ORthodox perspective of Traditionalist Catholics
(05-12-2012, 11:59 PM)Crusader_Philly Wrote:
(05-12-2012, 11:01 PM)Silouan Wrote: And where exactly would one look to find "authentic" Catholicism these days? Bishop Fellay? Bishop Williamson? The Vatican with it's clown masses and laypeople communing each other? Perhaps if you could point us in the right direction the attacks would be a little less nonsensical.  :LOL:

Easy. The Catechism of the Council of Trent, for starters. Or, as the First Vatican Council declared:

Vatican Council I, Dogmatic Constitution on the Faith  (1870), DZ 1792. Wrote:Further, by divine and Catholic faith, all those things must be believed which are contained in the written word of God and in tradition, and those which are proposed by the Church, either in a solemn pronouncement or in her ordinary and universal teaching power  [magisterium], to be believed as divinely revealed.

And what to do when those solemn pronouncements clearly contradict each other?

(05-12-2012, 11:59 PM)Crusader_Philly Wrote:
(05-12-2012, 11:01 PM)Silouan Wrote: Any bishop who ceases to hold the Orthodox Faith has separated themselves, regardless of which throne they sit upon.

Indeed. The so called "Orthodox" have separated themselves from the one, true Catholic Church founded by Our Lord Jesus Christ, through pertinacious schism, attacks against the Holy See, denial of the apostolic doctrine of Roman Primacy, denial of essential points of Faith (just because Rome said the same), and not seeing marriage as an always indisoluble bound until death, admitting people to re-"marry" who were divorced after adultery. Schism and heresy lead to Hell.

Not according to the infallible Magisterium of the Catholic Church as expressed in papal statements and conciliar documents from Vatican II onward.  :)

(05-12-2012, 11:59 PM)Crusader_Philly Wrote:
(05-12-2012, 11:01 PM)Silouan Wrote: On the other hand, on pain of eternal damnation you are required to believe that it's impossible for the Pope to teach heresy and that you must give consent in issues of faith and morals even when not taught ex cathedra.

Which I and many others believe and do.

"The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the "eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels" - Pope Eugene IV

"For such people salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace which, while having a mysterious relationship to the Church, does not make them formally part of the Church but enlightens them in a way which is accommodated to their spiritual and material situation." - Pope John Paul II

So which of your infallible pontiffs do you follow on this teaching?  :LOL:

(05-12-2012, 11:59 PM)Crusader_Philly Wrote:
(05-12-2012, 11:01 PM)Silouan Wrote: The point is the SSPX are denying your own dogmas by not submitting to the Pope. They are in essence destroying the very thing they propose to save. Of course for us it proposes no issues for our faith, whereas for you it absolutely destroys the very foundations of your ecclesiology and undermines any justification for your continued separation from us.

Not everyone agrees with the SSPX position. You can find several threads on this topic throughout Fisheaters, even in the archives.

Yes, but many do. What do you think of them? Do you not see a fundamental inconsistency in their position?

(05-12-2012, 11:59 PM)Crusader_Philly Wrote:
(05-12-2012, 11:01 PM)Silouan Wrote: :LOL: :LOL: :LOL:

Take a look at the Dictatus Papae and tell me who is prideful! That being said, if the Roman faithful had been a little more prideful maybe they wouldn't have rolled over like dumb sheep while the Second Vatican Council gutted the faith they had received from their fathers. Perhaps that's a subject for another thread......

I do not see what is so funny about the powers of the papacy, which is of divine origin, descending from the Rock of St. Peter. That being said, would you like me to criticize your Russian prelates for collaborating with the KGB? Or any other faults of Eastern schismatic laity? I would remind you that this is a Roman Catholic forum.

That it is. I suppose that means you're only able to criticize each other? Either way, the rest of this statement is nothing but an excuse to throw insults. It certainly has nothing to do with the point I was making.

(05-12-2012, 11:59 PM)Crusader_Philly Wrote:
(05-12-2012, 11:01 PM)Silouan Wrote: Would you say the destruction of your Church since Vatican II and all that has followed such as the pedophilia scandal and the cover up are Divine punishment for something? Perhaps the intrigue of the Unia?

The Church "destroyed" since Vatican II? Absolutely not. Scourged and afflicted, yes. But we have survived 300 years of Roman persecutions, and before the Edict of Milan, 30 of 33 Roman Pontiffs faced martyrdom. The Romans who had issued edicts trying to eradicate the Church eventually converted. For 200 years, barbarian peoples destroyed the Western Empire, but were eventually civilized and converted. For centuries, Muslims have tried to conquer the Church, and still have not. The same cannot be said for the East, which fell in 1453. Heresy and schism may have afflicted the Church, but the Church is still here, and we are still here.

You and and other Eastern schismatics are not free from scandals now, are you? It should be of no surprise that many Catholics are sinners and people who have made mistakes.

What in the world are you talking about? Pretty sure we're still here and going strong.

[Image: 172832808.jpg]

Messages In This Thread
Re: ORthodox perspective of Traditionalist Catholics - by Silouan - 05-13-2012, 09:01 PM

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)