Is that a Society priest in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?
#11
(02-16-2013, 12:20 PM)maldon Wrote: We agree, Allan. That is why I do not think a reason to adhere or not to the SSPX should depend on who gets elected. We have the same problems today that we will have the day after the election. If you feel the need for shelter, etc. a la SSPX, you should be there already.

Agreed!!
Reply
#12
I am happy they r here :)
Reply
#13
(02-16-2013, 11:26 AM)Allan Wrote: Ummmm....you do know that the SSPX affirms that the pope is the pope, right?  To shelter under them is to hide with the faith from its enemies.  The Society is a reaction to an intolerable situation which, by grace, will be temporary only.  It is a defensive measure to protect we who are to weak to sustain faith in an age of unchecked modernism.

Second
Reply
#14
Am I one of the only ones who is hopeful about the next pope? Who's with me?
Reply
#15
(02-16-2013, 12:20 PM)maldon Wrote: We agree, Allan. That is why I do not think a reason to adhere or not to the SSPX should depend on who gets elected. We have the same problems today that we will have the day after the election. If you feel the need for shelter, etc. a la SSPX, you should be there already.

Well, I "adhere" to the Catholic faith, not the SSPX.  The Society provides a safe venue for authentic Catholic worship, should we pass through a period of excessive modernist fire.  My faith is constant, but my fallen nature and fearful disposition cause me to seek safety and shelter until God's will be done, and this crisis settles out.
Reply
#16
(02-16-2013, 02:36 PM)GodFirst Wrote: Am I one of the only ones who is hopeful about the next pope? Who's with me?

I am always hopeful, until given reason not to be.  Such as, if Cardinal Schönborn is elected as Pope Paul VII.  Then, perhaps, my hope would wane a bit.
Reply
#17
(02-16-2013, 02:36 PM)GodFirst Wrote: Am I one of the only ones who is hopeful about the next pope? Who's with me?

Not I.  Only God knows if the abdication was pleasing or offensive.  The evidence thus far?  Lightning. Meteors raining down destruction. 

Let those who have eyes, etc.

Personally...I think this could be it. 
Reply
#18
Again, Allan, we seem to agree. My issue is that you should have been with the SSPX before and now and also in March. I do not know how you expect to be able to predict the beginnings and ends of modernist crises based on papal elections. To me that seems wild speculation. I suggest you make such decisions today, and stick to them, until you truly feel you should make a change.

And as for lightning and meteors, lightning could be seen as good as well as bad. Impossible to interpret. Meteors hitting Russia could mean anything. Ditto for whatever hit Cuba. Maybe God is happy with the Pope. Maybe not. There was lightning before Fatima and at La Salette. Was Our Lord happy or angry with the visionaries?

I do agree, however, that it is significant.  The powers of heaven, lightning, seasonal elements, storms, are ultimately controlled by the Will of God, passed down to the Angels who execute His commands. But significant good or significant bad is impossible to say, except in hindsight, and we are unfortunately on the opposite end from 'hindsight'.

If I were to guess, I would guess that as usual it is both good and bad, and the new pope will be both good and bad for the Church and the world. A terrific reformer would be good for the Church in the obvious ways, and bad for the chaos it would mean, schisms, protests and the like. A lukewarm pope would be bad for the Church in the obvious ways, and good for us, in that we will have to learn the hard way to be better than we are, to pray more and better, and sacrifice ourselves, and be ready for the worst things, and not to hope to see the secular glory of the Church again in our time. I like the first option better!
Reply
#19
(02-16-2013, 10:48 AM)Allan Wrote: About the only scenario I can see that could maybe justify an abdication is one where some diabolical cadre of Bishops was blackmailing the Pope with some skeleton in his closet that, if revealed, would scandalize the faithful to an incredible degree.  The two main option being unpalatable (to wit, cave and do their bidding or refuse and have the papacy be scandalized by the revelation), the Holy Father chose the "third way" and toppled his king on the board, exposing the blackmail to a select few Cardinal electors who will steer the election to a candidate able to disempower the evil faction and take it on for once and for all.

Either that or he was just sick like he said.  Whatever. 

On the contrary, I don't think that Pope Benedict XVI would abdicate unless he felt comfortable that his controversial programme would be continued or at least not overturned given the current climate in the College. I think that if HH thought that the wolves were at the door he would hang on to the office with a death grip.
Reply
#20
(02-16-2013, 01:03 PM)Mithrandylan Wrote:
(02-16-2013, 11:55 AM)TS Aquinas Wrote:
(02-16-2013, 11:39 AM)DrBombay Wrote: Why would God punish the entire Church because he didn't like the actions of Benedict XVI?  ???

Wouldn't be the first time God punished His flock for the actions of the leader, remember David.

Thank you

People today have lost a sense of 'people'

God punishes people as well as individuals.


Thank you & God bless.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)