In order to suppress the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM)

https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2021/05?m=1



This pope has been hinting at this for a while with his questionnaire circulated in early 2020.

Other Jesuit "thinkers" have weighed in that the Vatican should ban the TLM (https://religionnews.com/2021/04/13/the-future-of-liturgical-reform-in-the-catholic-church/)




None of this will work the way that the modernists hope that it will. Now, the traditional community is concentrated in FSSP, ICK, and Ordinariate parishes and at the relatively few diocesan parishes that allow TLM, usually 1 mass/week.

The modernists grudgingly allowed this because they thought that traditionalism would wither and die in the aftermath of their liturgical revolution. But that modernist revolution is now gray and tired and insurgent traditionalism is ascendant. Boomer modernists are afraid that the insurgent trads are going to uproot their liturgical revolution.

It’s a rule of counter-insurgency that you try to concentrate your insurgent opponents to kill them. If they disperse and swim among the people, the insurgents are harder to identify, isolate, and kill.

By suppressing TLM and forcing traditionalist, apostolic Catholics back into mainstream NO parishes, the modernists are going to seed those parishes with the seeds of their reversion to tradition. More of those who are trapped in lukewarm non-trad parishes will see what authentic Catholicism looks like and they will want a taste of it and by outbreeding, outpraying, and outevangelizing the modernists, trads will defeat the modernists through God's grace.

Ban the fastest growing part of the church....that makes sense.

And the one producing for more vocations per capita parishoner

These reasons are why that anti-Pope Bergoglio hates it.

Will not comply with some two-bit modernist hack pretending to be Pope.

1. Stay faithful to the true Magisterium, stay in a state of grace (go to reconciliation and receive the Sacraments as often as you can)
a)  This is done by reading the Word of God, knowing what we believe and why we believe it. Live the precepts of the Church and dedicate yourself and family to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary. These dedications are essential for these times and invites the Holy Spirit to guide you so you can know  what you should do to stay faithful to God's true church.  Stay faithful to what Christ taught. Continue to attend mass.
b) Dedicate your homes to the Sacred Heart as quickly as possible.
2. Remember the Pope is chosen and called by God.  PRAY PRAY PRAY for POPE FRANCIS and all the priests, prelates, princes, and sons of the church. Darkness covers them.  Through his ordination the Pope belongs to Jesus. What we do to them we do to Christ. I'm speaking as a sinner who has been more than critical and very vocal about this Pope until I released the depth of harm I was causing.  We can be vocal about concerns but not without praying for conversion. Make God the center of everything.
3. The Christ will come to cleanse this earth .  You can't look at the numerous plagues Covid, Black Fungus Death in India, Locusts, mass flooding of China, Iran, Egypt and Iraq. Bizarre hail storms destroying crops. The worst mouse plague and infestation of crops and feed in Australia, locusts in the middle east, Europe and Russia have wiped out crops,  volcano's and earthquakes. It's biblical and the solution is for mass amounts of people to return to God as they did in Nineveh. We can't wait for these shepherds to call for conversion and fast. We have to do it ourselves.  No one wants to hear this solution but it is the solution. Science will not solve any of these issues.  And the trap of modernism is believing that God is simply spiritual and worship isn't required. It's believing that we are above God and can manage these plagues through science. That is completely WRONG as it dismisses God's divinity in and places us equal to Him. The faithful must seriously live our faith to remain the remnant.

Also, I strongly suggest,  because of these disasters, to stock and keep about three months worth the food/water for your family and dedicate it to the Holy Spirit.  We are very near global famine and food shortages. Don't wait. Just like the parable of the Ten Brides Maids: Stay awake, be ready. Don't wait to do this.

Abolish the traditional Mass?

Attached File

*cough*anarchy*cough*

------

I almost feel sorry for you guys. Almost.

Bergoglio has to have been giving serious rcc strokes for a while now.

Right!

What do you do when someone is not acting in an entirely Christian way? I guess just abandon everything else about that church, right?

“I am persuaded that it is not without the special will of God that, apart from any verdict of the judges, the criminals have endured protracted torment at the hands of the executioner.” - Calvin's letter to Farel on 24 July

"Michael Servetus, a Spaniard, physician, scientist and Bible scholar, suffered a worse fate. He was Calvin's longtime acquaintance who resisted the authority of the Roman Catholic Church. However, he angered Calvin by returning a copy of Calvin's Institutes with critical comments in the margins. So what did Calvin do? You can read his resolution from a personal letter he wrote to a friend:

?“Servetus offers to come hither, if it be agreeable to me. But I am unwilling to pledge my word for his safety, for if he shall come, I shall never permit him to depart alive, provided my authority be of any avail.” - Letter to Farel, 13 February 1546

Oh, wait a minute. Maybe people just make mistakes.

Calvin is not supposed to be, claimed to be, and otherwise doesn't function as the pope or anything like him. Apples to oranges.

I'm actually sort of surprised that I feel bad for yall in the RCC over stuff like this, but it does manage to tweak a nerve. Bergoglio has got to be driving you guys nuts.

I can't see any reason why he'd even consider this, it's like he's *pushing* for a split.

I'm a protestant and don't claim to know anything about the Catholic church, and I'm definitely not trying to shit up this thread, but this just seems like magic spells to me. Jesus said there's only one way to the Father, and that's through Him. What's all this about dedicating things to sacred hearts?

I agree with being prepared though, that's solid advice anytime.

Because PF is a Peronist.  He's all misdirection, feint, push and back off all while hiding his true intention.

After a lot of prayer on this, I think he will make some moves to suppress TLM, but not ban it.  My comments on counter-insurgency theory hint at what I think he will do.  PF has made nice with SSPX all the while throwing shade at those who love the TLM.

While the TLM-only communities (SSPX, FSSP, ICKSP) are booming, most of the world, especially in the US, does not have easy access to one of those parishes/institutes/chapels.  Lots of Catholics only have access through diocesan TLMs.  I don't know if PF will revoke that motu proprio, especially while B16 is still alive.

All of those TLM communities DO require a bishop to ordain their priests.  SSPX has bishops that ABP Lefebvre consecrated in 1988.  ICK and FSSP have no bishops.  I think that PF may try to play the long game and only consecrate bishops hostile to TLM in an effort to try to choke out the traditional communities.  He may make it harder for diocesan priests to say TLM through some kind of "reform" of SP, but probably not an outright abrogation.

Thank you for your  post and candor.
It isn't "magic" its a dedication to Christ. The Sacred heart is Christs Crucified Heart. If you study the passion of Christ by Sacred Word, you understand that there not only was Jesus viciously, and horrifically tortured, spat upon, whipped, punched, nailed to the cross, but that in the Human yet divine person of Jesus Christ, His heart was also crucified and the most horrific way. This is GOD Himself who loves us in ways we cannot comprehend, carrying a cross pass all those HE LOVES as their creator. We can't begin to imagine the pain this caused. So we worship the Crucified Heart of Jesus. His extreme love for us was shown in the His words from the cross: Father forgive them, they no not what they do."  The HEART of Jesus is HIS DIVINE LOVE.  Catholics honor the Blessed Mother. Mary, as the New Arc of the covenant and the Mother of God in her great huimilty is infinitely lower than Her Beloved Son. To do Our Lady justice in a few words is impossible. But we know Jesus denies Her nothing. The wedding feast of Canaan and later from the Cross Jesus gave His mother to his Beloved Apostle (giving his mother to us as well).  We cannot claim to love Our Lord Jesus and ignore the profound influence and pure vessel of The Mother of God.  
When you dedicate yourself, your families and your Homes you make them Christs (Who is the Son of God the Father, from whose providence gives us all to begin with) It a commitment to honor those wounded hearts that our neglects and sins cause such grievous sorrow. It's a prayer and action of  keeping God  front and center in our families our homes, our conduct toward each other. You won't go wrong in prepping if you do that.

Magic on the other hand is illusion, man made, or occult and demonic. Huge difference between asking for God Blessing through the dedication to the Two Heats as opposed to hocus pocus.
Holy vs Unholy.

Meh. The Church has been under Satanic attack from outside and within since it was formed just as Jesus, Mary, and the Saints promised it would be if the majority of the lay people  didn't pray, repent of their sins, and stay in a state of Grace. As the Old Testament Jews found out God will lift His protective hand and replace blessings with chastisements depending on His follower's behavior and obedience in that particular time period.

Martyring of the Apostles. The Protestant revolution leading to countless confused sects today, The bloody French Revolution, The bloody Spanish Civil War, Freemasonic infiltration and the seeding of secular humanism and liberation theology within the Hierarchy, Bolshevism spreading her Godless errors throughout the world, Cultural Marxism through mass media and "entertainment" destroying our youth and early family formation. Mainstreaming of fornication, contraception, feminism, homosexual unions, cohabitation, abortion, divorce, remarriage, etc. etc..  

We already know that only a remnant of the true faithful will persevere bruised and battered from attack from all sides in the last days or get martyred trying. Everything is going to plan. It's depressing, but our time in this vale of tears is but a microsecond in the grand scheme of the afterlife.

I struggle between wanting to assume the best in charity and not wanting to be a naive rube.  Matthew 10:16 comes to mind; I don't want to be excessively serpentine to the point of losing simplicity.

That said, no matter how I look at this situation, I cannot help but have a degree of distrust in the prelates.  On the positive side, Pope Francis has a long history of being kind to the SSPX, long before he became pope.  Therefore, it seems unlikely that he would have hatched an evil plan decades ago to deliver a deadly strike when he would become pope.  It seems more likely that he just wants to continue exercising that same kindness in good faith and in hope for canonical regularization.  Further, in giving a bishop to the FSSP and ICKSP, he's not doing anything different than his predecessors, unfortunate as that is.  On the other hand, for every step that he takes to the right toward tradition, he seems to take two to the left toward modernism.  Also, judging by his friends, one can hardly say that this coterie are friends of tradition.

Bottom line: Whatever his true intentions are, he cannot do more than what God is willing to allow, so I'm not too worried about it.  Of course, that is not to say that I'm going to be an idle spectator.

There's nothing in there about Mary being the new ark of the covenant. In fact Jesus minimizes his physical relationship with his mother in order to emphasize his spiritual relationship with his followers.

As far as Christ's agony, His prayer in Gethsemane refers specifically to Himself, but He submitted to His Father's will. The greatest agony that He experienced was abandonment by His Father. If anything, the assumption that His agony was caused by his followers or creations is presumptuous, as we place humans and their importance above His eternal relationship with the Father.

My impression of specific dedications for whatever purposes to hearts and whatnot seems like an echo of the Pharisees' practice.



It almost seems like you're elevating Jesus' attributes or experiences above Christ Himself in his full person.

Again, not trying to fling poop, just a type of religion that's outside my experience.

ETA: and you'll never hear me argue about this. This is the work of the Holy Spirit, sanctifying us and centering our lives on God.

Not only that, but there are Marian apparitions that foretold this, Akita for one and likely Fatima as well.

EGO dont assis

I have several points of disagreement with your post, but in not wanting to detract from the main theme of this thread, I think most of those points funnel to the sentence I quoted.  What church do you belong to?  Trying to understand the theological background; not looking for an address.

I'm a Reformed Baptist.

I've done some research just in the last day or so in my desire to learn more about the doctrines cited. I've realized that the Catholic conception of Mary as intercessor goes far beyond any Biblical descriptor of her or her relationship with Jesus, and because I believe that Scripture alone contains God's will for His people, I now realize that we really can't communicate in a meaningful way regarding Biblical revelation concerning Mary.

I'm very open to further discussion if you want, but please realize that I fully believe in the supremacy and infallibility of Scripture, and I will not be moved from that belief.

So I take this to mean that you believe that unless you can specifically or explicitly cite a Scriptural foundation, then any doctrine that one derives from the Bible without such cannot be and should not be seen as legitimate?

In other words, if it isn't mentioned rather directly in the Bible, then holding to such a doctrine is not Christian in nature?

Generally speaking, yes.  I can't think of a doctrine that I believe for which I can't cite a specific Biblical foundation.  I do know Christians who hold to extra-Biblical doctrine, and I would consider them the "weaker brother" from 1 Cor. 8 and trust the Holy Spirit to guide and correct them, and trust Jesus to deliver them to Himself perfect at the last day as I trust Jesus and the Holy Spirit to guide and correct me in my doctrine.

I see. Well, here is where I see a conflict. Could you please show where, anywhere in Scripture, Christ or the Apostles state that we are to see the Bible as the final authority on His Word? In fact, can you find anywhere where Christ commands the Apostles to write the NT books? Where does He tell them what they should write in each book? Where does He tell them what they should name those books they write, and which of those books they must declare Canon? Where does He declare that they are to use those books, and those books only, to spread His Word as the final authority?

In my opinion, the entire premise of Sola Scriptura is flawed because it fails to meet its own criteria for legitimacy.

This isn't the case for the Church. The RCC believes that Sacred Scripture is the infallible and divinely inspired Word of God, and that all doctrines should have some foundation, some root in Scripture. However, Scripture cannot the final authority because aside from the aforementioned reason of it not meeting its own criteria, Scripture itself attests to primacy of the Church, not of itself:

2 Thessalonians 2:15
So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter. (letter here means the literal letter being written to the Apostles not the Bible as of yet)

And of course, the Bible is only possible because it was written, compiled, and promulgated by the first Christians, those who comprised the early Catholic Church. That's why the Bible is considered Sacred Scripture to begin with; It is based off the authority of tradition/the Church that declared it such. We know it is sacred because Christ gave the Church the authority to determine such things:

Mathew 16: 15-20
He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah,[c] the Son of the living God.” 17 And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

Thus, Sacred Scripture operates in conjunction with Sacred Tradition. The first four Popes were either an Apostle, or a direct disciple of an Apostle.

I agree that we cannot really communicate in a meaningful way unless we agree substantially on Holy Scripture.  I've come to this realization through many conversations with protestants, whereas you seem to have come to it within a day or so.  Clearly, you're the quicker learner.

How did you come to believe that Holy Scripture is supreme and infallible?

I subscribe to the ontological argument for the canon of Scripture; that is that God inspired certain men to infallibly transcribe His will, and has preserved that writing through the ages to guide and direct His church.  Since God has inspired men to transcribe His will, it exists incontrovertibly.  Since God's desire in creating Scripture was to inform and guide His people, he has preserved and presented it to them.

2 Tim. 3:14 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it 15 and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

(That the man of God may be complete; that is lacking nothing, from studying the Scriptures, proves that the Scriptures represent the full and complete will of God for His people.)

2 Peter 1:16 For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased," 18 we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. 19 And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, 20 knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation. 21 For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

Insofar as Paul refers to the traditions, he's referring specifically to his own teachings, in apostolic authority, which were directly related to the Thessalonian church.  Also I think it's a bit disingenuous to intimate that the traditions he refers to might somehow be at odds with the truth he then relays in the inspired epistle to that church.
This passage refers specifically to the apostolic authority conferred on His disciples by Jesus (in order to teach His will to those who were by faith saved by Christ) and discontinued after the completion of the revelation of the canon of Scripture.  The idea that Peter was empowered with special infallibility or authority above the other apostles is easily disproven when Paul confronted him to his face:

Galatians 2:11 But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party. 13And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. 14But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, "If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?"
I directly oppose the inclusion of Sensus Fidelium in the determination of truth.  I believe it's a circular argument (e.g. The consensus of the faithful determines truth->who are the faithful?->those who believe themselves faithful-why do they believe themselves faithful->because of their adherence to the consensus).  

I believe that the apostolic authority ended when the canon of Scripture was complete, as well as the apostolic gifts.  

I don't believe in apostolic succession, since it's not mentioned anywhere in Scripture, and the inclusion of the apostle Matthias was contingent upon his witness of the Resurrection.  Therefore I oppose the inclusion of the Magisterium in the determination of truth.  

Again, I am fully open to further discussion, and I appreciate the candor and civility with which it's been conducted thus far.  However I realize that we're basing our arguments on fundamentally incompatible epistemological foundations, and for that reason it's basically impossible for us to reach consensus.

What do you mean you have done some research in the last day or so? You've condensed integral aspects which were alluded-to, prophesied, and revealed spiritual realities, from Adam and Eve to the beginning of the New Covenant (including OT typology fulfillment) in the "last day or so"? You wouldn't accept that level of research for someone looking into the Reformed Baptist position (and FWIW, my dad was a Baptist preacher, though more in the Arminian camp than Calvin, so I grew up with all the anti-Catholic arguments)

Let me be blunt, per your earlier comments you don't see Mary's role in Scripture because you don't know Scripture as well as you think you do. I know, because I was in the same place. Scripture is not some "reference chapter X for X issue." While teaching can be drawn from specific areas, it still must conform to the whole. And the whole demands that not only does Mary have a place in Scripture much more than what one sees in the Gospels (just as many understandings of the messianic prophecies and fulfillments you hold are throughout the OT/NT), she is in fact the Ark of the New Covenant, for she contained not only the Messiah, but in doing so the Manna come down from Heaven, the High Priest, and the perfect fulfillment of the Law: Jesus Christ.

It's a big mistake to think of Christ and Mary in terms of just their physical bond of maternity/sonship, as if she wasn't included in Christ's follow-on statement in that passage and raised up beyond her physical contribution to Christ (which is one of the things He was addressing). The undertone of those who use such an argument as that passage is that Mary did NOT do the will of the Father.

It amazes me when people can point to the evangelize by numbers of messianic prophecy, but then ignore the reality of their total scope.

For example, if Christ is the King of the Davidic Kingdom (of which there shall be no end), then who is His Queen? Hint: the wife of the king was never the queen. It was always the mother. Ergo, if Mary is not the Queen of Heaven, then neither is Christ the King.

If the Eucharist is not something greater than the Manna from heaven (and let's be honest, oyster crackers and grape juice is a pretty trailer park fulfillment vs the Manna), then are we to believe that the type was more miraculous and great than the fulfillment? Lame.

Mary is everywhere in Scripture in type and fulfillment. An unfulfilled type means there is more to come which has not been revealed in Scripture, or, having been revealed is not contained in the reality of true, orthodox, Traditional Christianity.

But here's the thing: every other denomination, even those diametrically opposed to the Reformed Baptist position have a foundational reference for their diametrically opposed beliefs. Who decides, and what authority is there to appeal to when the text itself is in question?



I'd recommend if you continue your research (which I encourage), that you do so with Scripture.

This is a good site: https://www.scripturecatholic.com/catholic-faith/
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2016/01/mary-ark-of-the-new-covenant-biblical-evidences.html

From there, look at how the Church Fathers and later theologians/scripture scholars approached such things:
https://www.catholic365.com/article/2987/here-is-how-the-bible-proves-that-mary-is-the-ark-of-the-new-covenant.html

https://sites.google.com/site/aquinasstudybible/home

The specific issue of Mary as the New Ark is just one example of Protestant ignorance of Scripture as a whole. Scripture is much more than chapter and verse. It's a theological onion, which when peeled back properly can make the toughest of men cry.

see inside

While private revelation is not mandatory for Catholics it's hard to ignore the many times The Blessed Mother has appeared (these have undergone extreme scrutiny and investigation)

Not just Akita and Fatima but also bionically: Isaiah 13:  the day of the Lord is near: it shall come as a destruction from the Lord. [7] Therefore shall all hands be faint, and every heart of man shall melt, And shall be broken. Gripings and pains shall take hold of them, they shall be in pain as a woman in labor. Every one shall be amazed at his neighbor, their countenances shall be as faces burnt. [9] Behold, the day of the Lord shall come, a cruel day, and full of indignation, and of wrath, and fury, to lay the land desolate, and to destroy the sinners thereof out of it. [10] For the stars of heaven, and their brightness shall not display their light: the sun shall be darkened in his rising, and the moon shall not shine with her light.

[11] And I will visit the evils of the world, and against the wicked for their iniquity: and I will make the pride of infidels to cease, and will bring down the arrogance of the mighty. [12] A man shall be more precious than gold, yea a man than the finest of gold. [13] For this I will trouble the heaven: and the earth shall be moved out of her place, for the indignation of the Lord of hosts, and for the day of his fierce wrath. [14] And they shall be as a doe fleeing away, and as a sheep: and there shall be none to gather them together: every man shall turn to his own people, and every one shall flee to his own land. [15] Every one that shall be found, shall be slain: and every one that shall come to their aid, shall fall by the sword.

Over 30 Saints and Blessed have mentioned The Illumination of Conscience/3 Days of Darkness, the Warnings and provided "markers" for the coming of this day. Including St. Padre Pio.  Blessed Anna Maria Tiagi, St. John of the Cross, Marie Julie Jahenny. St. Francis. just to name a few and that continues through this day.
Signs that were foretold about before the Warning.
1.Flouting of church laws, irreverence and immodesty in church, fall in attendance at church.
2.Lack of charity towards others, heartlessness, indifference, divisions, contentions, godlessness, pride in human knowledge.
3.Breakdown of family life: immorality, adultery, perversion of youth (e.g. homosexuals giving lectures in schools), immodest fashions  people concerned only with eating, drinking, dancing and other pleasures.
4.Civil commotions, contempt for authority, downfall of governments, confusion in high places, corruption, coups d'etat, civil war, revolution. (The first four proximate signs have already come to pass, at least partly; for we are yet to see civil war and revolution in the West. But the sequence of events is not strictly chronological; there is room for some overlapping. Thus, the 5th proximate sign seems to have begun also.)
5.Floods and droughts, crop failures, unusual weather, tornadoes, earthquakes, tidal waves, famines, epidemics, unknown diseases (e.g. new strains of viruses).
6.Pope fleeing Rome and world war 3 commencing. (we are on the verge of this and will be forced into it if China attacks Taiwan)

The triumph of the Immaculate Heart occurs therein after in the true renewal which is a restoration of tradition.

Our Lady of Lourdes
Our Lady of La Sallette
Our Lady of Rawanda
Our Lady of Akita
Our Lady of Zeitoun, Egypt
Our Lady of Guadalupe, Mexico
Our Lady of the Miraculous Medal, Rue du Bac, Paris, France
Our Lady of Knock, Ireland
Our Lady of Beauraing, Belgium
Our Lady Queen  of Peace Medjagore
Our Lady Queen of Peace Garabandal
Our Lady of Laus, France
Our Lady of Good Counsel, Genazzano, Italy
Our Lady of Loreto, Italy
Appearance to St. Jean Vianney, France
(these are approved and there are more) So why would the Mother of God waste her time in heaven on us who ignore her and Her Son?

The Blessed Mother has been permitted to come to us in service in three ways:
She comes to heal   ( Through the grace of God she has provided healing Springs all over the Globe. Some recognized, some under investigation)
She comes as to Protect the Children of God  to plead for our safety through prayer and repentance to provide a remedy for wars, or catastrophic events. She warned us about the plagues.
She comes comes as a Messenger to provide ample warnings for cataclysmic events.

God always has sent profits to warn and provide remedy before He is forced to cleans the earth. Noah, Moses, Jonah, ... so many others.
 
This should be a separate thread: but in this case the Catholic church has failed to do what God asked us to do through His Mother: The Third Secret was supposed to be released in 1968. It was not. As a result we had VAT II.
What was released in 2000 is not the full text of the Third Secret but it is believed that the Secret is relevant to the infiltration of Satan into all parts of the church. Had the secret been released as it was supposed be, informed Catholics would have averted what we are facing today.
Our Lady (on behalf of God) asked that Russia has be dedicated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Russia has not, and the Nuncio who was supposed to arrange this undermined it. Putin even asked about dedicating Russia to Our Lady and this Judas made the message sound like Russia would be the enemy of the world. When in fact Our Lady would have been permitted intervene it Russia preventing the spread of her errors.

Each time the Blessed Mother came, she warned us about terrifying events and all have come to pass with with frightening accuracy.
There have been some 100's of false prophets as well, which have been dismissed but the messages with the exception of Knock , Our Lady's messages have always been the same.

Read the books by St. Louis De Montford.  

I certainly would not claim to have internalized all the Catholic teaching on the doctrine of Mary in the last couple days.  However, in the small amount of research I have done, I've realized that the epistemology of Catholicism and the epistemology of protestantism are incompatible, and because of this, meaningful discourse is difficult.
Dr. James White in his discussions of Mary often notes that protestants tend to shy away from teaching on Mary because of her primacy in Catholic doctrine and a desire to clearly differentiate their own position.  I think this is true.  However, I reject all the Marian Dogmas except theotokos.  I don't believe that Mary has any role in the salvation of sinners or the dispensation of graces, I don't believe that she was conceived immaculately or bodily assumed into heaven, and I don't believe that she was a perpetual virgin.  I think that the text of Scripture has to be twisted way outside it's original meaning to assert any of those things.
I do believe that Mary was a human, and a sinner, and as such didn't always do the will of the Father.

Luke 2:48 When they saw Him, they were astonished; and His mother said to Him, "Son, why have You treated us this way? Behold, Your father and I have been anxiously looking for You." 49 And He said to them, "Why is it that you were looking for Me? Did you not know that I had to be in My Father's house?" 50 But they did not understand the statement which He had made to them.

This appears to be a massive leap of logic.  Nowhere is the legitimacy of a king questioned regarding the presence or absence of a queen mother.  The Davidic kingship is patrilineal.
Eucharist to us is a memorialization of the covenant Jesus has made with us (!) in His blood.  Certainly manna is a type of Christ, as He refers to Himself as the bread of heaven.  I don't believe that the actual constitution of the oyster crackers and grape juice is very important at all.  The important thing is proclaiming His death.

1 Cor 11:26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.
Thank you for your references, I'll be interested to dig in to them when I get a chance.

Y'all are going to wear out my typing fingers lol.

I apologize, it appears I missed a couple of your points.  Even the staunchest textual critics of the Bible agree, of the hundreds of thousands of textual variances in the various historical Biblical fragments, almost none change the meaning of the text significantly, and those are easily corrected by the preponderance of extant sources.


I don't think the issue of Mary as New Ark is an example of Scriptural ignorance, I think it's specific avoidance of teaching on Mary in the protestant tradition, combined with our view of Jesus' body and blood as symbols of the New Covenant (which is explicit in Scripture, not a result of typological synthesis.)

I love you.... in the Christian Brotherly way.

wut? avjui  iadc  adsoicn hac pacem bella bella nos veratu

Are any of these rules in the Bible or something?

What in the world are you trying to say in this post?

....and they shall destroy us from within. The Caliphate and the Communist have allied themselves to tear down both Western religion and civilization. The slow progress which has festered for so long is starting to give it's dark fruits. Beware ye of faith, for your are the last to see such days and will suffer greatly at the hands of those to your left as your saviors to your right are cut down and sundered as the chaff is.

Can we do some killin' on our way out?

 I suppose that response is deserved.  It was all the Latin and the Pope banning stuff.  Just wondering where all this comes from. Was it instructed somewhere in the Bible?  Not Roman Catholic here, just here for the intrigue.

From what I skimmed, the Pope is doing something calculated to move the Roman Catholic church back to more traditional and original practices?

Why does it matter?  This is why.

I wish I had TLM near me. Tired of weak, boring sermons and the non stop singing that distracts from proper meditation before/during/after communion.

We have one 2 hrs away. We went at least once a month, but being at 3pm made it difficult especially if I had to go to work that night and it was costly in gas and having to eat out or prepare. (I know excuse). This was pre COVID and we haven't been since. We started tolerating NO because at least now there was 2 consecrated people (priest & deacon) administering the Eucharist.  We could only go to the Deacon, because the priest refused to give us Our Lord on our tongue. He would actually switch sides if he saw my family on a certain side. It became very sad because my children would say "wanna bet he changes sides Dad.".... of course he would.

Last Sunday, All restrictions have been removed. So, we get all women Extraordinary Ministers and laughing joking, priest even fist bumped one. I and my older son refrained from receiving, since tge priest won't give us the Eucharist and the Deacon wasn't there. My wife brought the rest of the children and received from the lady. It has since been an argument with my wife and I. I don't know what to do..... I want to receive Our Lord so badly, but I am in fear of receiving it so unsacrilegious. My wife and I have still been debating what to do. The NO is so bad. I see it more and more.

Ugh.....

Just as a thought exercise...what would your response be if you knew the deacon was not in a state of grace when he distributed the Blessed Sacrament? I ask because I would argue that it is incumbent upon you to make sure YOUR state of mind/heart/soul is adequately prepared, but not that of the Eucharistic Minister.

We have no nearby TLM to attend so it's a non-issue for us. Fortunately our parish is pretty conservative and our NO Masses are fairly reverent. I don't get too spun up about women as EM (or EM in general) as there are different reasons for the hows and whys. I also converted in my 20s so I can't say I've seen it all.

It is your right as a Catholic to petition your pastor and your bishop to provide one.  Easy for me to say since I fell into an FSSP parish locally, but you can do it.  You will probably need to organize a like-minded group and work for it; you shouldn't have to, but you probably will.

Get the group together and organize.  Offer to raise funds if changes to the physical layout in your church are necessary.  Offer to raise funds for vestments and missals.  Be willing to accept that, if the priest agrees, you may have to settle for a 1400 Mass on Sundays - pack the church for that Mass anyway.  If your priest is still unwilling, maybe try to find a priest who will come in once or twice a month and say the TLM if you pay his way.  

You CAN do it.  I attended a diocesan TLM in Charlotte this past weekend.  There is not a TLM-only parish there, but there are two diocesan parishes in Charlotte that have TLM at least every Sunday because the faithful demanded it.  I'm in a TLM Facebook group for Arlington VA (not my diocese) and the number of parishes offering at least 1 TLM per week seems to be going up every month.

If you build it they WILL COME.  Social media can help you organize.  You may have to reach across parish lines in your town to get enough like-minded folks together.

I've been to 3 TLM churches so far.  I won't go back to NO unless there are no other choices available.  

I took my parents with me this past weekend.  My dad grew up in TLM but has only attended NOM since it became the ordinary form; my mom is a former Presbyterian convert.  I took them to a low mass locally, but they didn't like it much.  My dad is hard of hearing and I put them in the back pew because I was ushering.  He couldn't make out anything that was going on.  This past week they said that we could go to TLM while I was visiting instead of their NO parish - it was a high mass and they loved it, especially my convert mother.  She said that she had never attended any service that seemed so absolutely focused on worshipping God.

It was only my second high Mass and I still haven't figured out all of the differences in the stand/sit/kneel/respond-don't respond from the low Mass, but it didn't matter because the focus wasn't on what we did, but on God.

Thank you for your post.  It drives home how fortunate I am through no merit of my own.  Maybe resolve to try to attend again once/month and make it a special day and joyful for your family when you do so.

I understand your hesitance.  I never used to feel that way; I was even an EMHC and lector myself, but I know many who share your sentiments.  I got to the point, even at my relatively conservative NO parish, that I was not super enthused about the EMHC thing because of the lack of reverence.  I really only started as one because my pastor just assigned me to the job and he is a truly good and holy priest.  

FWIW, I think that if you are sincere in not wanting to receive in that manner, that it is ok to not and you should offer up that sacrifice and pray for your pastor.  Talk to your wife about making the trip to TLM once/month though and see if you can agree on that.

One more thought I had.  Isn't it curious how rare the Extraordinary Form of the Mass seems to be, yet Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion seem so...ordinary?

It does not matter that who provides it is in a state of Grace. They are Extraordinary Ministers, NOT Eucharistic Ministers. Because they are supposed to be utilized in an emergency. Which I not the case. Areas in my area.

I forget which Saint it was. But there is a quote about some parishioners asking what they should do because they know that their priest was not in a State of Grace. The Saint said, " I would kiss his hands any chance I get." This was because only the priest can consecrate the Body & Blood.

But thus isn't the case in this issue. I don't know what to do though.

Yes. I grew up with receiving in the hand & my parents were both EMHC. My mother and I have gone back and forth on it. Her and my Father grew up with the Latin mass and remember vividly the confusion and change. She still doesn't understand why they removed all the beauty from so many churches. It is funny though, because she understands and agrees with my logic and arguments. But, she can't seem to get passed the issues. Right now she is just happy she is allowed the Holy Eucharist (she lives in California).

I have petitioned my pastor and he will not hear of it. My boys have not been altar servers for a few years now & one son who never was but is of age wishes he could. I would love it as well.  I am tempted to go ask the local TLM group if my sons could at least be trained. Maybe that will help my wife with any decision I make.

I do ask for your prayers on this. I need to fight for my children's Faith. I don't want to be wishy-washy, like they see our priests have been.

ETA: has anyone petitioned the FSSP to set up a parish in their dioceses? It's been on my heart to email them for more information. Our small Church is served by the same priests from the main city in the county (only 2 churches) I wonder if it could be utilized. Baby steps.

I will say. If you want to share the TLM with someone. Take them to a High Mass. The low mass did nothing for my wife. The High Mass did. We even brought 2 friends who are Evangelical Christians. They are now in RCIA, he said he was on the fence converting but his wife wasn't anywhere near converting. But, when they saw the actual worship of God! A light turned on. Miracles happen in the Presence of Our Lord.

That wasn't an option here when I started attending.  We were low Mass only due to restrictions on singing.  I think that the Fraternity parish in Richmond played things much looser regarding masks and sung Masses.  That said, I agree with you.  High Mass is incredible.

Also, I want to encourage you to not lose heart.  I talked with some of the old timers at my current parish who got things started.  They used to rent a hotel banquet room on Sunday in the 90s to get a TLM and then became a mission chapel with a tiny building that they quickly outgrew before constructing our current building, which we may be on the verge of outgrowing.

Keep praying for your priest and I will add your family to my daily intentions.  God will reward whatever sacrifices you make on behalf of your family.

I agree with this.  I know of at least 2 cases where visitors were "turned off" when they attended by themselves.  IMO Catholics generally do a poor job of welcoming visitors relative to pretty much any other group.  It's just an observation and I mean no disrespect to anyone in saying that.  It's just that we should make sure we attend with visitors and make sure they understand what is going on and can follow along, especially with a Low Mass.

Thank you! I will pray for you and your family as well!

I place it God's hands. I am going to email FSSP and send feelers. We shall see what happens.

I have to say, we planned the time with our friends and shared a meal right after to speak about it. I will caveat and say, that visit occurred almost 2 yrs ago. So, it wasn't overnight.

I know I haven't been the best at welcoming. The Catholic Mass  an be overwhelming to explain properly to others. Especially in one sitting. It's all God's work. We just schedule the visit.

I think this is a fair depiction of someone going to the Low Mass without knowing what to expect.

Attached File


To be clear, I love the Low Mass, and so do most people after a while, but I agree that those unfamiliar would likely find it to be a letdown at first.  And I don't blame them.  A culture of hyperactivity and hyperstimulation is not immediately welcoming or appreciative of the profound peace, humble silence, and simple tranquility that characterizes the Low Mass.