TRADITIONIS CUSTODES

[KnightofChrist]

1 hour ago, Peace said:

I don't see it as a ban. I would say that fundamentally it puts the decision of whether to celebrate the TLM back in the hands of individual bishops, rather than giving parish priests the discretion to celebrate it without permission from their bishops.

It is a ban with a slow burn, slowly choking out the traditional groups. None of the Non-SSPX traditional societies have a single bishop, not one. The local bishop isn't supposed to allow a parish church to be used for the TLM and he cannot grant any more personal parishes that did not exist before today, 7-16-2021, nor can they permit any creation of new traditional groups.

The traditional societies and groups are not allowed to grow. Any child not allowed to grow will die.

[Peace]

6 minutes ago, KnightofChrist said:

It is a ban with a slow burn, slowly choking out the traditional groups. None of the Non-SSPX traditional societies have a single bishop, not one. The local bishop isn't supposed to allow a parish church to be used for the TLM and he cannot grant any more personal parishes that did not exist before today, 7-16-2021, nor can they permit any creation of new traditional groups.

The traditional societies and groups are not allowed to grow. Any child not allowed to grow will die.

Yeah I think the "slow death" argument has a lot of merit. It seems pretty clear that PF wants to rid the Church of the TLM and that the new regulations are designed to do that.

But I don't think it will be an immediate thing.

I'd say that nixing the TLM is pretty consistent with what the Church laid out in the 60's and 70's though. At least to me it seems that the intention there was to suppress the TLM.

Benedict kind of said that there was never any intention to abrogate the TLM, but that always struck me as a bit of a fiction.

I'm not saying it is a good thing to abrogate the TLM, but I think it is consistent with the institution of the new Mass back in the 60's and 70's. I think its tough to say that they really contemplated that there would be two forms of the western rite in existence at the same time.

Edited July 17, 2021 by Peace

[KnightofChrist]

25 minutes ago, Nihil Obstat said:

I have generally found this conversation not to be very fruitful online. Not in public discussions, anyway.

It is fruitless, pointless, old and no one will change their position.

1 minute ago, Peace said:

Yeah I think the "slow death" argument has a lot of merit. It seems pretty clear that PF wants to rid the Church of the TLM and that the new regulations are designed to do that.

But I don't think it will be an immediate thing.

Of course it's not immediate, that would be too cruel and look too cruel for the Pope of Mercy. 

[Peace]

3 minutes ago, KnightofChrist said:

It is fruitless, pointless, old and no one will change their position.

Why not give it a shot? I've been proven wrong on this site before and admitted as much. If I'm wrong about the SSPX being in schism I'd admit it. It's not something that I have an ideological stance on, to be frank.

 

[KnightofChrist]

Just now, Peace said:

Why not give it a shot? I've been proven wrong on this site before and admitted as much. If I'm wrong about the SSPX being in schism I'd admit it. It's not something that I have an ideological stance on, to be frank.

 

No, thank you. I simply don't have the free time that would be required. Plus, in the past you and I have not really gotten along well. I do not wish to return to that state nor do I wish to increase whatever division may remain between us. Probable that such a discussion between us would lead to a quarrel. 

[Peace]

Just now, KnightofChrist said:

No, thank you. I simply don't have the free time that would be required. Plus, in the past you and I have not really gotten along well. I do not wish to return to that state nor do I wish to increase whatever division may remain between us. Probable that such a discussion between us would lead to a quarrel. 

LOL I quarrel with literally everyone about everything. I chose the name "Peace" to remind myself not to be so darn argumentative all the time!

But yeah as a general matter I think it is a bit concerning how some of the well-meaning trads like you and @Nihil Obstat are a bit sympathetic towards the SSPX. I think the SSPX can be a bit dangerous or seductive for trads because both groups share a certain affinity for the TLM and share some of the same concerns about abuses within the Church. But in my view the SSPX goes far beyond where trads go, into a bit of a dangerous place that's clearly crossed the line.

[Ice_nine]

everywhere I look the world and the church, it all just seems like a giant dumpster fire. 

[Peace]

4 minutes ago, Ice_nine said:

everywhere I look the world and the church, it all just seems like a giant dumpster fire. 

Best place to start is to clean your own home!

[Ice_nine]

5 minutes ago, Peace said:

Best place to start is to clean your own home!

or

[Peace]

6 minutes ago, Ice_nine said:

or

It's actually kind of interesting to think about. A matter a perspective perhaps? The world is actually in fantastic shape isn't it? I mean think about it - our Lord has already walked the Earth, shared the gospel, redeemed the human race. The victory is already won. I think we just forget it sometimes and lost perspective maybe.

Sure the world ain't perfect but things could be worse. Much, much, much worse were God not looking after things. And we now live in a time where literally anyone almost anywhere on the planet can get on the web and learn the truth.

Even say now compared to say 500, 1000, 2000 years ago. I think its a tough argument to make that any of those previous eras were more moral than the world is today, even given all of our current problems.

Edited July 17, 2021 by Peace

[Ice_nine]

3 minutes ago, Peace said:

I mean think about it - our Lord has already walked the Earth, shared the gospel, redeemed the human race.

true

4 minutes ago, Peace said:

Sure the world ain't perfect but things could be worse. Much, much, much worse were God not looking after things.

Was He ever not?

6 minutes ago, Peace said:

I think its a tough argument to make that any of those previous eras were more moral than the world is today, even given all of our current problems.

disagree. Moral progress is a myth. You filthy commie.

[Peace]

3 minutes ago, Ice_nine said:

true

Was He ever not?

disagree. Moral progress is a myth. You filthy commie.

LOL yeah we should go back another 50 years or so. You would need to find a new husband no?

[Nihil Obstat]

32 minutes ago, Peace said:

LOL I quarrel with literally everyone about everything. I chose the name "Peace" to remind myself not to be so darn argumentative all the time!

But yeah as a general matter I think it is a bit concerning how some of the well-meaning trads like you and @Nihil Obstat are a bit sympathetic towards the SSPX. I think the SSPX can be a bit dangerous or seductive for trads because both groups share a certain affinity for the TLM and share some of the same concerns about abuses within the Church. But in my view the SSPX goes far beyond where trads go, into a bit of a dangerous place that's clearly crossed the line.

Honestly my sympathy for them is much more conflicted than you probably even realize. Am I sympathetic towards them? Yes, I have never hidden that. But my sympathy for them, such as it is, has always been highly qualified.

I have no unified theory of traditionalism, and if you watch you will see me criticize traditionalists as a whole very harshly. I do not especially like most traditionalists. Despite being one.

I wonder if you noticed or find it as interesting as I do: I entered this thread by blaming trads for this situation because we are not holy and virtuous and only after that did I take a shot at the progressivist curia who hate the traditional Mass. And yet now here I am shoehorned into defending the SSPX from charges of schism?

And that, in a strange sort of way, represents my own feelings about the Society.

[Ice_nine]

19 minutes ago, Peace said:

LOL yeah we should go back another 50 years or so. You would need to find a new husband no?

in 1970? No, I would not. And also, not in the North if you want to wind the clock back a little further.

Just because slavery is no longer legal, even though it still exists, is not proof of moral progress in general. We kill thousands of pre-born children, screw anything we feel like, have drag queen story hours at the public library. We're a bunch of fat, cowardly addicts and mindless consumers.

We're contemptible in our own special way <3.

Stop trying to see the glass half full

[Norseman82]

I guess the thing to watch for now is how it is implemented on a diocesan level.  I'm in Chicago, so it will be interesting to see what Cardinal Cupich will do (nothing yet on the archdiocesan website).   

[chrysostom]

There are entire reams of argumentation and actual decision-making which connects two things together which, in my mind, simply ought not to be connected.

1. Whether or not TLM can be said

2. Whether or not people who attend TLM are behaving badly

I don't know whose idea it was to connect 1. to 2. but it has always felt extremely inappropriate to me. This sort of thing is the real instrumentalisation of an ancient, venerable, and beloved liturgy which is a spiritual home for so many.

[Ash Wednesday]

I knew that a rollback on Summorum Pontificum was coming, but this was actually harsher than what I had expected or would have liked to have seen. I'm leaving it with the hands of time and the hands of God, though. The TLM survived before 2007 and it will survive after this. It would be interesting to see how the topic is approached when there are no generations left that would have any bias or opinions about the TLM and life before or after Vatican II.  

And I know the response is "this is a litmus test regarding loyalty to the Church" with regards to whether or not people will go to the SSPX, but on the other hand ....where is the litmus test for everything else on the opposite end? German clergy are allowed to openly defy the CDF and bless gay couples, but heaven forbid a young priest wants to say the old mass.  

Where I live in the UK it will be interesting to see if the parishes nearby will still be allowed to keep things as they are -- two parishes near me offer both forms of the Mass and I don't see any controversies or rocking of the boat going on, so I think the reasonable thing would be to not force people's hands. The UK bishops should just be glad to see anyone in church at all.    

 

[KnightofChrist]

8 hours ago, Peace said:

LOL I quarrel with literally everyone about everything. I chose the name "Peace" to remind myself not to be so darn argumentative all the time!

But yeah as a general matter I think it is a bit concerning how some of the well-meaning trads like you and @Nihil Obstat are a bit sympathetic towards the SSPX. I think the SSPX can be a bit dangerous or seductive for trads because both groups share a certain affinity for the TLM and share some of the same concerns about abuses within the Church. But in my view the SSPX goes far beyond where trads go, into a bit of a dangerous place that's clearly crossed the line.

I've sympathized with the SSPX for 20+ years now. Still Catholic, still believe the Pope is the Pope, even when he does bad things, even wicked things. I still believe Vatican II was an actual Church Council, still believe the NO is a valid Mass in which our Blessed Lord comes down from heaven in the Holy Eucharist. 

The SSPX are not without faults, but not the boogie men people make them out to be. 

[Anomaly]

7 hours ago, Ice_nine said:

true

Was He ever not?

disagree. Moral progress is a myth. You filthy commie.

My cynical answers are

possibly a person, not a diety 

No, and if so, not the complete control that lazy people wish. 
 

agree, in general.   But many people in general always seek a new depravity and try to get others to go along. 
 

As far as being married to another race in 1970, LOL.  It would not have had the opportunity for peace or joy general normalcy you enjoy now.  I was there. 
 

And congratulations on your marriage.  May you always remember to seek (and be) the joy in this world for yourself and your spouse.   

[Ash Wednesday]

I won't touch the subject of the SSPX with a 10 foot pole. I've seen too many good Catholics otherwise getting along fine completely fall out over the subject. I've listened to both sides of the argument about what their status is and decided the subject is above my pay grade anyway. I don't expect a pop quiz about them when I die.