Keep this thought in mind: No matter what conclusions we come to here, what has happened to the Church has come about within the space of forty years. All this has happened without the least genuine sign of alarm from the reigning pope or his men. All the while, we have been told that it was in the spirit of and according to the norms laid down by the Second Vatican Council. During his reign, Pope John Paul II has continued to exult over the fact that the Church is moving toward the great finale of the Third Millenium. It should be clear to the dullest mind that what has happened was intended all along, that the goals and visions of the Revolutionists who control the Church are very different from those of true Catholics, and have not the slightest reference to the glory of the most Blessed Trinity, the exultation of the Church, the salvation of her children, or the conversion of those wandering in sin and error without, the thought of whose peril causes the true Catholic to tremble and weep.

-- TC (Treadmill234@south.com), February 02, 2005

Answers

bump

-- TC (Treadmill234@south.com), February 02, 2005.

Well, you posted your cr@p on the right forum, I'll give you that much.

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), February 02, 2005.

More than a billion "true Catholics" would disagree with your schismatic ramblings. Submission to the pope and the Magisterium - in what THEY proclaim is right, not in what YOU think is right - is the first measure of a "true Catholic". If that isn't there, neither is Catholicism.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), February 02, 2005.

While pope John 23rd might not have been a communist, he was manipulated by them to their advantage

Two of his more famous encyclicals were "Mater et Magistra" and the controversial "Pacem in Terris". It was not until he lay on his deathbed, dying from lukemia that he realized how he had been used by the modernists, progressivists, communists and masons to undermine the one obstacle in their way: Holy Mother Church. Sadly, his successor did not heed his plea, "Stop the Council! Stop the Council!" He passed away on June 3, 1963 and the entire world mourned the good Pope. For his writings, see John XXIII

Paul VI Proclamations of post-Vatican II popes The jury is still out on Cardinal Giovanni Battista Montini who, though exiled by Pope Pius XII returned to Rome to be elected Roman Pontiff and, rather than following John XXIII's cautions, plunged even deeper into the malaise that Vatican II became as factions greatly embittered all camps and those progressivists from the northern regions of Europe were allowed to run freely and rule liberally as the Rhine flowed into the Tiber. Paul's pontificate lasted 15 years and yet he wrote one less encyclical than his predecessor. While many think he will forever be remembered for the one great encyclical that was so widely rejected "Humanae Vitae", the truth is he will forever be lamented for what he did on April 3, 1969 when he ushered in the "abomination of desolation"..."standing in the holy place" (which Christ had warned of in Matthew 24: 15) of the man-made sacrilege of the Novus Ordo. If only it had been ignored as was his encyclical on human life, but the modernists had already gained a strong foothold after Vatican II in almost every chancery worldwide. With this infiltration in place the cancer began to grow even deeper as the devil recruited more to help him in deconstructing his greatest enemy on earth - Holy Mother Church. Paul died on August 6, 1978, admitting that satan was now in the sanctuary. For his Encyclicals, Apostolic Letters Constitutions, and Exhortations.

-- TC (Treadmill234@south.com), February 02, 2005.

TC Are you saying that Pope Paul VI considered Novus Ordu to be a "man made sacrelidge," and ushered it in anyway? Did he actually die admitting that Satin was "now in the sanctuary?" Is this for real? I had never heard this before.

Also did Pope John XXIII really die saying "Stop the council?" If he said this as a living Pope, why didn't the council submit to his demand? This just doesn't sound right.

I'm not attacking your statements, just trying to understand whether this is literally what took place, or more like hyperbole to make a point.

If these were actual statements, are you sure of the context?

-- Jim (furst@flash.net), February 02, 2005.

What TC says is NOT without basis. It IS a proven fact and should you actually open your Minds and Eyes a little you will see that some of what he states IS Accurate.

Do some Deeper research and you might find some stuff that you Really don't like. But of course you need to understand that communism is not a concrete item most people see it as but is idealism in the air. You know what it is but you just can't get your hands around it.

But Please at least invest a FEW minutes to read the list and commentaries and then report back on how many MF's come out your mouth from the list of 45 items. And then if you still aren't convinced do some more research on your own.

But as Good Catholics you know NOT to kill the messenger just because you don't like the message

On Jan. 10, 1963, Congressman Albert S. Herlong Jr. of Florida a list of 45 Communist goals into the Congressional Record.

Entered INTO : Congressional Record, Vol. 109 88th Congress, 1st Session Appendix Pages A1-A2842 Jan. 9-May 7, 1963 Reel 12

http://www.restoringamerica.org/documents/45_goals_of_communism.html

"27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."

"This has been largely accomplished through the communist infiltration of the National Council of Churches, Conservative and Reform Judaism, and the Catholic seminaries."

Commentary on each issue provided at :

"http://newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/5/8/133540.shtml"

Book title page: Skousen, W. Cleon. Naked Communist, The Salt Lake City, Utah: Ensign Publishing Co. C. 1961, 9th edition July 1961.

-- Michael G. (NoEmail@Nowhere.no), February 02, 2005.

I have come to understand that Communism has played a part in the way in which Pius XII has become so widely and wrongly condemned by - --it seems like almost everyone. Its almost generally accepted that he was weak, and a virtual do nothing during the War.

I'm sensitive to that issue mainly because I bought into it and probably propagated it for awhile. Never actively, but more passively by going along with the blather. I didn't thoroughly investigate the propaganda so I never defended him.

As for the information about Popes John XXIII, and Paul VI, as descibed by TC, I have never heard any of this. All of the Catholic clergy involved in my education, including my parents, loved these two men.

While I am aware that a number of Catholics do not believe a valid pope has been heading the Church since Pius XII, I have always seen these people as part of a "fringe" group.

Also I'm just doing the best I can to be Catholic as I understand it, and as it was taught to me. I don't need a lot of distractions as my faith has been a bit shakey anyway.

-- Jim (furst@flash.net), February 02, 2005.

Perhaps John 23rd was more naive than anything. His close friend, at his bedside when he died, reported this.

Pope John XXIII summoned the Italian bishops to the Roman Synod of 1959 as an anticipation of the Second Vatican council. In a massive reaffirmation of traditional practice, the pope solemnly confirmed the use of Latin, condemned all attempts at creativity on the part of the celebrant of Holy Mass, ordered Gregorian Chant, and forbade women entry to the altar area.

A year later the pope issued his Apostolic Constitution Veterum Sapientia, On Promoting the Study of Latin, as the Church's cultural and religious heritage and as its living language -- universal, immutable, and non-vernacular. He bound bishops to "be on their guard lest anyone under their jurisdiction, being eager for innovation, write against the use of Latin in the teaching of the higher sacred studies or in the liturgy, or through prejudice makes light of the Holy See's will in this regard or interprets it fa1sely." He attributed a very special importance to this document, promulgating it with a solemnity unique in the history of the present century -- in person, in St. Peter's upon the Confession of St. Peter himself, and in the presence of the cardinals and of the Roman clergy.

When he opened the Second Vatican Council on October 11, 1962, Pope John XXIII charged the Council Fathers "that the Sacred Deposit of Christian Doctrine should be guarded and taught more efficaciously [with a] renewed, serene, and tranquil adherence to all the teachings of the Church in their entirety and preciseness, as they still shine forth in the acts of the Council of Trent and the First Vatican Council."

In fact, the Second Vatican Council was apparently a great disappointment to the pope. According to Anne Muggeridge, the daughter-in-law of the famous British Catholic convert and journalist Malcolm Muggeridge), in The Desolate City, John Cardinal Heenan of Westminster reported that when, during the rebellious first session of the Council, the pope realized that the papacy had lost control of the process, he attempted to organize a group of bishops to try to force it to an end.

Malcolm Muggeridge, who reported from Rome on the Second Vatican Council for the British Broadcasting Corporation, considered Pope John "politically naive and unduly influenced by the handful of 'liberal' clerics with whom he is in close contact." In a 1985 interview, he gave his assessment of the pope thus:

Really Pope John -- who was built up as a saintly and perfect pope, the good man of our time -- whether consciously or unconsciously, did more damage to the Church than possibly any other individual man had ever done in the whole of its history.... It seemed almost as though Pope John was operating on behalf of the devil without being in any way conscious of it.

Whatever Pope John's disposition was, however, before the second session of the council could open, he died. His last words on his deathbed, as reported by Jean Guitton, the only Catholic layman to serve as a peritus at the Council, were: "Stop the Council; stop the Council." In any case, it is a fact that Pope John signed not one document of the Second Vatican Council.

-- TC (Treadmill234@south.com), February 02, 2005.

The conciliar popes are teaching universal salvation, however see what popes of the past have taught ex cathedra.

Our Glorious Popes and the Dogma Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus

The Popes through the centuries have defended the doctrine "outside the Church there is no salvation. Here is small reference of their teachings on the matter:

Pope Pelagius II (A.D. 578 - 590): "Consider the fact that whoever has not been in the peace and unity of the Church cannot have the Lord. ...Although given over to flames and fires, they burn, or, thrown to wild beasts, they lay down their lives, there will not be (for them) that crown of faith but the punishment of faithlessness. ...Such a one can be slain, he cannot be crowned. ... [If] slain outside the Church, he cannot attain the rewards of the Church." (Denzinger 246-247)

Pope Saint Gregory the Great (A.D. 590 - 604): "Now the holy Church universal proclaims that God cannot be truly worshipped saving within herself, asserting that all they that are without her shall never be saved." (Moralia)

Pope Innocent III (A.D. 1198 - 1216): "With our hearts we believe and with our lips we confess but one Church, not that of the heretics, but the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church, outside which we believe that no one is saved." (Denzinger 423)

Pope Leo XII (A.D. 1823 - 1829): "We profess that there is no salvation outside the Church. ...For the Church is the pillar and ground of the truth. With reference to those words Augustine says: `If any man be outside the Church he will be excluded from the number of sons, and will not have God for Father since he has not the Church for mother.'" (Encyclical, Ubi Primum)

Pope Gregory XVI (A.D. 1831 - 1846): "It is not possible to worship God truly except in Her; all who are outside Her will not be saved." (Encyclical, Summo Jugiter)

Pope Pius IX (A.D. 1846 - 1878): "It must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation; that he who shall not have entered therein will perish in the flood." (Denzinger 1647)

Pope Leo XIII (A.D. 1878 - 1903): "This is our last lesson to you; receive it, engrave it in your minds, all of you: by God's commandment salvation is to be found nowhere but in the Church." (Encyclical, Annum Ingressi Sumus)

"He scatters and gathers not who gathers not with the Church and with Jesus Christ, and all who fight not jointly with Him and with the Church are in very truth contending against God." (Encyclical, Sapientiae Christianae)

Pope Saint Pius X (A.D. 1903 - 1914): "It is our duty to recall to everyone great and small, as the Holy Pontiff Gregory did in ages past, the absolute necessity which is ours, to have recourse to this Church to effect our eternal salvation." (Encyclical, Jucunda Sane)

Pope Benedict XV (A.D. 1914 - 1922): "Such is the nature of the Catholic faith that it does not admit of more or less, but must be held as a whole, or as a whole rejected: This is the Catholic faith, which unless a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved." (Encyclical, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum)

Pope Pius XI (A.D. 1922 - 1939): "The Catholic Church alone is keeping the true worship. This is the font of truth, this is the house of faith, this is the temple of God; if any man enter not here, or if any man go forth from it, he is a stranger to the hope of life and salvation. ...Furthermore, in this one Church of Christ, no man can be or remain who does not accept, recognize and obey the authority and supremacy of Peter and his legitimate successors." (Encyclical, Mortalium Animos)

Pope Pius XII (A.D. 1939 - 1958): "By divine mandate the interpreter and guardian of the Scriptures, and the depository of Sacred Tradition living within her, the Church alone is the entrance to salvation: She alone, by herself, and under the protection and guidance of the Holy Spirit, is the source of truth." (Allocution to the Gregorian, October 17, 1953)

Then, as though to set this constant teaching of the Fathers, Doctors and Popes "in concrete," so to speak, we have the following definitions from the Solemn Magisterium of the Church:

Pope Innocent III and Lateran Council IV (A.D. 1215): "One indeed is the universal Church of the faithful outside which no one at all is saved..."

Pope Boniface VIII in his Papal Bull Unam Sanctam (A.D. 1302): "We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff."

Pope Eugene IV and the Council of Florence (A.D. 1438 - 1445): "[The most Holy Roman Church] firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart `into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels' (Matt. 25:41), unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church."

-- TC (Treadmill234@south.com), February 02, 2005.

"Perhaps John 23rd was more naive than anything"

TC, I will be honest I really believe a lot of what has/had occurred was through people being naive/innocent/ignorant of how slick the logic of a high-minded person is/can be. Sometimes you can't believe someone that close close to you would hit you out of the blue when you seem to have a mutual trust and respect with them and the "assumed" same goals for the Church and people, but after a person gets hit a few times in the head the guard goes up.

Look at the list I provided, it was not limited to the Church but is throughout society/government which was hit with False Love. It is not like a bunch of Cardinals walking around with the little red book. Each of these areas society/government/religion were ALL hit at the most damaging areas, the educational system, the Churches and government handout programs and Double minded speech and thoughts and Actions.

But as I have mentioned at an earlier discussion the current Pope HAS done a lot to remove this crap but this is a complex removal process because the cancer can and is everywhere and no-where. I know you have Good Strong Faith in the Church and I believe in time you will see more of what you are accustomed to however not all of it. But try to give the Pope some slack. Regrettably, like many large issues it will take time before you can see clearly and with some distance for clarity that he is a good man for this time in Church History and HAS been making Changes back.

Hey, but on a highly complimentary note, a Lutheran friend of mine was telling me about his brother who was one of the most greedy, big ego persons you would like NOT to meet started attending a Traditional Catholic Church and as my friend says " I can NOT believe that this is the same guy” Totally reformed him and it has been for some time already and he still loves helping out at the food pantry and many of the other ministries his Church is involved with.

-- Michael G. (NoEmail@Nowhere.no), February 03, 2005.

Michael; Nice to hear the story about the Lutheran.

For myself, when I started to attend the traditional mass, I felt a lot more closer to God than I did in the new mass.

As for the present pope, he needs our prayers, sick as he is.

-- TC (Treadmill234@south.com), February 03, 2005.

"Also I'm just doing the best I can to be Catholic as I understand it, and as it was taught to me. I don't need a lot of distractions as my faith has been a bit shakey anyway."

Jim, Don't ever let any of this type of stuff cause you to get shakey on your faith to be honest it should really strengthen your faith in the Catholic Church and that it IS truthful in it's teachings (New or Traditional).

People will always argue about details who is or who isn't legit, look at Bush and how many still cry that he was never elected President the first time and surely our Country still goes on and on and on. and the Catholic Church has been around for 2,000 years nearly 10 times longer then our Country, about 1,000 years longer then the longest running government the world has ever known.

Truth is The TRUTH does LIVE on. That doesn't mean that problems wont surface from time to time, Holier then thou Church ladies will always be part of every church and deception may creep in from time to time but your spirit will see it and you will learn to look past it while it is being taken care of and it will get taken care of. Of course it may seem that glaciers melt faster at times but you will know. But Fact is the TRUTH does remain! Just go with the confidence that you ARE on the right track and Keep your Faith In God the Father, Jesus Christ his Son and The Holy Spirit. And YOU WILL be covered and protected.

-- Michael G. (NoEmail@Nowhere.no), February 03, 2005.

TC-- I think it is great when people find a place that they feel closer to God.

And I'll be honest it is very rare that I have come across a Priest which I get little or nothing out of during the service, but this new one we have it's been 5 months and he has finally hit on one. But I do have to admit I DO see God bending this guys will in a very real way. (hard to explain) But even during these other services when I feel like slamming my head on the pew in front of me because of him (OK Over Dramatization! ), When I am in line and see all of the other people receiving communion I really am in awe of how the truth is still there.

And yes the Pope does remain in my prayers as well

Thank You!

-- Michael G. (NoEmail@Nowhere.no), February 03, 2005.

Michael,

If a particular church or priest helps you in your faith, sure stay with it. I am always interested in why the abrupt change in the church since Vatican two. I have read many reasons but non of them sem plausible except for the Masonic influences.

Last year a relative of mine was at the new mass with her son. The priest went into some pantomime with a wig on his head. She got up and walked out. Unfortunately she was the only one to do so.

If they keep putting up with that sacrilege they will get more of the same. I had things like that happen to a lesser degree in my church. I finally had enough and left.

In the traditional mass they follow the mass to the letter. No ad libbing. The sermons are on the four last things and Heaven, Hell and love of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the love of His mother.

-- TC (Treadmill234@soth.com), February 03, 2005.

"It Is Sinful to Take Part in It [the Novus Ordo]" It was in 1975, five years after the introduction of the Novus Ordo service that Fr. Oswald Baker attracted national attention when he insisted on celebrating only the Traditional Latin Mass instead of the Novus Ordo service in his Roman Catholic parish of Downham Market, Norfolk, England, where he had been pastor since 1949.

Because Fr. Baker stood up for the Roman Catholic Mass instead of its Novus Ordo counterfeit, Charles Grant, the Northampton Newchurch bishop, determined to make an example of Baker. That bishop didn't realized that he had caught a tiger by the tail!

It quickly became clear that Baker enjoyed strong backing from the majority of his parishioners, who formed a "1570 Society" to support him, 1570 being the year in which Pope St. Pius V canonized the Catholic and Apostolic Traditional Latin Mass "in perpetuity" in accordance with the decrees of the dogmatic Council of Trent. Catholics started coming from all over the country to attend his Sunday Masses, and laypeople throughout the English-speaking world wrote in their hundreds to assure him of their wholehearted agreement with him.

At a time when toleration was supposed to be in vogue, the Northampton bishop and Newchurch as a whole were particularly embarrassed to find themselves looking both narrow and tyrannical. As the situation developed, Baker showed every sign of enjoying himself. He made barbed remarks about Novus Ordo services that made use of pop music and "sensuous dancing girls."

The Daily Telegraph, which often had a reporter in his congregation, recorded one sermon in which he pointedly referred to St. John of the Cross, who was jailed by his superiors for his beliefs in the 16th century, then was released to become Vicar General of Andalusia. To general laughter from his parishioners, Baker continued: "There is something about them, these priests who gain a misleading reputation for disobedience." He then added: "These bishops. They will have their little joke."

Meanwhile, the new parish presbyter dispatched by Grant performed the Novus Ordo service for a scant minority of Downham Market Catholics in the town hall. The people voted for the Traditional Latin Mass with their feet. Fr. Baker continued his ministry and intensified his fight against Vatican II and Newchurch. He publicly stated that "the new Mass is a sacrilegious parody of the true Mass: it is sinful to take part in it."

After the battle with the Newchurch bishop, Fr. Baker initially rejoiced when Archbishop Lefebvre's Society of St. Pius X sent young priests to England, following in the footsteps of the Reformation martyrs who had refused to accept the introduction of Protestantism. Baker denounced the New-Order Church produced by Vatican II, agreeing with the Lefebvre: "The Conciliar Church is a schismatic Church, because it breaks with the Catholic Church." However, although Baker was sympathetic to Lefebvre, Lefebvre's association with problematic popes Paul VI and John Paul II disappointed him.

Fr. Baker's congregation swelled when the film producer-director- actor Mel Gibson, who bought a house nearby, appeared for Sunday Mass and stayed for coffee afterwards.

Fr. Baker passed to his eternal reward on July 2, 2004, at age 89, having been born on May 1, 1915. [News-Telegraph]

-- TC (Treadmill234@south.com), February 03, 2005.

"I take a very pessimistic view of the Catholic Church, despite the very brilliant Pope you've now got . . . The things in it that hold my admiration are the very things that it's turning its back on . . . I can't join it; and I'll have to meet my Maker not having joined it. Probably I'll get a frightful pacing in purgatory for it, but I can't help it. "

-- Ian (ib@vertifgo.com), February 03, 2005.

Ian,

If you are not a Catholic and would have any thought of joining the Novus Ordo church, you might as well stay Protestant. for the past 43 years the N.O. has drifted more and more into protestantism.

Until vatican two the church was one,holy, catholic, and apostolic.

They have adopted Protest prayers,customs, music and even changed the consecration of the chalice to become more ecumenical.

What was the result? People left in large numbers and young people did not want any part of the priesthood.

They are now in a kind of freefall and it will not cease ntil they return to being catholic.

-- TC (Treadmill@234.com), February 03, 2005.

TC

when you walk away, you lose your influence 100%.

Divine Providence is real.

read the papers, dude. get writing to the editors, influence the Church in what way you can. don't just run away.

"pray for a pope".

... and God Bless you, sir.

-- Ian (ib@vertifgo.com), February 03, 2005.

"Probably I'll get a frightful pacing in purgatory for it, but I can't help it. "

Ian: Something tells me you are wrong on that. However if you could remember to put in a few million good words for me I will most likely appreciate that!

-- Michael G. (NoEmail@Nowhere.no), February 03, 2005.

Fight from the inside is hopeless. People write to the bishop. What good does it do? Being the bee buzzing around from the ouside will get more attention.

Following is the rite of peace at the new mass. Do you really have an peace at that moment. Shaking hands with someone that has just been picking their nose or coughing in their hand. You are probably saying to yourself. "Will I catch a cold from this guy?

According to the thinking embodied in the "New Mass," charity and communal harmony require you to busy yourself doing something with everyone else-sing along, march around, listen to the commentator, go here, go there. In the Rite of Peace, all are saying, "peace, peace." But there is no peace. They will not leave you alone that you may find any. Therefore, true to the unfailing policy and method of the Revolution, probably that which has caused more disturbance, distraction, anger (totally justified), and dissension than any other of all the detestable innovations in the "New Mass" is this execrable artificiality called the "Rite of Peace

-- TC (Treadmill234@south.com), February 03, 2005.

TC, you really are a pinhead. Of all the things that changed between the old rite and the new the peace changed the LEAST, and that's what you object to? What is it in the old rite?

Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.

or the peace of the Lord be with you.

To which we reply

Et cum Sprituo tuo

Or, and also with you.

I bet if you really read it, you'd say "wow, that's moving", but then again, you're probably too busy deciding which books of the Bible aren't inspired. For those not as far gone, here you go:

P: Dòmine Jesu Christe,

qui dixìsti Apòstolis tuis:

Pacem relìnquo vobis, pacem mean do vobis; ne respìcias peccata nostra, sed fidem Ecclèsiae tuae; eàmque secùndum voluntàtem tuam

pacificàre et coadunàre dignèris.

Qui vivis et regnas in sàecula saeculòrum. Amen.

P: Pax Dòmini sit semper vobìscum. C: Et cum spiritu tuo.

P: Offèrte vobis pacem.

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), February 03, 2005.

sorry about the formatting, you get the idea

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), February 03, 2005.

Frank'

We do not dialogue with the priest. the acolytes take care of that.

I have see one priest come up the aisle, kissing the women on the aisle. Is that in the book?

It is hard to find two priests that do it the same way. Is that in the book or does he have to stick to some kind of script?

-- TC (Treadmill234@south.com), February 03, 2005.

Christ, our priest of priests said let the children come to me, ate with His flock, allowed women to wash his feet, would you have our priests do less? Where did you get the idea that to be a priest meant to be removed from your flock?

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), February 04, 2005.

Why do people assume what I mean. The mass has developed over centuries into , as one saint put it, "The most beautiful thing this side of Heaven".

Beautiful cathedrals were built, saints were martyred trying to save the mass in England etc. They offerd Our Lord the best that they could.

Along comes V2 and they throw it all out.There is one thing that the ovus ordo people will nevr understand. People love beauty. So they give them something where everyone could participate. The priest becomes one of the group. A president, or presider. The beautiful silence and awe is gone and babel takes its place. There is no respect for the tabernacle, genuflections are much less if at all. I could cie more and more of what has become of the liturgy. Clown masses, motorcycle masses, football helmet masses, you name it, and it isn't done yet.

But I must remember that it is still the same sacrifice as always.

Next time you are at a wake for a dear friend, bring in the clowns. That should go over big.

Well remeer, the Mass is Calvary, no clowns allowed, or wise guy priests cracking jokes. But you N.O.'s keep being part of it and enjoy.

-- TC (Treadmill234@south.com), February 04, 2005.

Mentioning "clown masses" is about as valid a criticism as saying "Hitler was a Catholic". 99.999% of Catholics have never seen a "clown Mass" or "motorcycle Mass" (whatever that is). Attempting to create an image of a body of a billion+ people by pointing to what a few wackos who claim to be members of that body are doing is simply an admission that you have no valid criticisms to offer concerning what the body at large is doing - namely, worshipping our Lord and Savior through the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, in the manner dictated by the Church to which Christ said' "he who hears you hears Me".

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), February 04, 2005.

Motorcycle mass- Fr. father Paul Shanley, Father Jerry,...Saint Anne's Church, San Bernardino.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonval@yahooo.com), February 04, 2005.

I get a kick out of those who so weakly defend the novus ordo, brushing off fact after fact. They bring up that billion catholic stuff. That means they were baptized, but never again saw the inside of the church. If only ten percent of those billion even went to mass, you would not have to close all those chuches. Every large city in America is closing churches by the dozens. Why is there such a shortage of priests among a billion people?

Please don't insult us with that argument.

Just because you have not seen a clown mass does not mean it is not there. I am sure that there are a lot of things that you have not seen, that you do believe.

Have you seen the crucifixion?

-- TC (Treadmill234@south.com), February 04, 2005.

No TC, it's not about the mass, it's about having respect for the Pope and Magesterium and realizing that they, not YOU, are guided by the Holy Spirit in the direction of the church. When you say the things you do you make yourself look like a fool, not the church!

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), February 04, 2005.

One question; Was it me with my foolish little voice, or was, it John Pau(among others) who put the church into a free fall?

Or is the church alive and well and thriving, and I just do not see it?

If you even admit to a problem, ( and you will not), it will be the fault of everyone except John Paul.

If so, you have to at the very least admit that he was an incompetent leader. I do not believe that he is incompetent. He knows exactly what he was doing and of the bevy of appointments that he was making.

Kasper, Weakland, Mahoney,Hubbard, Egan, Law etc etc. What a lineup of good men!

Did he ever chastize any of them? No indeed. Ask yourself an honest question. Why?

If you in your misplaced loyalty do not see it, there is no hope for the church.

As for the Holy Spirit, all 4 of the past popes have never called on Him, even once.

If you can find where they did, please point it out. Specify please.

-- TC (Treadmill234@south.com), February 04, 2005.

Those who deny that the post-Conciliar "popes" and "the bishops in union with them" are Catholic, have no problem with rejecting their authority. However, for those who believe these men are true popes, true Vicars of Christ, the problem becomes more difficult. Be this as it may, there is no question but that the majority of those born to the faith are being asked to follow the directions laid down by the post-Conciliar "pontiffs," and to accept the changes in doctrine, worship and governance that have been initiated since Vatican II, in the name of "obedience." It is therefore of the utmost importance that Catholics understand the nature of their obligations with regard to this virtue.

-- TC (treadmill234@south.com), February 04, 2005.

There have been no changes in doctrine, nor could there ever be. Any such change would make a liar of Jesus Christ Himself.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), February 04, 2005.

Just a little touch of heresy;

A Jewish-Christian Revolution: 3

14/07/2001 Why convert the saved? Eugene Fisher

The Catholic Church does not support organisations which aim to convert Jews. Nor should it, argues the associate director of the Secretariat for Ecumenical and Interreligious Relations at the US Conference of Catholic Bishops. For the Church believes that Judaism is salvific for Jews

-- TC (Treadmill234@south.com), February 05, 2005.

Paul M

"There have been no changes in doctrine, nor could there ever be. Any such change would make a liar of Jesus Christ Himself."

if this is what you truly believe, you will accept a challenge. i am sure that TC can point to a doctrine of the Church that has been changed. you will then prove that it has not.

isn't that fair?

-- Ian (ib@vertifgo.com), February 05, 2005.

The church has of course kept the doctrines of the Incarnation,Crucifixion, and Resurrection.

They have not kept the command of Jesus to go and preach to all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, The Son, and the Holy Ghost. Remember that this is a commandment and not a suggestion.

They have stoppd trying to convert the Jews.The pope has at least twice gone into the synagogues and bowed his head while the Jews prayed for the coming of the Messiah. For a Catholic this is blasphemy. Remember the stearnest warning that Our Lord gave. "He who denies me before men, I will deny before my Father in Heaven".

Should this pope not be concerned with that?

Pope Paul 6th gave the Tiara to the U.N. and wore the Jewish ephod on his own robes.

The church has stopped preaching the gospel and instead 'dialogues" with "our brethren". If they are not with us they are against us. Why don't they believe this anymore?

They have cast aside three dogmatic declarations such as Cantate Domino.

If you care to, look it up and see what it says about other than Catholics.

-- TC (Treadmill234@south.com), February 05, 2005.

* A Heretic is a baptized person who rejects an authoritative teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. A schismatic is a person who refuses communion with a true Pope or refuses communion with true Catholics. An apostate is a person who rejects the Christian faith completely. All heretics, schismatics and apostates sever themselves from the Catholic Church automatically (Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943). Therefore, if one is a heretic he is not a Catholic (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896). And most heretics convince themselves that they are not denying any dogma when they actually are. The novus ordo is guilty of this.

-- TC (Treadmill234@south.com), February 05, 2005.

Federici emphasized the "irreversible" nature of the Church's NEW understanding of its relationship to the Jewish people, arguing on the basis of scriptural and magisterial sources that "none of the inspired Christian sources justifies the notion that the Old Covenant of the Lord with His people has been abrogated or in any sense nullified .... The Church recognizes that in God's revealed plan, Israel plays a fundamental role of her own: the sanctification of the Name in the world. The Church is clear too that the honor of the Name is never unrelated to the salvation of the Jewish people who are the original nucleus of God's plan of salvation .... Christ did not nullify God's plan but rather (serves) as the living and efficacious synthesis of the divine promise" (I, B, 6-8, p. 53). Therefore, Christian witness must take into account "the permanent place of the Jewish people according to God's

They do not deny, “The church’s new understanding of relationship with the Jews. What do they mean by “new understanding”.

You see that is the heresy of V2. A new understanding on so many things.

They do not deny the ex cathedra documents of the pre V2 popes. No indeed, they just have a “new understanding”

Very cunning and misleading many people, but thank God, not the people who hold to tradition. .

-- TC (Treadmill234@south.com), February 05, 2005.

“Many” vs. “All” That which is really in question in regard to the Novus Ordo is whether the change from “for many” to “for all men” involves a change of meaning or not. Most argues it does not. He reasons that the Greek word “polloi,” used by the Evangelists in the accounts of the Last supper (meaning “for many”), is used in other parts of Scripture to mean “all of a large group” (or “all who are many,” as Most puts it); thus, to translate it “for all” is really the same as “for many.”

But, if we examine the actual usage in the Novus Ordo, we find “for all men” in English. We do not find “for all who are many,” but “for all men,” period. Now by no stretch of the imagination can “for all men” mean the same as “for many” or even “for all who are many.” The last two phrases refer to the members of a large exclusive group; “for all men” is exclusive of no one. “For all men” is the official English translation of the Vatican II church.

The Catechism of the Council of Trent explains why “for many,” i.e., the exclusive group, must be used:

“Looking to the efficacy of the Passion, we believe that the Redeemer shed His Blood for the salvation of all men; but looking to the advantages which mankind derive from its efficacy, we find, at once, that they are not extended to the whole, but to a large proportion of the human race... With great propriety, therefore, were the words, ‘for all,’ not used, because here (in the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist) the fruit of the Passion is alone spoken of, and to the elect only did His Passion bring the fruit of salvation.”

-- TC (Treadmill234@south.com), February 05, 2005.