Belgium's Most Conservative Bishop, Selected by the Pope, Personally
#11
(01-13-2010, 09:22 PM)NonSumDignus Wrote: Even still, don't you agree that a Bishop who not only encourages the EF but actually says it himself is much preferable to one who attempts to suppress it?

First of all, I must confess I abhor the pretentiousness of the "Extraordinary Form" vs. "Ordinary Form" speech. This new concept put forward by the Pope that the Tridentine Mass and the Pauline Mass are somehow expressions of the same rite is quite disgusting, to say the least. Secondly, you obviously miss the point about the whole thing. Again, this is not a battle about "preferences" but about the integrity of faith. If it were about preferences, it should cease the minute it started.

To answer your question, I'll ask one myself: "Don't you agree that a protestant who not only believes in Christ's divinity but who actually professes belief in the Blessed Trinity is much preferable to a Muslim who is an open enemy of God?"
Reply
#12
(01-13-2010, 09:39 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: "Don't you agree that a protestant who not only believes in Christ's divinity but who actually professes belief in the Blessed Trinity is much preferable to a Muslim who is an open enemy of God?"
I'd say yes....but then I'd fall into your trap :laughing:
Reply
#13
(01-13-2010, 09:41 PM)RalphKramden Wrote:
(01-13-2010, 09:39 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: "Don't you agree that a protestant who not only believes in Christ's divinity but who actually professes belief in the Blessed Trinity is much preferable to a Muslim who is an open enemy of God?"
I'd say yes....but then I'd fall into your trap :laughing:

The trap is not mine, actually. This kind of trap was laid by the enemies of God a long time ago. Many fall for it, even the so-called "friends of Tradition."
Reply
#14
(01-13-2010, 09:39 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(01-13-2010, 09:22 PM)NonSumDignus Wrote: Even still, don't you agree that a Bishop who not only encourages the EF but actually says it himself is much preferable to one who attempts to suppress it?

First of all, I must confess I abhor the pretentiousness of the "Extraordinary Form" vs. "Ordinary Form" speech. This new concept put forward by the Pope that the Tridentine Mass and the Pauline Mass are somehow expressions of the same rite is quite disgusting, to say the least. Secondly, you obviously miss the point about the whole thing. Again, this is not a battle about "preferences" but about the integrity of faith. If it were about preferences, it should cease the minute it started.

To answer your question, I'll ask one myself: "Don't you agree that a protestant who not only believes in Christ's divinity but who actually professes belief in the Blessed Trinity is much preferable to a Muslim who is an open enemy of God?"


Well, yeah. At least he's on the right path - gotta start somewhere.
Reply
#15
(01-13-2010, 09:43 PM)franklinf Wrote: Well, yeah. At least he's on the right path - gotta start somewhere.

There you go, another victim of our times.

He's not "on the right path", since the right path leads to Heaven. He and the muslim are both hell-bound.

"[the Church] firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within her, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church." - Eugene IV, Cantate Domino.
Reply
#16
(01-13-2010, 09:49 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(01-13-2010, 09:43 PM)franklinf Wrote: Well, yeah. At least he's on the right path - gotta start somewhere.

There you go, another victim of our times.

He's not "on the right path", since the right path leads to Heaven. He and the muslim are both hell-bound.

"[the Church] firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within her, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church." - Eugene IV, Cantate Domino.

I should have been more clear in what I mean. By "right path" I meant to conversion to Catholicism. If one already believes some of the Truths, then one is on the right path to conversion - particularly when compared to an "open enemy of God."

Sorry for the confusion - not believing the dogma of EENS isn't a problem. But lets not forget, while they might be hell-bound, no one is on the way to hell until their death. There is always the chance for conversion - thus why I said that.

Thats why I think its good this bishop is appointed. Much better to have one friendly to / open to Tradition than one not. Greater chance of fully converting the former, as already halfway there (heart / mind isn't closed to it).
Reply
#17
(01-13-2010, 09:55 PM)franklinf Wrote: I should have been more clear in what I mean. By "right path" I meant to conversion to Catholicism. If one already believes some of the Truths, then one is on the right path to conversion - particularly when compared to an "open enemy of God."

My point was that they're both enemies of God. The muslim already believes in some truths too - the oneness of God, some moral precepts, etc. One could argue that after rejecting the absurdity of the mohammedan claim to truthfulness, he may be more disposed to embrace Catholicism than the protestant. The protestant has a strong bias against the Catholic Church, the whore of Babylon to him, so the particular creed he professes that claims to acknowledge Christ may be even more detrimental to his conversion than the mohammedan creed that rejects Him.

However, the plain truth is that they're both hell-bound by professing the creeds they profess. There's no degrees of "less-falsity" here in terms of our heavenly goal. Something is wrong even if it is 99,9% right. To claim that a person who believes in a 99,9% true creed is more disposed to the truth than one who believes in a 0,1% true creed is nothing but a mere pious conjecture. In fact, something 99,9% right is far more insidious and detrimental to the acceptance of Truth.

(01-13-2010, 09:55 PM)franklinf Wrote: Thats why I think its good this bishop is appointed. Much better to have one friendly to / open to Tradition than one not. Greater chance of fully converting the former, as already halfway there (heart / mind isn't closed to it).

Or, then again, he might be an obstacle to true restoration. One can only guess. In the meantime, there's nothing objectively sound to cheer about.
Reply
#18
(01-14-2010, 01:06 AM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: In the meantime, there's nothing objectively sound to cheer about.
You may be right, but the work snickerpuss comes to mind :bronxcheer:
:laughing:
Reply
#19
(01-14-2010, 01:12 AM)RalphKramden Wrote:
(01-14-2010, 01:06 AM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: In the meantime, there's nothing objectively sound to cheer about.
You may be right, but the work snickerpuss comes to mind

I assume that term must have some derogatory meaning in slang that I'm not familiar with.

Nevertheless, calling people's attention to the real issues at hand is a duty. Many seem to get excited about "conservative" bishops and priests being appointed. I, on the other hand, don't. Conservatives are enemies of the Faith, just like liberals.
Reply
#20
No Vetus you are just the perfect example of the very angry Rad Trad that will never be happy with anything except for returning the Church to the Middle Ages which in it of it self would not be bad I think most people here including my self would like to see a strong West, but its over time passed the reformation happened faith is no longer important in the west as a matter of the State.

The Church does not turn on 90 degree angles, and when it does its never permanent hence the Novus Ordo and how it will not survive the next 50 years in its current form.

To whom will you run Vetus when VII gets clarified and reaffirmed and the SSPX is reconciled to the Church and every church in the world celebrate the Tridentine as well as a reformed Novus Ordo? What fringe group will run to?
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)