms of the Mass aren't treated with the same respect.

Exactly what it is it about the TLM that makes it so special in comparison to other forms? I've been to the TLM enough times. It's great, but I just don't get the obsession that some people seem to have with it I guess. . .

I have said on here repeatedly that I will not get roped into arguments about the liturgy. There are plenty of resources out there from various societies on the matter. Just because it doesn't matter to you doesn't mean it shouldn't matter to anyone else.

[Peace]

42 minutes ago, KnightofChrist said:

"It is not to be excluded that I will enter history as the one who split the Catholic Church.” - Pope Francis, according to Walter Mayr, Der Spiegel, Source: Inside the Vatican

Also note July 16th, 1054, with the excommunication of the Patriarch of Constantinople, was the historical start date of the Great Schism. 967 years to the day of the release of Traditionis Custodes.

What schism? Are you leaving the Church because you must have the TLM?

[KnightofChrist]

2 minutes ago, Peace said:

I've never doubted that. Why the sympathy for SSPX though? I mean, there are things that I can agree with them on (such as the need to correct various liturgical abuses). But overall they seem to be a group that does more harm to souls than good.

I can just state the objective truth about them:

The SSPX is a schismatic group that leads their flock and other Catholics down the path of damnation by encouraging them to skip Mass when no TLM is available, violating the third commandment.

That's pretty bad in my book. I don't need to call them a boogeyman.

This and making out of line 'jokes' about @Ice_ninehusband beating her is why I avoid discussing the SSPX with you. Clearly your mind is made up. 

[Peace]

4 minutes ago, Ash Wednesday said:

I have said on here repeatedly that I will not get roped into arguments about the liturgy. There are plenty of resources out there from various societies on the matter. Just because it doesn't matter to you doesn't mean it shouldn't matter to anyone else.

I didn't say that it shouldn't matter to you. I don't understand why it does. If you don't feel like explaining that, it's perfectly cool by me though.

3 minutes ago, KnightofChrist said:

This and making out of line 'jokes' about @Ice_ninehusband beating her is why I avoid discussing the SSPX with you. Clearly your mind is made up. 

Oh please. Give me a break pal. You know plenty well I could not care less about these pitiful attempts to shame.

I stated what is objectively true about the SSPX, and whether or not you like my "jokes" (as you  put it) does not change the facts.

Edited July 17, 2021 by Peace

[KnightofChrist]

2 minutes ago, Peace said:

What schism? Are you leaving the Church because you must have the TLM?

Merely pointing out the reported quote by Pope Francis and that his Traditionis Custodes was released on the anniversary of the Great Schism. 

I'm not leaving the Church, nor is the TLM. 

[Peace]

1 minute ago, KnightofChrist said:

I'm not leaving the Church, nor is the TLM. 

Well that's good to hear.

[KnightofChrist]

19 minutes ago, Peace said:

Well that's good to hear.

I am Catholic. No better or worse than anyone else. 

[Peace]

1 minute ago, KnightofChrist said:

I am Catholic. No better or worse than anyone else. 

Well there are certainly plenty of people I am worse than, that's for sure.

[Ash Wednesday]

42 minutes ago, Peace said:

I didn't say that it shouldn't matter to you. I don't understand why it does. If you don't feel like explaining that, it's perfectly cool by me though.

It's fine, there are plenty of "which liturgy" debates out there and I don't even attend the TLM exclusively at all. Mostly I'm just sympathetic to liturgical freedom and don't like the idea of people having their hand forced about what liturgy they attend. I know some people feel strongly enough that they want to see the Novus Ordo banned but I don't think that would be prudent treatment of the faithful at all.

[Ice_nine]

3 hours ago, Anomaly said:

possibly a person, not a diety  

wrong

3 hours ago, Anomaly said:

As far as being married to another race in 1970, LOL.  It would not have had the opportunity for peace or joy general normalcy you enjoy now.  I was there.

Yeah haha lol lmao rofl. I'm so ignorant of basic US history. Dumb little me. But it wasn't illegal. You were "there" right? So people in Connecticut and Alabama all felt the same? Maybe, but obviously some people did the thing despite. Even today, some don't like it and try to make it hell for people. Not my experience, but it happens.

Also, back in those yonder times in America, an Irish-Catholic marrying an Italian-Catholic was considered scandalous and a big deal and there's probably only like 20 people alive today who would even blink at it.

Zoom on out. There's thousands of years of human history. When was slavery abolished? Rather recently. Score 1 for the home team. When did the concept of race, miscegenation, and eugenics. Also pretty recent. Go back a few hundred years and race didn't even exist.

My point is, it's not so linear.

 

4 hours ago, Anomaly said:

And congratulations on your marriage.  May you always remember to seek (and be) the joy in this world for yourself and your spouse.   

The point of marriage is to assist my spouse in achieving his ultimate end of his existence with the God who created Him. Otherwise we're just 2 bags of meat in delusion engaging in a really pointless exercise.

But thanks