Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Latin Mass Attracts Young Worshippers and Converts in Bob Jones University Territory
The Greenville News ^ | 4/27/04 | Ron Barnett

Posted on 04/27/2004 7:04:58 AM PDT by Mershon

Edited on 05/07/2004 9:06:02 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

The sanctuary is both modern and Romanesque, a streamlined brick and glass edifice with a lofty, vaulted ceiling.

And inside this brand new house of worship on Greenville's Eastside echoes a liturgy that is nearly as ancient as Christianity itself - the Traditional Latin Mass.


(Excerpt) Read more at greenvilleonline.com ...


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Current Events; Ecumenism; Evangelical Christian; Mainline Protestant; Orthodox Christian; Religion & Culture; Worship
KEYWORDS: bobjonesuniversity; fssp; latinmass; lefebvre; tradition; traditionalism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-137 next last
More and more converts and young people in the heart of the Bible Belt are finding their way to Tradition. "If you build it, they will come! They most certainly will come!"
1 posted on 04/27/2004 7:05:00 AM PDT by Mershon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Mershon
I think the Tridentine Mass would be fairly popular if it were offered in a "wide and generous" manner.

Sure, not everyone likes it; but it has a beauty and reverence that can't be beat, IMO.

2 posted on 04/27/2004 7:11:24 AM PDT by B Knotts (Just another medieval Catholic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mershon
so long as it doesn't replace the Mass in the vernacular

This is somewhat amusing. It is a common belief that Mass in the vernacular is the norm.

That may be true in practice, but as far as I know, the Novus Ordo, in Latin, is the current norm. Mass in the vernacular was always supposed to be an option.

3 posted on 04/27/2004 7:14:49 AM PDT by B Knotts (Just another medieval Catholic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mershon
The caution stems from concerns that use of the old language might be seen by some as an attempt to return to pre-Vatican II theology.

I heard this same thought expressed in my own parish, rather vehemently, that the "theology" of Vatican II was different than what came before.

Not wanting to get into a heated dispute at that time, I calmly expressed my disagreement with the statement and we moved on. What say you, Catholics? Did Vatican II express a a different theology?

I've read a few of the documents and I don't see it.

4 posted on 04/27/2004 7:33:27 AM PDT by siunevada
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mershon; B Knotts; siunevada; Canticle_of_Deborah; Siobhan; NYer; Salvation
I took a look at the parish's website, and their new church isn't bad for something that was finished last year. It looks like they will get stained glass in there eventually.



5 posted on 04/27/2004 7:56:50 AM PDT by Pyro7480 (Sub tuum praesidium confugimus, sancta Dei Genitrix.... sed a periculis cunctis libera nos semper...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mershon
I wondered why you changed the title of this article. Then I found this letter you wrote to the Diocese Report.

Dear Editor:

While the Deep South has been used to the conservativism of Bible Belt Baptists and fundamentalists of other denominations, a new "traditionalism" is rising within the borders of South Carolina.

With only 3 percent of the entire state of South Carolinians declaring themselves to be Roman Catholic, there is an influx of Yankee (Northern) transplants and a steady stream of local converts (several young men who have decided they want to become Roman Catholic Priests) spurred on by the visits of Catholic apologists/converts Gerry Matatics, Steve Wood and Scott Hahn (all three former Presbyterian ministers), over the past couple of years. This stream of Catholics from the North and from within is also being geometrically multiplied by the burgeoning Hispanic population, and has the Greenville, South Carolina Catholic population approaching 10 percent, not including many of the Hispanics who are not officially registered in their parishes.

This stream, which started out as a trickle, and is becoming a flood, speared six local Bob Jones University-affiliated churches to hold a four-day anti-Catholic conference back in February 2003, in which they brought in six ex-Catholic Priests and seminarians to innoculate their congregations against the horrors of "the whore of Babylon." As a result of the publicity surrounding this conference, another young man in his early 20s, a youth minister at another local Protestant Church, has recently been inquiring about becoming Catholic because he is discerning a call to the Priesthood as well.

In the midst of the everyday anti-Catholic environment has emerged a growing movement of traditional Catholics whose numbers are difficult to calculate, but have included from 130 to over 200 attendees at five traditional Latin Masses over the past year and a half.

Now, this traditional Catholic community moves forward, and perhaps the irony is that the "spirit of Vatican II" that every Catholic in his 40s and 50s and above was brainwashed with over the past 40 years, is perhaps really and simply a return to traditional Catholicism. These Greenville-Spartanburg, South Carolina-based Catholics will get the opportunity to attend the traditional Latin Mass (pre-Vatican II liturgy) on a monthly basis (third Sunday of every month) in Blessed Trinity in Greer, South Carolina at 5:30 p.m. Father Mark Fischer, a Priest with FSSP, who is based in an Atlanta-area Latin Mass community, will make the monthly trek up to the Greenville-Spartanburg area, and will also hold catechesis classes beginning at 4:30 p.m. through 2003. This Holy Mass is being celebrated through the gracious permission of His Excellency, Robert J. Baker, and Father Steve Brovey, Pastor of Prince of Peace in Taylors and Blessed Trinity in Greer.

Of course there are lots of older folks that attend this liturgy, but what is interesting is that there is an ever-increasing number of younger people and especially young families--BIG families--who were born after the Mass was changed to English and the Priest began to face the people, rather than offering sacrifice turned toward God.

All this in the heart of Bob Jones University territory. Perhaps "the spirit of Catholicism" in its "old-time religion" fits into the landscape in the Deep South much better than anyone could have ever imagined. God works in mysterious ways!

Written In Memory of Cardinal Pie of Poitiers

Mershon
Taylors, South Carolina
6 posted on 04/27/2004 8:04:43 AM PDT by Between the Lines
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Between the Lines
To the Editor, [Greenville News]

I want to congratulate you on the article about the Traditional Latin Mass at Prince of Peace Church. In this day and age, fair and accurate journalism is no longer a "given"; but as evidenced by this story, Ron Barnett is an asset to your paper.

I just moved to Michigan from the Upstate, where I attended the Latin Mass. As a former Southern Baptist born and raised in Union, I converted to the Catholic Faith fourteen years ago. Like Mr. Arrington, I was attracted to the age-old forms of worship found in the Traditional Mass. Nothing could be more Christ-centered that what I found in it's ancient rites and rituals. I now attend a weekly Traditional Latin Mass in Flint, MI.

With all due respect to Fr. Conner, Latin is spoken and studied by many people all over the world. It helps with SAT scores and those studying medicine and other sciences. If it is true that "only God knows Latin", then our prayers at Mass are definitely being heard, since we pray to Him and not to each other.

Emily Paluszak
Millington, Michigan
7 posted on 04/27/2004 8:43:50 AM PDT by Mershon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Between the Lines
And by the way, believe it or not, the relics under the altar at Prince of Peace include Pope St. Pius X. Traditional Latin Mass in May on Mondays (NOT Memorial Day) and the second and third Sunday of every month.

Come join us!!!
8 posted on 04/27/2004 8:48:09 AM PDT by Mershon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mershon
Who else has relics under the altar? There has to be at least one martyr usually.
9 posted on 04/27/2004 8:49:49 AM PDT by Pyro7480 (Sub tuum praesidium confugimus, sancta Dei Genitrix.... sed a periculis cunctis libera nos semper...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Mershon
Please note that mass at this church is offered by the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, which is in full communion with the Holy Father. It is so important that those seeking out masses according to the Tridentine rite ensure that those churches are in full communion with the Successor of Peter, otherwise they are not fully Catholic.
10 posted on 04/27/2004 8:59:01 AM PDT by Unam Sanctam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Between the Lines; Mershon
"Of course there are lots of older folks that attend this liturgy, but what is interesting is that there is an ever-increasing number of younger people and especially young families--BIG families--who were born after the Mass was changed to English and the Priest began to face the people, rather than offering sacrifice turned toward God."

The Holy Ghost raises to the moment whom He pleases. The Mass of the Ages will never go out of fashion becuse of the Gifts of the Holy Ghost.

Liberals make the mistake in believing that all they have to do is wait until the pre Vatican II generation dies off, then they will have their own way. Never happen

11 posted on 04/27/2004 9:19:07 AM PDT by Arguss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Diago; narses; Loyalist; BlackElk; american colleen; saradippity; Polycarp; Dajjal; ...
Thanks for this interesting article that shows the Latin Mass can be popular even in the heart of the Bible Belt. I know that the Richmond diocese has 2 parishes that are Tridentine only, one in Richmond and one near Virginia Beach.

This case is very interesting for the fact that a normal New Mass parish just decided to start offering the Latin Mass. The article doesn't really explain what got that started.
12 posted on 04/27/2004 9:23:27 AM PDT by Maximilian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: siunevada
The caution stems from concerns that use of the old language might be seen by some as an attempt to return to pre-Vatican II theology...

What say you, Catholics? Did Vatican II express a a different theology?

Like you, this statement leaped out at me from the article. From my perspective, the Latin Mass is primarily a vehicle to return to the "pre-Vatican II theology." The Mass alone is not enough if one continues to hold modernist beliefs that contradict centuries of Catholic teaching.

It would be a grave disservice to the faithful if the Latin Mass is presented in a context in which it is deliberately shorn of its connection to traditional Catholic theology. Although in fact, this is the intention of virtually every diocesan indult Mass when it is not part of a traditional apostolate like the FSSP. The bishop thinks, "We'll give those old cranks a Latin Mass to keep them quiet, but it will be surrounded by a New Mass environment."

However, I have personally witnessed more than one priest who started out saying the Latin Mass with a New Mass theology and sensibility who changed dramatically over time. It seems that it was impossible for them to continue offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass without becoming transformed, and thereby rejecting the new theology and adopting a more and more traditional Catholic understanding.

As far as it being a "different theology," that's self-evident. Anyone who cannot see the difference would also have trouble seeing the difference between black and white or night and day. The liberals have no such trouble. They are very clear that the spirit of their new post-Vatican II Church is radically different in every way from the pre-Vatican II Church, and they are extremely active and aggressive to maintain that distinction and prevent any return.

13 posted on 04/27/2004 9:36:26 AM PDT by Maximilian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mershon
I just *dragged* some folks from my young adults group to see their first Tridentine Mass this past Sunday. Thought I'd try and plant a seed.
14 posted on 04/27/2004 9:49:26 AM PDT by GenXFreedomFighter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam
And if there is no "indult" available within a reasonable distance, what then? Are tradition-minded Catholics just supposed to shut up and put up with whatever nonsense goes on at their Novus Ordo parish?

You know perfectly well that the Vatican has admitted that if someone attends an SSPX mass not with the intention of separating himself from the Pope, but solely for the sake of desiring to attend the Traditional Latin Mass, this is not a sin and fulfills the Sunday obligation. Presumably this also applies to "independent" traditional masses.

I am preparing to move to North Carolina, where there are no "authorized" Latin masses in the entire state. The SSPX is the only option. I recently got a very nice e-mail from the woman who founded the Una Voce chapter in Charlotte. She did everything she was supposed to do--petitioning the bishop, etc.--all to no avail. The Novus Ordo Diocese of Charlotte has all sorts of "multicultural" ministries, complete with a Korean mass, a Vietnamese mass, and a Martin Luther King celebration, but apparently can't bother to accommodate anyone who wants a Latin Mass. So she now goes to the SSPX. Honestly, what else was she supposed to do?

I myself am very interested in Catholicism, but only the traditional version. As long as I live in North Carolina and the situation there remains as it is, I will either approach the SSPX or remain a non-Catholic. Sometimes I wonder which choice people like you would prefer.
15 posted on 04/27/2004 9:51:47 AM PDT by royalcello
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: royalcello
Your "people like you slur" is completely uncalled for.
16 posted on 04/27/2004 9:56:46 AM PDT by Unam Sanctam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Mershon
"Come join us!!!"

Oh how I long to!

17 posted on 04/27/2004 10:03:38 AM PDT by sneakers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Mershon; Maximilian
Thirty-five-year-old Robert Fromageot, a member of the Atlanta-based Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter

First of all, the FSSP is based in Elmhurst, PA, not Atlanta, GA. Fr. Fromageot is the pastor of a parish in Atlanta (St. Francis de Sales, I think). Secondly, I know Fr. Fromageot from his previous assignment. He is a very faithful and devoted priest. Those congregants are blessed.

18 posted on 04/27/2004 10:05:17 AM PDT by ELS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam
How is that a "slur"? By "people like you" I meant "Catholics who insist that there can never, ever, be any justification for attending, for any reason, a traditional Latin mass that is not approved by the local bishop." If you're going to respond, please address the actual points I made instead of overreacting to a nonexistant insult where none was intended.
19 posted on 04/27/2004 10:06:13 AM PDT by royalcello
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Maximilian
Latin may be a "dead" language, but it is coming to life in the aftermath of Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ." Dialogue in the film was in Latin and Aramaic, the languages of Jesus' time.

LOL......Latin is nowhere as DEAD as Bernadin, Untener, or any other unfaithfully departed AmChurch subversives.

Matter of fact, Latin is very much alive, and will be so till the end of time.

20 posted on 04/27/2004 10:21:45 AM PDT by m4629
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: royalcello
Catholics believe that the Catholic Church is the one true Church founded by Christ, and that Church is a visible Church in communion with the Successor of Peter. This is not simply an optional bit of Catholic belief that one can take or leave. Therefore, there is a HUGE difference between FSSP and indult masses on the one hand and SSPX and other schismatic groups on the other hand. It is not the case that the difference does not matter. It is an issue that has to be addressed, and that is why any good Catholic should ensure that the Tridentine mass is by a group in communion with the Holy Father. Where the bishop has, in breach of Ecclesia Dei, not provided for an indult mass, then you must follow your conscience in line with what the Church says. However, it would appear that many "traditionalists" who post on this site go to masses of schismatic groups even if there is an indult mass available, and even if there is not one, they go far beyond attending a schismatic mass out of "necessity," but actually publicly and vocally proslytize on this site on behalf of schismatic groups, encourage others to disobey and disrespect the legitimate authorities of the Church, including the Pope, schismatically call into question the legitimate authority of the Pope and the Catholicity of the Church, speaking of a "Novus Ordo Church" and other schismatic phrases. In these cases it is demonstrated that their intention is not simply to satisfy their conscience by assisting at the Tridentine rite, but to call into question the legitimate authorities in the Church and to encourage schism.
21 posted on 04/27/2004 10:22:57 AM PDT by Unam Sanctam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah; Desdemona
ping
22 posted on 04/27/2004 10:28:52 AM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maximilian; siunevada
I always think the point should be made that this Mass is closer to the Mass that vatican II called for then the current Mass. Remember, the current Mass was crated later, and was very different then what Vatican II called for.
23 posted on 04/27/2004 10:34:01 AM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Mershon
This account repeats an error regarding the SSPX. The Pope never "excommunicated" Archbishop Lefebvre. He announced that an excommunication had taken place latae sententiae and was automatic--that is, it had resulted from the Archbishop's act of disobedience. The Pontiff himself had no direct involvement. What makes this more complicated than is at first apparent, however, is the fact that Canon Law provided for exceptions for disobedience which incurred no penalty--one of which the Archbishop properly evoked. The Pope was therefore incorrect in his assessment of the Archbishop's status.
24 posted on 04/27/2004 10:37:37 AM PDT by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: siunevada
Vatican II absolutely expressed a new theology--much of it ambiguously Catholic at best. So does the Novus Ordo. So does Rome in general these days--so new as to represent a wholly new religion.
25 posted on 04/27/2004 10:40:34 AM PDT by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: siunevada
What say you, Catholics? Did Vatican II express a a different theology?

Absolutely. It's a whole new religion and is hardly recognizable from pre-Vatican II Catholicism. The new Mass has more in common with a Lutheran meal service than it does the Tridentine Mass.

26 posted on 04/27/2004 10:59:30 AM PDT by Grey Ghost II
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: siunevada
What say you, Catholics? Did Vatican II express a a different theology?
The definition of theology going back to Augustine that defines not only the Augustinian tradition but the entire catholic tradition is fides quaerens intellectum -- that is, theology is faith seeking understanding. While the basic definition of theology has remained the same, the specific truths of our faith have been given different philosophical iterations throughout the Church's history. For example, Augustine gave the truths of our faith a (neo)Platonic iteration, Aquinas an Aristotelian iteration, and Rahner a Kantian iteration.

Vatican II did not offer a new definition of Catholic theology, but it did set out to articulate the truths of the faith in a way that spoke to the Church in the modern world. In some cases, that articulation was quite new, representing a change not in the truths of the faith but rather in the common understanding of those truths.

One example of a change in common understanding initiated by Vatican II would be the right to religious freedom and the possibility of salvation for all, as found primarily in Dignitatis Humanae ("On Human Dignity") and to a lesser extent in Lumen Gentium ("Light to the Nations"). This doctrine is one of the clearest examples of where Vatican II not only advanced the Church’s doctrine and clarified its prior articulation, but on the point of the right to religious freedom, actually reversed what had been the common teaching and understanding up to that point.

Specifically, in Dignitatis Humanae, the council recognized that there is a right to religious freedom that is based on the dignity of the human person. Even when the person may be in error, he does not lose his human dignity and therefore his right to that freedom. This was a development of doctrine to the point of actually being a reversal of at least the common teaching. The common position in 19th century theology was summed up in the phrase, “Error has no Rights.” For example, some Catholic theologians taught that in a state in which Catholics were the majority or had power, the state had no obligation to endorse or tolerate any other religion except Catholicism, or to allow any practices which would in any way cause problems for Catholics. The recognition at Vatican II was that even though error has no rights, the one who errs has rights, and thus the human person maintains a dignity even when they use that dignity or that freedom improperly. Therefore, the Church’s claim to what was called “indirect power” in civil matters concerning religion (the claim that the Church had the right to demand that the state favor the Catholic state) was no longer taught.

Another example was a new way – new, at least, in terms of recent centuries – of talking about the role of Christ in the Church, avoiding what had been an ongoing debate since the Reformation. After Trent, post-conciliar Catholic theologians had reacted to the Protestant doctrine of sola scriptura in a way that emphasized the importance of tradition. Vatican II, however, points out in Dei Verbum (Word of God) that tradition and scripture are not two different sources of revelation but simply two different channels by which the ONE source of revelation -- Christ Jesus -- flows. Of course, even this can be misleading, because scripture is part of the tradition, and because tradition is bound by and defined by scripture. Still, by focusing on the person of Christ Jesus as the source of revelation, the often acrimonious debate about whether there are two sources of revelation or one is skirted. There is only one source of revelation, but it’s not sola scriptura, it is the person of Christ Jesus – the Word of God.

27 posted on 04/27/2004 11:01:41 AM PDT by eastsider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam
"Please note that mass at this church is offered by the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, which is in full communion with the Holy Father. It is so important that those seeking out masses according to the Tridentine rite ensure that those churches are in full communion with the Successor of Peter, otherwise they are not fully Catholic."

Your inference is wrong--as usual. The SSPX, for instance, is certainly fully Catholic. On the other hand, the Holy See itself clearly is not, since many of its highest officials are heretical or apostate. This is not the case with Catholic traditionalists, wherever they may still be found.

The SSPX makes no compromises with the faith--not even under pressure from Rome--which distinguishes it from the FSSP which is indulged by Rome only on condition that it remain silent about the destructive policies of the Holy See. But the ancient Mass should never have been an "indulgence" in the first place; it is the eternal patrimony of every true Catholic and its denial demonstrates a calculated disregard for the salvation of souls and for the faith itself.
28 posted on 04/27/2004 11:03:41 AM PDT by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Mershon
Jonathan Arrington, a 21-year-old Greek major at Furman University, leads the Gregorian chant from a high loft at the back of the church. A die-hard Southern Baptist until converting to Catholicism three years ago, Arrington said he feels a connection to centuries of Christian faith in the Latin rite.
------

Gerry Matatics is responsible for this conversion. The story is here http://www.gerrymatatics.org

I wonder if Jonathan is entering SSPX or FSSP seminary?




29 posted on 04/27/2004 11:04:09 AM PDT by Canticle_of_Deborah (The day the Church abandons her universal tongue is the day before she returns to the catacombs-PXII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: royalcello
Then why not just move an hour and a half down the road and join a Catholic Church in union with Rome in Greenville, SC?
30 posted on 04/27/2004 11:05:53 AM PDT by Mershon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ultima ratio
"The Pontiff himself had no direct involvement."

Motu proprio - From JPII himself. That is "no direct involvement."

Second, read Ecclesia Dei Adflicta and Vatican I, especially about the Pope having full and immediate JURIDICAL power.

Unless and until these are lifted, as a Catholic, you are bound to accept them, or you lapse into private judgment. Stop repeating the same tired, old SSPX propaganda. Yes, Lefebvre excommunicated himself. Read Ecclesia Dei Adflicta.
31 posted on 04/27/2004 11:10:14 AM PDT by Mershon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: eastsider
"This doctrine is one of the clearest examples of where Vatican II not only advanced the Church’s doctrine and clarified its prior articulation, but on the point of the right to religious freedom, actually reversed what had been the common teaching and understanding up to that point."

My approved master's thesis, awaiting a Nihil obstat and imprimatur from my bishop, proves that DH did not OVERTURN previous infallible teaching on this point, and that it merely emphasized the "dignity of the human person" aspect. The document itself states at the outset that it must be read in continuity with the traditional Catholic teaching. The new Catechism makes this clear as well. There was little in the way of development, with lots of prudential and authentic (but not ordinary magisterial) teaching in DH. It is also murky at best. If it overturned the previous, continuous ordinary teaching, then the gates of hell have prevailed.
32 posted on 04/27/2004 11:14:18 AM PDT by Mershon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah
Jonathan is discerning his vocation to the priesthood or religious life for a traditional Catholic order. He has never attended a Mass offered by the SSPX because he is a staunch proponent of the dogma, Outside the Church, there is no salvation.
33 posted on 04/27/2004 11:16:19 AM PDT by Mershon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Mershon
DH did not OVERTURN previous infallible teaching on this point ... If it overturned the previous, continuous ordinary teaching, then the gates of hell have prevailed.
I agree with you completely. I used the phrase "common teaching" as a way of avoiding the term "ordinary teaching" -- which is too close to "ordinary magisterium" for my liking.
34 posted on 04/27/2004 11:20:38 AM PDT by eastsider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam
You've been spewing these slanders for quite a while now. But no matter how often you sling such slurs, they remain false and unsubstantiated by the facts. The SSPX NEVER denied its communion with the Successor of Peter--though JPII said so in the Ecclesia Dei letter. The truth is, Archbishop Lefebvre and his followers refused to be complicit in the destruction of the old Mass. That is the bottom line. For this refusal, they were deliberately marginalized and persecuted--but never truly excommunicated. I myself DO attend an SSPX chapel rather than an indult Mass and do so from necessity--since the Indult parishes of themselves do not provide the necessary support for my family, for small children especially, that is needed to live a fully Catholic life. The Mass alone, in fact, is not of itself enough to guarantee that Modernist beliefs do not permeate the parish atmosphere and poison the faith. So stash these slurs--they won't wash. Nor do they hold up under closer scrutiny--though Rome wishes they could and tries its best to suggest they are real rather than insinuations without substance.
35 posted on 04/27/2004 11:30:01 AM PDT by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Mershon
SSPX is not outside the Church, but thanks anyway for the article.
36 posted on 04/27/2004 11:32:02 AM PDT by Canticle_of_Deborah (The day the Church abandons her universal tongue is the day before she returns to the catacombs-PXII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah; Mershon
Yeah, the situation, as the Vatican puts it, is "irregular." The bishops were technically excommunicated, but the parishoners aren't.
37 posted on 04/27/2004 11:34:32 AM PDT by Pyro7480 (Sub tuum praesidium confugimus, sancta Dei Genitrix.... sed a periculis cunctis libera nos semper...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam; Mershon; saradippity
Please note that mass at this church is offered by the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, which is in full communion with the Holy Father.It is so important that those seeking out masses according to the Tridentine rite ensure that those churches are in full communion with the Successor of Peter, otherwise they are not fully Catholic.

Unam you bring up a good point. I've been having a heated debate with the nun (and other staff) at our local parish on whether Mel Gibson "is a Roman Catholic" or not. She continues week after week to slander him saying he is not RC, not only because he rejects many parts of VatII (as per the Diane Sawyer interview), but because he has his own church "outside" the Diocese of Los Angeles. Last night she linked him as part of the schismatics that are "out there," (i.e. called him a "Lefebvre-ite").

From what I could gather, the priests that he had come onto the set to say Mass while filming "The Passion of The Christ," whom he's had personal relationships with, and who also say Mass at his church, are from The Legionnaires (sp?) of Christ." According to their website, they are in full communion with Rome and The Holy Father.

Do you have any thoughts, knowledge, or opinions regarding this group of priests? Is she wrong for these repeated accusations (in front of a large group of "new" Catholics just admitted into The Church) of Mel "not being a true Roman Catholic?"

I have my own opinions, but it is based on what Mel has said directly, not what others have said about him, or his father. I'd like to put an end to the argument, because I'm tired of hearing this kind of stuff from a nun who can't back her facts up, other than from a Diane Sawyer interview.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

38 posted on 04/27/2004 11:36:47 AM PDT by kstewskis ("Political correctness is intellectual terrorism..." M.G.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: kstewskis
From what I could gather, the priests that he had come onto the set to say Mass while filming "The Passion of The Christ," whom he's had personal relationships with, and who also say Mass at his church, are from The Legionnaires (sp?)of Christ."

Mel Gibson never had the priests from the Legion of Christ offer Holy Mass on set. Mel attends ONLY the TLM. There have been at least two articles recently about the priests who offered Holy Mass, both in union with the Holy See.

Your nun is causing scandal through detraction and calumny, and should shut her mouth.
39 posted on 04/27/2004 11:44:47 AM PDT by Mershon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: ultima ratio
FROM VATICAN I

And so,
supported by the clear witness of holy scripture, and
adhering to the manifest and explicit decrees both of our predecessors
the Roman pontiffs and of
general councils,
we promulgate anew the definition of the ecumenical council of Florence [49] ,
which must be believed by all faithful Christians, namely that
the apostolic see and the Roman pontiff hold a world-wide primacy, and that
the Roman pontiff is the successor of blessed Peter,
the prince of the apostles,
true vicar of Christ,
head of the whole church and
father and teacher of all christian people.
To him, in blessed Peter, full power has been given by our lord Jesus Christ to
tend,
rule and govern
the universal church.
All this is to be found in the acts of the ecumenical councils and the sacred canons.

Wherefore we teach and declare that,
by divine ordinance,
the Roman church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other church, and that
this jurisdictional power of the Roman pontiff is both
episcopal and
immediate.
Both clergy and faithful,
of whatever rite and dignity,
both singly and collectively,
are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this
not only in matters concerning faith and morals,
BUT ALSO IN THOSE WHICH REGARD THE DISCIPLINE AND GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH TRHOUGHOUT THE WORLD.

In this way, by unity with the Roman pontiff in communion and in profession of the same faith , the church of Christ becomes one flock under one supreme shepherd [50] .

This is the teaching of the catholic truth, and no one can depart from it without endangering his faith and salvation.

FROM ECCLESIA DEI ADFLICTA: Personal from JPII

In itself, this act was one of disobedience to the Roman Pontiff in a very grave matter and of supreme importance for the unity of the church, such as is the ordination of bishops whereby the apostolic succession is sacramentally perpetuated. Hence such disobedience - which implies in practice the rejection of the Roman primacy - constitutes a schismatic act.(3) In performing such an act, notwithstanding the formal canonical warning sent to them by the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops on 17 June last, Mons. Lefebvre and the priests Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta, have incurred the grave penalty of excommunication envisaged by ecclesiastical law.
40 posted on 04/27/2004 11:51:09 AM PDT by Mershon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: ultima ratio
thanks for pointing that out.

Re, my post #38. The nun I mentioned was talking about "schismatic" sects (and had to get her dig into Mel Gibson, which really ticked me off...but that's beside the point)

...she told this large group (the RCIA group newly joining the Church) that Lefebvre was indeed "excommunicated" and had "recanted" on his death bed. But in the meantime, he had appointed bishops while "disobedient," (i.e. they were not valid, ect...) and there is where the problem lie with the SSPX.

I'm only telling you this, because this is what is "spread" (pun intended) around. I don't claim to be an expert or extremely knowledgeable on the subject (but I am learning), but that's why I look to my fellow Freepers for that kind of information :)

41 posted on 04/27/2004 11:53:26 AM PDT by kstewskis ("Political correctness is intellectual terrorism..." M.G.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam
Here is what you say, much of it wrong: "However, it would appear that many "traditionalists" who post on this site go to masses of schismatic groups even if there is an indult mass available, and even if there is not one, they go far beyond attending a schismatic mass out of 'necessity,' but actually publicly and vocally proslytize on this site on behalf of schismatic groups, encourage others to disobey and disrespect the legitimate authorities of the Church, including the Pope, schismatically call into question the legitimate authority of the Pope and the Catholicity of the Church, speaking of a 'Novus Ordo Church' and other schismatic phrases"

Here are the facts.

1. Catholics may not only attend SSPX Masses for reasons of "necessity" alone--though many do for that reason--but also for reasons of devotion. Here is what Msgr. Perle of Ecclesia Dei said in his most recent letter on the subject:
"If your intention [for attending Mass at an SSPX chapel] is simply to participate in a Mass according to the 1962 Missal FOR THE SAKE OF DEVOTION, this would not be a sin." I would add that not only is it not a sin--but for many Catholics it is probably the only sure means of attaining grace for Mass attendance, given the sorry state of the Novus Ordo priesthood and episcopacy, as well as most Novus Ordo Masses. Of course we speak out on this site, by the way. Why should we let lies about us flourish without correction--or lies about the faith itself, for that matter?

2. No one I know who attends Mass at an SSPX chapel, nor any priest of the SSPX has ever called "into question the legitimate authority of the Pope and the Catholicity of the Church." This is more of your nonsense. I repeat--NEVER have we called into question JPII's legitimacy. This was untrue from the first day it was uttered--and was an untrue statement when JPII said as much in his Ecclesia Dei letter. We do, however, call into question his wisdom and his orthodoxy, as when he places his Catholicism on a par with Voodoo priests and animists, or attacks Catholic Tradition itself--and we have every right to do so as Catholics. But we do not question his legitimacy as pope. Nor do we question the Catholicity of the Church as you falsely state. We call into question the Catholicity of the Vatican bureaucracy--an altogether different thing.

The problem is that you recognize no distinction between the Vatican and the faith itself. But the Vatican is not the Church. Nor is it the faith.
42 posted on 04/27/2004 11:55:50 AM PDT by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Mershon
Your nun is causing scandal through detraction and calumny, and should shut her mouth.

I'm really trying not to LOL, but I agree with you wholeheartedly.

If I had some ammo to give her, perhaps it would quiet her down. Can you give me any suggestions?

thanks :)

43 posted on 04/27/2004 12:02:18 PM PDT by kstewskis ("Political correctness is intellectual terrorism..." M.G.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: siunevada
I heard this same thought expressed in my own parish, rather vehemently, that the "theology" of Vatican II was different than what came before.

Not wanting to get into a heated dispute at that time, I calmly expressed my disagreement with the statement and we moved on. What say you, Catholics? Did Vatican II express a a different theology?

I've read a few of the documents and I don't see it.

I agree. It's the people who didn't understand the "old church" who have trouble with the new! [Hint: the essentials are the same....]

I'm also amused about the phrase "Latin, instead of the vernacular." Like the people using it have no clue that once GREEK was the common language of the mass...until people no longer universally understood Greek...so it was permitted in the vernacular of its time....Latin.

Always fun to point out that the "Kyrie" is GREEK.

44 posted on 04/27/2004 12:03:13 PM PDT by gemoftheocean (geez, this is all straight-forward and logical to me....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: eastsider
"representing a change not in the truths of the faith but rather in the common understanding of those truths."

This is doublespeak. It is the way modernists think. The theologians of the past two thousand years, as well as the faithful, were too dumb to understand the truths of faith. These have to be newly translated--because the "common understanding" of those truths were misunderstood until modern geniuses arrived on the scene to reveal their meanings. The result is evident: unprecedented confusion and chaos--all in the name of clarification.

45 posted on 04/27/2004 12:04:04 PM PDT by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Mershon
I was referring to the motu proprio--which merely announced something had supposedly taken place and had kicked-in automatically. He himself refers to the late sententiae. But he never himself officially declared the Society excommunicated nor schismatic--only unofficially in a letter, and wrongly, by the way. Canon Law, remember, had its own caveats to disobedience--and it is the Pope's own law, trumping even the motu proprio as authoritative. It was a canon of Canon Law providing for the "state of necessity" that the Archbishop properly evoked. Therefore no penalty was ever sustained. That is the bottom line canonically, however much p.r. Rome puts out to the contrary.
46 posted on 04/27/2004 12:09:23 PM PDT by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: ultima ratio
It was a canon of Canon Law providing for the "state of necessity" that the Archbishop properly evoked. Therefore no penalty was ever sustained. That is the bottom line canonically, however much p.r. Rome puts out to the contrary.

I think you clarified my understanding of what happened there too, thanks.

47 posted on 04/27/2004 12:18:14 PM PDT by kstewskis ("Political correctness is intellectual terrorism..." M.G.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Mershon
Mel Gibson never had the priests from the Legion of Christ offer Holy Mass on set. Mel attends ONLY the TLM. There have been at least two articles recently about the priests who offered Holy Mass, both in union with the Holy See.

Actually, Mel did have priests from the Legionaires of Christ on the set. I don't know for a fact that they offered Mass, but they may have celebrated the New Mass separately from the Latin Mass that Mel attended. I'm pretty certain that Cavaziel attended another Mass.

The priest who most often offered the Latin Mass on the set of "The Passion" was Fr. Stephen Somerville. He is a priest from Canada who back in the sixties and seventies had been a member of the ICEL committee that wrote the execrable "translation" of the Mass. In the recent past he wrote a public denunciation of his own service on the committee and renounced any support or approval of what was done with his assistance. He has since become a "cooperating" priest with the SSPX.

Renouncing My Service on I.C.E.L. - An Open Letter - by Father Stephen Somerville, STL

His is a common situation. Others that come to mind are Fr. Stephen Zigrang and Fr. Lawrence Smith, both of whom left their diocesan assignments last year to cooperate with the SSPX. The SSPX is a fraternal society of priests, similar to a religious order, and only certain priest are official members. But there are many other priests both religious and diocesan who cooperate by offering the traditional Latin Mass at SSPX-associated chapels.

48 posted on 04/27/2004 12:20:05 PM PDT by Maximilian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: ultima ratio
"That is the bottom line canonically, however much p.r. Rome puts out to the contrary."

According to "ultima ratio's" illogical reasoning (how ironic!) or private opinion vs. that of the official arbiter of canon law--the Pope. Read Vatican I again. The Pope is bound by canon law, but HE is the ultimate interpreter. Therefore, his interpretation of canon law, unless proven otherwise by the Roman Rota (whom the Pope is over, by the way) is authoritative. Do you have an official document from Rome saying something different than Ecclesia Dei Adflicta? Or do you have a "canon lawyer" SSPX priest? That would be quite humorous since the SSPX does not even recognize the authority of the 1983 code, but always reverts to the 1917 code. So, according to your SSPX canon lawyer per the 1917 code, Archbishop Lefebvre's excommunication was unjust or invalid, even though he ordained bishops against the will of the Holy Father? Is that what you are saying?
49 posted on 04/27/2004 12:22:46 PM PDT by Mershon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Mershon
Typical propaganda about who's in and who's out from the Novus Ordo Church. What makes you think the Holy See, with apostate cardinals like Kasper calling the shots, is "in the Church"? How are two-thirds of the bishops of Amchurch "in the Church"? The argument can be validly made that only traditionalists, who alone uphold true Catholic tradition, are the remnant-survivors of the true Catholic Church.
50 posted on 04/27/2004 12:25:23 PM PDT by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-137 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson