If the Tridentine Mass was brought back...

[Brother Adam]

[quote name='brendan1104' date='Feb 20 2006, 06:38 PM']Mr. Myles... Archbishop Lefebvre did what he did, in conscience, because he knew he had to consecrate the bishops. Honestly, just check out [mod]we do not link to sspx sites[/mod] I'm tired from all the SSPX debates on PM.
[right][snapback]893157[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Luther felt like he just 'had' to leave the Catholic Church as well. It's okay if you want to be a Protestant, a Catholic in schism bredan, all you have to do is admit it. You can make up excuses and twist scripture and the writings of the magisterium any way you would like it, but it is helpful if you would be honest about it. And remember- you came to Phatmass, no one forced you to come here. But remember also no one is buying your schismatic propaganda. We are quite well aware of the facts and Cam isn't the only one who has earnestly studied the facts behind the SSPX. They indeed are in schism.

But I'll make you a deal. You write a letter to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith asking for the current canonical status of the SSPX. If they write back and state that the SSPX is in full communion and not in schism, I'll agree no longer to teach that they are in schism. If they write back and tell you what we all already know, then you have to agree to be honest about it.

Think about it.

Edited February 21, 2006 by Lil Red

[catholicinsd]

[quote name='brendan1104' date='Feb 20 2006, 06:43 PM']Palmar de Troya? And Pius XIII? You've gotta be nuts! Kristina where are you and OLAM Dad?!
[right][snapback]893165[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

The trads, and their un-Catholicness, are responsible for the creation of these sects.

[brendan1104]

[quote name='Myles' date='Feb 20 2006, 07:41 PM']So conscience makes their excommunication invalid...? 


[right][snapback]893162[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

No, not neccessarily... there are other reasons that are stated on the SSPX's website that I am not going to post, because it would be deleted. Archbishop Lefebvre did what he knew was his duty.

[Cam42]

[quote name='catholicinsd' date='Feb 20 2006, 07:39 PM']Do you trads support the Pope in Spain? The one in Montana?
[right][snapback]893161[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Some support the Palmarian Catholic Church in Spain, but not the SSPX. And properly speaking they are conclavists too.

And the conclavists in Montana are properly speaking not sedevacantists, they are conclavists.

They are conclavist, because they have an antipope.

[brendan1104]

[quote name='catholicinsd' date='Feb 20 2006, 07:44 PM']The trads, and their un-Catholicness, are responsible for the creation of these sects.
[right][snapback]893168[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

No, mentally ill people are. I'd like to have you tell that to some "trad" going to the indult or FSSP.

[brendan1104]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Feb 20 2006, 07:45 PM']Some support the Palmarian Catholic Church in Spain, but not the SSPX.  And properly speaking they are conclavists too. [right][snapback]893171[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Please clarify that you called Palmar conclavist, and not the SSPX.

[Cam42]

[quote name='brendan1104' date='Feb 20 2006, 07:44 PM']No, not neccessarily... there are other reasons that are stated on the SSPX's website that I am not going to post, because it would be deleted. Archbishop Lefebvre did what he knew was his duty.
[right][snapback]893170[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

And that duty was misguided.

[Cam42]

[quote name='brendan1104' date='Feb 20 2006, 07:46 PM']Please clarify that you called Palmar conclavist, and not the SSPX.
[right][snapback]893176[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Most people can read. I was clear in what I said.

[brendan1104]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Feb 20 2006, 07:48 PM']Most people can read.  I was clear in what I said.
[right][snapback]893179[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I can read... it was a little confusing, you could've said that before you brought up the SSPX.

[Lil Red]

moved to debate table

[Cam42]

[quote name='brendan1104' date='Feb 20 2006, 07:49 PM']I can read... it was a little confusing, you could've said that before you brought up the SSPX.
[right][snapback]893181[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Nope. I word things the way I do for a reason.

[toledo_jesus]

I would go to whatever Mass was offered in its place.


If this hypothetical were true, would it impugn the authority of the Church? I mean realistically. Would this situation mean that the Church had erred in matters of Faith and Morals, and therefore would the whole authority of the Church be questionable? I lean toward thinking yes, but I am not as informed as other people.

[Ash Wednesday]

I would accept it IF the tridentine mass became the norm.

As is, though, I think the Novus Ordo will continue -- perhaps disciplines regarding how it is to be said will be reformed, but the Novus Ordo will not be done away with. The most gorgeous mass I've ever been to (so far) was a Novus Ordo said in Latin. It had gregorian music and was of the utmost reverence.

[Ash Wednesday]

[quote name='toledo_jesus' date='Feb 20 2006, 06:01 PM']I would go to whatever Mass was offered in its place.
If this hypothetical were true, would it impugn the authority of the Church?  I mean realistically.  Would this situation mean that the Church had erred in matters of Faith and Morals, and therefore would the whole authority of the Church be questionable?  I lean toward thinking yes, but I am not as informed as other people.
[right][snapback]893195[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Though would the norm of a mass be more of a matter of discipline rather than doctrine...?

[Socrates]

Whether the mass is Tridentine or "Novus Ordo," I'm staying loyal to the Church and to the Pope.

And personally I think the Pope makes a lot more sense and speaks with much more authority than any of those wackball "rad trads" on their silly websites.