Pope Calling Our Bluff?
Quote: In addition I have been reading some sedevacantists' writings, and to be quite honest, some of the people not keen on the expected deal talks in the very same language as the sedes.

Certainly you are much too bright a guy to have not noticed this going on for quite awhile. Yes, the pimple is now coming to a head, which makes for increased drama. But, in my reading on Trad forums over many years, I have always sensed a soft-sedevacantism by many. If not outright. Of course, I realize we are not all world class writers, me included most obviously, so I may be misinterpreting them or they may not be crystallizing their thoughts as well as they should. But, at the same time, I have found it intellectually dishonest to talk like a sede and yet take refuge in the fact that we have a pope. One shouldn't be able to have it both ways. As one famous bishop always is wont to mention; if it swims like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it probalby is a duck.
Quote:Do you think the SSPX has to obey the Pope if there is no compromise of faith and governance (even taking into account that the disagreements of VII etc are not resolved yet)?

If the SSPX is Catholic, which I think it is, yes it must obey the pope. And the idea that they have disagreements with VII is admirable. But, who do they think they are to change it? Especially from the outside. That's a losing propositon from the beginning. Unless, of course, there are elements within the Society which want no part of reconcilation and hence desinged the losing proposition to insure their victory and their vision from the outside. I believe the pope is reigning them in for their own good. Like a good father bringing his children back into the family. He is also telling them it is time act. Join the fold, or admit to schism. And I think he has shown much patience in this regard.

All they ever had to do was view VII in Light of Tradition. Much good can come of this. Or they can blow the deal and let the George Weigels, Opus Deis, ADLs and the whacked out German Theologians win. And win they will, without even having engaged in battle. I think they would call that an unearned or lucky victory.

In the meantime, the FSSP and ICK is doing alright. Although I sense a snobbery about it by some that is not healhty. Cardinal Burke is celebrating the Mass of the Ages. And St. John Cantius has trained some 700 priests in the TLM. So I don't even see the Society as being in a leadership position at this time. Perhaps that's the stumbling block. I don't know.

Finally, it seems that some are waiting for a perfect Church to enter. Since when were things ever perfect in the Church run by men? 

(05-15-2012, 10:59 PM)MRose Wrote: Why is it that the Pope only wants to make "tough" moves or assert his supreme authority over Traditional groups, rather than all of the other garbage pretending to be Catholicism, over Bishops who do not have the Faith, so on and so forth.

Far too many things have gone on unchecked for decades without any sign of disapproval or attempts to stop them. Is it so much to ask for:

1. A complete rejection and elimination of all the liturgical abuses present in Novus Ordo wastelands. Forbid lay lectures, altar girls, communion in the hand, communion under both species, versus populum, guitars, etc. It is quite telling that many Catholics all around the world cannot simply attend their parish church or nearest church with "Catholic" on the sign, simply because the liturgical practice is intolerable. This is not even considering what goes on doctrinally.

2. Attempts to remove heretical pastors, bishops, and seminary rectors and professors all over the world. If they won't leave, excommunicate them. There is no way that the Portuguese priest Vetus recently brought up should have a job at a prestigious university.

3. Either univocally reconcile the documents of the Second Vatican Council with orthodox Catholic teaching and Tradition, or condemn them if this is impossible. Specifically, Lumen Gentium, Dignitatis Humanae, and Nostra Aetate. I believe that Vatican II documents are incompatible with Catholic truth and teaching, so either prove me wrong or burn the documents.

4. Explicitly condemn the false ecumenism, collegiality, and religious liberty which have been rampant in the Church for decades.

5. Undo the de facto illegal suppression of the traditional Mass (Tridentine, "Latin," Gregorian, etc.) and institute a return to this as the normative liturgy of the Roman Rite. Allow an English version of the old rite to be used as a way of re-familiarization, with gradual implementation of the entire old older.

6. Require all clerics to take the Oath Against Modernism, and excommunicate those who refuse.

7. Unequivocally condemn universal salvation heresy, remembering the words of Our Lord: "Go into the whole world, and preach the Gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, he that believeth not shall be condemned." - St. Mark 16:15-16

8. Re-use the traditional rites of sacraments, abandoning the problematic and oftentimes dubious new sacraments.

9. Make it absolutely clear that modern day Judaism and any observance of the null and void Old Covenant is not salvific.


Just look around and one can find:

- the Novus Ordo and new sacraments (strong case that they are dubious)
- subsistit in and talk of "separated churches" (Unitatis Redintegratio, Ut Unum Sint)
- the near abandonment of Thomism in seminaries
- the scandalous annulment fiasco seen worldwide
- the seeming contradiction between eg Dignitatis Huamae and Quanta Cura.

I can list so many more things and examples of actions that aren't stretches, or asking for too much. All of us are traditionalists because we love the Church, we love the Faith, we want to get to Heaven, and live Catholic lives just like our ancestors did. In short, the Concilliar popes need to start acting like Catholic popes 24/7, not just occasionally.

Will the thousands of faithful who have been scandalized by the Concilliar novelties and heresies ever receive an apology? What about all of the gutted churches around the world? Our ancestors paid for those churches and built them with their blood, sweat, and tears, yet many have been gutted, and built with an architecture that really does not convey Catholic teaching. Read "Goodbye, Good Men." Will people like that, who have seen their vocations destroyed, get an apology? These were not even trads, but Novus Ordo conservatives who went along with everything, and are thus should have been treated the best by the concilliar authorities and popes.

Time and other constraints prevent me from truly writing my thoughts, analyses, and criticisms of this situation, but the truth is out there. Everything is on the Internet, for many people arrive at traditional Catholicism through the Internet.

Will all of the things seen at e.g. Tradition in Actions "Church Revolution in Photos" be condemned? Will things like this continue?

A lot of people like to give the SSPX a hard time because of their "outsider" position. Yet, these people fail to realize, before 1988, every trad was basically in the same boat, as even the FSSP founder priests were suspended. There is no difference in disobeying a suspension or an excommunication of legitimate authority.

Likewise, many give sedevacantists a hard time. Some sedes are troublemakers, and many have done imprudent things, yet can their critics not realize that they, right or wrong, want to preserve the Faith so much, without any compromise, heresy, or novelty, that they are willing to go to emergency measures to do so? Does anyone really think that Michel-Louis Guerard des Lauriers OP, Pope Pius XII's confessor, advisor to the Pope on "Munificentissimus Deus," and co-author of the Ottaviani Intervention, really received a normally illegal episcopal consecration for selfish or rash reasons? He did it because he wanted to preserve the true Faith and true sacraments.

In short, unless I see the concilliar authorities univocally and unequivocally assert truly Catholic teaching in regards to:

1. The character of the Catholic Church

2. The papacy

3. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass

4. The nature of dogma

5. The nature of laws

and anathematize the heresy and nonsense we have all witnessed for decades, I don't think I need to justify myself in repeating St. Thomas the Apostle's words of nisi videro, non credam.
(05-15-2012, 11:41 PM)Guardian Wrote: I'm with Doc here.  The "whiny little kid getting picked on at the playground attitude" is overused and getting really old.  

Has everyone forgotten what has been going on the last 40+ years?
(05-15-2012, 11:54 PM)Adam Wayne Wrote: Like a good father bringing his children back into the family.

Sometimes I think I'm living on the moon.

What "family" is that? The Gambinos? Bonannos? In fact, forget about the family that physically and spiritually rapes her members. What kind of "unity of faith" does this Church the SSPX are being brought back to like rebel children pretend to have?
(05-16-2012, 12:01 AM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(05-15-2012, 11:54 PM)Adam Wayne Wrote: Like a good father bringing his children back into the family.

Sometimes I think I'm living on the moon.

What "family" is that? The Gambinos? Bonannos? In fact, forget about the family that physically and spiritually rapes her members. What kind of "unity of faith" does this Church the SSPX are being brought back to like rebel children pretend to have?

Unnecessary comment removed.
(05-16-2012, 12:09 AM)Crusader_Philly Wrote:
(05-16-2012, 12:01 AM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(05-15-2012, 11:54 PM)Adam Wayne Wrote: Like a good father bringing his children back into the family.

Sometimes I think I'm living on the moon.

What "family" is that? The Gambinos? Bonannos? In fact, forget about the family that physically and spiritually rapes her members. What kind of "unity of faith" does this Church the SSPX are being brought back to like rebel children pretend to have?

Indeed. The situation reminds me of a wife beating, negligent, and abusive dead-beat dad, who after decades begins to pay child support. Should the wife and kids just leap back into his arms?
Colorful and humorous language to be sure. And I can appreciate the humor. Although perhaps a bit passionate. Right now there is a unity against unity. And yes, even in the Church. So what do you want to do? Come in and help, or stay outside and say, "see I told you so" as She falls apart. And yes, you may be on the moon. Because you are so isolated as to have lost a sense of reality. I understand this and relate to it. Sometimes when I attend Mass, I think everything is OK. But, then I have to leave and join the world again.
(05-15-2012, 10:46 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: A "tough" move?

I'd personally give him more credit if he made tough moves against heretics posing as Catholics, against ecumenism, etc. But, alas, we all know we've really past the point of no return now.

It's true that the SSPX will be forced to accept the deal if they don't wish to become sedevacantists de jure but that will probably mean the end of Traditional Catholicism, if we don't consider the sede independent groups.

Traditional Catholicism is still alive and well in the East.  Just sayin'.
I am not going back to a family of sodomite, paedo shielding apostates.  What is the point?

Don't like them. Don't like their new gay religion.

I don't need perfect (trads are far from perfect). I do need trying, rational and consistent.

I'm 43 and what passes for a Trad today would have been called a pussy-cat 20 years ago.  You would not pass muster.

I think so, Script.  I was actually talking about this with someone just last night.  Keeping in mind that we have no idea what deal exists, if one exists.  But since we have no idea, we are free to speculate.  IF it's a deal that doesn't require the sspx to change anything (in fact, the only change at all would be on Rome's part, at the minumum by "recognizing" the sspx) then refusal is ipso facto schismatic.  Or, sedevacantist.  To say "no deal with Rome under no circumstances" is to either be sede or schismatic.  So that's the choice some people will have to make.  The sspx has gone on the way they've gone on for the exact reason that they would not compromise Tradition.  So if they don't have to compromise Tradition, then there's no difference after a deal from the sspx view.  Excepting the sede stance, NO ONE could say that such an offer would be a bad thing.  No, it would be a great thing for the society to be given faculties within the regularzed structure of the Church without having to change anything.  Only a sede or a schismatic could logically reject that.  
More Catholic Discussion: http://thetradforum.com/

Go thy ways, old Jack;
die when thou wilt, if manhood, good manhood, be
not forgot upon the face of the earth, then am I a
shotten herring. There live not three good men
unhanged in England; and one of them is fat and
grows old: God help the while! a bad world, I say.
I would I were a weaver; I could sing psalms or any
thing. A plague of all cowards, I say still.
I thought you got burnt out on the SSPX and were hanging with the FSSP.  Are you with an independent chapel now?

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)