Tradition?

[james]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Mar 1 2005, 12:16 AM']


I don't trust anything that the New York Times puts forth, let alone anything having to do with the Catholic Church.  Try using Vatican numbers.  And you call yourself Traditional, relying on a liberal rag like the Times?



[/quote]
Actually, the only reason I am aware of the NY Times poll is because it was reprinted in an article in "Latin Mass" magazine, and I do call Latin Mass magazine traditional. You can read the article here:

[url="http://www.seattlecatholic.com/article_20031208.html"]http://www.seattlecatholic.com/article_20031208.html[/url]

Latin Mass has no reason to doubt the NY Times figures and neither do I. They reflect reality.

Try using Vatican numbers? They're the ones who claim that the church is undergoing a "new springtime" of "spiritual renewal." This is their interpretation of a 350 percent decline in new ordinations to the priesthood over the past 30 years. This is a renewal? I'm sorry but the Vatican's take on these matters is not in keeping with reality.

Edited March 1, 2005 by james

[Cam42]

[quote]Actually, the only reason I am aware of the NY Times poll is because it was reprinted in an article in "Latin Mass" magazine, and I do call Latin Mass magazine traditional.[/quote]

And if the editors told you to jump how high would you? Latin Mass Magazine is hardly an authoritative source. While I don't disagree with everything that they say, I wouldn't use it as a definitive source.

It would be like me saying, the PGA tour is undergoing major reforms this upcoming year. How do I know? I read a poll about it in Golf Digest. Therefore it must be true.

While Latin Mass Magazine has some very good things, it is hardly a definitive source. It is mainly opionion.

[quote]Latin Mass has no reason to doubt the NY Times figures and neither do I. They reflect reality.[/quote]

They reflect one aspect of reality. The indult. They don't reflect all of it. However, that is acceptable, because they are addressing a niche. It is their business to promote one aspect, which is precisely what they do. They deal with the Traditionalist movement within the Church (one that I have already said that I support).

However, I am not concerned with what Latin Mass Magazine thinks, I am more interested in what you think, when it comes to the New York Times. I contend that there is no credence in it because they are baised against the Catholic Church. Do you agree or disagree? If you agree, how can you quote them? If not, how can you call yourself Traditional? It is a progressive rag, IMHO.

Cam42

[Cam42]

[quote]I don't need to read an article in Latin Mass magazine or see a poll in the NY Times to confirm reality. There is a serious crisis of faith in the church in the laity and in the clergy all the way up the hierarchy.[/quote]

Then why quote it? Why use quotes from Latim Mass Magazine at all? You are contradicting yourself.

[quote]I believe that for the Vatican to state that we are experiencing a "new springtime" is insane. The church is, in large part, in a state of apostasy.[/quote]

It is great to know your position.....finally. It is a heretical statement to say that the Church is in a state of apostasy. I would assume that the small part of the Church that is ok, is the "traditional" movement, including the SSPX, SSPV, and CMRI. Those who do not recognize the full authority of the Holy Father, are they the part of the Church that is ok?

To state that the Church, at large, is in a state of apostasy is a heretical statement.

That statement rings of the truth that is contained in CCC 675. You are persecuting the Church in a way that can only veiwed as putting the Church on trial.

[quote]Before Christ's second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth575 will unveil the "mystery of iniquity" in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh. (CCC 675)[/quote]

By definition, it is ubsurd to state that the Church is in a state of apostasy. Unless of course you think that Jesus Christ is totally repudiating Himself.

[quote]....apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith.... (CCC 2089)[/quote]

The Catechism goes on to say about the unity of the Church:

[quote]In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. [b]But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church[/b] - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame." The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism - do not occur without human sin:

Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers. (CCC 817)[/quote]

Notice it doesn't say anything about the Church being to blame. And to hold the Chruch responsible for the actions of certain men is an incorrect notion.

Finally, to confirm that your notion of apostasy is incorrect, is confirmed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

[quote]Conversion to Christ, the new birth of Baptism, the gift of the Holy Spirit and the Body and Blood of Christ received as food have made us "holy and without blemish," [u]just as the Church herself, the Bride of Christ, is "holy and without blemish."[/u] (CCC 1426)[/quote]

Cam42

[Cam42]

[quote]Once again, this is bull.[/quote]

Why? Because Rome has excommunicated the bishops of the SSPX, therefore making every sacramental action illict.....or the fact that phatmass is faithful to the Magisterial teachings of the Roman Catholic Church.

Oh, the last I checked Cardinal Ottaviani never entered into schism....I can't say the same for Archbishop Lefevbre.

Cam42

[dUSt]

I've deleted the last half of this thread and closed it because [b]phatmass is not the place to debate the trad vs n.o. mass.[/b]