A Problem of Traditionalism
#41
(11-02-2009, 08:22 PM)DesperatelySeeking Wrote:
(11-01-2009, 04:07 PM)nsper7 Wrote: Traditional Catholicism seems to have bred a great deal of division within the Church.

Let's turn that statement around - I think that post-conciliar modernism seems to have bred a great deal of division within the Church.

I never claimed otherwise, but as people are wont to often point out: this is a "Traditional" forum. Maybe I was too hyperbolic in comparing the division among "Traditional" Catholics to Protestantism's divisions and for that, I am sorry. Still, there are major divisions within the Traditional Catholic movement: (i.e. is the NO valid or not? is the SSPX disobedient [compared to FSSP/ICKSP/etc/] or doing the right thing? is the current Pope actually the Pope? are "Neo-Conservative" Catholics merely modern/progressive wolves in "smells'n'bells" sheeps clothing? etc.) and is this a sign of the negative fruits of the movement?
Reply
#42
(11-02-2009, 08:26 PM)nsper7 Wrote: [is this a sign of the negative fruits of the movement?

Again, this can be argued from the other side.  Can't the tensions that you listed be the negative fruits of modernism?

From a Trad perspective, that's what I'd argue.  The Trad perspective will say "if you hadn't changed, we wouldn't be dissenting"....the NO world will say "if you'd just go along with the new program, we'd all be in agreement".

There's not much common ground for discussion - one side is right.  There's not a middle ground.
Reply
#43
(11-02-2009, 08:34 PM)DesperatelySeeking Wrote:
(11-02-2009, 08:26 PM)nsper7 Wrote: [is this a sign of the negative fruits of the movement?

Again, this can be argued from the other side.  Can't the tensions that you listed be the negative fruits of modernism?

From a Trad perspective, that's what I'd argue.  The Trad perspective will say "if you hadn't changed, we wouldn't be dissenting"....the NO world will say "if you'd just go along with the new program, we'd all be in agreement".

There's not much common ground for discussion - one side is right.  There's not a middle ground.

But I wasn't pointing Traditional arguments with Non-Traditionalists. The FSSP claim to be Traditionalist, as do the SSPX and the SSPV and the CMRI, but the FSSP (along with the ICK, Canons-Regular of St. John Cantius, etc.) are in good standing with Rome. The SSPX has no Canonical standing within the Church and is in a state of disobedience with Rome, but they recognize the current Pope as valid. The SSPV (which separated from the SSPX) is Sedeprivationist. The CMRI is Sedevacantist and Feeneyist (it should be noted that +Lefebvre of the SSPX did not espouse a Feeneyist position).

Reply
#44
lets try this with a hypothetical.
Pope Benedict has a personal vision that so disturbs him that he goes to the world and the Worlds Bishops and proclaims authoritatively that Vat2 needs to be suppressed as does the NO, he proclaims Quo Primum to be his reset for the Church, banns all false ecumenical efforts, condemns Heresy, etc etc...in other words a full restoration of the Church's modality pre Vat2
Which groups would scatter into hundreds of schisms and apostasy? Traditionalists or Modernists? And which would coalesce into unity behind the Holy Father? That is where the True Church is.....
Reply
#45
That would be interesting, (the hypothetical).
I suspect that it would never happen. About 1977-8 I used to read L'Osservatore Romano from cover to cover every week. In that time Paul VI used to have his articles most weeks, and I remember thinking at one time with some exuberance that "this man is changing his mind about "the renewal"". But almost immediately he disappeared from the pages and Jean Cardinal Villot took over.
I rather think that the modernists have the hierarchy so well under the thumb that nothing that doesn't suit their purpose will see the light of day (officially) until a (possibly very painful) clean up takes place.
Reply
#46
(11-02-2009, 11:34 PM)voxpopulisuxx Wrote: lets try this with a hypothetical.
Pope Benedict has a personal vision that so disturbs him that he goes to the world and the Worlds Bishops and proclaims authoritatively that Vat2 needs to be suppressed as does the NO, he proclaims Quo Primum to be his reset for the Church, banns all false ecumenical efforts, condemns Heresy, etc etc...in other words a full restoration of the Church's modality pre Vat2
Which groups would scatter into hundreds of schisms and apostasy? Traditionalists or Modernists? And which would coalesce into unity behind the Holy Father? That is where the True Church is.....

If such a thing happened, I would trust the Pope and have the faith in the Holy Spirit's guidance of the Church and I guess I would be attending a TLM from then on, eh? It is within the Pope's authority to suppress the use of a Form/Rite (after all, that is what St. Pius V's Quo Primum did) and, since the declarations of the Second Vatican Council are pastoral (no infallible declarations), they can be altered by the Pope, another Ecumenical Council or the actions of the universal and ordinary Magesterium.
Reply
#47
Hmm.
Papolatry doesn't equal Catholicism.
There have already been some 40 or so "popes" that have been deposed or censured for heresy or anti-popery.
Reply
#48
(11-03-2009, 02:21 AM)Oldavid Wrote: Hmm.
Papolatry doesn't equal Catholicism.
There have already been some 40 or so "popes" that have been deposed or censured for heresy or anti-popery.
Hang on. Protestants accuse catholics of being papolatrists. Catholics don't accuse catholics of it? Do they?
Reply
#49
Whether they are accused or not many "catholics" are indeed papolaters.
Reply
#50
(11-03-2009, 04:36 AM)Oldavid Wrote: Whether they are accused or not many "catholics" are indeed papolaters.
Your joking. That's amazing. Am i a popalator? Maybe I am an Maryolater as well.
Do you mean these people actually think that the Pope is the 4th member of the Trinity? I never heard of that before. Whacko.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)