C.f.r.

[qfnol31]

You might find this interesting, but I was once told by one of CFR that they don't tend towards the Charismatic as much...

[popestpiusx]

Can ya feel the love???????? I feel it!! Can ya feel it????

[popestpiusx]

To resond or not to respond, that is the question.

[M.SIGGA]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Apr 1 2004, 04:36 PM'] You might find this interesting, but I was once told by one of CFR that they don't tend towards the Charismatic as much... [/quote]
have ya been to a Steubenville Youth Conference - North, South, East, West? Wow it's early in the AM...

(goes back to bed)

[qfnol31]

I've been to one...

[friarMatt]

We know a tree by it's fruit...i have no problem with "rock music/lifeteen masses" it resonates with young people, personally it resonatesdwith me...upbeat praise and worship music was what fostered my vocation...i am not a saint, very far from it, but I want to be one, and a holy friar and priest, PSPX, I find that some of your comments are completly dismissive of anyone who thinks differntly then you and others in a VERY distinct minosrity...i end with the words of St. Augustine ... In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; and in all things, charity (or love)." I don;t find a pipe organ to be an essentuial

in Christ and Mary,
fr. Matt

[popestpiusx]

Dismissive of others? No. I just want people to defend what they belive using actual catholic argumentation instead of the typical "Well, I feel that its ok because I like it."

[BLAZEr]

Here's Catholic argumentation for you:

Our Shepherd permits it.

[friarMatt]

wow....put that in your censor and smoke it :-)

[cmotherofpirl]

[Lounge Daddy]

[popestpiusx]

I must have missed something. The fact that the Holy Father allows something (unthinkable ever before in Church History) does not mean I have to suddenly embrace what the Church has always forbidden. Does the assertion that rock bands in sanctuary are not conducive to sanctity make me schismatic?? You people ganging up on me here (which doesn’t bother me in the slightest) have yet to address the facts that I quoted earlier. I quoted St. Pius X. That wasn’t good enough for you. So I quoted Vatican II. Still not good enough. In fact, one person even openly disagreed with what was quoted (something that would have spawned a warning had I done it). The only thing that one can conclude is that you people have no real argument, but rather are guilty of what you have accused me of: measuring the rest of the world according to the standard of himself. You are like this stuff, ergo it is good. Who’s standard is that? Your own! I have not one time told you what my personal opinions are in this regard. I will if you want to know, but they are irrelevant to the argument. The Church has officially promulgated certain standards. These, and not one’s preferences or opinions, are the standard by which all (within the genus of what we are discussing) is to be judged. You disagree? Take it to the Church. She taught the stuff, not me. How schismatic of me to think such things.

And to you Mr. Sigga, your post does not even merit a response. However, a few things do need to be pointed out. You posted the following “but why in the H are you even a Roman Catholic? There are lots of little schismatic groups around that would love every little thing you have ever said on Pm. If one whole-heartedly believes the Pope is a nut and the Roman Catholic priesthood is a hoot, why lie to oneself and not just leave?”

What in the hell are you talking about? Show me where I said the Pope is a nut. Show me where I have stated that the Roman Catholic Priesthood is a hoot. I don’t even know what you mean by “hoot.” Why the hell am I Catholic? Because the Church is the Fullness of Truth. Because she has an unbroken line of teaching 2000 years old. Because, unlike every religion and sect in the world apart from the Catholic Church, her teachings are not subject to personal preferences or opinions. Her truth is absolute and unchanging. Because she was instituted by Christ and because outside of her there is no salvation. Pretty schismatic, huh?

You go on to say: “I love the Pope and the priesthood and V2 so naturally I would identify as a Roman Catholic. This isn't 1950 or 1850 and the Church is ALIVE in Christ TODAY in 2004 preaching to the masses and evangelizing sinners.”

Can you explain how this in some way is contrary to anything I have said? Have I said that I do not love the Pope the priesthood or Vatican II? Pointing out issues where they may be legitimately pointed out does not indicate a lack of love. In fact, it indicates a more complete love. If I though my father was doing something that was dangerous to him or his soul and I said nothing could I actually claim to love him? No, of course not. Secondly, I am well aware of what year it is and that the Church is Alive etc. That is the whole point of my being Catholic and defending the Church. If she was dead, the whole thing would have been a lie and there would be nothing to defend. Also, for the record, I am the one who quoted from the Vatican II document on the liturgy. Not you. It seems to have been conveniently ignored. I am being accused of hating Vatican II, yet I am the one using the Council documents to bolster my argument. Am I the only one that sees the irony there?

You state further: “If you want to go to the indult Latin Mass, fine then just go, but the Council is over and done with - just say a "Glory Be" and get over it.”

Yes, you are right, the Council is over. I will certainly say a Glory Be for that. Imagine the costs of running a council for forty years. No, it is definitely better for the Church that they ended it in 1965. And I will go to the indult Latin Mass, happily, as is my right according to the Holy Father.

And for all you who jumped on the bandwagon, well... God Bless You All!!

[PedroX]

[Theologian in Training]

I haven't the time nor desire to argue with the rest of you here, but your discontent with popestpiusx is quite evident. Perhaps I have not read enough of his posts to form a similar opinion, but I actually think you are too dismissive of him. Granted, you may not see eye to eye on certain issues, but not a single one of you addressed any of his concerns, rather, you started an argument with him and merely reaffirmed your own thoughts on the issue.

You espouse charity, how important it is to be a saint (it is in our mission statement) and yet you come across a guy who is a little more polemic, maybe even as much as Ironmonk and immediately decide that his thoughts on the issue are not worthy of a discussion.

I don't know, maybe I am missing something, and maybe I will be seen as sympathetic towards him, but I don't understand what the problem is. Not all Catholics are completely sold on drums in the sactuary, nor are they all advocates of a more charismatic type of Mass. Yeah, it may help draw the youth, and we should be thankful for that, but just because someone does not agree with what sometimes appears to be rock and roll music at the Mass does not mean we decide he should leave the Catholic faith and hates the Pope. Besides, just because the Pope allows it does not mean it is an infallible statement as to how all liturgies should be done.

Like I said, I may be missing something, but this is merely my own .02

God Bless

[cmotherofpirl]

pspx I apologize for the smiley. I just get tired of trad type people, and I thought the censor crack was funny. I never quite thought of a censor that way before.

[popestpiusx]

I took no offence, mother. I am just tired of there being an inconsistent standard of reproof. It's open season on traditionalists on this phorum. Had I said of someone else, especially a so-called "Church Scholar", what they said of me I would have received a nasty e-mail from one of the moderators and probably had my account suspended. I'm not asking for anyone to get in "trouble" over this. I just want consistency. I despise double standards and logical inconsistencies with a passion that burns hotter than a thousand suns. Be that as it may, I was not offended by anything said of me. No hard feelings and no apology necessary.

In Christo et Maria,
PSPX

[popestpiusx]

By the way, thank you Theologian, for coming to my defence (even though you don't necessarily agree with me). God Bless.

[Theologian in Training]

[quote name='popestpiusx' date='Apr 3 2004, 06:27 PM'] By the way, thank you Theologian, for coming to my defence (even though you don't necessarily agree with me). God Bless. [/quote]
Hmmm...never said that. I haven't read enough of your posts to form an opinion, one way or the other. Regardless, you are welcome.

God Bless

[friarMatt]

PSPX, If I came off hard on you or uncharitable, "mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa." I hope that the Latin apology counts even more

Know of my prayers

in Christ and Mary,
fr. Matt

[popestpiusx]

Please, no apologies. I took no offence.

Theologian, I was not saying that you DO NOT agree with me but that you don't NECESSARILY. In other words, it is not your agreement with my argument that caused you to defend me. Thank You again.