Changes - Amended!
#81
(01-27-2012, 01:51 PM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(01-27-2012, 01:39 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:
(01-27-2012, 04:46 AM)Tapatio Wrote:
(01-23-2012, 05:06 PM)Someone1776 Wrote: I think it's the people who say "the Pope is the Pope, but I don't have to listen him" that get most terrified of the idea of attending NO as a last resort or trying to read Vatican II in light of tradition.  Sedes know there is no Pope so they don't need to think about these questions.  But for people who say "the Pope is the Pope, but I don't have to listen him" such approaches will completely shatter their approach to the Church.  They very much want to have their cake and eat it too, and admitting you can attend the NO as a last resort takes away their cake.  I think that's why this group is so quick to look for all the bad in the Church, so concerned that any good signs are in fact traps, and why they are so quick to label people as Neo-Catholics.  I am not saying sedes are saints on these forums, but for the most part they know where they stand and don't feel threatened by Benedict XVI. They seem to mostly see him as a man who likes to wear a funny hat.  On the other hand, people who say "the Pope is the Pope, but I don't have to listen him" see Benedict as a clear and present danger that must be stopped at all cost.  In addition this crowd tends to be most vociferously opposed to sedevacantism.  For mainline Catholics sedevacantism isn't much of a temptation so they don't feel the need to oppose it at all costs, even though they disagree.  They don't need to attack sedevacantism to justify to themselves why they still recognize Benedict as a true Pope. 

I think a lot of people show up here and see the words "neo-Catholic," "new religion," and "Pre-Conciliar Church vs Post-Conciliar"  tossed around and they don't stop to really think about what these words mean and adopt them without thinking.  Many people here are aware that there are problems in the Church, but they don't understand the traditional ways people addressed problems in the Church before in the past.  The "the Pope is the Pope, but I don't have to listen him" crowd is very quick here to make their approach dogma and seek quickly discredit anyone who points out obedience to the Pope is central to Catholicism.  They seek to falsely depict the choice as either you admit Benedict has instituted a new religion that we should do nothing with or we need to start clapping our hands and say everything is great within the Church.  People who are critical of the Novus Ordo, Vatican II, and the Pope, but admit all are valid are dismissed as compromising the faith and labeled "Neo-Catholics."  

That's a false choice.  You can be very critical of the Pope, Vatican II, and the Novus Ordo and remain obedient to Rome. That is the position that some of the most prominent defenders of tradition took such as Dietrich Von Hildebrand, Alice Von Hildebrand, and Michael Davies.  But, this position is very scary to many here and many see it as their duty to oppose it as all costs and delegitimize the people who take this position as much as they can.  

I think the venting of frustrations is fine. I think the raising of some big questions about the Pope, Vatican II, and the Novus Ordo should happen. Traditional Catholics have these issues on their mind.  I would think it might be good to restrict certain perennially contentious topics like the validity of the NO to one sub-forum so they stop derailing millions of threads not on those topics.  The problem is that are many people here who have taken it as a dogma of the faith that the Church of Benedict XVI is a new religion and have made themselves the Grand Inquisitors of the Church to enforce this dogma.

Frankly, I find many sedes approach these topics more charitably and consistently than people who say "the Pope is the Pope, but I don't have to listen him."  Father Anthony Cekeda, a prominent sedevacantist, will usually note in his writings that he is but a humble priest and he has no authority over you to compel you to believe anything or to cast you out of the Church.  Some sedes and mainline Catholics forget this, but I think when it comes to lay people thinking they have the authority over others, the power to enforce dogma and the power to cast others out of Church the people most likely to act this way are people who say "the Pope is the Pope, but I don't have to listen him."  And that is when things really get nasty here. When people start accusing each other of not being Catholic, but being followers of a false religion.  
Now why would you type that?
They know there is no pope? They think there is no pope is what you are saying right?
right?

I don't think he was stating objective fact. Sedes "know" there is no Pope in the same sense that atheists "know" there is no God. He was being facetious. Or at least that's the way I read it. Pretty sure Someone1776 is not a sede.

I am a Novus Ordo sede!  I know the chair is vacant because "Benedict" won't ordain women! 

It's not the lack of ordaining women, since no popes did.  However JP2 ceased to be pope after promulgating the heretical Ordinatio Sacerdotalis forever bound the archconservative "rad-trad-church" to a misogynistic view of the priesthood that denies the Divine Feminine.  I still hold to the true Spirit of V2 church.  We don't have any of the difficulties the trad sedes do, since they have to figure out how to adhere to trad teachings on the magisterium while not having one.

We Spirit Churchers don't need no stinkin' magisterium, problem solved.
Reply
#82
(01-27-2012, 01:57 PM)newyorkcatholic Wrote:
(01-27-2012, 01:51 PM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(01-27-2012, 01:39 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:
(01-27-2012, 04:46 AM)Tapatio Wrote:
(01-23-2012, 05:06 PM)Someone1776 Wrote: I think it's the people who say "the Pope is the Pope, but I don't have to listen him" that get most terrified of the idea of attending NO as a last resort or trying to read Vatican II in light of tradition.  Sedes know there is no Pope so they don't need to think about these questions.  But for people who say "the Pope is the Pope, but I don't have to listen him" such approaches will completely shatter their approach to the Church.  They very much want to have their cake and eat it too, and admitting you can attend the NO as a last resort takes away their cake.  I think that's why this group is so quick to look for all the bad in the Church, so concerned that any good signs are in fact traps, and why they are so quick to label people as Neo-Catholics.  I am not saying sedes are saints on these forums, but for the most part they know where they stand and don't feel threatened by Benedict XVI. They seem to mostly see him as a man who likes to wear a funny hat.  On the other hand, people who say "the Pope is the Pope, but I don't have to listen him" see Benedict as a clear and present danger that must be stopped at all cost.  In addition this crowd tends to be most vociferously opposed to sedevacantism.  For mainline Catholics sedevacantism isn't much of a temptation so they don't feel the need to oppose it at all costs, even though they disagree.  They don't need to attack sedevacantism to justify to themselves why they still recognize Benedict as a true Pope. 

I think a lot of people show up here and see the words "neo-Catholic," "new religion," and "Pre-Conciliar Church vs Post-Conciliar"  tossed around and they don't stop to really think about what these words mean and adopt them without thinking.  Many people here are aware that there are problems in the Church, but they don't understand the traditional ways people addressed problems in the Church before in the past.  The "the Pope is the Pope, but I don't have to listen him" crowd is very quick here to make their approach dogma and seek quickly discredit anyone who points out obedience to the Pope is central to Catholicism.  They seek to falsely depict the choice as either you admit Benedict has instituted a new religion that we should do nothing with or we need to start clapping our hands and say everything is great within the Church.  People who are critical of the Novus Ordo, Vatican II, and the Pope, but admit all are valid are dismissed as compromising the faith and labeled "Neo-Catholics."  

That's a false choice.  You can be very critical of the Pope, Vatican II, and the Novus Ordo and remain obedient to Rome. That is the position that some of the most prominent defenders of tradition took such as Dietrich Von Hildebrand, Alice Von Hildebrand, and Michael Davies.  But, this position is very scary to many here and many see it as their duty to oppose it as all costs and delegitimize the people who take this position as much as they can.  

I think the venting of frustrations is fine. I think the raising of some big questions about the Pope, Vatican II, and the Novus Ordo should happen. Traditional Catholics have these issues on their mind.  I would think it might be good to restrict certain perennially contentious topics like the validity of the NO to one sub-forum so they stop derailing millions of threads not on those topics.  The problem is that are many people here who have taken it as a dogma of the faith that the Church of Benedict XVI is a new religion and have made themselves the Grand Inquisitors of the Church to enforce this dogma.

Frankly, I find many sedes approach these topics more charitably and consistently than people who say "the Pope is the Pope, but I don't have to listen him."  Father Anthony Cekeda, a prominent sedevacantist, will usually note in his writings that he is but a humble priest and he has no authority over you to compel you to believe anything or to cast you out of the Church.  Some sedes and mainline Catholics forget this, but I think when it comes to lay people thinking they have the authority over others, the power to enforce dogma and the power to cast others out of Church the people most likely to act this way are people who say "the Pope is the Pope, but I don't have to listen him."  And that is when things really get nasty here. When people start accusing each other of not being Catholic, but being followers of a false religion.  
Now why would you type that?
They know there is no pope? They think there is no pope is what you are saying right?
right?

I don't think he was stating objective fact. Sedes "know" there is no Pope in the same sense that atheists "know" there is no God. He was being facetious. Or at least that's the way I read it. Pretty sure Someone1776 is not a sede.

I am a Novus Ordo sede!  I know the chair is vacant because "Benedict" won't ordain women! 

It's not the lack of ordaining women, since no popes did.  However JP2 ceased to be pope after promulgating the heretical Ordinatio Sacerdotalis forever bound the archconservative "rad-trad-church" to a misogynistic view of the priesthood that denies the Divine Feminine.  I still hold to the true Spirit of V2 church.  We don't have any of the difficulties the trad sedes do, since they have to figure out how to adhere to trad teachings on the magisterium while not having one.

We Spirit Churchers don't need no stinkin' magisterium, problem solved.

:LOL:
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)