Vatican Offers SSPX Ordinariate
#11
It would be terrible PR for papacy to say, "Yeah, that ecumenical council was in error on x, y, and z." When Pius XII decided to reverse completely the (non-infallible) decision of Florence regarding the matter and form of the sacrament of Order, he never came out and said, "Florence is in error." He simply stated the truth and left it to theologians to explain the discrepancy.
Reply
#12
(08-24-2011, 12:31 AM)Resurrexi Wrote: It would be terrible PR for papacy to say, "Yeah, that ecumenical council was in error on x, y, and z." When Pius XII decided to reverse completely the (non-infallible) decision of Florence regarding the matter and form of the sacrament of Order, he never came out and said, "Florence is in error." He simply stated the truth and left it to theologians to explain the discrepancy.

Yes, that's what the Papacy and the Church really need to worry about: PR.

Truth? What is truth?

Sounding like Pilate more and more.
Reply
#13
(08-23-2011, 11:57 PM)CollegeCatholic Wrote: Thoughts? Do you trust bp. Fellay to make the right choice? 

Not really, to be honest.

God is in charge, though. Remember that.

I believe the real solution won't come from the SSPX or the jackals in the Roman Curia: it will come from heaven. The only thing the SSPX can aspire to be is a vehicle of grace, preserving Divine Revelation in its entirety.
Reply
#14
If Benedict XVI offers an ordinariate or something similiar, then the Society, to be consistent, should accept it.  To be separate from those that they say Chirst has put in charge of the Church is absurd.  They have made, de facto, the Superior General their pope.  They don't get to pope sift.  Either Benedict is the pope or he is not.  If he is, submit.  Don't let group think or loyalty to the old man take away your objective reasoning.  

 Joe
Reply
#15
(08-24-2011, 12:49 AM)joe17 Wrote: If Benedict XVI offers an ordinariate or something similiar, then the Society, to be consistent, should accept it.  To be separate from those that they say Chirst has put in charge of the Church is absurd.  They have made, de facto, the Superior General their pope.  They don't get to pope sift.  Either Benedict is the pope or he is not.  If he is, submit.  Don't let group think or loyalty to the old man take away your objective reasoning.

You sure know a lot about "objective reasoning", Joe.
Reply
#16
(08-24-2011, 12:45 AM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(08-24-2011, 12:31 AM)Resurrexi Wrote: It would be terrible PR for papacy to say, "Yeah, that ecumenical council was in error on x, y, and z." When Pius XII decided to reverse completely the (non-infallible) decision of Florence regarding the matter and form of the sacrament of Order, he never came out and said, "Florence is in error." He simply stated the truth and left it to theologians to explain the discrepancy.

Yes, that's what the Papacy and the Church really need to worry about: PR.

The pope doesn't need to give anti-Catholic apologists more material to use.

Also, we don't need religion reporters coming up with crazy headlines like, "Church rejects former teaching."
Reply
#17
(08-24-2011, 12:55 AM)Resurrexi Wrote:
(08-24-2011, 12:45 AM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(08-24-2011, 12:31 AM)Resurrexi Wrote: It would be terrible PR for papacy to say, "Yeah, that ecumenical council was in error on x, y, and z." When Pius XII decided to reverse completely the (non-infallible) decision of Florence regarding the matter and form of the sacrament of Order, he never came out and said, "Florence is in error." He simply stated the truth and left it to theologians to explain the discrepancy.

Yes, that's what the Papacy and the Church really need to worry about: PR.

The pope doesn't need to give anti-Catholic apologists more material to use.

Also, we don't need religion reporters coming up with crazy headlines like, "Church rejects former teaching."

I'm going to pretend you really didn't write that.

You should reflect on that line of reasoning: it makes your faith look weak and pathetic. I trust you will reconsider this.
Reply
#18
(08-23-2011, 11:44 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: It's all just talk right now.

When will the Pope acknowledge the modernist errors of Vatican II? Will I live to see the day? That's what I'm really interested in.

I think that the actions are the acknowledgement. I doubt that Rome would be doing much of anything if that was not the case.

Plus I think that the offer to the SSPX will be much more generous and will have much more teeth than just an ordinariate. There is going to be a message being sent and if nothing else this is a classic hammer and the anvil move by B16. In one side he sends the FSSP to flank (the hammer) as the modernist Bishops turn he sends the SSPX to crush them in the middle. (the anvil) If anything B16 has completely dumbfounded his detractor and critics and has out maneuvered his enemies.
Reply
#19
Vetus,

  I know enough about reasoning to know that if my pope has not given faculties and a mission to a pious union, that one of his predecessors rescinded any approbation to that society, then that means such organisation must submit to the pope's authority, not just give lip service.  One should also note that if a big lie has been permitted for over 40 years at most churches with Rome's permission, that those enforcing this has to be called out.
  I am putting it rather simply, of course.  I hope that helps you understand me better.

  Joe
Reply
#20
(08-23-2011, 11:44 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: It's all just talk right now.

When will the Pope acknowledge the modernist errors of Vatican II? Will I live to see the day? That's what I'm really interested in.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)