FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Rorate Caeli: Many FI priests petitioning to be relieved of pontifical vows
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
(05-15-2014, 11:47 AM)puppy99 Wrote: [ -> ]Dears, can anyone explain to me what's happening? What's the good of it for those priests to be relieved of pontificial vows and become diocesan?

Diocesan Rite is achieved when a religious institute achieves 40 fully-professed members. Pontifical Rite is achieved when a religious institute achieves 200 fully-professed members. As far as I can tell, leaving Pontifical Rite means less direct scrutiny from the Curia. They would return to their status of being dependent upon local Dioceses, rather than acting as their own "floating diocese" - to use a somewhat imprecise allegory.

To relinquish Pontifical Rite is somewhat akin to relinquishing some freedom... but with this Pope, it may well be for the better.
Since nearly half of the priests are leaving FI, this beautiful congregation is going to be destroyed.  :'((  >:(
(05-15-2014, 11:45 AM)puppy99 Wrote: [ -> ]I am outrageous because of the pope.

Ha.

(05-15-2014, 11:45 AM)puppy99 Wrote: [ -> ]He is, as per Bishop Fellay, millions of times worse than Pope Benedict XVI, and leading souls to hell.

Did +Fellay really say "millions of times worse"?

(05-15-2014, 11:59 AM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]Is it now acceptable on this forum to call the Sovereign Pontiff a heretic?  Must we continue to "wait and see," or are we to call "black" that which is clearly white?  I'm not looking to be provocative, but I just glanced at the forum rules again and they remain the same as they've always been.

Yeah, I'm a bit surprised at some of the threads that are currently being permitted.
(05-15-2014, 11:59 AM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]Is it now acceptable on this forum to call the Sovereign Pontiff a heretic?  Must we continue to "wait and see," or are we to call "black" that which is clearly white?  I'm not looking to be provocative, but I just glanced at the forum rules again and they remain the same as they've always been.

Has anyone called him a heretic on this thread?
(05-15-2014, 11:59 AM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ][size=10pt]Is it now acceptable on this forum to call the Sovereign Pontiff a heretic?[/size]  Must we continue to "wait and see," or are we to call "black" that which is clearly white?  I'm not looking to be provocative, but I just glanced at the forum rules again and they remain the same as they've always been.

On what grounds would someone call him a heretic?  What is his heresy?
(05-15-2014, 11:43 AM)puppy99 Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-15-2014, 10:07 AM)Deidre Wrote: [ -> ]This whole thing reminds me of the struggles of St. Teresa and the early Carmelites. Friars were arrested, nuns were excommunicated en masse, one of her convents was deprived of the Blessed Sacrament... But she said the same thing about crosses. She told her nuns to rejoicewhen they were misunderstood and persecuted, because then they could imitate Our Lord in something.

But they were not forced to say Novus Ordo mass or profess fidelity to Vantican II.

Exactly.
(05-15-2014, 11:59 AM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]Is it now acceptable on this forum to call the Sovereign Pontiff a heretic?  Must we continue to "wait and see," or are we to call "black" that which is clearly white?  I'm not looking to be provocative, but I just glanced at the forum rules again and they remain the same as they've always been.

Where on this thread has anyone called Pope Francis a 'heretic'?
(05-15-2014, 03:43 PM)Miles Immaculatae Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-15-2014, 11:43 AM)puppy99 Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-15-2014, 10:07 AM)Deidre Wrote: [ -> ]This whole thing reminds me of the struggles of St. Teresa and the early Carmelites. Friars were arrested, nuns were excommunicated en masse, one of her convents was deprived of the Blessed Sacrament... But she said the same thing about crosses. She told her nuns to rejoicewhen they were misunderstood and persecuted, because then they could imitate Our Lord in something.

But they were not forced to say Novus Ordo mass or profess fidelity to Vantican II.

Exactly.

You missed my point.
(05-15-2014, 11:59 AM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]Is it now acceptable on this forum to call the Sovereign Pontiff a heretic?  Must we continue to "wait and see," or are we to call "black" that which is clearly white?  I'm not looking to be provocative, but I just glanced at the forum rules again and they remain the same as they've always been.

It's always acceptable to call a heretic for who he is, including the Holy Father, but one must have sufficient evidence to declare him such.

Being a lousy pope is not grounds for declaring him a heretic.
(05-15-2014, 05:55 PM)austenbosten Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-15-2014, 11:59 AM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]Is it now acceptable on this forum to call the Sovereign Pontiff a heretic?  Must we continue to "wait and see," or are we to call "black" that which is clearly white?  I'm not looking to be provocative, but I just glanced at the forum rules again and they remain the same as they've always been.

It's always acceptable to call a heretic for who he is, including the Holy Father, but one must have sufficient evidence to declare him such.

Being a lousy pope is not grounds for declaring him a heretic.

Only a future Pontiff may judge a predecessor of heresy. I do not intend to judge the Holy Father and call him heretic, and I do not claim to have the authority to do so. However, the following, taken at face value does seem 'heretical', according to my meagre and defective intellect:

We hold the Jewish people in special regard because their covenant with God has never been revoked. (Evangelii Gaudium #247)

Now, I do not know what the Pope meant by this. I will give him the benefit of the doubt. The comment is ambiguous. I will assume it is not 'outright formal heresy', if such a thing exists, I don't understand the proper criteria.

This is what the Church teaches, and this teaching is infallible, I believe:

“It [The Holy Roman Church] firmly believes, professes and teaches that the legal prescriptions of the old Testament or the Mosaic law, which are divided into ceremonies, holy sacrifices and sacraments, because they were instituted to signify something in the future, although they were adequate for the divine cult of that age, once our lord Jesus Christ who was signified by them had come, came to an end and the sacraments of the new Testament had their beginning.” - Council of Florence

I am not sure to what extent, if any, there is a contradiction with what the Pope said in EG and previous infallible teaching.

I'll leave it up to you.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9