Dear SSPX: Shut Up & Pray
#51
(10-18-2013, 12:31 AM)maldon Wrote: Geremia,
Thank you for the St. Thomas quotations. He said it so much better than I did. Bishop Fellay can, if he wants, correct the Pope with respect and gentleness, privately or publicly.

His schoolboy insults do not resemble St. Thomas' recommendations.

I think that Bishop Fellay should follow St. Thomas in his manner.  But if he did, but gently pointed out the same large and small errors, and statements that could imply errors would the critics of the SSPX really be happy? Criticizing the manner of Bishop Fellay's expression is distracting some from the substance of what he says. He should not "shut up" about that substance, the facts that few are admitting outside the SSPX - the errors that are creeping into the Church. 

The Vatican isn't going to accept the SSPX if they keep proclaiming the presence of these errors (regardless of how gently they say it.).  They want the SSPX to shut up about TRUTH.
Reply
#52
(10-17-2013, 07:40 PM)lumine Wrote:
(10-17-2013, 07:23 PM)DominvsSabaoth Wrote: Looks like the spirit of Vatican II is back in town :facepalm:

If you are referring to me, you are wrong.  While the Second Vatican Council was an ecumenical council of the Catholic Church, the "spirit" of Vatican II as you are using it is disparaging my faith.  I have probably been Catholic longer than you have been alive....


Edited to add: I have been Catholic longer than you have been alive...
the comment wasn't about you, unless you are pope Francis!
Reply
#53
(10-18-2013, 06:52 AM)DominvsSabaoth Wrote:
(10-17-2013, 07:40 PM)lumine Wrote:
(10-17-2013, 07:23 PM)DominvsSabaoth Wrote: Looks like the spirit of Vatican II is back in town :facepalm:

If you are referring to me, you are wrong.  While the Second Vatican Council was an ecumenical council of the Catholic Church, the "spirit" of Vatican II as you are using it is disparaging my faith.  I have probably been Catholic longer than you have been alive....


Edited to add: I have been Catholic longer than you have been alive...
the comment wasn't about you, unless you are pope Francis!

Haha, thank you for the clarification.  Although, giving a face palm to His Holiness really isn't the way to go...
Reply
#54
Doce me,

Fair enough. But beware the temptation to think of the Church as a building that "errors" can creep into. It is not. It is the Mystical Body of Christ, One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic, as much so today as on the day of Pentecost. The earthly component is a bunch of human beings, each of which is a sinner, each of which has errors of his own. To the extent that I am a sinner, the Church has errors, but this does not apply to the Church officially teaching error, which is cannot and will not do.

Therefore, the "errors" of which you speak do exist, but they are first and foremost moral errors, sins, Bishop Felllay's as well as Pope Francis' as well as my own. Charity comes first, and to the extent that it is first, we will do well, we will think well and rightly, and we will speak well and with charity.

I suppose I mean that Bishop Fellay is a part of the problem as well as a potential part of the solution, just like you and I are. There is no guarantee that by having more correct theological opinions than, say, Pope Francis, Bishop Fellay is going to make things better. Au contraire. To the extent that he is holy, charitable, prudent, just, temperate and full of fortitude, to the extent that he lives the 9 gifts of the Holy Ghost, to the extent that he puts both God AND his fellow man ABOVE himself he will make things better. This last speech looks like just the opposite side of the same coin that is causing grief in the Church. The same coin.
Reply
#55
(10-18-2013, 08:21 AM)maldon Wrote: Doce me,

Fair enough. But beware the temptation to think of the Church as a building that "errors" can creep into. It is not. It is the Mystical Body of Christ, One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic, as much so today as on the day of Pentecost. The earthly component is a bunch of human beings, each of which is a sinner, each of which has errors of his own. To the extent that I am a sinner, the Church has errors, but this does not apply to the Church officially teaching error, which is cannot and will not do.

Therefore, the "errors" of which you speak do exist, but they are first and foremost moral errors, sins, Bishop Felllay's as well as Pope Francis' as well as my own. Charity comes first, and to the extent that it is first, we will do well, we will think well and rightly, and we will speak well and with charity.

I suppose I mean that Bishop Fellay is a part of the problem as well as a potential part of the solution, just like you and I are. There is no guarantee that by having more correct theological opinions than, say, Pope Francis, Bishop Fellay is going to make things better. Au contraire. To the extent that he is holy, charitable, prudent, just, temperate and full of fortitude, to the extent that he lives the 9 gifts of the Holy Ghost, to the extent that he puts both God AND his fellow man ABOVE himself he will make things better. This last speech looks like just the opposite side of the same coin that is causing grief in the Church. The same coin.


There are times when the truth hurts. This time it's the truth about Francis. Just because it causes unpleasant consequences doesn't mean it's not a valid conclusion.
Reply
#56
I was saddened that the reconciliation efforts didn't go through when Pope Benedict XVI was working so hard for Christian unity.  I think the SSPX would do more good if they were in full communion with the Church like the FSSP and the ICKSP... whose priests do not embrace the Novus Ordo either.  A lot of Catholics who might be won over to the beauty of the traditional Mass are repelled by the SSPX because of their history and a concern over their official status with the Church, and I think this hesitancy is in some ways pious because a devout child of the Church does not seek to go someplace that might be outside the Church, but at the same time their liturgies and teachings are inherently more Catholic than most Novus Ordos.  I can't blame them for not wanting to reconcile now that Francis is pope.  It is a slap in the face and it does sting.  But I don't think Francis will take away their treasures as much as he seems to disregard them entirely.
Reply
#57
He disregards them because he has no power over them.  Were they under his power, he would begin to take away their treasures-- as he has already done with the Friars of the Immaculate.

The first thing that will have to go is opposition to anything but the traditional interpretation of V2.  We're seeing that even in the latest theologians banished among the Franciscans of the Immaculate.
Reply
#58
(10-18-2013, 10:52 AM)Chestertonian Wrote: But I don't think Francis will take away their treasures as much as he seems to disregard them entirely.

Which so far has been his pattern:  disregard.

Disregard widespread doctrinal error being preached in some cases, being unaddressed by pastors & bishops in others.
Disregard the shameful state of the liturgy in thousands of Catholic parishes above the equator.
(Disregard the state of the Church in general above the equator.)
Disregard the effect of ambiguous Papal remarks on millions of Catholics, as evidenced by what your remarks have generated in Catholic media.
Disregard how the secular media is celebrating what they see in your remarks as opening wide the Narrow Gate and trivializing or making irrelevant absolute moral law.
Disregard the effect of your remarks about "narrow-mindedness" on the millions of faithful Catholic activists fighting social issues which are part of the Church's official mission.
Disregard that there is any crisis in the Church whatsoever, on any level, of any category.

.....(Wait, what was your job description again?)
Reply
#59
(10-18-2013, 11:49 AM)Miriam_M Wrote:
(10-18-2013, 10:52 AM)Chestertonian Wrote: But I don't think Francis will take away their treasures as much as he seems to disregard them entirely.

Which so far has been his pattern:  disregard.

Disregard widespread doctrinal error being preached in some cases, being unaddressed by pastors & bishops in others.
Disregard the shameful state of the liturgy in thousands of Catholic parishes above the equator.
(Disregard the state of the Church in general above the equator.)
Disregard the effect of ambiguous Papal remarks on millions of Catholics, as evidenced by what your remarks have generated in Catholic media.
Disregard how the secular media is celebrating what they see in your remarks as opening wide the Narrow Gate and trivializing or making irrelevant absolute moral law.
Disregard the effect of your remarks about "narrow-mindedness" on the millions of faithful Catholic activists fighting social issues which are part of the Church's official mission.
Disregard that there is any crisis in the Church whatsoever, on any level, of any category.

.....(Wait, what was your job description again?)

It's been disregarded too.
Reply
#60
(10-17-2013, 10:25 PM)lumine Wrote:
(10-17-2013, 09:58 PM)onosurf Wrote:
(10-17-2013, 07:40 PM)lumine Wrote:
(10-17-2013, 07:23 PM)DominvsSabaoth Wrote: Looks like the spirit of Vatican II is back in town :facepalm:

If you are referring to me, you are wrong.  While the Second Vatican Council was an ecumenical council of the Catholic Church, the "spirit" of Vatican II as you are using it is disparaging my faith.  I have probably been Catholic longer than you have been alive....


Edited to add: I have been Catholic longer than you have been alive...

The Pope embraces the "spirit" of Vatican II.  Didn't you see World Youth Day?  Or is that beyond criticism as well because it was lead by the non-modernist pope?

Why would I watch World Youth Day?


I guess sticking one's head in the sand is a solution to dealing with these scandals.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)