[Dominick]

How can you defend this anti catholic doctrine the church teaches now? It deviates from everything the church taught for 1962 years. It is the church which has stopped being Catholic, not Traditionalists.

Once again, a Traditionalist is a Catholic in Union with Rome, who thinks that the implementation of those doctrines are lacking among local Ordinaries, and Pastors. A Traditionalist could never hold that the Novus Ordo is invalid, or the Church teaches error. Therefore you can't count yourself among them. (period)

Do we really want to start this again? Catholic is Catholic and means something specific; if you want to be in the SSPX(ish) camp you are welcome to do that. Please don't pretend to be Catholic, nor pretend that Catholics in union with Pope Benedict are not Catholic.

[BulldogCatholic]

Dominick

The question I always pose to those who throw the "schism" thing around is as follows, and I note you have placed much emphasis on the Bishops from another thread, is as follows:

If the Pope or for that matter tomorrow told you that he (she? soon to be?) told you to that Buddah had much to offer and as at Fatima where JPII allowed the Hindus to worship, your diocese as well as most other dioceses except for maybe 10% of the church's (which will still allow your Novus Ordo Mass but with "modifications") and you were to start incorporating some of the ways hindus, etc worship into your liturgy (and the Bishop can do what they want as we all know)...what would you do?

That is the same question that many Traditional Catholics were faced with after Vatican II and in the past 40 years. We have been told that we must worship like Protestants, only we are still going to call ourselves Catholics. No-you may have been able to sell that "obedience" line to the cafeteria catholics and the Kerry supporters who are Catholics (some 50% of catholics voted for the Pro abortion Kerry as well as Clinton). But it does not work on those that are real "Catholics" as handed down from the Apostles.