Hello everyone, just logging on after a long day. I don't post here as often as I used to--a direct result of the traditionalist flood. It's a bit like an oil spill, really. And I have to say that to be honest--I know this thread will bloat into a traditionalism debate just like all the others do. I wish this very fact would alert the trads that their views are not welcome, and they would kindly leave... but that's not how oil spills work, is it? No, no wishing it away. The Greenspun landscape is changed forever. My once favorite hangout is blackened. I used to be able to debate without my blood boiling, but now I can't do that, and it disturbs my peace.

But enough of the regulars are around to read this, so this is really addressed to them. No, that won't prevent trad bloat (nothing can prevent it) but I'm just stating authorial intent.

I went from sublime happiness to tension recently, and I need to try and put my finger on why. Sometimes it helps to put one's thoughts on a computer screen, and sometimes it helps even more to stick it up and get some reflections.

Part of it might be that I have been terribly shocked by the strength of anti-Catholic and anti-religious convictions in some people my age. They breathe their hatred so heavily that reason and debate is worthless--no sound argument can even be completed before "XTIANS SUXORS THEY RAPE CHILDREN" is burped out in some form or another. Goodness, the world hates us. I look out and see a whole army, a dark legion of hedonists, just like the Uruk-Hai orcs at Helms Deep.

But we're talking about more than a piddling 100,000 here. I mean, the sea of hate just stretches out into the horizon. It will never end, and I feel so much like Peter sinking into the ocean when I think about how much hatred is out there. My faith is that the consolation of Christ is right in front of me, waiting for me, but something inside of me ruptures my peace. What is it, what is it?

I have hope for the world, but for the moment it is a theoretical, a doctrinal hope. I know that the Lord has come to save, not to condemn, because that it what the Church teaches and I believe her. I also fear the mortal and viscious sin of despair. But my heart rages with agony at so many people turned away. My isn't broken--it is trampled and spat upon, burned and eaten. I can't share my faith! I can't share it! It dies upon leaving my lips. I want to be a fisher of men but my bait is plastic and sour.

I'm conflicted. I want to be a humble and meager servant but I want to be in the front lines of the culture war. I want to be silent and obedient but also a hero of the "true Chuch, terrible as an army with banners." I want to grab the darkness of the world, rip away the obscurity, and blind them with the light of Christ, and say, "See your Maker! Tremble, fear, and come home to the banquet of the Lord!"

"He who seeks to be the first will be the last and the servant of all." Yes! That's what I want. I don't care about my name; let me be invisible and small in the world if only God can let me not be a waste.

Oh, but the incredible odds--thousands to one; it makes my stomach flip-flop. I'm Peter in the ocean again; I have fear, I lack faith, I'm not clever, nobody will listen to me, and some people will die--really die--and I am powerless before them. Maybe it isn't my fault; maybe I did all I could do. But if a doctor cries when his patient dies, then how could a seminarian, or a priest, feel in a desert of faith?

The New Evangelization. It's like trying to stop the Missippi river with you hand; it's like throwing a bucket of water on the Sahara.

Blast. I'm repeating past posts. Here's little Skoo again all in a tizzy. Boohoo--have a cookie, welcome to the real world. Well, I admit there's something not quite rational in here, but like every time I'll feel better eventually and come back to write about it. Goodness it's a nasty pattern of behavior I'm getting into.

Anyway, pray for me and for the world.

-- Skoobouy (skoobouy@hotmail.com), November 13, 2003

Answers

Skoobouy,

I can understand how you feel. There is hope however. As an Episcopalian attending RCIA I also have some misgivings but they are a bit different. My wife and three children are Catholics and I attend Catholic mass with them. The church that I have called home (Episcopal) for 36 years has 2.3 million members in the US and losses more every year. It has now ordained a divorced and now openly gay bishop with a majority of support from his collegues. The church I grew up with is dying morally. It stands for nothing.

Meanwhile, you are and I plan to be a member of the Catholic Church. She has written doctrine in the Catechism and despite what some members feel never changes Her doctrine. Despite recent problems with sexual abuse the Church has not adjusted Her teachings.

I have lived in the south for most of my life and becoming Catholic is very alien to me. I am surrounded by Methodists, Baptists, Episcopalians, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc. I have fought (friendly) some recent battles with people of these faiths including my own mother. I have done the best I can in just a few months to learn all I can about the Church and I must say She is easy to understand and agree with.

I continue to learn about my new faith. I now see the protestant faiths as easy and seductive. They are optimistic and seem to feel a few good deeds and a little faith go a long way. This has been my life until this year. The Catholic faith is hard and difficult for many. It is difficult to me because I am a sinner. For people who have a strong dose of God's grace it is easy. The fact that it is hard tells me I am on the right track. This is THE faith. I SHOULD struggle to meet the Church's teachings.

The Catholic church has 1 billion members worldwide and 70 million in the US. It continues to grow. To this southern protestant, the members of the Catholic faith were alien and rare. I now realize the Church is indeed "universal" and I am working on coming to terms with the alien.

Honest mom I won't be worshipping the pope.

-- David F (dqf@cox.net), November 13, 2003.

The pope is the head of the Church. I am to obey him on doctrinal issues. Some people feel that Catholics worship him like God. We are to obey him but do not worship him or am I wrong?

-- David F (dqf@cox.net), November 13, 2003.

Skoobouy, Good to hear from you.

I understand what you're saying.

I try to be positive then I get perturbed and say/post when I shouldn't.

We all have out battles.

BTW, I read Thomas Merton's books, The Seven Storey Mountain and No Man is an Island. I will read more, when I can. Very good. Thank you for mentioning them.

God bless,

-- john placette (jplacette@catholic.org), November 13, 2003.

Perhaps it's the Holy Ghost shocking you into the realization of the gravity of our situation in the Church.

The very people you consider such a dark influence on this forum and perhaps upon the Church may only be that way in your mind and not in reality. It really could be that you are actually wrong in your outlook; perhaps the holier than thou tag, like most of the rest of the tags, are affixed in reverse. I figure if I've been wrong in my thinking in the past, and I have, that maybe some of you in here could be wrong in your thinking right now on a couple of matters.

As you have every freedom to post your gut feelings, I take the same liberty here; principally it's that while the current laity and hierarchy have been painting a rosy present and future for our Catholic Church, you are coming into direct, tangible evidence to the contrary in the world at large. The world hates the Catholic Church, and the more we immerse ourselves in the things of the world, which is the principle fault of the modern Catholic, then the more we are lured into their game and their ways. Problem is, the World is better at the ways of the world than we Catholics are, and we will lose that game, and our Faith in the process. Lose our Faith, that is, only if we allow that to happen. It's exactly what's been happening, and that is in fact what you are witnessing.

We as a Church are about to get crucified by the whole world.

Honestly, do you think us trads are really that stupid, uneducated and lacking in faith? Perhaps it would be a matter of aquiring of the very sort of charity that you find missing around you that would, for yourself, be required for you to see that your traditionalist bretheren, if you will, are your secret allies instead of your known enemies. Perhaps it would be shocking to find out how much so.

I know well how you feel about us trads, and I don't intend to change your mind now. But give it some reflection the next time you stop for a visit in front of the Blessed Sacrament, and you ask Him if that's not the case.

You will end up, in the long run, coming to the side of the tradionalists Catholics, make no mistake. As abhorent a thought as they may seem to you now.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), November 13, 2003.

I wish this very fact would alert the trads that their views are not welcome, and they would kindly leave

No showing us the Spirit of Vatican II love, understanding, and dialogue, then?

I'll feel better eventually

Keep heart, S. Read Robert's message in the "A Note of Thank You" thread. A very moving, humbling testimony to Mary, the saints, and Our Lord working through this forum -- not "blackened", but, thank God, yielding sweet smelling Little Ways.

-- Jaime Esquierva (nobis_peccatoribus@yahoo.com), November 13, 2003.

"Honestly, do you think us trads are really that stupid, uneducated and lacking in faith?"

"We trads," Emerald. Not "us trads." L@L.

Hi Skoobouy,

Maybe it's Divine Providence that my Bible study's passage tonight includes the following:

Romans 5:3-8 -- "...we even boast of our afflictions, knowing that affliction produces endurance, and endurance, proven character, and proven character, hope, and hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out into our hearts through the holy Spirit that has been given to us. For Christ, while we were still helpless, yet died at the appointed time for the ungodly. Indeed, only with difficulty does one die for a just person, though perhaps for a good person one might even find courage to die. But God proves his love for us in that while we were still sinners Christ died for us."

God bless you in your vocation! In your sadness, lean on Our Lord and be His instrument. I know that He will work through you in amazing ways!

AMDG,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), November 13, 2003.

You don't have to be a trad to realize "the gravity of our situation in the Church." You just have to be a trad to blame it on the Magisterium. And that'll happen to me over my dead body.

I will die faithful to Christ, working through the Church, and affirming her ancient traditions as passed down by the Fathers and reiterated by Trent, Vatican I and II.

-- Skoobouy (skoobouy@hotmail.com), November 13, 2003.

David F.,

God bless, keep up the good work, and don't worship the Pope. He hates that. :)

-- Skoobouy (skoobouy@hotmail.com), November 13, 2003.

In the name of honesty, Mateo, you might point out that the link you provide is of a group that has taken it upon themselves to elect their own "Pope".

You are well aware that this is no more a representative of tradtional Catholicims itself than posting a clown mass picture or some such thing is of yours.

Since Skoobouy has called, in this forum, the posting of clown pictures and such something akin to an evil act, I would suggest that he now jump your case for what you just did.

Again, lacking a supportable case, this is the way such things go, is it not?

Consistency is key, in more ways than just one.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), November 13, 2003.

And I will die a slave to the Blessed Virgin and as someone sworn to uphold the belief and practices of Holy Mother Church.

I suppose we could laud ourselves all day and make ourselves feel good.

But if I were to reach out a hand in friendship, it would not be taken. That's when you know the world hates you.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), November 13, 2003.

Sedevacantists are the ultimate extreme of a movement that is already extremist. Though the term "schismatic" flies fast and furious in discussions between "traditionalists" and followers of the current teaching of the Church, these guys genuinely are in self-proclaimed schism, by any definition of the term, not only publicly denying the authority of the Pope (the past several Popes actually), but going so far as to elect their own "pope". These whackos have no more in common with the majority of "trads" than cookie and grape juice "masses" have to do with the current rite of the Holy sacrifice of the Mass as defined by Holy Mother Church. As Emerald so rightly said, such cases - attempts at condemnation of either the current rite of Mass or the former rite - are utterly unsupportable. It would be well if people stopped trying.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 13, 2003.

"You are well aware that this is no more a representative of tradtional Catholicims itself than posting a clown mass picture or some such thing is of yours."

This again is schismatics' multiplication by division. I know you'll figure it out soon.

My point is this: just as you don't deem these traditionalists good enough to be part of your version of "traditionalism," I don't see any need to believe that traditionalists disobedient to the pope and their bishops (setting up their own churches, etc) are a valid part of tradionalism. To be a traditionalist is to live the virtue of obedience. To believe that through their disobedience the Catholic Faith will be saved is just as impossible as believing protestantism was destined to save the Holy Bible.

But you are right: they aren't authentic traditionalists.

AMDG,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), November 13, 2003.

"This again is schismatics' multiplication by division. I know you'll figure it out soon."

It'll work as an objection until I do. Then what? lol! Just teasing.

Actually I know what you are saying; it's not like I don't get it, it's that I disagree with it. But I really do understand what you are saying. Maybe sometime soon on another thread.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), November 13, 2003.

"As Emerald so rightly said, such cases - attempts at condemnation of either the current rite of Mass or the former rite - are utterly unsupportable. It would be well if people stopped trying."

Paul,

I didn't post the link to "condemn the former rite" of the Mass. My personal opinion is that the Tridentine Mass (as well as the current mass in Latin) should have much wider usage. This is in line with the stated objectives of Vatican II and Pope John Paul II.

My point of posting (which I think Emerald sees) is that the group in question can safely defend their actions using the logic that other "dissenting traditionalist" group uses:

1) The "we're not changing doctrine" defense.

2) The "you can't prove we're in schism" defense (heck, they think that somebody else than JP II is pope).

3) The "we just broke a little Canon Law" defense.

4) The "we're here to save tradition and you're going to thank us" defense.

-------------

OK, so I'll explain the "multiplication by division" thing. protestants (because they have no anchor) have tended to split as protestantism has grown. Hence...

Well, there you go.

AMDG,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), November 13, 2003.

Matt;
You strike a chord with me. Every Catholic knows the world has changed. Faith hasn't changed. The Holy Spirit hasn't departed for any ''trad'' pastures.

The Church marches on, and some Catholics are hard up for perseverance. They want to retreat back into the Tridentine womb, where all you hear in the church is ''a pin drop.'' Where we were 50 years ago. I know it seems like Paradise looking back.

No one seems to pray anymore, for the triumph of Jesus Christ over this world. If we're missing before the action starts, who's going to greet Him when He returns?

Not the Pharisees. Not the isolationists who were trying to keep protestants out of Christ's flock. Not the guardians of Tradition who disowned the Church on grounds of illegitimacy and heresy. They'll pass on the tribulations and Armageddon.

They want Paradise in this life. A comforting Church, with no English or Spanish or VietNamese or other language heard by the faithful. Only Latin. Our heritage, and if it was good enough for Nero; dang, it's good enough for trads!

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 14, 2003.

"OK, so I'll explain the "multiplication by division" thing. protestants (because they have no anchor) have tended to split as protestantism has grown. Hence..."

The division in Protestantism occurs in the arena of doctrine; in the various deviations from doctrines is where at work is the principle of division.

The first casualty is the Sacraments, severing all connection to the divine realities: what now do we have in common with them?

Baptism? Sometimes.

The Blessed Sacrament? Never, really.

Confession? Nope.

Holy Orders? Nahh...

Marriage? Well, sure.

Extreme Unction? Nope.

Confirmation? No.

When one has severed one's self from the Sacraments, one has severed themselves from salvation. This is the why and the where of Unity, and the entire reason for the existence of the Pontiff. He is charged to serve these things, and us in these things.

The Papacy is integral to our Faith, but it is not really the papacy that is the sum of the Protestant's separation from us, but only a part of it. They complain about the papacy bitterly, and lately we propose it in a manner which makes it appears as if it were the sum of the gulf between us and them.

It most certainly is not the sum of it, or even the half of it.

So when...

"Matt; You strike a chord with me. Every Catholic knows the world has changed. Faith hasn't changed. The Holy Spirit hasn't departed for any ''trad'' pastures."

...it strikes no chord with me. The Faith itself has not nor could ever change, but it is in fact the case that the modern Catholic's perception and practice of The Faith has in fact changed. It reflects something of the Protestant's loss of the divine realities.

The comparison of traditionalists to Protestants cannot stand. Not when the traditionalist Catholic keeps, or strives to keep, the Holy Faith whole and undefiled. This includes the Papacy itself.

The modernist's aim is to strike at the Head, at the Vicar of Christ. The best way to accomplish this, and the most cunning, is to foster a common understanding of the papacy to mean something that is off principle; to give it a character that misses the essence of it. This is what I mean when I say that much of the disagreement that occurs between the Traditionalists and the NeoCatholics is centered around the latter's failure to comprehend the nature of the ordinary and supreme magisterium of the Catholic Church. The quick out for the latter is to blame the former for rejecting the Papacy outright. Nonsense.

Matters of obedience are well worth looking into to see if the principles of Catholicism regarding hierarchy have been violated or not by traditionalists. Accusations of violations of canon law are worth looking into to see if excuses are being made of or not.

But the investigation of the above is either incomplete, or not done at all, by the accusers of the brethren. It is too careless a conclusion to make to be comparing traditional Catholics to Protestants when the comparison fails in all ways except in matters relating to hierarchical authority, when one has not adequately investigated the truth of the latter.

In a word, you're rendering sloppy theories that do not fit the facts. I don't mean to sound insulting; just shooting as straight as I'm able.

The "anchor" you refer to can't simply be the Papacy, but the Papacy and all the rest of what Catholicism is as well. Modernism just loves to mistake the part for the whole without saying it outright, leaving the flock to draw the deviant conclusion for themselves. This way modernism is "held harmless" while the flock suffers by their own hand from ingesting the pill... this way it can continue to operate unchecked into the future.

When you have all the doctrines of the Faith, including all that's related to the Papacy, then you can't avoid being a traditional Catholic; and I do mean that kind of traditional Catholic... not to fight over the pink-slip on a word.

About traditionalists as a dark influence, look deeper:

"Do not consider me that I am brown, because the sun hath altered my colour: the sons of my mother have fought against me, they have made me the keeper in the vineyards: my vineyard I have not kept."

Canticles 1:5

There's more at work here than simple accusations.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), November 14, 2003.

"The division in Protestantism occurs in the arena of doctrine; in the various deviations from doctrines is where at work is the principle of division. "

What doctrine divides you from "Pope Pius XIII's" Traditionalism?

They've got the "reject Vatican II" conspiracy...and the Masonic conspiracy...and the "Vatican smoke of Satan" conspiracy. Sounds like they are part of the traditionalists that are here to save the Catholic Church. What "divides" you from your brother traditionalists?

Multiplication by division.

AMDG,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), November 14, 2003.

"The division in Protestantism occurs in the arena of doctrine;"

This is not a correct statement. Sometimes, protestantism divides simply because some church-goers like pastor Joe-Bob, and other church-goers like pastor Billy-Bob.

Again: what doctrine divides you and Pope Pius XIII?

AMDG,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), November 14, 2003.

"In a word, you're rendering sloppy theories that do not fit the facts. I don't mean to sound insulting; just shooting as straight as I'm able."

You may hold such an opinion; but that does not make it so. The facts are quite clear (even on a most basic level). Your defense of part of the fragmented traditionalist movement (including those who can't be obedient to their bishops nor the Pope) has made you put on blinders so that a clear proof showing them to be schismatic doesn't get through to you. You're a "true believer" in the schism. How could it get through to you?

"The "anchor" you refer to can't simply be the Papacy, but the Papacy and all the rest of what Catholicism is as well. Modernism just loves to mistake the part for the whole without saying it outright, leaving the flock to draw the deviant conclusion for themselves. This way modernism is "held harmless" while the flock suffers by their own hand from ingesting the pill... this way it can continue to operate unchecked into the future. "

You know, when Robert (I think that is his name) posted how he's abandoning the "Novus Ordo" (read Catholic) Church for some schismatic church's seminary, Faith counted the number of references to Mary vs. Our Lord and complained that the abundance of references to Mary was a red flag for her (no doubt, she's protestant). The natural Catholic logic is: loving Our Lady brings us closer to her Son, Our Lord. But she's using the same "conspiracy theory" technique that you use to point out what you perceive as "modernist heresies." To her, the references to Mary are her version of a "modernist heresy." Somehow, despite Faith not saying that Mary is bad, the secret (heretical) meaning was that Mary is more important than Our Lord.

This is the problem that results when everyone appoints themselves as personal heresy analyst for the Christianity. There's a potential conspiracy in every statement made, if you can convince yourself enough.

AMDG,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), November 14, 2003.

"About traditionalists as a dark influence, look deeper: "

I have no problem with traditionalists, as I am a traditionalist--I love the Tradition of Catholicism. I do have a problem with schismatics.

When you realize that the disobedience of "Pope Pius XII" is no different than SSPX or any other schismatic group (I'm sure there are plenty), then we won't have problems with the term traditionalist. Currently, you believe that disobedience to a bishop's temporal authority (as expressed in Canon Law) is a valid expression of traditionalism. I believe that such people should not be included in authentic Catholic "traditionalism." There is no loyalty in disobedience to the Papacy.

AMDG,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), November 14, 2003.

"Matters of obedience are well worth looking into to see if the principles of Catholicism regarding hierarchy have been violated or not by traditionalists. Accusations of violations of canon law are worth looking into to see if excuses are being made of or not. "

Is this fancy speak for "I'm covering my eyes so I can't see these people breaking Canon Law"?

I listed a litany of violations of Canon Law, and what was your response: "Hey, I personally didn't do any of these," therefore traditionalism is innocent. You tried to sidestep the reality that traditionalist schismatics have broken Canon Law as much as they can. And somehow, you claim that your hands are clean, even when you approve of their disobedience.

AMDG,

Mateo

PS--Sorry for the thread hijack, Skoobouy.

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), November 14, 2003.

Skoobouy, after reading your original post on this thread, the first thing that popped into my head was that you have a martyr complex. I think you'd be a lot happier and would have all that weight and sadness lifted off your shoulders if you gave up the idea of "Poor me, I'm a martyr for my Faith, and it's sooo hard, ouch!" and instead you should realize that Christ suffered infinately more than you ever will, and He never complained while doing it.

If you want to be rewarded in heaven for your earthly sufferings, then you must not be rewarded here on earth. You can't have both. Having someone to complain to (except a Confessor or a spouse), i.e. this forum, is a form of earthly reward that you are taking. Having someone to listen to your problems is a great comfort. While you are doing this, though, you are lessening your heavenly reward. Everything has to balance so if you've already been rewarded for your sufferings here, then you won't be rewarded for them in heaven.

Another thing I see from your post is that you have this idea that everyone hates you (typical of someone with a martyr complex) and that everyone hates your religion. I think you are confusing different beliefs with hate. I don't hate you because you are Novus Ordo. I don't hate any Novus Ordos. I don't hate anyone, not even Satan himself. Most people, Catholic or not, are this way. "Love the sinner, hate the sin." Love the people (pray for them, hope they get to heaven) but hate their sins and/or their false beliefs. Feel sorry for and disgusted with the devil, while rejecting him. Hate nothing but sin. Most thinking people, whether Buddhists, Agnostics, Muslims, Catholics, or anything else, think and act this way.

Dislike is different. I can dislike Hindus all I want. You can dislike Trads all you want. But you are still bound to pray for us, meaning, you still have to love us! :) And we have to love you, and all others we believe are in error.

Skoobouy, I think you just got bogged down with misinterpreting error as hate. They are both wrong, even evil if you like, but they are different. Most people these days don't hate. People have been taught "tolerate, tolerate, tolerate" for so many centuries now that it has finally sunk in.

Don't feel like the world hates you or hates Catholicism just because the world may not like you or your beliefs.

-- Psyche +AMDG+ (psychicquill@yahoo.com), November 14, 2003.

"Skoobouy, after reading your original post on this thread, the first thing that popped into my head was that you have a martyr complex."

This is one of the best examples of projection that I've seen on the forum! L@L

AMDG,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), November 14, 2003.

When the name is ''psyche'' you have to expect some psychobabble, Friends.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 14, 2003.

Looking at this and many message boards, amd I the only one who can seamlessly switch between a tridentine mass and a traditional leaning Novus Ordo(meaning no altar girls, no EMEs, traditional hymns and use of communion rail) and not think anything of it? I realise that Pope John Paul II while solid on his doctrine, is not the forceful leader that Pope St. Pius X was, that would cleanse the church, but at the same time, he is the Pope and the viccar of Christ, but still human. Traditionalists have to realise not every mass celebrated with the normative/Novus Ordo missal is the same, and many parishoners that go to these masses are on the same side of the culture wars as you are.

Again as I said in a previous post, I realise why people become traditionalists, I understand that in some diocese', going to a "independent" parish may be the only viable option between going to a hetrodox parish that will cause one to lose their and their familes faith. I realise there are in this era, as there were in the eraly days of the "reformation" and during the Arian heresy, that Bishops are of poor quality, but I have hope that the church will get though this. Yes, outside the core of the faith, Pope John Paul II has had some lapses in judgment when dealing with peace/ecumenical issues, but should Assisi or the Kissing of the Koran constantly be brought up, while ignoring many of Pope John Paul II encylicals that are quite ortohdox?

-- John B (rftech10@yahoo.com), November 14, 2003.

Hi Matteo,

No, it's ok. I did predict this would happen, after all, didn't I? Even if I hadn't said anything about the Trads, one of them would have stuck out and said something goofy.

That's why I believe Greenspun is dead. Hardly any thread escapes "Trad bloat".

Psyche: interesting notion. However, if you read the same forums I do, you would see why I call it "hate". It isn't simply error; it's down-right, Christians-should-be-beaten, mouth-frothing visceral revulsion. Please excuse my melancholy.

Thing is, although I admit my first post was rather self-indulgent, Catholic literature about the baseness of the world does hold a certain pride of place in our Church's history, doesn't it? And besides, if I wanted praise, I wouldn't have posted in a thread where I knew I would just be laughed at by Trads, now would I.

John B., welcome. That was a very nice post of yours, and I applaud your wish to reconcile conflict. I also understand and sympathize with people who are scandalized by stupid happy-clappy Masses.

Unfortunately, there is simply no such thing in the Catholic Church as an "independent parish." It doesn't exist. Ordination demands communion with the bishop, and priests who break that communion do not have the canonical right to perform the sacramemnts. "Rent-a- priests" are in the same exact situation--they marry, break communion, and continue to practise. They are also in a conspiracy to coerce the Church to grant them legitimacy by organizing and drawing people away from sanctioned Catholic parishes.

"Communion" does not mean "slavish conformity." Individual priests have enough legitimate autonomy that they can celebrate high liturgies no matter what the bishop says. Sometimes they can't use the Tridentine missal, but nothing can prevent a priest from celebrating like they do in the Brompton Oratory in London, for example. (They have the most fantastic Sacosanctum Concilium Latin Mass I have ever seen; hardly distinguishable from the Tridentine).

-- Skoobouy (skoobouy@hotmail.com), November 15, 2003.

St Agnes in St. Paul MN and Assumption Grotto in Detroit are also very similar to Brompton Oratory, sadly parish' such as these are few and far between.

As for "independent" or SSPX parish', if their orders are valid, and yes, that does become a big question when it comes to "independent" parish(Though SSPX orders are accepted as valid without question by Rome), the worst can be said is they are equivlent to Eastren Orthdox. At best, what can be said of the SSPX is that they are in a illregular relationship with Rome, and that can not even be said about others groups such as CMRI, SSPV, SGG, etc.....

I thank God that I have yet to be forced to make a choice to attend a non diocean parish, and in a majority of diocese', there are options avilable to attend a reverent mass such as traditional leaning Novus Ordo parish such as the one I go to, a Indult that is in a reasonable location and held during a reasonable time, or in a handful of diocese', the Anglican Use mass, but like I said, I am thankful I have options. If I was in LA, Pheonix, large parts of the Bay Area or in larg parts of the South where there wasnt the "ethnic" Catholisicm that preserved many traditional aspects of the faith in the face of the "Sprit of Vatican II" in the Midwest and North, I honestly do not know what choice I would make. Its sad that so many faithful Catholics have to suffer like they are doing, and because of this situation, I can not out of hand condemn faithful, and yes I mean faithful Catholics that attend SSPX chapels. I guess its a no win choice between cannonical or material schism, and a choice that no faithful Catholic should be forced to make.

-- John_B (rftech10@home.com), November 15, 2003.

Skoobouy,

I promise that I continue to "pray for [you] and for the world."

I had been wondering what happened to you, and now I know. It's the same thing that has me within a centimeter of losing my mind. I know what you're thinking ... "The pseudo-traditionalists are driving JFG crazy." But no. It's not they who are doing it. They are merely following their demon-inspired, animalistic instincts. What is driving me to the brink is the cowardice (or phenomenal imprudence) of the Moderator, who has so far failed to ban the psedo-trads.

You wrote: "But enough of the regulars are around to read this, so this is really addressed to them. No, that won't prevent trad bloat (nothing can prevent it) but I'm just stating authorial intent."
You were wrong. The Moderator "can prevent it."

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), November 16, 2003.