Pope Francis is shaking things up, and the Conservatives don't like it
#31
(08-17-2013, 11:23 PM)maldon Wrote: I think that you cannot see Tradition or the Church in remotely similar ways if you disagree on whether or not a man is pope. For a Catholic, too much depends on it. I imagine it is the same for sedes; otherwise they wouldn't want to be sedes. Take 2 priests, a sede and a non-sede trad: they can say the mass in identical ways, but that is just a similarity of motions. The Church, for each of these men, is completely different, which means that Christ's Body is completely different, and the meaning of history, including the history of salvation and their own personal histories, is completely different. You are left with a union of motions only.

So Whitey, I think the opposite is true. It would be a LOT easier if Pope Francis simply let both liberals and trads have the same freedom to duke it out in the Church. That's the easy road for us, because they will not get vocations, and we will, and then it is game over. All we need is freedom to live as we have and want. That freedom we have. The SSPX does not have it yet. Conservatives will just end up accepting whatever the hierarchy say, which will be a good thing when trads are in the hierarchy.

Noted ...you may be right.
Reply
#32
(08-18-2013, 12:35 AM)Miriam_M Wrote:
(08-17-2013, 01:21 PM)Sant Anselmo Wrote: Pope Francis is Shaking up the Catholic Right... and the Conservatives are taking it out on the Traditionalists

Could this explain some of the actions taken by CA and others over the last couple of months?  Hard to say.  It seems a bit far fetched to me, but perhaps there is a grain or two of truth in there. 

Saint Anselmo, I have also found this page helpful:

http://www.faithfulanswers.com/conservat...tholicism/

Excellent article! Parts sounded familiar....I'm wondering if I read it before on another site.
Reply
#33
(08-18-2013, 12:38 AM)Whitey Wrote:
(08-17-2013, 04:40 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: Sorry, but I'm a Catholic who believes the Dogmas defined by the Ecumenical Councils:

Right, we all should. Question : So if pope Francis cannonizes JPII are you going to acknowledge JPII is a saint ?

As I have noted several times before, yes, I will. Francis is Pope and canonisation is an infallible act. That doesn't mean that I will invoke him or encourage devotion to him. I have repeatedly said that canonising John Paul would be a prudential error of glaring magnitude, but the decision to do so or not is far above my pay grade.
Reply
#34
The article is right about conservatives and traditionalists being a tiny minority. We already knew that. But why are most Catholics "Catholic-in-name-only"? Because the Church is a top-down structure. If the leaders are liberal, the laity is going to be liberal. Liberal popes promote liberal priests to be liberal bishops. Conservatives are kept down or pushed out. It's been going on since Vatican II. Grass-roots movements (like the traditional movement) do not change a top-down structure like the Catholic Church. When the shepherd is struck, the sheep scatter.

Perhaps, then, this is just an acceleration of the rot. John Paul and Benedict kept up appearances and fooled us. Francis will come out of the closet. We do know that our narrative is the passion of the Mystical Body. The Church must be killed off before Christ rebuilds. That's what Malachi Martin was saying before he died, and Bergoglio might be the instrument to bring the Mystical Body all the way to entombment. Certainly, we must go to entombment before the resurrection, so maybe the faster the better? Even Christ shortened the crucifixion to a mere 3 hours before he gave up the ghost. And maybe this is a case where "these times will be shortened for the sake of the elect."

The "brick-by-brick" conservatives, though, are hopping mad because they thought things were finally turning around. Poor fools. Now they have a pope who calls the Blessed Virgin a pelagian.
Reply
#35
(08-17-2013, 03:33 PM)Basilios Wrote:
(08-17-2013, 03:27 PM)guacamole Wrote:
(08-17-2013, 03:03 PM)Whitey Wrote: A search of "traditional Catholic forum", or "traditional Catholic message board" via google produces a list where CathInfo and FishEaters top the hits list.

it's frightening to think that someone investigating traditional catholicism would read cathinfo first.  just horrible. seriously.

lulz. They'd think it's all about hatin' Jews and calling Pope Francis 'Bergoglio'.

But to be honest when I first read FishEaters I was horrified. Mind you, I was a radical conservative (devotee of CAF) and at that time there were still some, um, rather unsavoury members who have since been sent to band camp.

When I lived in Italy, the Communists always called John Paul II Karol Wojtila.
Reply
#36
What if we did unite and formal schism is declared by Rome ? So what ? Schism from what ?

A schism already exists
Reply
#37
(08-18-2013, 12:46 AM)Whitey Wrote:
(08-17-2013, 11:23 PM)maldon Wrote: I think that you cannot see Tradition or the Church in remotely similar ways if you disagree on whether or not a man is pope. For a Catholic, too much depends on it. I imagine it is the same for sedes; otherwise they wouldn't want to be sedes. Take 2 priests, a sede and a non-sede trad: they can say the mass in identical ways, but that is just a similarity of motions. The Church, for each of these men, is completely different, which means that Christ's Body is completely different, and the meaning of history, including the history of salvation and their own personal histories, is completely different. You are left with a union of motions only.

So Whitey, I think the opposite is true. It would be a LOT easier if Pope Francis simply let both liberals and trads have the same freedom to duke it out in the Church. That's the easy road for us, because they will not get vocations, and we will, and then it is game over. All we need is freedom to live as we have and want. That freedom we have. The SSPX does not have it yet. Conservatives will just end up accepting whatever the hierarchy say, which will be a good thing when trads are in the hierarchy.

Noted ...you may be right.

I disagree that Tradition is different for these two men.  What is different is the status of the Church post-Vatican II.  You are simplifying things when you say the only thing the same is the "motions", but I understand that it is easy to do that. 
Reply
#38
(08-18-2013, 03:51 AM)jovan66102 Wrote:
(08-18-2013, 12:38 AM)Whitey Wrote:
(08-17-2013, 04:40 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: Sorry, but I'm a Catholic who believes the Dogmas defined by the Ecumenical Councils:

Right, we all should. Question : So if pope Francis cannonizes JPII are you going to acknowledge JPII is a saint ?

As I have noted several times before, yes, I will. Francis is Pope and canonisation is an infallible act. That doesn't mean that I will invoke him or encourage devotion to him. I have repeatedly said that canonising John Paul would be a prudential error of glaring magnitude, but the decision to do so or not is far above my pay grade.

This is where I differ.  This would be more than a prudential error in my opinion and therefore I would have a very difficult time assenting.  Since as a Catholic I am required to do so, it brings a lot more into question for me if a pope canonizes a man who has done so much against the Traditional Faith of the Catholic Church.  I'm not sure how any traditional Catholic would be able to just call it a "prudential error".  Are there any other canonized saints who did things against the Faith (after conversion to the Faith)?  Are there any canonized popes who did things against the Faith?  And, to be clear, I am NOT speaking of sinning.
Reply
#39
(08-18-2013, 04:12 AM)charlesh Wrote: We do know that our narrative is the passion of the Mystical Body. The Church must be killed off before Christ rebuilds. That's what Malachi Martin was saying before he died, and Bergoglio might be the instrument to bring the Mystical Body all the way to entombment. Certainly, we must go to entombment before the resurrection, so maybe the faster the better? Even Christ shortened the crucifixion to a mere 3 hours before he gave up the ghost. And maybe this is a case where "these times will be shortened for the sake of the elect."

My husband mentioned something to this effect although he seems to think we're at Holy Saturday.
Reply
#40
(08-18-2013, 07:03 AM)2Vermont Wrote: My husband mentioned something to this effect although he seems to think we're at Holy Saturday.

when i read this i was a little shocked because i thought you were a man.  :blush:
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)