How Would You Act as Pope?
#41
Along the lines of it isn't my responsibility, I'd probably be a bad one. I'd raise Rosarium to the College of Cardinals and bring back the Inquistition. He wold be perfect in the job, as a pedantic head master type would be perfect. A sort of Johnny one note until everyone is singing from the same hymnal. Then I'd make Matthew Talbott the Executioner as he probably understands the gravity torture and of death. HK would be my dresser and I'd let him have free reign on Vestments or Attire  even down to all Parish Priests. You must look the part to be the part. Except no fiddle backs for me period. Ecco lo! Nienti, non due scarpe d'Giapetto ma Cole e Hahn indubio! That's all for now.
tim
my very first motu proprio, my mom would be proud
Reply
#42
(07-28-2009, 12:04 PM)timoose Wrote: Along the lines of it isn't my responsibility, I'd probably be a bad one. I'd raise Rosarium to the College of Cardinals and bring back the Inquistition. He wold be perfect in the job, as a pedantic head master type would be perfect. A sort of Johnny one note until everyone is singing from the same hymnal. Then I'd make Matthew Talbott the Executioner as he probably understands the gravity torture and of death. HK would be my dresser and I'd let him have free reign on Vestments or Attire  even down to all Parish Priests. You must look the part to be the part. Except no fiddle backs for me period. Ecco lo! Nienti, non due scarpe d'Giapetto ma Cole e Hahn indubio! That's all for now.
tim
my very first motu proprio, my mom would be proud

He seems the most reasonable. Lets elect timoose Pope...

(Hey, it worked for David Bawden...sort of)
Reply
#43
(07-28-2009, 11:11 AM)Scipio_a Wrote:
(07-27-2009, 07:30 AM)nsper7 Wrote: And I'd be just as blunt with SSPX: either accept the Church, Vatican 2 and all, or you're in schism.
And then you'd be in schism and we could all laugh about how sorry a "Pope" you;d been.

The Pope cannot b schism since he is the Pope. Basically, I am tired of SSPX trying to straddle the fence (they say are obedient to the Church, yet they refuse to accept the Pope's authority on matters they disagree with). Thus, I would put it to them plainly, there are two options:

A) You are fully obedient to the Church and the to the Pope. You will publicly submit yourselves to Papal authority, accept the validity of Vatican 2 and the Mass of Pope Paul VI. You will utterly renounce any sedevacantist ideas and you will issue a statement publicly condemning the idea. They will issue a comprehensive letter of apology for their actions that have led to division in the Catholic Church. Even though I normally don't want people kissing the Papal Ring, I would probably make every one of their clergy do so as a sign that they are fully resubmitting to Papal authority.

B) If they refuse, they are now deemed a schismatic group and all their clergy will be under a ban of excommunication. It will be deemed utterly inappropriate for the faithful for attend an SSPX Mass unless that is the only option in the area.

It sounds harsh, but what other option is there? I respect their desires and motives, but you cannot allow loose cannons on deck as it were. If they want to be society of the Catholic Church, then they must submit to the same level of authority as all other orders do.
Reply
#44
Would you also require the Cardinal Archbishop of Los Angeles, among others, to kiss your ring publicly as a sign of submission to your authority?
Reply
#45
(07-28-2009, 02:18 PM)nsper7 Wrote: It sounds harsh, but what other option is there? I respect their desires and motives, but you cannot allow loose cannons on deck as it were. If they want to be society of the Catholic Church, then they must submit to the same level of authority as all other orders do.

Well, this "same authority" seemingly has less problems with clown masses, non ordained people handling the Eucharist, open heresy being taught and Sacrilege than with an unapproved bishop.
Reply
#46
(07-28-2009, 02:18 PM)nsper7 Wrote:
(07-28-2009, 11:11 AM)Scipio_a Wrote:
(07-27-2009, 07:30 AM)nsper7 Wrote: And I'd be just as blunt with SSPX: either accept the Church, Vatican 2 and all, or you're in schism.
And then you'd be in schism and we could all laugh about how sorry a "Pope" you;d been.

The Pope cannot b schism since he is the Pope. Basically, I am tired of SSPX trying to straddle the fence (they say are obedient to the Church, yet they refuse to accept the Pope's authority on matters they disagree with). Thus, I would put it to them plainly, there are two options:

A) You are fully obedient to the Church and the to the Pope. You will publicly submit yourselves to Papal authority, accept the validity of Vatican 2 and the Mass of Pope Paul VI.

The SSPX already acknowledges the validity of Vatican II and that of the New Mass.

(07-28-2009, 02:18 PM)nsper7 Wrote: You will utterly renounce any sedevacantist ideas and you will issue a statement publicly condemning the idea.

How can the SSPX renounce what it does not hold? It has always condemned sedevacantism and ejected priests for adhering to it.

(07-28-2009, 02:18 PM)nsper7 Wrote: They will issue a comprehensive letter of apology for their actions that have led to division in the Catholic Church. Even though I normally don't want people kissing the Papal Ring, I would probably make every one of their clergy do so as a sign that they are fully resubmitting to Papal authority.

Quite the double standard you have there. Would you also thank them for having provided a liturgical oasis and a haven of orthodoxy to hundreds of thousands of Catholic faithful?

I am not a hardcore SSPXer; I adhere to their stance on Vatican II, but disagree with them as regards the New Mass, and deplore their "interesting" ecclesiology. But I cannot pretend that they were the ones who led to the greatest division in the Catholic Church over the past forty years, nor that they were not instrumental in preserving the treasure of the Church that is the TLM.
Reply
#47
(07-28-2009, 02:24 PM)Rosarium Wrote:
(07-28-2009, 02:18 PM)nsper7 Wrote: It sounds harsh, but what other option is there? I respect their desires and motives, but you cannot allow loose cannons on deck as it were. If they want to be society of the Catholic Church, then they must submit to the same level of authority as all other orders do.

Well, this "same authority" seemingly has less problems with clown masses, non ordained people handling the Eucharist, open heresy being taught and Sacrilege than with an unapproved bishop.

Well, as I said, I would not tolerate liberal crap either. As they say, I have two feet, I can stamp out multiple things at once. Clown Masses would be banned utterly. The use of EMHCs would be examined closely by a Papal Commission. I would bring Seminaries and clergy into line, demanding orthodoxy and orthopraxy. I would strongly consider a new Inquisition (although I would not call it that: perhaps the Holy Office for the Preservation and Defense of the True Faith, with more sweeping powers than the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith).
Reply
#48
(07-28-2009, 02:30 PM)nsper7 Wrote: Well, as I said, I would not tolerate liberal crap either. As they say, I have two feet, I can stamp out multiple things at once. Clown Masses would be banned utterly. The use of EMHCs would be examined closely by a Papal Commission. I would bring Seminaries and clergy into line, demanding orthodoxy and orthopraxy. I would strongly consider a new Inquisition (although I would not call it that: perhaps the Holy Office for the Preservation and Defense of the True Faith, with more sweeping powers than the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith).

Since the SSPX is a reaction against such things, fixing that would resolve everything so the issue of the SSPX wouldn't come up.
Reply
#49
(07-28-2009, 02:22 PM)DrBombay Wrote: Would you also require the Cardinal Archbishop of Los Angeles, among others, to kiss your ring publicly as a sign of submission to your authority?

Well, the liberal leaders I would basically talk to privately, saying the following:

Please teach the True Faith and meet requirements for orthodoxy or orthopraxy or please submit your resignation.

I would replace outgoing liberal Bishops with more Traditional ones (i.e. from the FSSP, ICKSP, even the SSPX once they were back in full and regular communion. Truthfully, I am not sure I would even require the returning SSPXers to kiss the Ring of the Fisherman now that I think about it. After all, the goal should not be to humiliate and basically 'conquer', but to get them to make a decision and promote unity in the Church.
Reply
#50
1) Have the TLM, but allow the Mass of the Catechumens to be in the vernacular in Low Masses (using dignified and traditional language). High Mass would still be Latin only

2) Go back to the pre-Pius XII calender of saints, and then add newer saints from there.

3) Reinstitute the pre-Pius X psalter

4) Holy Communion can only be administered by priests and deacons, while kneeling and on the tongue

5) No more female altar servers, and no more lay lectors, male or female. I would consider allowing a married subdiaconate though, and these subdeacons could read the Epistle

6) I would really encourage the growth of the Eastern Rites. In Greece, only the Greek Catholic Rite would be allowed; in Russia, the Russian; etc. As opposed to having the Latin Rite prevalent even in traditionally Eastern Rite countries

7) Oh, and my name would be Gregory XVII, or possibly Ambrose I


Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)