FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums
The SSPX Talks With Rome Are Not a Failure - Printable Version

+- FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Church (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Forum: Catholicism (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: The SSPX Talks With Rome Are Not a Failure (/showthread.php?tid=47420)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8


The SSPX Talks With Rome Are Not a Failure - Augstine Baker - 07-27-2011

The SSPX Talks With Rome Are Not a Failure
The Italian District Superior of the Society of Pius X: "the goal of the talks were never conceived to produce a settlement. "

(kreuz.net)  It is a "judgement afflicted with error", to characterize the talks of the SSPX with the Vatican as broken.

This was explained by the District Superior of the Society of Pius X, Father Davide Pagliarani, on the 26th of July in an interview with the famous website 'blog.messainlatino.it'.

http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2011/07/sspx-talks-are-not-failure.html


Re: The SSPX Talks With Rome Are Not a Failure - Aenigmata in Tenebris - 07-27-2011

So the intention of talks was "never to produce a settlement"?? Then why the continuous updates on where they were in regards to an agreement? Why waste time negotiating if the whole point if the negotiation is mute?

This is basically just rehashing the SSPX line that "the Church is wrong (as if the Church can be wrong); we are right". They'll come around some day. They have to come to an acceptance of us; the legitimacy of the SSPX canonical situation depends "rather upon that which the hierarchy accepts the mission, with which it can accept the contribution to Tradition for the renewal of the Church."

The SSPX has fallen so far from the intentions and ideology of Archbishop Lefebvre. http://sspx.org/archbishop_lefebvre/two_years_after_the_consecrations.htm




Re: The SSPX Talks With Rome Are Not a Failure - Augstine Baker - 07-27-2011

(07-27-2011, 02:31 PM)Aenigmata in Tenebris Wrote: So the intention of talks was "never to produce a settlement"?? Then why the continuous updates on where they were in regards to an agreement? Why waste time negotiating if the whole point if the negotiation is mute?

This is basically just rehashing the SSPX line that "the Church is wrong (as if the Church can be wrong); we are right". They'll come around some day. They have to come to an acceptance of us; the legitimacy of the SSPX canonical situation depends "rather upon that which the hierarchy accepts the mission, with which it can accept the contribution to Tradition for the renewal of the Church."

The SSPX has fallen so far from the intentions and ideology of Archbishop Lefebvre. http://sspx.org/archbishop_lefebvre/two_years_after_the_consecrations.htm

You obviously haven't been listening very closely to the talks or even paying attention to what's going on in the Church as a whole, have you?

Come back and talk to me when more than ninety percent of the Bishops aren't steeped in heretical and erroneous thinking.



Re: The SSPX Talks With Rome Are Not a Failure - Aenigmata in Tenebris - 07-27-2011

(07-27-2011, 02:36 PM)Augstine Baker Wrote: You obviously haven't been listening very closely to the talks or even paying attention to what's going on in the Church as a whole, have you?

Come back and talk to me when more than ninety percent of the Bishops aren't steeped in heretical and erroneous thinking.

Actually, I have - http://sspx.org/articles_index.htm

Read the always vague, always hopeful, press releases and progress with Rome on negotiations to reach an agreement. It's a non-stop sales pitch the whole way.

I'll return to my first question - co the point was NOT to reach a settlement or agreement?


Re: The SSPX Talks With Rome Are Not a Failure - Augstine Baker - 07-27-2011

(07-27-2011, 02:44 PM)Aenigmata in Tenebris Wrote:
(07-27-2011, 02:36 PM)Augstine Baker Wrote: You obviously haven't been listening very closely to the talks or even paying attention to what's going on in the Church as a whole, have you?

Come back and talk to me when more than ninety percent of the Bishops aren't steeped in heretical and erroneous thinking.

Actually, I have - http://sspx.org/articles_index.htm

Read the always vague, always hopeful, press releases and progress with Rome on negotiations to reach an agreement. It's a non-stop sales pitch the whole way.

I'll return to my first question - co the point was NOT to reach a settlement or agreement?

Apparently it was for the SSPX and Rome to take stock of the situation.  This is what the Italian superior is saying, not some goof-off with a blog.

What's wrong with sales?  The SSPX has an important mission to accomplish and that hasn't deviated much since Archbishop Lefebvre, has it?  It's about doctrinal clarity, validity, truth and the Liturgy. 

Are these things unimportant?


Re: The SSPX Talks With Rome Are Not a Failure - Aenigmata in Tenebris - 07-27-2011

(07-27-2011, 02:36 PM)Augstine Baker Wrote: Come back and talk to me when more than ninety percent of the Bishops aren't steeped in heretical and erroneous thinking.

If this be the case, then it would seem to mesh more with the theological position of the sede vacantist (not that I think that is bad - it seems a legitimate opinion).

God's teaching isn't vague. the Catholic Faith isn't vague. Doing the right thing is never vague - although at times it can be very difficult. These (admittedly now) pointless talks seem to be very vague, and have a very vague goal. I simply find the "show" of the talks to be pathetic.


Re: The SSPX Talks With Rome Are Not a Failure - Aenigmata in Tenebris - 07-27-2011

(07-27-2011, 02:51 PM)Augstine Baker Wrote: What's wrong with sales?  The SSPX has an important mission to accomplish and that hasn't deviated much since Archbishop Lefebvre, has it?  It's about doctrinal clarity, validity, truth and the Liturgy. 

Are these things unimportant?

Oratorators and salesmanship is important if you want to call it that. "Sales" when souls are in the balance shouldn't take 40 years... which is how long the SSPX has been under interdict.

Archbishop Lefebvre was always very direct and clear as to what he thought of those currently being negotiated with, especially after the consecrations.


Re: The SSPX Talks With Rome Are Not a Failure - Augstine Baker - 07-27-2011

(07-27-2011, 02:58 PM)Aenigmata in Tenebris Wrote:
(07-27-2011, 02:51 PM)Augstine Baker Wrote: What's wrong with sales?  The SSPX has an important mission to accomplish and that hasn't deviated much since Archbishop Lefebvre, has it?  It's about doctrinal clarity, validity, truth and the Liturgy. 

Are these things unimportant?

Oratorators and salesmanship is important if you want to call it that. "Sales" when souls are in the balance shouldn't take 40 years... which is how long the SSPX has been under interdict.

Archbishop Lefebvre was always very direct and clear as to what he thought of those currently being negotiated with, especially after the consecrations.

I've been having this argument  and witnessing it for almost twenty years and I'm continually surprised by how bankrupt it is, and yet intelligent people still choose to bank on it.

How can you seriously contend that the SSPX is under interdict, when they're practically the only organization in Western Europe that actually obeys and respects the person and office of the Pope?

The Photian Schism took hundreds of years to heal and the most recent one is still in effect.  Church history, much?


Re: The SSPX Talks With Rome Are Not a Failure - ggreg - 07-27-2011

If the Church can never be wrong then what do you do when your rational mind tells you that it is wrong, simply because it directly contradicts the truths it taught for 100s of years?

Sorry, but from where I am standing a strict view that "the Church" cannot err and my human reason do seem to be conflicting.  The Church appears to have erred to me.  I find this mysterious and it leads me to think that we are in the end times, but I cannot deny the fact that practically speaking the entire hierarchy of the Church are either apostates, heretics or people so gutless and weak that they won't stand up to them and resist.  The lukewarm if ever there was a meaning of that word.

If you ignore your reason and your senses and just chant "the church cannot err, the church cannot err", then I cannot see much difference between that and a member of a kool-aid drinking cult like the Branch Davidians.

People who say "something cannot happen because it cannot happen" are hardly credible when they deny it happening in the face of it happening.


Re: The SSPX Talks With Rome Are Not a Failure - SaintSophia - 07-27-2011

Its not the Church that erred here, but several men - albeit ones that held considerable power... and maybe even noble intentions.