54 Answers from Bishop Fellay: the interview
#21
(02-18-2011, 09:08 PM)kgurries Wrote:   Ok, fair enough -- it's a confusing topic.  What does perfect communion with the Church entail?  Can there be such a thing as partial communion?  I look into those questions here:  http://opuscula.blogspot.com/2011/02/ful...union.html

Let me know if you agree or disagree with any of that.

I disagree with most of that.  There are multiple concepts of  'the Church" imprecisely and confusedly being toggled around.  All without clarifying the constitution of the Church. 

I recommend you take a look at Atila Sinke Guimareas' "Ecclesia"  volume 11 of his collection on Vatican II.  The whole book is a study in the contrasts between the pre-conciliar understanding of the Church with the multitude of notions that can be drawn from the documents of Vatican II due to its lack of precision even in the most traditional sounding documents.  The Holy Father's ideas on "wounds" and "fabric" referring to false religions reminds me of something akin to "the Beast with Five Fingers"  the idea that a member can be separated from the head and still maintain "elements" of itself when it was united to the head.    as if it is independently alive without the head and it's unity. 

At its best, "partial communion' is an imprecise term for "wish for communion."  It has no practical meaning when it comes to the "one, holy and apostolic Church"  One is one, communion is a state of completeness, it's can't be "partial" it is not. 

As Chesterton once remarked about St. Thomas in his book, " Against all this the philosophy of St. Thomas stands founded on the universal common conviction that eggs are eggs. The Hegelian may say that an egg is really a hen, because it is a part of an endless process of Becoming; the Berkeleian may hold that poached eggs only exist as a dream exists; since it is quite as easy to call the dream the cause of the eggs as the eggs the cause of the dream; the Pragmatist may believe
that we get the best out of scrambled eggs by forgetting that they ever were eggs, and only remembering the scramble. But no pupil of St. Thomas needs to addle his brains in order adequately to addle his eggs; to put his head at any peculiar
angle in looking at eggs, or squinting at eggs, or winking the other eye in order to see a new simplification of eggs. The Thomist stands in the broad daylight of the brotherhood of men, in their common consciousness that eggs are not hens
or dreams or mere practical assumptions; but things attested by the Authority of the Senses, which is from God."

Reply
#22
I noticed that the Bishop, in his recent interview, says that one community which is embracing the EF is the Franciscans of the Immaculate. Indeed there are friaries now where this is the only form of the Holy Sacrifice offered.
Reply
#23
Gerard, fair enough.  I was mainly looking at the question of partial communion and what that entails.  I find it somewhat analogous to the prodigal son.  There is a real separation -- but not an absolute separation.  He still remains a kinsmen to his brothers in spite of his separation.  There is still a family bond that can't be totally broken.  Not sure if you saw what Cardinal Journet provided? 
Reply
#24
(02-19-2011, 12:34 PM)kgurries Wrote: Gerard, fair enough.  I was mainly looking at the question of partial communion and what that entails.  I find it somewhat analogous to the prodigal son.  There is a real separation -- but not an absolute separation.  He still remains a kinsmen to his brothers in spite of his separation.  There is still a family bond that can't be totally broken.  Not sure if you saw what Cardinal Journet provided? 

I did read that, but I think that is a construct built in order to support ecumenism, not an indicator of some kind of proximity to a "net dipole moment" concerning unity.  It's simply a recognition of similarities or what traditions, sacraments or ideas have been taken by the people who left the Church and their descendents. 

I also suspect that there is a hint of racial Judaism present as if, heretics, schismatics and apostates are kinds of "lost tribes" or something.  Contrast that with the interior of the temple that segregated people by station in life and conversely the Church having a heirarchy  and sanctuary.  But that is anti-Catholic with the universality of the openness of the Church to allow all people to enter.  Now, it's being described as the Church is a fragmented exterior with bits and pieces everywhere and a core that is the Catholic Church.
Reply
#25
Kgurries is right - it is a confusing situation for the Catholic Church right now.

I find it helps to picture what the overall outcomes would be for the Church given the ongoing struggle between the forces of Traditionalists v the larger camp of the Liberal/Modernisers.

Religious freedom or Vat II style Ecumenism would build a multicultural Tower of Babel, with a bland and dumbed-down liturgy, catechesis, doctrine etc, edging towards a toleration of even Sodomites in the liturgy, and call this globalised project The One Church.

Tradition would build an inter-dependent confederacy of Catholic Nations spread out across the globe, substantially distinct in their qualities but united in submission to the timeles deposit of Faith and the Traditional Liturgy. Not Babel, but a Catholic Church instead modelled upon the Heavenly Jerusalem, " After this I saw a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and tribes, and peoples, and tongues, standing before the throne, and in sight of the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands: [Apocalypse 7:10] " As also glimpsed terrestrially in Christendom of the High Middle-ages.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)