FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: CDF rejects SSPX second response
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
(02-04-2012, 01:11 PM)Guardian Wrote: [ -> ]Chris: Just want to say I agree 100% with all your posts.  Keep fighting the good fight man, you're spot on and not alone.    
God Bless.

He's not alone, to be sure.  I think I agree with the goal of Chris's argument.  The strange thing is, I think the branch Chris is sitting on got lopped off by Msgr. Ocariz, and frankly, that amazed me.  At CAF, I was often in the minority asking for clarification about the limits of resistance to an order or teaching of the magisterium - and finally got banned for it.  But Chris and I are in the same boat:  per Msgr Ocariz, there is no room for dissent about anything, because Msgr. Ocariz insists that V2 changes the meaning of documents and traditions that preceded V2.  The best example I can give of this in action is in scripture:  modern scripture students do not believe that angels actually sang to shepherds, or that a star shone in the east.  They insist that the story "teaches a truth" even though it is historically false.  But they will not admit that if the angels did not sing, then the story is false, because they state that the fact that they have magisterial authority to apply new methods of interpretation reconciles the difference between belief over time.  That's just nonsense, though.  It means that when someone says Luther was a great witness for Christ, I cannot point to earlier documents saying he was not as proof.  There is no proof, except what happens today.  This restricts Chris, and it resticts me from finding common ground with Chris.  See the problem?
(02-04-2012, 01:18 PM)Warrenton Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-04-2012, 01:00 PM)Meg Wrote: [ -> ]While this may be partly true, I also believe that the pope truly wanted to give traditional Catholics a place in the Church. Okay, it wasn't a very big place, but it was a start. And TLM's are increasing, slowly but surely, in diocese all around the U.S. Some bishops still won't allow it, but that will change in time, and with patience, prayer, and fortitude, and hard work. Surely the Ecclesia Dei groups are a good example to all of us in this way.

I agree with what you wrote, in the main, though I distinguish different problems with the N.O. than simply being watered down, as you said. But this is a question of whether we look at V2 (and its legacy) as positive error, or passive omissions.  The question, to my mind, is mainly semantic.  But under the Msgr. Ocariz's framework, if traditionalists have a place in the Church, then to deny them a place in the Church was an injustice, and the bishops and priests who won't allow a place are out of step with the will of the magisterium, and in a state of functional schism themselves.  Isn't it easier, and more in accord with common experience, to concede that the magisterium can make errors of judgment like any other human institution, and that it can act unjustly, and that people can resist it when it does within certain degrees, based on justice?  What we can then debate is the degree, or form, resistance can take.    

But surely what may appear to be injustice (and perhaps it is injustice) has a valid reason according to God? God's ways are not always our ways, since we cannot see the bigger picture. Sometimes a situation requires a great deal of time to pass before God's plan is made evident. Perhaps this isn't a good example, but when St. Thomas Aquinas was kicked out of the University of Paris because the minimalists thought he was siding too much with Aristotlian philosophy, he didn't complain. He didn't say it was unfair. That's what saintly virtue does. Sure it was unfair, but eventually he was exhonerated and made a saint. He was so much in touch with God that he didn't require the respect and admiration of humans.
(02-04-2012, 01:22 PM)TrentCath Wrote: [ -> ]Indeed mindless obedience is always to be praised  :eyeroll:

Trent, whenever I concede too much I know you'll be there to pull me back!  :blush:

As I have been trying to make clear, my problem is not so much with Chris as it is with what Msgr. Ocariz wrote.  Chris and Meg and Jayne at least admit that V2 either changed things, or was used to usher in changes. They disagree on the degree to which one was justified in resisting the changes, and perhaps on the significance of the changes.  Msgr. Ocariz does not admit anything changed, because he says the fact of magiterial action reconciles all apparrent change.  Ironically, the intertices between the present and the past, while illusory, defines the spatial limit of permissible dissent, but only until a specific magisterial act addresses it.  It's a mind bender.  I find it interesting that neither Chris, nor Jayne, nor anyone on CAF has yet taken up my repeated requests to defend Msgr. Ocariz's approach.  This is significant, since Msgr. Ocariz claims to be explicating the hermanuetic of continuity. 
(02-04-2012, 01:22 PM)TrentCath Wrote: [ -> ]Indeed mindless obedience is always to be praised  :eyeroll:

Praiseworthy obedience will always dismissed as mindless by some people.
Meg Wrote:The pope truly wanted to give traditional Catholics a place in the Church.

The Church should be traditional in the first place, not divided up into groups such as, "modernists here, liberals there, and traditionalists over there."

You guys can go on and on about the Mass (which is truly an important issue), but the problem is more fundamental than that: it's about the Catholic Faith itself.  The hierarchy has perverted it, if not in theory (officially), then certainly in practice (e.g., ecumenical prayer gatherings, papal praise for heretics and for heretical sects).
(02-04-2012, 01:30 PM)Meg Wrote: [ -> ]But surely what may appear to be injustice (and perhaps it is injustice) has a valid reason according to God? God's ways are not always our ways, since we cannot see the bigger picture.

Of course!  But we are endowed with reason in order to make jugdments about what is good or bad, just or unjust, traditional or non traditional, even though we know in the absolute sense, most of our judgments are provisional due to our limitations.

Your analogy to St. Thomas was quite apt.  St. Thomas left, but he did not accept the truth of the university provosts. Also, the university did not attempt to silence him forever.  The medieval Church had better methods for dealing with dissent, precisely because its praxis was incredibly traditional.  That is why the Orthodox, despite being in schism, have not gone off on bizarre tangents like some Protestant sects:  they have retained the traditional praxis.  

The continuity of traditional sacramental form and prayer is what I have focused on -  and this is what I see Msgr. Ocariz attacking, much more so than Chris.   But Msgr. Ocariz does so at several removes, which is frustrating.
(02-04-2012, 01:46 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]
Meg Wrote:The pope truly wanted to give traditional Catholics a place in the Church.

The Church should be traditional in the first place, not divided up into groups such as, "modernists here, liberals there, and traditionalists over there."

You guys can go on and on about the Mass (which is truly an important issue), but the problem is more fundamental than that: it's about the Catholic Faith itself.  The hierarchy has perverted it, if not in theory (officially), then certainly in practice (e.g., ecumenical prayer gatherings, papal praise for heretics and for heretical sects).

There is nothing new about the hierarchy being imperfect in its practice of the Catholic Faith.
(02-04-2012, 01:53 PM)JayneK Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-04-2012, 01:46 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]
Meg Wrote:The pope truly wanted to give traditional Catholics a place in the Church.

The Church should be traditional in the first place, not divided up into groups such as, "modernists here, liberals there, and traditionalists over there."

You guys can go on and on about the Mass (which is truly an important issue), but the problem is more fundamental than that: it's about the Catholic Faith itself.  The hierarchy has perverted it, if not in theory (officially), then certainly in practice (e.g., ecumenical prayer gatherings, papal praise for heretics and for heretical sects).

There is nothing new about the hierarchy being imperfect in its practice of the Catholic Faith.

Edit: My continually complaining about it will not solve anything, so I'm just going to leave it alone.  Following Catholic news just increases my pessimism, and despair as well.  I think it's time for a break.
(02-04-2012, 01:53 PM)JayneK Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-04-2012, 01:46 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]
Meg Wrote:The pope truly wanted to give traditional Catholics a place in the Church.

The Church should be traditional in the first place, not divided up into groups such as, "modernists here, liberals there, and traditionalists over there."

You guys can go on and on about the Mass (which is truly an important issue), but the problem is more fundamental than that: it's about the Catholic Faith itself.  The hierarchy has perverted it, if not in theory (officially), then certainly in practice (e.g., ecumenical prayer gatherings, papal praise for heretics and for heretical sects).

There is nothing new about the hierarchy being imperfect in its practice of the Catholic Faith.

Meg's statement is very true, very revealing, and it's why the SSPX has justly stood firm against the current overtures toward regularization. Rome wants to cede Traditional Catholicism "a place" in the Church ! It's absurd.
(02-04-2012, 01:46 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]
Meg Wrote:The pope truly wanted to give traditional Catholics a place in the Church.

The Church should be traditional in the first place, not divided up into groups such as, "modernists here, liberals there, and traditionalists over there."

You guys can go on and on about the Mass (which is truly an important issue), but the problem is more fundamental than that: it's about the Catholic Faith itself.  The hierarchy has perverted it, if not in theory (officially), then certainly in practice (e.g., ecumenical prayer gatherings, papal praise for heretics and for heretical sects).

THIS!
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25