One of the many good things my friend Dave Smith brings to this place is his vast range of references to good material. The recently asked Rob to look at this piece by Dietrich von Hildebrand on the Latin Mass. Let me offer some reflections.
I like his balance at the start. He does not pretend that everything with the Latin Mass (TLM) was rosy – he writes:
the faithful attended Mass in personal isolation, each worshipper making his private devotions, or at best following the proceedings in his missal
with Latin creating a barrier between the priest and the people. Despite this statement, he asks:
Does the new Mass, more than the old, bestir the human spirit–does it evoke a sense of eternity? Does it help raise our hearts from the concerns of everyday life–from the purely natural aspects of the world–to Christ? Does it increase reverence, an appreciation of the sacred?
And, of course, as will be clear from the rhetorical question that he answers in favour of TLM. It is quite hard, reading the article, to see how the sort of TLM he describes is more reverent than the NO one:
Is it not plain that frequently the community character of the new Mass is purely profane, that, as with other social gatherings, its blend of casual relaxation and bustling activity precludes a reverent, contemplative confrontation with Christ and with the ineffable mystery of the Eucharist?
The answer seems clear to him because of the way he feels; those who do not share his feelings are unlikely to agree with him.
I doubt anyone would argue that reverence is not important, but he assumes that the NO Mass lacks it but did the sort of TLM he began by describing have it either? This seems a false antithesis – a good TLM juxtaposed with a bad NO Mass. That’s the sort of argument which only works when your readers agree with you.
Hildebrand asks an interesting question:
Do we better meet Christ by soaring up to Him, or by dragging Him down into our workaday world?
It is plain, as ever with these rhetorical questions, what answer we are supposed to offer. But let us pause a moment. Christ met us in this workaday world, he sacralised it, and our flesh with his presence, so let us not so easily talk about ‘dragging him down’ – he came, as he comes, willingly through love. Hildebrand is offering a false antithesis – we meet Christ wherever he meets us.
He draws a similar false antithesis between a secular community and a church one:
I submit that the new liturgy must be judged by this test: Does it contribute to the authentic sacred community? Granted that it strives for a community character; but is this the character desired? Is it a communion grounded in recollection, contemplation and reverence? Which of the two–the new Mass, or the Latin Mass with the Gregorian chant evokes these attitudes of soul more effectively, and thus permits the deeper and truer communion
If, as the implication seems to be, an authentic sacred community is grounded in recollection, contemplation and reverence, then it is hard to see how TLM he describes had any of those characteristics. He assumes TLM permits a ‘deeper and truer’ communion, but offers no reason, other than his own feelings, why we should agee. It is unclear how one might measure ‘deeper’ and ‘truer’. As so often in this line of argument, adjectives are used which imply that one’s own preferences are morally superior (or is someone going to tell me that ‘truer’ and ‘deeper’ are morally neutral objectives?) to those of others. I am not sure why it is necessary to introduce such loaded language into these discussions – but can see why doing so causes offence and perpetuates divisions. How these Christians love each other – anyone?
Hildebrand writes this about authentic community:
The actualization of men’s souls who are truly touched by Christ is the basis of a unique community, a sacred communion, one whose quality is incomparably more sublime than that of any natural community
But again, there is a false antithesis at work. If our souls are truly touched by Christ, we do indeed form a unique community – but that is a sacralisation of one sort of natural community (unless, of course, one thinks a church community is not natural?) – and that community is actualized in either form of the Mass – if, of course, the Mass is valid. And there lies, for me, the problem with such articles. Hildebrand offers us good opinions as to why he prefers one form of Mass to another (and ones with which, when I in the RCC, I should sympathise) but in so doing, he writes about one form in a way which provides ammunition for those who go further than he does in calling it invalid.
Where we meet the Lord at the Eucharist, there is reverence, and there is an authentic Christian community. How it is actualized is a matter of taste. To suppose that one’s own preferred form is somehow better than another authorised one, is to elevate one’s own opinion to a level higher than it deserves. Having changed one form for another in my own Church, I can sympathise with those who find an older form more to their taste, but encountering my Lord at both forms, I can only say that what matters is that. Where we meet him, be it in the refugee I meet in the workaday world, or in the silence of the Eucharistic encounter, we are privileged. To suppose one form is somehow more authentic or provides a deeper and truer communion seems a little arrogant to me.
Servus Fidelis said:
Validity is never questioned. What is questioned is what motivated the relegating of the Old Mass to a dusty bookshelf and the creation of a New Mass that was formed from (written by those who were swept up in) the undercurrents of the day which are still working their way out in our own day. This interview with his wife, who is on the board of Franciscan University to this day, sheds some background on the turmoil that persists within the Church; both Communist (neo-marxist) and Freemasonic influences. There was and is a lot of intrigue pertaining to the changes made by John XXIII and Paul VI. She admonishes the Traditionalists that use their intellect to beat others with Truths and has a good attitude I think about the whole thing; which her last statement makes clear.
http://www.latinmassmagazine.com/articles/articles_2001_su_hildebran.html
LikeLike
Servus Fidelis said:
He speaks of substance not taste. Perhaps a little back lighting to what was transpiring behind the scenes would be helpful.
http://www.latinmassmagazine.com/articles/articles_2001_su_hildebran.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
I’m sorry, but nowhere in the piece you linked to is there any substance at all. He admits at the start that TLMx could be pretty dire, then goes on to ignore that and to posit some ideal form of TLM against some debased form of NO Mass. I was very disappointed. .
LikeLiked by 2 people
Servus Fidelis said:
Alice explained that rather well: it was a loss that had already taken place of the sense of the supernatural. The Mass doesn’t fix that; no Mass will fix that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
Again, how does she evidence this? Where is the evidence apart from her opinion and that of others who think like her? Did she ask anyone attending the NO Mass whether they felt the loss of the supernatural – or is she projecting her views on them?
The initial piece acknowledged that TLMs could be quite isolating and incomprehensible – was there much in that for the man and woman in the pew of the supernatural?
All I am seeing here is opinion dressed up as fact.
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
I’m sorry, but that is terrible journalism.
It starts off with the classic leading statement:
‘ In terms of the present crisis, when did you first perceive something was terribly wrong?’
This presumes two premises which ought to be proved, or at least adduced – that there is an actual ‘crisis’ and something is ‘terribly wrong’. But I note, again, the personalisation – ‘when did you notice’ – everyone’s entitled to an opinion; no- one’s entitled to elevate it to the status of an ex cathedra statement. Honestly, here’s an interviewer with an agenda asking someone else with the same agenda to confirm that in a magazine read by others of the same opinion. If this was the Left, you’d be calling it (and rightly) ‘groupthink’.
I’m fearfully disappointed. I see it with the student left, everyone talks the same way and they exclude other views and even get angry when they come across them. But it seems that some RC traditionalists got there first.
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
I shan’t go on – but honestly, to put her husband’s insights about Hitler in the same place as his opinions on V2 seems to me to debase the language of apologetics. Godwin’s law comes in – the first person to mention Hitler reveals they have an opinion, not an argument.
As it happens, I think I would agree with her opinion in many ways – but I recognised my feelings are at work, with my brain coming in behind to find reasons for my feelings. But the way in which the NO Mass is talked about – well, I wonder where the Sedes got their ideas?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Servus Fidelis said:
Well of course you know better than these well respected Catholics . . . and mind you, well respected in both camps.
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
Why personalise it? I have offered a critique, and instead of addressing it you play the personal one. If I am wrong and this is not opinion dressed up as ‘fact’, explain it to me – but don’t go the ‘who are you to question these people’ route. If I were to say ‘well of course, if you know better than these well respected Popes and cardinals, I don’t think you’d think I was making much of an argument.
LikeLike
Servus Fidelis said:
And you expect me to back up her facts? How can I do so? I can only take her at her word or I can call her a liar and her husband as well. I trust her husband’s opinion (if that was all it was) though he knew the Latin and he knew if the priests were mumbling the Latin quickly and not prayerfully. Why should I doubt him? You may take it up with him in heaven I fear. For he cannot defend himself against your accusations.
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
I am committing the heinous crime of subjecting the views to critical scrutiny. They add up to his opinion. That’s fine. What isn’t are the accusations he aims at the NO and, by extensions, to those who go to such Masses.
As I say in the piece, he uses loaded words to criticise the NO – that’s where he crosses a line and I criticise him for so doing.
I had not realised he was infallible and could not be criticised. I am simply asking for a counter argument and if you don’t have one, that’s OK too 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
NEO said:
That’s fine, it’s his opinion, and you agree with it. Nothing at all wrong with that. I’m inclined to, as well. It’s when we elevate opinions to facts or make of them dogmatic statements that we go wrong.
LikeLike
Servus Fidelis said:
I guess drawing a comparison about reading the future plans of Hitler which was out in the public domain and applying it to the conditions they were living in is no someway analogous in your mind to what was known about the turmoil in the Vatican at the time. I thought she made complete sense. But then, I have read her and know how well she is respected by everyone. She is still on the board at Franciscan University in Steubenville, OH and it is one of the finest Catholic Universities in the country. She and her husband were not and are not kooks. But alas, you know much better than they who know most of the players quite well.
LikeLiked by 1 person
NEO said:
Why do you feel the need to personalize this? Jess is saying, correctly, that the article is not backed up with facts. That’s all. She (and I) are inclined to agree, but that is our opinion, as the linked article is his, and likely yours.
That is no attack, it’s simply the truth, and I find it hard to respect anyone who attacks the truth, especially when we are all in basic agreement.
LikeLike
Servus Fidelis said:
There are more demonstrations of ‘fact’ I could supply but I would be loathe to provide them and never have published any of them for fear of weakening the faith of other Catholics. So when certain things keep rhyming I am inclined to accept the demonstrations. Alice has not published a lot of Dietrich’s private writings and doubt she will . . . which I presume is because of the same reasons.
It is much more positive to compare the actual ‘content’ of both Masses and the ‘rubrics’ of each Mass to draw one’s private opinion as to the efficacy of both; as it is certainly no secret that a storm of secular thought errupted worldwide following the close of VII. Draw you own conclusions. Obviously you and Jess and I have already done so. We simply come to different conclusions.
LikeLike
NEO said:
No, the only real difference here is that we don’t think we are qualified to tell others what they should think, without providing evidence as to why they should think so. If someone’s faith is so weak that the truth will destroy it, they have no faith anyway. The truth, as always, stands on it’s own, but opinions need documentation.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Servus Fidelis said:
Do you then want to explore, line by line and rubric by rubric the two Masses side by side? We can do so if you would like thought it will require many months of posts to get anywhere close to covering the material. Have you and Jess both studied the contents of both? If not then where are your fact based opinions coming from? You want to blame the abysmal statistics after the NO was given us as merely a change in culture. But why did it erupt so quickly? Is it not that the ideas and ideals of the neo-Marxists and the Freemasons became mainstream in the world and also undefended by the Church? Too many factors here to talk about. But there is much grist for the mill.
LikeLiked by 2 people
NEO said:
We never said our opinions are fact based, they are simply our opinions, and what works for us. And we are not proposing that they should be implemented anywhere, let alone everywhere.
On the other hand, you are asserting that his are, but for whatever reasons, his facts can’t be shared. That’s quite a dichotomy. If they are his opinions, fine, if they are something to run the church on, they need objective documentation.
LikeLike
Servus Fidelis said:
He gave his philosophical reasons . . . you choose to disagree with him. Fine. I supplied an interview with his wife to give some backdrop of what problems were bubbling up at those times: communism and freemasonry. We all have heard and are pretty sure that Annibale Bugnini was a member of a Masonic Lodge . . . but we have adopted the Mass that he designed and wrote for our use. Nothing can be known for sure though his name was found on a register of members. He was not the only one and you will have to decide if the ‘rumors’ are simply that or if they are facts. The writers (one which Alice von Hildebrand mentions) of some of these things is difficult to find . . . and even then they are disparaged now that the writers are dead. It was a sad time for the Church and we are still in turbulent times. I’m not sure that what we know is simply the tip of the iceberg. But then, I don’t think that it matters. What I think is undeniable is that the New Mass does not offer the Church much of a defense against the ill winds that blow across Western European Culture sat the present.
LikeLike
NEO said:
That’s what you keep denying, we don’t disagree with him, at least much. But from what you’ve given us, and this is not my field, there is no documentation as to how he reached his conclusions. They may be right or wrong, as may mine, because they are simply unproven assertions.
And I don’t think it wise to build anything on an unproven assertion, let alone for people to bet their eternal souls on one, especially one that they may not understand.
This is, in fact, why we have Bishops, and others that are experts in the field, to help us in discernment. I disagree with mine, often, but I never, never make the assertion that they are of evil intent. They aren’t, they just have a different view of what works, and it’s at least possible that they are right, and I’m wrong. I do appreciate that they don’t try to tell me how to do control systems, where our roles are reversed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
“Charges of Archbishop Bugnini being a Freemason are unfounded and should be entirely left out of any discussions about the Novus Order Mass, or of Archbishop Bugnini.”
This is from a well-researched and argued piece here:
http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/novus-ordo-new-mass-freemasons.php
It examines the so-called evidence and shows there is none .
What it has to say about Hildebrand’s often quoted comment on Bugini is really good example of how to evidence and nuance an argument:
‘”Truly, if one of the devils in C. S. Lewis’s The Screwtape Letters had been entrusted with the ruin of the liturgy, he could not have done it better.” (http://www.tanbooks.com/doct/vatican_liturgy.htm)
This statement is often found in articles accusing Archbishop Bugnini of being a Freemason. While the statement shows a very passionate defence of the Traditional Mass, and expresses von Hildebrand’s profound distaste of the New Mass, there is no accusation of Bugnini being a Freemason. If the comment was intended to say that he was a Freemason, as many traditionalists believe, one would think Hildebrand would say it, since proof of Freemasonry would mean automatic excommunication of Bugnini. But he had no reason to believe this. He was not in Rome. His wife, Alice von Hildebrand has never insinuated that Bugnini had any association with Freemasonry. We have to assume the statement was intended to demonstrate his disgust at the direction of the liturgy, which is understandable, given that it was so different to what he was used to.”
Yes, he was disgusted at it, yes it was different, but that does not amount to inferior or not a proper Mass.
LikeLike
Servus Fidelis said:
Well it was a very good link, Jess and I am more than happy to accept the position that there are no facts that the oft quoted rumors are true and hope that they are not.
All that we know is what we have been left with for a Mass and the many changes. We know the changes we witnessed were more for the people than for the praise of God; witnessed by even these few.
1. Elimination of Oath Against Modernism at the Seminaries
2. Elimination of Leonine Prayers after Mass
3. Elimination of Friday Abstinence
4. Elimination of Fast from midnight on Saturday to Mass the next morning
5. Altars turned into tables
6. Elimination of Genuflection at the Et incarnatus est
7. Changing the words of Consecration
Those are simply off the top of my head. Read the text of the old (and the red) of the old versus the same of the new. Find the propitiatory and expiatory sacrifice clearly proclaimed by the prayers if you can. I can’t find a clear example in the new Mass. Maybe it is just that this is my opinion and nothing more. But this entire conversation simply stems from stating this obvious defect . . . I merely wanted to provide you with words from some well respected and of course the sainted Pio and their concerns as well. That you have no problem is fine. That other Catholics find none . . . that is fine as well. That I cannot find an Extraordinary Form of Mass remains a problem that I am hoping to conquer once my wife retires. Then I plan to sell my home and move where I can die without the distractions that I have lived with these past 25 years. I simply want to never have to think about these things again . . . just live my life of faith in peace. And for that I pray . . . and that there are more new priests capable of saying the Traditional Mass.
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
That’s so understandable, but I thought it important, not least given the temptations QV is sometimes subject to, to emphasise that the NO Mass is valid and that many of the rumours were not true.
I accept there were changes, but those changes were authorised by those with the power to do so. I have always been puzzled by the idea that the changes were to fit in with what we do – we didn’t do anything like your NO Mass.
I’m personally sympathetic, but I think it important to say it is my view. I know it’s easy for me to seem to denigrate a liturgy I don’t like, but I shouldn’t in case others misunderstand.
Another cross for you, I am afraid, dear friend 🙂 xx
LikeLiked by 1 person
Servus Fidelis said:
Actually, the same cross I bore from the moment I became Catholic; for I had fallen in love with the Church of the Saints . . . including the Mass that I had to wait years to hear. I’m used to it and resigned to whatever the future brings but I do always hold out that hope and prayer that I might not be so terribly distracted by simply wanting to live a full Catholic life. 🙂 xx
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
It seems very wrong that anyone wanting to find their version of the full Catholic life should not be able to do so. Newman thought that the century after an ecumenical council was the worst time to be a Catholic – looks like he was right. 🙂 xx
LikeLiked by 1 person
Servus Fidelis said:
Well it is always confusing in such times and many opportunities arise to either become lax in faith (or God forbid, lose one’s faith) or to repeat the doubts or calumny that others have stated or written. At such times there is nothing that can retained other than one’s sense of the Catholic Faith. For me that is found in the Catechism and expressed fully in the Traditional Mass. I can’t quite find the harmony between the Catechism and the Novus Ordo I guess. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
Understandable. Were I an RC I would not, I think, find the NO uplifting – except for one part of it, of course 🙂
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
This article seems full of sense to me – can you tell me where it goes wrong in your opinion?
http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/novus-ordo-new-mass-freemasons.php
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
This piece here seems very sensible, and eschews the drama:
http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/mass_new_vs_old.php#hermeneutics
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
So, it is better to do the dog whistle thing then, of implying “I know more than I can say”.
Whatever happened to treating people like adults? If their faith is so fragile it can’t stand up to facts, what sort of faith is it? Of course, if these facts are more opinions and preferences which denigrate the preferences of others, best keep them hidden.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Servus Fidelis said:
What do you think? Do you think that all the dirty laundry should be hung out to dry. Now that most of the players are dead how are we to provide the ‘facts’ that you demand. Even then, would you accept their witness as to what they knew or said? It does no good. I am only saying that there are more than kooks out there who acknowledge the flaws and the human failures of the times. If you do not accept their witness then I can say little more. Padre Pio was of a similar mind. Was he a kook too?
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
I can’t improve on this:
‘However, saying the Church is falling apart because the Mass was changed, and propagating a conspiracy theory to influence this discussion is immoral. It is reckless calumny against an Archbishop and all popes since Vatican II. This conspiracy theory is like the Da Vinci Code in its attempt to deride the Vatican, and is easily dispelled by any reasoning person.”
http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/novus-ordo-new-mass-freemasons.php
Or is this some dreadful set of ‘liberals’ influenced by communist masons?
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
If you have an argument against what I am saying, do use it, but saying ‘she knows best’, which is what you are doing isn’t an argument at all. Several Popes clearly do not agree that the NO Mass is banal and inferior, so why do you dare disagree with them and prefer the views of a couple of professors? See, if I do it, you’re not going to go ‘well, you know, since you put it like that’, so why expect me to.
LikeLike
Servus Fidelis said:
I will not for the same reasons that she does not. It is not helpful to the Church.
We need not know anymore than the eruption of neo-Marxism and Freemasonry that became rife in those times. It is why no condemnation for Communism was made and why our language of a communion of the faithful is now viewed more as a masonic ‘fraternal brotherhood’.
LikeLike
NEO said:
He makes, I think, a good case for why he prefers the TLM. That’s fine, I prefer traditional services as well. But if the necessary things are said and done, it is a matter of taste, and perception, and few Christians, Catholic or otherwise, understand (or understood, when it was all that was available) the Latin mass. If a message is totally misunderstood or ignored, is it effective? I don’t think so.
A matter of taste, certainly, and effectiveness. TLM wasn’t, whether the NO is, is a separate and different question. Neither is, I submit, as effective as whatever they did in first century Jerusalem.
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
As it happens, I agree with him, and with Dave and with you. I much prefer the older forms of service. But I don’t feel under any impulse to knock the newer ones or to imply that my preferences are for a truer Mass than someone else’s. Live and let live.
I have preferences, I have feelings, and my brain in quite capable of rationalising them – I can also argue several donkeys away from their hindlegs and convince myself I’m right and others are wrong. Fortunately I am surrounded here and at home with those kind enough to point out that I have convinced only the one person who was already convinced – me 🙂 xx
LikeLiked by 1 person
NEO said:
I know you do, as do I. But we are not the world, and I suspect we are not proper representatives of it either, we surely aren’t of the unchurched, or never churched to begin with.
I too, can convince myself that I know what is best for everyone, quite easily, in fact. But sadly, because I believe it, just doesn’t make it so, and somehow, somebody always tells me that, and they may be correct, occasionally! 🙂 xx
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
It is this business of dressing up one;’s feelings as though they were indisputable facts, then using them to denigrate others which bothers me. If he’d said I find TLM more sacred than the NO one, who could have argued? Many of us would share that view. It is when he starts saying what he does about the NO one that he seems to flirt with Sede territory.
If people mean to say something, say it, but blowing dog whistles and then claiming you didn’t seems not too hot an idea.
LikeLiked by 1 person
NEO said:
That is indeed the problem here. I know I would. That’s the thing that gets me so often, not just here, this blowing of dog whistles and then claining one didn’t.
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
I’m a bit lost here. The Web is full of Catholics knocking the NO and of conspiracy theories.
LikeLiked by 1 person
NEO said:
Yeah, even here. How come I never hear about the Catholic conspiracies, like I used too? I suspect the Masons, and other have plenty to do running their charities.
Besides, if what I’ve read is correct, Rome created the Masons when they, for the greed of the King of France, suppressed the Templars. Not to mention the English Reformation. Whoops, gotta look out for those unintended consequences.
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
This site is very sensible:
http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/novus-ordo-new-mass-freemasons.php
It includes the words I’d agree with:
“However, saying the Church is falling apart because the Mass was changed, and propagating a conspiracy theory to influence this discussion is immoral. It is reckless calumny against an Archbishop and all popes since Vatican II. This conspiracy theory is like the Da Vinci Code in its attempt to deride the Vatican, and is easily dispelled by any reasoning person.’
LikeLiked by 1 person
NEO said:
Very sensible, indeed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
There’s a good one on the two Masses here:
http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/novus-ordo-new-mass-freemasons.php
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bosco the Great said:
The official line of the CC is that Freemasons are bad. But the last 4 Holy Fathers have been Masons. Bergoglio is a Mason. Well, after all, its just another false cult. No big deal.
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
You have actual evidence do you, Bosco?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bosco the Great said:
Yes, and its common knowledge my sister. I rail about the false religions, but being Masons is a point I never bring up because its the least important. Masons is just another worthless club. Who really cares. When I get up ill look around for info if yould like. In the mean time, you can search Freemason headquarters. The headquarters is just around the block from the Jesuits headquarters. They are one in the same.
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
Bosco, you and I both know you have no proof. I is not a good thing to spread rumours with no proof.
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
q=tbn:ANd9GcT_E464RuzD-s-07phhgAbxmzd1Zl_WoHoRu3u0T1l-mdWcodru
Masonic hand sign
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTMuidj6gRX65qVYsu1XZZZVGMoM4U8Wuii-3fdDPMV_WyTDDmtMA
Mason symbol necklace
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQggEu34td1ykDKvd3muVNkOCx06SFTdHw7sr544wJbRiH-Drfe
Freemason hand sign
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
Rumors…no proof. Good sister….it doesn’t matter to you who is in the freemason club. It doesn’t impact your life. I just put up photographic evidence of membership in the masons. If that isn’t enough, well, you just don’t care. I don’t care. But in another way I do care. Because these people will spend eternity in everlasting fire and torment. That’s bad. I cant even wrap my head around that concept. I don’t even like thinking about it.
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
We all know photos on the internet can be messed around with Bosco.
What matters is we confess Jesus is Lord and follow him.
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
Yes good sister. It matters nothing to me who is mason or a member of the Mickey Mouse Club. Get saved. That’s all that matters.
One more thing good sister. Don’t get lulled into complacency. You seem to be the last one to know about the masons and who they are. Your prime minister is a mason. Prince Charles is a mason. Napoleon was a mason. The ruler of this world is Satan. Should this bother you? You should already know this. Its not flesh and blood that we battle with…its principalities in high spiritual places that we battle with. Theres nothing we can do but get saved and hold on to the promise that Jesus does our battle for us. A room full of Bozos with fish hats cant do battle for us. Jesus, our high priest does our battle.
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
I think Masons are different in different countries, and I think conspiracy theories a bit silly really.
Satan is the prince of this world, but the Lord Jesus has already beaten him and opened the way to salvation to all who will receive him. I hope and pray as many as possible will heed the call – the door is open, we only have to go through 🙂
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
That’s rite. Who has told you this?
The door is open. Now, good sister, you have opened the big can of worms. Yes, the door is open…so what does the Devil do about it? This is the greatest question posed to mankind and the universe.
The Devil sets up alternative doors, and he puts barriers to the door. He sets up religions, alternative doors, that people can enter without entering the Door that is Christ Himself. He gives us movies and theme parks, which in themselves are no harm, but distract us from the reality that there is a lake of fire waitnig for the unbeliever. Satan gives us dead people for us to pray to. He gives us live people we call God….Holy Father. He gives us costumed holymen we expect to save us.
In the meantime, the Door is there, and there are but a few that find it.
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
The door is open and we can come to him, but only through his love and our love – in the beginning and the end Bosco, God is love, and only through love can we be redeemed. So let us set aside all things of this world and just love him as he loves us. So simple, but so hard for us fallen creatures.
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
Say, good sister, how come when I go to post a picture, it doesn’t come up? Can you look into that for me…because I have more photographic evidence that you are seeking. It will show beyond a doubt that these people are in satanic cults. Maybe the powers to be don’t want them exposed to you.
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
It may be a bad link – C will know.
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
I submit that the new liturgy must be judged by this test: Does it contribute to the authentic sacred community? Granted that it strives for a community character; but is this the character desired? Is it a communion grounded in recollection, contemplation and reverence? Which of the two–the new Mass, or the Latin Mass with the Gregorian chant evokes these attitudes of soul more effectively, and thus permits the deeper and truer communion
wHAT IS THAT?
Either you are born again or you aren’t.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bosco the Great said:
Obama satanic hand sign also used by the Holy Father and numerous rock stars.
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
Now, any accusation that a Archbishop might be a Freemason rightly sends chills up the spines of faithful Catholics. Freemasonry is the archenemy of the Church. This is a serious allegation
http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/novus-ordo-new-mass-freemasons.php
That’s a joke. Almost all bishops and popes are freemasons. Its common knowledge. All heads of state are freemasons. Hitler wasn’t a freemason, because he didn’t care about them. Stalin was freemason. Putin is mason. Obama is mason. Merkel is mason.They are all masons.
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRSdbknfbsBmYXkKZdNFe0kfd67qt3kcKUyzPe9zhrXYPLFDmxb7g
The Holy Father flashing the satanic hand sigh
Enjoy
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
if you say so
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
I don’t say so. You can see it for yourself
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
I can see something, but would it not be a bit odd if he was a secret mason to let someone photograph him making a sign to prove he was?
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
Its not odd. How do you think they operate? Whats the use in keeping it totally a secret? Its a gigantic fraternity. And they are duty bound to do the hand sign…its part of their power, or so they think. They are supposed to do the sign…it gives them power.
Heres something you might not want to know.;
John F Kennedys grave. It has a eternal flame, a fire that never goes out. That eternal flame is a Freemason or something sign. It shows that their organization killed Kennedy. I know it sounds crazy. We are living in a crazy world.
The all seeing eye. Its on the back of the American dollar bill. Am I crazy, or deluded, as the old man said of me? Rock stars who are members of the Illuminati do the pyramid hand sign in their photos. Not only are they not trying to hide it…they love to show the other members that they are also a member. The pyramid with the eye in it….its all over the catholic churches and all over their walls. Im sure the devotees will explain who im nuts and that the all seeing eye is a godly symbol. One enterprising cathol in here told me that the Red Dragon up on the Vatican wall is not really a dragon, but a furry little kitty cat.
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
I don’t know Bosco, and really, I don’t care, I know the Lord, and what need have I of anything else? 🙂 xx
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTAnAgE9l5Hnly1qG0zRnnw4e5NfXPS3ANMPMwwsezj5g5qtBx3kg
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
Good and great answer. All we need is the Lord and Him crucified. There is nothing else.
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
It is so dear Bosco. He told us that we will be saved through his blood. I am covered in that blood and saved through it – though I am a sinner and not worthy – he picked me up.
LikeLike
Grandpa Zeke said:
Than hand sign Bosco is so worked up about is the American Sign Language sign meaning “I love you.” He will dispute this because he is deluded in his thinking and needs all of our prayers. Pope Francis apparently made the ASL hand signal meaning “I love you” when he was visiting in the Philippines. It really only takes a simple internet search to find the truth of these matters and Bosco’s delusions add nothing to the seriousness of today’s discussion.
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
They don’t poor darling.
I think some of the links to that catholic site were really useful to us all, Did you see them, grandpa?
LikeLike
Grandpa Zeke said:
I haven’t yet read it Jessica, in and out of the greenhouse today, but I surely will read before the end of the day. God bless you. xx
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
They are useful links, not least for those who are fearful as a result of the various rumours on the Internet – I owe the link to Chalcedon, who thought we might all benefit from it. He says it is good stuff.
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
I assume good brother Grandpa is elderly. That means he has bought into the line that only TV and velveta processed cheese spread is all that is real. Do satanic rock stars do the “I love you” hand sign ? He has no idea of the spirit world, or that satan rules this world. If satan does rule this world, then whom is he ruling? According to good brother Zek…no one. According to scripture,….almost everyone.
Say good brother Zek, what about all the other hand signs these guys do? You want to explain them all away? And one more thing….are you a mason? Or don’t you want to admit it.?
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
Why are you obsessed with these sorts of things Bosco? God is love, concentrate on God.
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
Because I noticed that you brought up the subject of masons earlier. I never bring up that subject. I don’t care enough about some club or another.
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
It came up from Dave S I think.
LikeLike
Grandpa Zeke said:
The only true statement in this ad hominem attack is that I am elderly. I will continue to pray for Bosco.
LikeLiked by 2 people
JessicaHof said:
Such prayers are especially valuable I think, Grandpa. We are told by the Lord to pray for those who despitefully use us, and he does not tell us that for naught, I am sure – bless you for the example you offer here 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Bosco the Great said:
Good brother Zek, are you a freemason?
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
Bosco – that’s a dreadful question – now stop it – am I going to have to find where I put the naughty step?
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
No, please no…not the naughty step again. Ill be good.
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
I knew you would be – bless you 🙂 xx
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bosco the Great said:
A few yrs ago, I had a client that offerd to sponsor me into the Lodge…the Freemasonic Lodge. he said they were very Christian. Talk about chills up my spine. About 5 weeks later I attended his funeral. I sat up on a platform next the the Grand Mason…because it was the only chair left in the room. I was with him the day he died. Actally, I was across the street from his house at a ladies house. He came over to put the final screw in her fence door he fixed for her.
I said to him…Don, you look good…..He slapped his chest and said….Ah feel good. He was on his way to a Lodge meeting. About 2 blocks from the Lodge, he had a massive coronary and opened his car door and fell out dead onto the street.
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
Poor man, may the Lord have mercy on his soul.
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
Padre Pio was of a similar mind. Was he a kook too?
He was worster than a kook. He promoted a false religion and he tricked people into thinking he shared in our Lords crucifix. He went to his reward.
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
Now Bosco, how can you say such awful things? Do you not believe in miracles and holiness? Padre Pio seems to me to have been a humble and a holy man who knew the Lord.
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
That’s because you are trusting and innocent. You don’t see the sinister ways of the devil. He reveled in showing off his crucifix wounds. He made them by putting acid on his hands. Come on…think about it. Jesus is the only one to die for our sins and suffer to redeem us. Anyone who claims to be a part of our redemption is a liar. And anyone who follows him will receive of the same reward he does.
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
He wasn’t claiming to be part of our redemption Bosco – he simply shared in the suffering of the Lord. We can all offer our suffering up to Him.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bosco the Great said:
yeah, Ok good sister, if you say so.
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
I do. I think he was so obviously a holy and a humble man – all he got for his pains for most of his life was suspicion from his own church.
LikeLike
Grandpa Zeke said:
“Do not tire yourself over things that cause anxiety and worry. Only one thing is necessary: to lift up your spirit and love God.” -St. Pio
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
So true, grandpa.
LikeLike
NEO said:
This is a seriously good link, dearest friend, recommended to all with an interest in reality.
http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/mass_new_vs_old.php#hermeneutics
LikeLiked by 2 people
Servus Fidelis said:
http://www.newmanreader.org/works/parochial/volume2/sermon7.html
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
http://www.nairaland.com/attachments/273425_PopeRatzinger-handsign2-20-09_jpgaa51fa24ccea1ccb931065c02bd0a7c9
Good brother Zeke…what is the german pope doing making the American “I love you” sign in Italy? Hes not. Its his masters sign.
LikeLike
Grandpa Zeke said:
I continue to pray for you Bosco.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jock McSporran said:
Jessica – I know which church you are involved with – or at least I can narrow it down to two. I won’t state it here, since it’s up to you to give this information on this forum if you want it known – and with hold it if you don’t.
I’d say that the approach to ‘getting saved’ that you and Rob seem to have been describing doesn’t correspond to my own Christian experience (of how I started taking it seriously) and doesn’t seem to leave room for the work of the Holy Spirit which I have seen as in some sense ‘normal’ for serious Christians.
You emphasise the importance of a church community that is welcoming and accepting, etc, etc …. and while all of that is important, I don’t think it played a role in my conversion or keeping me in Christ; it was more part of the ‘after sales service’, making the Christian life pleasant.
I came to faith hearing the word, thinking about it, being challenged by it, being conquered by it – and from that point on I was a Christian, whether the churches were any good or not; whether they were welcoming or not, whether they proclaimed the word or not. The best thing the church could provide was a nice service with good prayers, hymns, bible reading and sermon – and some talk over a cup of tea between fellow travellers in Christ – and not with some super-spiritual person getting paid by the church who formed part of some spiritual A-team. Of course, the prayer meeting to pray for the mission at home and abroad (outward looking – and emphatically not to brood on personal problems of the participants) was also a vital part of church activity.
In short – there is something that doesn’t quite add up with what you and Rob are describing here. When I have spoken to others who have come to faith, they seem to have the same general path as my own; coming to an understanding independent of churches, coming to faith despite everything that contradicts it, being conquered by the Word of God. And even if every church in the area turns out to be duff, this doesn’t put them off being Christian – since that is the work of the Holy Spirit – although it may put them off going to church (something very different).
LikeLiked by 3 people
JessicaHof said:
Some who are here come that way too, Jock. What we do is two things – provide a welcoming community for such people which they can decide to join if we suit them. We also provide Bible study classes and various other groups which people can come to. But we can only receive what the Spirit provides – and nurture people in their Spirit-filled faith.
LikeLike
Jock McSporran said:
Jessica – as I said, from my point of view, it doesn’t seem to add up. I didn’t engage in the topic of the previous thread, because the woman who came out as ‘gay’ in your first conversation with you sounded more like a plant, an ‘enemy agent’, rather than anything else.
As far as the topic of this thread goes – it is very important that the aim of church service, the act of worship, is that Christians (i.e. people who are already in Him) can worship God. If this is compromised because it is considered off-putting for someone who doesn’t believe and has simply come along to church to see what it is like, then there is a serious problem.
I don’t want to get into the particulars of the discussion about Reverence, because I do think that the Latin mass is rubbish (it might be OK if the education system were decent and everybody had to do O-grade Latin as I did – and if we could all translate the Aeneid. One of the high points of my education when I was 15 years old was translating the last chapter of The Aeneid. I now understand that even when I was going through it was already unusual to get this from a bog-standard comprehensive, which I attended, so I should count myself lucky) and I don’t think that any other type of Catholic mass is any better. But if Servus Fidelis feels that he can worship God through the Latin mass and that he cannot do this through the new post-Vatican 2 mass, because he thinks that the post-V2 mass has been heavily compromised to make the church community look more welcoming to those not yet committed to faith in Christ, then he has a very legitimate grievance.
I do think that you’re putting far too much emphasis on the priests and people employed by The Church. In your own spiritual life, you have made it clear that you go to confession an awful lot – because it gives you direct access to God through a priest – and I don’t understand why you don’t have this access when you simply pray directly to God. What does the confessional do for you that prayer to God doesn’t? Why do you need an additional level of mediation? Isn’t one mediator between man and God, Jesus Christ, enough?
We’re called upon to live godly lives, to be prepared to give a reason for the hope that we have. Some people are called to full time service to proclaim The Word, but from what you have described of the church that you are involved with, there seems to be a whole battery of people – priests and other salaried people, a spiritual A-team if you like, who act as mediators in a way that seems unhealthy to me. It doesn’t correspond to any part of my experience and it also doesn’t correspond to any of the conversion stories that I see in Holy Scripture.
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
If I’ve given that impression, Jock, then I’ve not been very good at describing what is happening here.
It isn’t that anyone here is a mediator (my own confessor is at another Church), we are all facilitators in that we exist to help people who want to create communities within this bigger one to do so – so, I’ve begun helping with Bible study, and I help a bit with a group helping with female refugees and the problems they are encountering; others help organise walking groups, or reading groups, of various arts and crafts events – so we are a vibrant community offering opportunities for people to bond in ways which society often does not any more. For me, and I think the priests here, it is about teaching the faith, both to the uncatechised and the badly catcheised, and providing services, of different styles, where people can come and offer worship to the Lord. I see communities in Acts which seem to do that, and am glad to be part of one.
My own formation is Anglo-Catholic, and so confession has been a part of my spiritual practice since conformation. I go every week, but that’s not the only time I speak to God about my sins and get advice from him. But I believe that when Jesus said the the Apostles had the power to forgive sins in his name, that power was passed on to their successors down the ages – so it is, if you like, a spiritual deep clean as opposed to my more normal spiritual cleansing.
The young woman is one of a group of who come here because they have found us to be the only church in the area in which they feel comfortable. Not all of them have come to the Lord yet, but some have, and the fact that they come every Sunday and hear the Word preached is better than them lying in bed sleeping – as they used to do.
A good Church community ministers to those at all levels – acknowledging we are all sinners and working together from there.
So, for those of us whose stomachs are ready for the meat, as it were, we have Morning Service at 8, and Evening Service at 6, both of which are older forms of liturgy, and then a sung Eucharist at 10.30, which includes modern worship songs – I can’t say those are to my taste, but last time I looked, no one made be an arbiter of taste. It works for the 300 or so who come every week, so something is going right.
And yes, I do think numbers matter. You can’t catehcise people who aren’t there. You can’t catechise people who come once and find the whole thing strange and no one welcomes them.
All we can do is work with the Holy Spirit and what He sends us. That this place has turned around in the last four years from being threatened with closure to being one of most vibrant Christian communities I’ve ever seen is a tribute not to the people here, but to the Spirit who inspires them.
LikeLiked by 1 person
NEO said:
Not surprisingly, I agree with you, Jess, on all points. But I think the key point to most of this week’s discussion lies in this comment:
“You can’t catechise people who aren’t there. You can’t catechise people who come once and find the whole thing strange and no one welcomes them.”
How very true this is, and how easy it is to forget, as we argue and discuss the forms and liturgies, but none of that matters as much as the legendary butts in the pew. That’s not an excuse to not do a valid service, ever, but it is a reminder that it is our mission to spread the Word, not simply worship.
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
Seems straightforward enough to me – just hard in practice 🙂 xx
LikeLiked by 1 person
NEO said:
Yes, it is hard, very hard, to do. But you know, as I do, things that are important are rarely easy. 🙂 xx
LikeLiked by 1 person
JessicaHof said:
Very true 🙂 xx
LikeLike
NEO said:
🙂 xx
LikeLiked by 1 person