Do not let the truth be lost re: SSPX Rome developments in 2009
#1
I've noticed in a lot of "recaps" of the events of the year, that the attempt to gloss over exactly what the real context of the Pope's lifting of the excommunications is being lost. 

The secular press will never acknowledge the existence of a Rosary Crusade or the fact that the Holy Father actually fulfilled the the two pre-conditions of the SSPX *before* they would be willing to sit down and talk about doctrinal issues.  They have been too concerned with mispresenting Bishop Williamson's statement and use that misrepresentation to chip away at the papacy. 

But Rome overtly and subltey  through its various "toadies" [Fr. Z, EWTN, Bishops who only have a veneer of orthodoxy]  have been from the beginning trying to recast the events as a complete overture of pure altruism on the part of the Holy Father.  Not a single word of the Rosary Crusade from anyone, especially the Pope.  With maybe the possible exception of this,  after he insults the SSPX , "Yet to tell the truth, I must add that I have also received a number of touching testimonials of gratitude which clearly showed an openness of heart." 

I would love to know what the number of "many unpleasant things--arrogance..etc"  that was heard compared to the millions of rosaries presented to him for years now in multiple Rosary crusades. 

Fr. Z was telling people, as if this is some great revelation that "hmmm.....the Pope is viewing this as a doctrinal issue."  For God's sake, it's about time!  No duh!  Hasn't that been what the SSPX has been saying since Paul VI and Archbishop LeFebvre had their big meeting in the mid 1970s?  I guess this is just and example of  the brilliant "insight" on the part of the Pope.  The Pope's no dummy, he's got plenty of books that express his ideas.  We don't need to "prop" him up by giving him phoney "insights" into the situation that a five year old would have the same insight about. 

If there is anything that makes me distrust Rome, it is the inability to be honest and complete in its presentation of facts.  There is a certain kind of immaturity at work when someone doesn't have the confidence to admit facts that they believe will undermine their temporal dignity.  Ironically, they don't even have anything to be proud of when it concerns their stewardship of the Church over the last few decades.  They should be humbly asking for prayers from the few faithful that are left and  they should be telling the whole truth.  To speculate on how it would sound :"When presented with 2 million rosaries from the faithful, I could not sit idly by when such a clear demonstration of faith and good will and the grace of God was made manifest.  It was through the faithful praying fervently that angels were sent to free St. Peter from prison.  We should look at this as a proof that the Holy Spirit is still active in His Church and the humble prayers of the faithful support Peter in his task. " 

There is a huge danger that history is going to be "revised"  (to use a word the secular press hates) to portray Rome as the gentle and charitable, rational, shepherds who out of nothing but paternal love reached out in response to a letter from four repentent bishops and took in some stray sheep who were too stupid to realize that there was no crisis in the Church and JPII was the great champion of the Latin Mass.  And Our Lady will have had nothing to do with it.   

The narrative starts with the request of the SSPX bishops and then goes to the Holy Father's act of pure charity (not justice) in removing the excommunications from these backwater people and he's going to prevent them from "drifting away."    There is no crisis in the Church, no acts of loyalty from the traditionalist faithful,  never was a need for the SSPX really, but the Holy Father made lemonade out of the lemons.  They were just a bunch of flakes that collected together and mislead a bunch of people that were disappointed in some "extravagances" in the implementation of the all wondeful Vatican II council. 

If that happens, a renaissance for the Church would be only the appearance of a renaissance and God will allow this crisis to drag out even longer and be even more painful.   

I can't express how disappointed I am that the Holy Father could go to the trouble to write this "explanation" to the whole world and never mention the power of prayer and Our Lady's role in his decision.  Even this sentence is problematic:  "The day I spoke about this at the Major Seminary, the feast of Our Lady of Trust was being celebrated in Rome. And so it is: Mary teaches us trust. She leads us to her Son, in whom all of us can put our trust. He will be our guide – even in turbulent times."

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedi...ca_en.html

I find that statement strangley off-putting the more I read it, I thought she was our guide and that He is our end. When we are with Him we need no guide because He is there. 




Reply
#2
I have only officially been Catholic for 5 years now trad for 31/2 but I can tell you one of the early things I learned is never trust modern Rome.
Reply
#3
"I love the Pope, it's the Vatican I can't stand."
Reply
#4
(12-31-2009, 12:13 AM)WanderingPenitent Wrote: "I love the Pope, it's the Vatican I can't stand."

Quote of the year!! And I totally agree.
Reply
#5
(12-31-2009, 12:10 AM)Baskerville Wrote: I have only officially been Catholic for 5 years now trad for 31/2 but I can tell you one of the early things I learned is never trust modern Rome.

God Bless.  I don't know how you did it. (humanly speaking, I know you got the grace to do it.)    Cradle Catholics are sometimes lucky to be Catholics precisely because of our weaknesses.  God probably said, "Oh he's going to run around bumping into things too much and make a hash out of things.  Cradle Catholic! "  
Reply
#6
(12-31-2009, 12:13 AM)WanderingPenitent Wrote: "I love the Pope, it's the Vatican I can't stand."

The problem is sometimes the words of the Pope, "the Vatican" and Joseph Ratzinger all come out of the same mouth.  I love the Pope when it's the voice of Peter,  I go back and forth when it's private theologiand Joseph Ratzinger speaking and I absolutely detest "the Vatican"  which can speak with a thousand forked tongues.

Reply
#7
Don't let this stuff worry you too much, Our Lady will have her say in history. Once the consecration of Russia is done, these sorts of problems will be sorted out.
If you think back just 5 short years, could you ever have imagined that tradition would have made such inroads to the point where the TLM is liberated, the SSPX bishops are unexcommunicated and now the Vatican is actually in the process of clarifying what V2 actually teaches, with the help of the SSPX nonetheless....
I still recall the days when I would open the paper and cringe when I saw JP2's picture, wondering "what kind of crazy antics is he up to now?"
Now I am occassionally pleasantly surprised, not always, but more so than before, much more.
I totally understand your frustrations, I share them, but we are moving forward, and any attempts by the liberal church establishment to marginalize the traditional movement will not stand.
In the end history will be written by the winners and Our Lady already said "in the end my Immaculate Heart will triumph."
Reply
#8
(12-31-2009, 12:28 AM)Gerard Wrote: The problem is sometimes the words of the Pope, "the Vatican" and Joseph Ratzinger all come out of the same mouth.  I love the Pope when it's the voice of Peter,  I go back and forth when it's private theologiand Joseph Ratzinger speaking and I absolutely detest "the Vatican"  which can speak with a thousand forked tongues.

God created as to be rational people, using our mind, as it is opposed to the gut feelings, and generic judgments.


Reply
#9
When the Motu Proprio first came out, I had an account here at FishEaters. I wrote that the entire Traditional Catholic world need to be grateful to the SSPX. I received violent and vulgar replies. Many were adament about others praying for this, too, not just the SSPX. THey weren't willing to accept the truth that lifting of the ban was a pre-condition for any theological discussion by Rome with the Society. I had gotten so annoyed that I closed down my account since that time until today.
Reply
#10
(12-31-2009, 12:05 AM)Gerard Wrote: But Rome overtly and subltey  through its various "toadies" [Fr. Z, EWTN, Bishops who only have a veneer of orthodoxy]   have been from the beginning trying to recast the events as a complete overture of pure altruism on the part of the Holy Father.  Not a single word of the Rosary Crusade from anyone, especially the Pope.  With maybe the possible exception of this,  after he insults the SSPX , "Yet to tell the truth, I must add that I have also received a number of touching testimonials of gratitude which clearly showed an openness of heart." 

I have  a very different impression of events.  Following the statements and actions of the Pope (and Fr. Z has been a key source of information) is the major influence leading me toward traditional Catholicism.  I was getting the message that something is really wrong with much liturgical practice as I was seeing it.  I was getting the message that there was something important and holy about the TLM and that I needed to check it out.  And I got the message from the lifting of the excommunications that the Pope sees great value in the SSPX and wants them in full communion with the Church because SSPX has something important to contribute.  It seems to me that the doctrinal clarifications being demanded by SSPX are clarification that the Pope wants and sees as necessary.  My impression is that he eagerly welcomes this process as being of great benefit to all.

Watching the events of the past year, my feelings toward SSPX have moved from suspicion to gratitude.  Next week, I am putting one of my children in an SSPX school which is not something I would have considered if it were not for how I understood the Pope.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)