If the Tridentine Mass was brought back...

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Feb 20 2006, 09:09 PM']At any rate, I can assure you that I do know what I am talking about.

[right][snapback]893326[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

[brendan1104]

[quote name='fidei defensor' date='Feb 20 2006, 10:32 PM']
[right][snapback]893346[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

(Cam)

Edited February 21, 2006 by brendan1104

[Cam42]

[quote name='brendan1104' date='Feb 20 2006, 10:30 PM']Heh heh, the hour and a half that's left of it E.S.T.

Don't worry Cam, I'm with you!

(Can I not be phishy anymore?  :  Please?
[right][snapback]893343[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

When you recant the SSPX and stick with that recantation, perhaps dUSt will take the phishy moniker away.

You also will need to stop with the "rad-trad" line. Being traditional is fine. I am most certainly traditional, however, I am most certainly orthodox.

Where there is Peter, there is the Church.

[toledo_jesus]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Feb 20 2006, 10:09 PM']You are new here, but honestly you really need to back off me.  I have formally studied the Liturgies of the Catholic Church pre and post-Vatican II.  They were my graduate emphasis.  I also am an installed acolyte, as mentioned earlier.

Before you come on here claiming scandal, etc....you need to read up.  I am not speaking of these things in any other way than that of a meaning of clarification or as a matter of catechesis.  I am degreed in Theology, Philosophy, and Catholic Studies.  My undergraduate empahsis was the Cappadocian Fathers and I have just mentioned my graduate emphasis.

As it is, most people are not scandalized by my postings.  If you are, perhaps this is not the place for you.  At any rate, I can assure you that I do know what I am talking about.

Have a nice day.
[right][snapback]893326[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Cam, i'm scandalized by the fact that you have so many degrees. It makes other people feel less smarterer than you, which I think is very uncharitable.

[brendan1104]

[quote name='toledo_jesus' date='Feb 20 2006, 10:47 PM']
[right][snapback]893365[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

May I recommend braces? :

[toledo_jesus]

[quote name='brendan1104' date='Feb 20 2006, 10:49 PM']May I recommend braces?  :
[right][snapback]893369[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I use braces to hold up my pants.

[brendan1104]

[quote name='toledo_jesus' date='Feb 20 2006, 10:51 PM']I use braces to hold up my pants.
[right][snapback]893373[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

[Cam42]

[quote name='toledo_jesus' date='Feb 20 2006, 10:47 PM']Cam, i'm scandalized by the fact that you have so many degrees.  It makes other people feel less smarterer than you, which I think is very uncharitable. 
[right][snapback]893365[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Alea iacta est

[brendan1104]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Feb 20 2006, 10:55 PM']Alea iacta est
[right][snapback]893380[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Remember Cam... pride is a capital sin.

I'm signing off... so please don't debate the SSPX or talk about the Tridentine Mass anymore tonight because I'm not here to defend them... if you comply with the wishes of your king you will be rewarded sweetly.

[Amator Veritatis]

[quote]First of all, are you trolling me for some reason? You seem bent on questioning most of my postings as of late. If you have an issue take it up in private. I have a PM box. Don't waste public space with this....[/quote]

I must admit that I do not know the meaning of trolling, though I too found it interesting that we had posted in the same threads. Perhaps great minds do think alike. In any event, I hope you do not misunderstand my intentions. I simply wish to offer whatever minimal knowledge I might have for the advancement of myself and others in virtue and in learning.

[quote]1. Nope. Solemn High Mass. This would make it the prinicple [sic].

2. Rampant everywhere, not just France.[/quote]

If there are multiple Solemn Masses at a church on the same day--this, of course, is rare if not non-existent throughout the entire world--the [i]Asperges[/i] would only be sung at the principal Mass, not all Solemn Masses, though I assume this is not the case at your church. As for the second abuse, it is sad that this is the case in many places. I am simply happy I have not experienced it yet.


[quote]3. When you are serving and only two feet or so from the celebrant, it is audible enough. My understanding of Latin is more than acceptable, so I can decipher mistakes. Also, when emceeing a Mass, one is standing next to the priest, much like an archpriest would, so hearing the prayers is quite easy. Yes, this one is a first hand experience, as are all of these.[/quote]

I am in complete agreement with you here. I am sad to say that I have heard the same problems in the Canon and other silent prayers during my experiences as an MC.

[quote]4. This point is not curious. Altar boys should not be handling sacred vessels. This is not acceptable when a deacon and sub deacon are present.[/quote]

Please do not misunderstand. I completely agree that it is a problem. I was merely interested as to whether this is a rubrical error properly speaking, under the new norms. I agree that the deacon and subdeacon should handle the sacred vessels and the priest in their absence, and I am sure to avoid this as much as possible whenever I serve. If I am obliged to transfer a ciborium, I use the veil, being sure not to touch the ciborium itself. This assumes, of course, that the ciborium be empty.

[quote]7. Innovation, is another word for custom. However, it is rubrical.[/quote]

If I may kindly point out, I believe the original word describing the list enumerated was "abuse" as can be seen in your post as well as that of StThomasMore, as the quotations below indicate.

[quote]There are 10. There are many more, but that should suffice. They are various in severity, but they are all abuses.[/quote]

[quote]I pray, oh Lord and Master of Orthodoxy, that you share with we, thy subjects, these abuses which thou hast witnessed.[/quote]

[quote]8. Double prayers, the double confetior [sic], the double domine non sum dignus, etc.......they are often omitted.[/quote]

Thank you for the clarification. I have not witnessed this in any of the Masses at which I have assisted, but I can imagine that such an abuse could easily occur.

[quote]9. Yes, I am speaking of the double feasts.[/quote]

If you are speaking of double feasts, I must say I am still confused. Do you mean, perchance, that the priest recites the prescribed prayers of the feria rather than that of a double feast? If this occurs, it is incorrect. If a double feast, termed a Second Class Feast in the 1962 Missal, should fall on a Sunday, according to the norms of the 1962 Missal, the Sunday would overtake the feast. Prior to the revisions under Pius XII and John XXIII, a double feast would overtake certain Sundays, I believe. A Double of the Second Class would overtake more Sundays, but still not all. Perhaps I am simply misunderstanding your meaning.

[quote]You are new here, but honestly you really need to back off me. I have formally studied the Liturgies of the Catholic Church pre and post-Vatican II. They were my graduate emphasis. I also am an installed acolyte, as mentioned earlier.

Before you come on here claiming scandal, etc....you need to read up. I am not speaking of these things in any other way than that of a meaning of clarification or as a matter of catechesis. I am degreed in Theology, Philosophy, and Catholic Studies. My undergraduate empahsis was the Cappadocian Fathers and I have just mentioned my graduate emphasis.

As it is, most people are not scandalized by my postings. If you are, perhaps this is not the place for you. At any rate, I can assure you that I do know what I am talking about.

Again, if you have issues with me, personally, don't troll me. If you don't, don't assume that everything that I post is a potential scandal. You have a total of 18 posts (and counting) and you have accused me of possible scandal twice. Please stop. You have no basis.

Have a nice day.[/quote]

I hope I have not offended you in some way, especially regarding this apparent trolling. I think it interesting that we have interests and knowledge--though mine certainly limited--in the same fields. I have chosen a few threads in which to begin my endeavours here at Phatmass. I find it interesting that you happen to be involved in two of them, though I do not think that necessarily merits any spectacular charge. Certainly there are others who happen to be discussing the topics on this thread as well as the other in which we have both been active. Your credentials are certain, and I make no protestation against them. I certainly have no issues with you personally. I know nothing about you but what I have seen on these forums. Let me assure you that I do not seek scandal or assume your posts contain scandal. When I first joined these boards the manner in which you treated fellow Catholics was to me not merely scandalous but appalling. That much is a matter of fact. As to the recent comment I made, I simply stated an hypothetical in which I hoped to clarify a situation, that an unwitting observer might not be scandalised by certain abuses which were actually in keeping with the norms laid down in the rubrics for the 1962 Missal. Please know that I certainly mean no offence to you or anyone. I simply wish to discuss charitably and intelligently various matters of the Catholic Faith, to grow in virtue and piety myself and perhaps to help others grow in holiness. With that being said, I wish you a splendid evening as well and pray God's blessing be with you.

Edited February 21, 2006 by Amator Veritatis

[philothea]

[quote name='brendan1104' date='Feb 20 2006, 08:57 PM']I'm signing off... so please don't debate the SSPX or talk about the Tridentine Mass anymore tonight because I'm not here to defend them... if you comply with the wishes of your king you will be rewarded sweetly.
[right][snapback]893383[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

[philothea]

[quote name='Amator Veritatis' date='Feb 20 2006, 09:03 PM']I must admit that I do not know the meaning of trolling,
[/quote]
"Trolling" is internet-speak for posting something deliberately inflammatory in the hopes of stirring up conflict.

[quote name='Amator Veritatis' date='Feb 20 2006, 09:03 PM']When I first joined these boards the manner in which you treated fellow Catholics was to me not merely scandalous but appalling. That much is a matter of fact.
[right][snapback]893389[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
??

Could you specify the posts you're referring to?

[Amator Veritatis]

I was referring to the posts made by Cam in the thread about another member, StThomasMore, as well as various comments I read in his posts before I actually signed up for Phatmass, the locations of which I do not recall. I had intended to disregard the prior conflict regarding my comments in one of my first posts (which explained my cause for finding scandal in some of the writings of Cam) after myself realising that it might be improper or simply futile and after the same recommendation was made to me by multiple members of the forums. In any event, I would never have even addressed the issue had it not been brought up again in this thread. I think it best, perhaps, to simply forget about the prior comments and incidents, as they have apparently been a cause of conflict already. If it is not yet clear, I was in no way intending to troll anyone.

Edited February 21, 2006 by Amator Veritatis

[Cam42]

[quote name='Amator Veritatis' date='Feb 20 2006, 11:03 PM']I must admit that I do not know the meaning of trolling, though I too found it interesting that we had posted in the same threads. Perhaps great minds do think alike. In any event, I hope you do not misunderstand my intentions. I simply wish to offer whatever minimal knowledge I might have for the advancement of myself and others in virtue and in learning.
If there are multiple Solemn Masses at a church on the same day--this, of course, is rare if not non-existent throughout the entire world--the [i]Asperges[/i] would only be sung at the principal Mass, not all Solemn Masses, though I assume this is not the case at your church. As for the second abuse, it is sad that this is the case in many places. I am simply happy I have not experienced it yet.
I am in complete agreement with you here. I am sad to say that I have heard the same problems in the Canon and other silent prayers during my experiences as an MC.
Please do not misunderstand. I completely agree that it is a problem. I was merely interested as to whether this is a rubrical error properly speaking, under the new norms. I agree that the deacon and subdeacon should handle the sacred vessels and the priest in their absence, and I am sure to avoid this as much as possible whenever I serve. If I am obliged to transfer a ciborium, I use the veil, being sure not to touch the ciborium itself.
If I may kindly point out, I believe the original word describing the list enumerated was "abuse" as can be seen in your post as well as that of StThomasMore, as the quotations below indicate.
Thank you for the clarification. I have not witnessed this in any of the Masses at which I have assisted, but I can imagine that such an abuse could easily occur.
If you are speaking of double feasts, I must say I am still confused. Do you mean, perchance, that the priest recites the prescribed prayers of the feria rather than that of a double feast? If this occurs, it is incorrect. If a double feast, termed a Second Class Feast in the 1962 Missal, should fall on a Sunday, according to the norms of the 1962 Missal, the Sunday would overtake the feast. Prior to the revisions under Pius XII and John XXIII, a double feast would overtake certain Sundays, I believe. A Double of the Second Class would overtake more Sundays, but still not all. Perhaps I am simply misunderstanding your meaning.
I hope I have not offended you in some way, especially regarding this apparent trolling. I think it interesting that we have interests and knowledge--though mine certainly limited--in the same fields. I have chosen a few threads in which to begin my endeavours here at Phatmass. I find it interesting that you happen to be involved in two of them, though I do not think that necessarily merits any spectacular charge. Certainly there are others who happen to be discussing the topics on this thread as well as the other in which we have both been active. Your credentials are certain, and I make no protestation against them. I certainly have no issues with you personally. I know nothing about you but what I have seen on these forums. Let me assure you that I do not seek scandal or assume your posts contain scandal. When I first joined these boards the manner in which you treated fellow Catholics was to me not merely scandalous but appalling. That much is a matter of fact. As to the recent comment I made, I simply stated an hypothetical in which I hoped to clarify a situation, that an unwitting observer might not be scandalised by certain abuses which were actually in keeping with the norms laid down in the rubrics for the 1962 Missal. Please know that I certainly mean no offence to you or anyone. I simply wish to discuss charitably and intelligently various matters of the Catholic Faith, to grow in virtue and piety myself and perhaps to help others grow in holiness. With that being said, I wish you a splendid evening as well and pray God's blessing be with you.
[right][snapback]893389[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I believe that you know what trolling is. End of that story. Say what you will, but you are trolling.

You really need to take me at my word. I told you it was the prinicple Mass. Get off my six.

Considering that StThomasMore has equated Innovation and abuse, it was not a stretch. You'd know that if you'd stop assuming and start reading.

Not all of the abuses take place on a Sunday at the principle (Solemn High) Mass. Yes, by double feasts I mean that the priest recites the prescribed prayers of the feria rather than that of a double feast? Or that he celebrates only one feast and not both, when both are prescribed.

You have not offended me yet, however, you are treading very close. If you choose to start your posting here at phatmass on these threads, it is usually helpful if you don't start by questioning those things which are accurate. I have not been inaccurate at all. And you assume that I have. Sorry Charlie, I can assure you that I am not.

Ahh, but you do assume that my posts contain scandal or at the very least "possible" scandal. In your very few postings you have claimed it twice and in this post you have actually accused me. Please stop. I have asked twice now. If you find something scandalous, take it up in PM, not in public, those were your personal thoughts about the thread and those thoughts need to be dealt with in private, not on the phorum. Thank you. However, nothing that I have done is scandalous, regardless of what you think. Please let it go. You have been asked.

As to your recent comment, it was an accusation. Please refrain. Have I been clear enough? I certainly hope so.

If you wish to discuss charitably and intelligently, I would suggest that you read through the total of the threads before you post. Your posts addressed to me, thus far, have been accusatory and combative. Please refrain from that unless it is directed toward you, unless you can take those posts in the proper context. For all of your rhetoric thus far, your contextual application has been very poor. You are questioning those things with which you agree.

Again, and for the last time, if you have a personal issue with me (or with anyone else) please deal with it in PM, not on the boards. They don't add anything to the discussion/debate.

Have a nice day.

[Cam42]

[quote name='Amator Veritatis' date='Feb 20 2006, 11:26 PM']I was referring to the posts made by Cam in the thread about another member, StThomasMore, as well as various comments I read in his posts before I actually signed up for Phatmass, the locations of which I do not recall. I had intended to disregard the prior conflict regarding my comments in one of my first posts (which explained my cause for finding scandal in some of the writings of Cam) after myself realising that it might be improper or simply futile and after the same recommendation was made to me by multiple members of the forums. In any event, I would never have even addressed the issue had it not been brought up again in this thread. I think it best, perhaps, to simply forget about the prior comments and incidents, as they have apparently been a cause of conflict already. If it is not yet clear, I was in no way intending to troll anyone.
[right][snapback]893412[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

DROP IT!!!!!! Or take it to PM.