Don't They See How Proud Luther Must Be Of Them?
I don't call 'em "Roman Protestants" for nothing!
Yeah, yeah... yet another blogger has decided to devote a posting throwing a veritable hissy-fit because I won't allow him to post any longer in the combox. I'm sure he'll get over it. But have you noticed that the closer the Motu Proprio gets, the more the Roman Protestants go into meltdown?
But anyhow, I was briefly checking out his blog (with a title that's more befitting a giggly girl or a "sensitive" boy ~ Catholic Ticklefight, or some such nonsense), and noticed the heading "A liturgically orthodox Catholic who enjoys many of the reforms of Vatican II..." A contradiction in terms if there ever was one.
From a posting I did many, many months ago, let's take a gander at some of the "reforms" of the Second Vatican Council... or more correctly, because of the "spirit" of Vatican II. But first, I want to take this opportunity to acknowledge that most of you reading this were raised with the Mass of Paul VI (The New Mass), just like I was. With that said, I ask of you, dear reader, to take this in objectively.
When do you think this may have happened?
"After the Consecration comes the Communion. Many of the congregation have not been to Confession and many have not fasted, not even from alcohol. They approach the Communion table with the others. X X X X X distributed the hosts and offers the chalice. The communicants receive the consecrated bread in the hand and casually drink from the chalice".
Sound like Mass at your local parish? Was it at St. Bozo's in Los Angeles? Church of the Group Hug in Boston? Nope... It was at a Lutheran Midnight "Mass" in Germany, Christmas, 1521.
Now I know darn good and well that the vast majority of folks who swing into The Lair are decent, faithful, loyal Catholics. I know this post is gonna get a lot of folks P.O.'ed. If you're angry, this isn't my intent. I just want to give folks something to consider.
Here are some examples of what Martin Luther did when he instituted the Protestant Revolt in the 1500's.
He got rid of the Mass of the Catechumens and changed it to Liturgy of The Word. Sound familiar?
He got rid of the Mass of the Faithful and changed it to Liturgy of The Eucharist. Sound familiar?
He stopped the "priest" from facing God in The Tabernacle (not that Lutherans have real priests or believe in The Real Presence) and he had them face the congregation instead. Sound familiar?
Luther got rid of unchanging Liturgical Latin and replaced it with the present day, ever changing, vernacular tongue. Sound familiar?
Luther ripped out the Communion Rail and forbade Communion kneeling and on the tongue. He replaced it with Communion standing, in the hand and under both Species. Sound familiar?
Luther added to the formula of the Consecration of the bread the words "quad pro obis tradetur" ("which will be given up for you"), and deleted both "mysterium Fidei ("the mystery of faith") and "pro multis" ("for the many") and replaced it with "for all". Sound familiar?
This last one is very important. Remember, for Catholics, it's always been "pro multis" ("for the many"). Jesus never said "for all". The Holy Bible never said "for all". The Catholic Mass never said "for all"... until Vatican II that is. The change from "for the many" [to "for all"] is flat out dangerous. Here's why... it denies Jesus at sooooo many levels.
There simply is no getting around it... the New Mass is protestant inspired, period. Only a blind man or a fool would argue against the obvious.
And to those who wet their pants in glee over the "reforms" that "the spirit" of Vatican II gave us, just keep in mind that their arguments in favor of "reform" are pretty much the same arguments that luther used.
luther would be proud of those who "enjoy the reforms".
I don't call 'em "Roman Protestants" for nothing!
Yeah, yeah... yet another blogger has decided to devote a posting throwing a veritable hissy-fit because I won't allow him to post any longer in the combox. I'm sure he'll get over it. But have you noticed that the closer the Motu Proprio gets, the more the Roman Protestants go into meltdown?
But anyhow, I was briefly checking out his blog (with a title that's more befitting a giggly girl or a "sensitive" boy ~ Catholic Ticklefight, or some such nonsense), and noticed the heading "A liturgically orthodox Catholic who enjoys many of the reforms of Vatican II..." A contradiction in terms if there ever was one.
From a posting I did many, many months ago, let's take a gander at some of the "reforms" of the Second Vatican Council... or more correctly, because of the "spirit" of Vatican II. But first, I want to take this opportunity to acknowledge that most of you reading this were raised with the Mass of Paul VI (The New Mass), just like I was. With that said, I ask of you, dear reader, to take this in objectively.
When do you think this may have happened?
"After the Consecration comes the Communion. Many of the congregation have not been to Confession and many have not fasted, not even from alcohol. They approach the Communion table with the others. X X X X X distributed the hosts and offers the chalice. The communicants receive the consecrated bread in the hand and casually drink from the chalice".
Sound like Mass at your local parish? Was it at St. Bozo's in Los Angeles? Church of the Group Hug in Boston? Nope... It was at a Lutheran Midnight "Mass" in Germany, Christmas, 1521.
Now I know darn good and well that the vast majority of folks who swing into The Lair are decent, faithful, loyal Catholics. I know this post is gonna get a lot of folks P.O.'ed. If you're angry, this isn't my intent. I just want to give folks something to consider.
Here are some examples of what Martin Luther did when he instituted the Protestant Revolt in the 1500's.
He got rid of the Mass of the Catechumens and changed it to Liturgy of The Word. Sound familiar?
He got rid of the Mass of the Faithful and changed it to Liturgy of The Eucharist. Sound familiar?
He stopped the "priest" from facing God in The Tabernacle (not that Lutherans have real priests or believe in The Real Presence) and he had them face the congregation instead. Sound familiar?
Luther got rid of unchanging Liturgical Latin and replaced it with the present day, ever changing, vernacular tongue. Sound familiar?
Luther ripped out the Communion Rail and forbade Communion kneeling and on the tongue. He replaced it with Communion standing, in the hand and under both Species. Sound familiar?
Luther added to the formula of the Consecration of the bread the words "quad pro obis tradetur" ("which will be given up for you"), and deleted both "mysterium Fidei ("the mystery of faith") and "pro multis" ("for the many") and replaced it with "for all". Sound familiar?
This last one is very important. Remember, for Catholics, it's always been "pro multis" ("for the many"). Jesus never said "for all". The Holy Bible never said "for all". The Catholic Mass never said "for all"... until Vatican II that is. The change from "for the many" [to "for all"] is flat out dangerous. Here's why... it denies Jesus at sooooo many levels.
There simply is no getting around it... the New Mass is protestant inspired, period. Only a blind man or a fool would argue against the obvious.
And to those who wet their pants in glee over the "reforms" that "the spirit" of Vatican II gave us, just keep in mind that their arguments in favor of "reform" are pretty much the same arguments that luther used.
luther would be proud of those who "enjoy the reforms".
posted by Kevin Whiteman at
5:20 AM
18 Comments:
Is you is, or is you aint a Roman Protestant. Mr. the way you're thinkin' is making me sick.
Actually, the folks who support B-16 (who feels that the current missal is an improvement, but that you shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater) on the current missal are the Catholics. (Like Palestrina and Wm. byrd, who wrote music for what to them was the novus ordo.)
the folks who fought for the old missal when the Tridentine missal was imposd on the Church are called "Gallicans", because (like their spiritual descendents) they were mainly French.
Just went and saw it. The gist is "You're mean! You're ignorant! You're unfair! YOU'RE THE REAL PROTESTANTS CUZ YOU DISOBEY THE CHURCH WHICH SAYS TO USE THE NEW MASS!
Yes, Catholic Restorationists -or Rad Trads if you must- do have some real a-holes and Jew haters amongst them. Some bad apples ruin the bunch. We could all be nicer to those who are truly interested, and we could all remember to be more publican and less pharisee.
But as to Cavey and us being prots? Let me borrow a response from novusordowatch.org:
This answer will have two parts. First, let us assume this were true. Let us assume that, yes, we are just Protestants in reverse, we're Martin Luther to the other extreme. So what? The "Spirit of Vatican II" Church does not have a problem with that. In fact, Vatican II even says (see Vatican II's Unitatis Redintegratio, no. 3) that as Protestants, we at the Cave "are correctly accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church" and -- note well! -- we "have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation" because "the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using [us] as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church." There you have it! Lighten up already! We are very honored to be Protestants, since even God Himself makes use of us to save souls! In fact, when we baptize someone, we are using a liturgical action that "must be regarded as capable of giving access to the community of salvation," so stop complaining about us being Protestants. You should be proud that we are Protestants! We expect you to give us episcopal rings and pectoral crosses, sign theological agreements with us, hold joint vesper services with us, and, when one of us passes to eternity, we expect you to imitate Benedict XVI and declare him to have been a "faithful servant" and to have "attained eternal joy"!
Now to the second answer. Let's be serious here. Does the LOTCC assist at or promote an invalid Protestant-modernist worship service? No. Does LOTCC sign theological agreements with Protestant heretics? No. Does LOTCC say that the Holy Ghost uses Protestant sects as means of salvation? No. Does anyone at LOTCC act as though Protestants had an apostolic mandate to preach the Gospel or make society a better place? No. Does LOTCC give away Catholic symbols such as episcopal rings or pectoral crosses and hand them to Protestant laymen dressed up as clergy? No. Does LOTCC invite Protestant clergy to have joint ecumenical worship services and even allow for the building of joint Catholic-Protestant churches, as John Paul II's Directory on Ecumenism says (nos. 137-140)? No. Does LOTCC help any heretic celebrate his false worship "worthily" by lending him whatever may be necessary for it, as John Paul II said his bishops may do (no. 137)? No. Does LOTCC deny, compromise, or equivocate on any doctrine, esp. as taught by the Council of Trent against the Protestants? No.
The "Spirit of V2 "people do all that. The LOTCC doesn't. And yet we are the Protestants? The "Spirit of V2" folks are protestants. They are not the Catholic Church, and that is why we have nothing to do with them.
And this goes double to all my Odox bretheren who do the same, like Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople, affectionately known as "Black Bart" and those participating in heretical groups like the NCC and the WCC!
Umnnnhhh...
The history of the Mass began a lot earlier than Luther began.
If you want a comprehensive and damn-near-totally confusing history of the epiklesis, look it up in the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia.
That's just one example.
"... his blog (with a title that's more befitting a giggly girl or a "sensitive" boy ~ Catholic Ticklefight, or some such nonsense) ..."
Tony's definitely a "Manly Man", and even has another blog called Manly Men in which he routinely takes on radical feminists.
While I don't necessarily share his enthusiasm for some of the "reforms of Vatican II", he's definitely on our side in wanting to see liturgical reform and less monkeying around with the Mass. He's a fairly traditional guy, but I think he's just skeptical that the Motu Proprio will have the effect that many desire.
I really don't think he's an enemy on this. I don't want to speak for Regular Guy Paul, but he's familiar with Tony, and I think he'll back me up on this assessment.
The history of the Mass began a lot earlier than Luther began.
Dad29,
You're right. The Latin Mass, proper, goes all the way back to Pope St Gregory the Great. 5th... 6th century?
Even then, the Latin Mass just didn't fall out of the sky. In it's embryonic form, it's been around beginning with the preaching of Sts. Peter and Paul when they were in Rome.
_____________________________
VSO,
Good to know you got my back!
_____________________________
Jay,
You know that I have no problem with peoiple disagreeing with me. You and I disagree from time to time. Dad29 and I disagree fairly often. Paul and I disagree... hell, all the time!
But I'll be damned if I'll allow anyone to just show up outta nowhere and start talkin' smack.
If Tony doesn't like the fact that I won't allow him to post on the combox, possibly he shouldn't have acted like a 1st class jack-ass to begin with.
You know, Jay... I have been known to go to others peoples blogs and ask some very pointed and hard questions, but what this joker did deserves permanent barring.
The book is closed.
You need help, Kevin, you really do.
Digitalhairshit/Stephanie,
Ahhh... I see now. If anyone has the bad manners to disagree with you or anyone else of your ilk, they are in need of "help".
Hitler and Stalin thought the same way. I recognize you for the fraud that you are.
Noooooow I remember why I banned you many months ago. Thanks for reminding me!
YOU'RE THE REAL PROTESTANTS CUZ YOU DISOBEY THE CHURCH WHICH SAYS TO USE THE NEW MASS!
Hmmmmm....the Church may say to use the new Mass, but she NEVER said to toss the Tridentine Mass. And Vatican II didn't say so either. Paragraph 4 of Sacrosanctum Concilium:
Lastly, in faithful obedience to tradition, the sacred Council declares that holy Mother Church holds all lawfully acknowledged rites to be of equal right and dignity; that she wishes to preserve them in the future and to foster them in every way. The Council also desires that, where necessary, the rites be revised carefully in the light of sound tradition, and that they be given new vigor to meet the circumstances and needs of modern times.
Anita,
When did the actual Text of Vat II documents actually matter, to either the "Spirit of Vatican II" crowd or the "Vatican II was Heresy" crowd?
Maybe if both the deformers and the reform of the deform folks would read the actual text of the VII documents, we'd be getting somewhere.
I'd rather be called a rad trad any day than be Lutheran lite.
There is no such thing as the Spirit of Vatican II Church; there is only the One Holy Catholic Church.
And the positive things said about our brothers and sisters by baptism in the Protestant communities and the remnants of Catholic truth they preserve applies to those born and raised there long after the separation was final, not to those who have enjoyed the fullness of Catholic Faith, the robe and ring and feast, and abandon it for the rags and gruel, maybe nourishing but so deprived, of protestantism.
VSO:
I know a good number of Lutherans (lots of them here in Milwaukee). I've observed their services and practices. Many do take Communion kneeling and on the tongue, and at an altar rail. Also, most older Lutheran churches have an ad orientum altar. The versus populum practice started in the 1960's - they picked it up from the Catholics.
You may ask - and have asked - who cares about what Lutherans do? I answer: if one talks about the practices of another religion, one should do so accurately. I would also recommend that if you want an accurate representation of Lutheran practices and their rationale, you should ask a Lutheran, or even better, a former Lutheran who has had enough sense to swim the Tiber...
Regarding the Words of Consecration (apologies for having to make a second comment here):
1) quod pro vobis tradetur is included in the Words of Consecration in other Catholic Rites.
2) Mysterium Fidei is not included in the Words of Consecration in other Rites.
3) I've always liked the French translation of pro multis: pour la multitud; literally, "for the multitude". I think using that in English would be a good solution.
wow... what a discussion!
Thanks for the post. I NEED this info. My annulment-granted father is dating a woman who is less reason and more faith (i.e. emotional) about Catholicism and the info posted will be helpful if arguments, er, I mean conversations arise in the future.
Eventually when we settle (after my dh finishes school) we're going where there's easy access to Trid Mass and a good Catholic community.
PS: thanks for using "Protestant Revolt" - just what it is and reminds me of Dr. Carroll!
Dave,
Those are good points you raise... but I still win because Amy likes it when I call her "the original Cave-Babe".
So there....
:-P
This comment has been removed by the author.
I agree with Dave that it is helpful to talk to a member of a Protestant denomination, or -- as he says -- a Catholic convert from that denomination, to get a better understanding. I went inside one of their church's once and was suprised they had a crucifix, not just a cross, over the altar (more than you can say for some "New Order" churches).
On a somewhat related note, several years ago -- before the Anglicans/Episcopalians started ordaining women or elevating announced homos to bishop and there was a still a slim hope of them reuniting with Rome -- a very loyal and learned priest (Ph.D/J.D.) told me the Lutherans would come back long before the Anglicans.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home