Rorate Caeli: Many FI priests petitioning to be relieved of pontifical vows
#21
(05-15-2014, 12:47 PM)Scotus Wrote: Has anyone called him a heretic on this thread?

Miles Immaculatae, in Reply #2, stated, "I knew he was modernist all along."

And you, in Reply #3, stated, "I realised that Francis was far more brazenly heterodox than I had feared."

Are these not equivalent terms?
Reply
#22
(05-15-2014, 06:13 PM)Miles Immaculatae Wrote:
(05-15-2014, 05:55 PM)austenbosten Wrote: It's always acceptable to call a heretic for who he is, including the Holy Father, but one must have sufficient evidence to declare him such.

Being a lousy pope is not grounds for declaring him a heretic.

Only a future Pontiff may judge a predecessor of heresy.

I redact my statement then.
Reply
#23
(05-15-2014, 09:01 AM)Clare Brigid Wrote: The Friars' response?  Our response?  Don't forget the Cross.  The Cross is precisely the one you don't want.  The Cross often involves injustice, being misunderstood, being persecuted, even by the Church.  (St. Pio of Pietreclina.  St. Joan of Arc.)  Don't reject the Cross, people.  Not now.

Put up your swords.

I'll respectfully disagree.  Christ said the two swords were enough, not too many.  I will be fighting this man to the hilt.

My weapon:

But if thy enemy be hungry, give him to eat; if he thirst, give him to drink. For, doing this, thou shalt heap coals of fire upon his head.  Be not overcome by evil, but overcome evil by good.  --Romans 12:20-21

But that surely doesn't mean I won't criticize this man.  He needs it, and desperately.  Perhaps even more desperately than we need him to be criticized.
Reply
#24
(05-15-2014, 06:13 PM)Miles Immaculatae Wrote: Only a future Pontiff may judge a predecessor of heresy.


Well that doesn't make any sense. You can use your mind just as well as anyone else. I think it's precisely this kind of thinking that has gotten you guys in the mess you are in today. The pope says rip out the altars and tear down the crucifixes? Do it. The pope says throw out the liturgy you've had for centuries? Not a problem, he is the pope after all. This mindset allowed a couple of men in the course of just a few years to destroy centuries of tradition. If the Catholic laity had any sense of their responsibility to protect the faith none of this would have happened. Instead you put that responsibility in the hands of a few very fallible men. You are going to have to break free of that if you are ever going to restore what you had. Of course at this point it is such a part of the Catholic mindset I don't see how it will ever change.
Reply
#25
Forgive me if I am utterly wrong here, but I think that becoming diocesan priests allows them to have the freedom to celebrate Mass in the EF per Summorum P. There seem to be two slightly different sets of 'freedoms' in this, and those with Pontifical vows do not enjoy the same freedom that any diocesan priest would. So I think it is a good solution to a bad problem. If they are diocesan priests, no authority can prevent them from celebrating the TLM. They will thus 'lose' their order but 'gain' their rightful religious characters. They could join the FSSP or ICK, Canons of St. John Cantius,  etc. I suspect they are following our Lord's advice to be "wise as serpents" in this, as they may have despaired of any help coming from this pope, or may see the writing on the wall.
Reply
#26
Other sources from inside say only 12 FI priests have asked to leave.

http://www.immacolata.com/index.php/en/3...n-14mag014

"The English speaking traditionalist website “Rorate Caeli” reports in a post of 14 May 2014 that 100/150 friars have asked Rome for “dispensation from vows.

There are actually only about a dozen priests and as many students in temporary vows of the total of 378 friars.

This news serves to create agitation and encourages those already hesitating through the psychological dynamic of suggestion.

The fifteen clerics after two months have not yet found a welcoming diocesan bishop, so this is simply a sabotaging and destructive strategy of former superiors who, for ideological reasons and personal interest, do not wish to see the present crisis end."
Reply
#27
So sad about it.  :'((
Reply
#28
(05-15-2014, 07:27 PM)austenbosten Wrote:
(05-15-2014, 06:13 PM)Miles Immaculatae Wrote:
(05-15-2014, 05:55 PM)austenbosten Wrote: It's always acceptable to call a heretic for who he is, including the Holy Father, but one must have sufficient evidence to declare him such.

Being a lousy pope is not grounds for declaring him a heretic.

Only a future Pontiff may judge a predecessor of heresy.

I redact my statement then.

I might not be correct about this. You will have to do your own study.

Actually, I think there is a possibility I might be wrong. I got confused: I think only a future Pope only has the authority to declare a predecessor was not Pope. But doesn't formal heresy cause one to cease being valid Pope, so aren't these the same thing? Very confusing.
Reply
#29
(05-15-2014, 11:45 PM)triumphguy Wrote: Other sources from inside say only 12 FI priests have asked to leave.

http://www.immacolata.com/index.php/en/3...n-14mag014

"The English speaking traditionalist website “Rorate Caeli” reports in a post of 14 May 2014 that 100/150 friars have asked Rome for “dispensation from vows.

There are actually only about a dozen priests and as many students in temporary vows of the total of 378 friars.

This news serves to create agitation and encourages those already hesitating through the psychological dynamic of suggestion.

The fifteen clerics after two months have not yet found a welcoming diocesan bishop, so this is simply a sabotaging and destructive strategy of former superiors who, for ideological reasons and personal interest, do not wish to see the present crisis end."

So who is right? Does anyone know?

C.
Reply
#30
(05-15-2014, 06:26 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote:
(05-15-2014, 12:47 PM)Scotus Wrote: Has anyone called him a heretic on this thread?

Miles Immaculatae, in Reply #2, stated, "I knew he was modernist all along."

And you, in Reply #3, stated, "I realised that Francis was far more brazenly heterodox than I had feared."

Are these not equivalent terms?

I don't like your attitude. But anyway, I'll answer your question...

1.) I do believe Pope Francis is Modernist.
2.) I have not now, nor ever said he was a formal heretic, and I refuse to say this, for I am silent on the matter, and if anyone wishes to put words in my mouth, then that is their call.
3.) Make of this what you will, but bare in mind, I may or may not share your estimation that these are equivalent terms.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)