Are We Witnessing the Autodestruction of Church Militant?
#11
(05-06-2020, 11:00 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote: In fact, Canonically, those who are not Catholic and most theologians would argue also laity, are not proper subjects of Jurisdiction, so the Pope could not in fact grant jurisdiction to the Orthodox or even to Sr Imelda.

I thought the Church had jurisdiction over all the baptised (since there's only one Church for them to be baptised into, thus a baby baptised by an Anglican priestess is actually Catholic until he grows up and becomes a schismatic and heretic), but chooses not to exercise it over those who aren't formally Catholic.
Reply
#12
(05-07-2020, 01:00 AM)Paul Wrote:
(05-06-2020, 11:00 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote: In fact, Canonically, those who are not Catholic and most theologians would argue also laity, are not proper subjects of Jurisdiction, so the Pope could not in fact grant jurisdiction to the Orthodox or even to Sr Imelda.

I thought the Church had jurisdiction over all the baptised (since there's only one Church for them to be baptised into, thus a baby baptised by an Anglican priestess is actually Catholic until he grows up and becomes a schismatic and heretic), but chooses not to exercise it over those who aren't formally Catholic.

I think we're talking about two different meanings of 'jurisdiction'.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
Reply
#13
Rose,

I've looked back over my old seminary notes (I kept them after leaving).

It is theologically certain that for absolution jurisdiction is necessary and of divine institution. The debated point is whether or not the priest possess it and the Church regulates that by restriction, or whether the priest does not possess it and then received it.

The more common opinion is that the priest always receives jurisdiction from his superior or from the law. Some deny this, but none of the major authors.

So, I stand corrected.
[-] The following 2 users Like MagisterMusicae's post:
  • , Lambert
Reply
#14
CM has a role to play within the Church, they've just gotta clean up their act. Have a little more class and stop being so tabloid--ish. Tabloidy? Tabloid-esque? I dunno, but anyway that. I stopped following them a while back because of the way they cover the bad news.
Oh my Jesus, I surrender myself to you. Take care of everything.--Fr Dolindo Ruotolo

Persevere..Eucharist, Holy Rosary, Brown Scapular, Confession. You will win.
Reply
#15
(05-07-2020, 08:25 AM)JacafamalaRedux Wrote: CM has a role to play within the Church, they've just gotta clean up their act. Have a little more class and stop being so tabloid--ish. Tabloidy? Tabloid-esque? I dunno, but anyway that. I stopped following them a while back because of the way they cover the bad news.

Maybe, I stopped following CM the last time the trashed the SSPX because of the way they handled it. CM, slowly, earned my trust back and now doubled down on the tabloid approach. CM will not be earning my trust back again.

Perhaps they will have a role to play in the church however at this moment their integrity is questionable at best. Is CM going to handle this properly or just go dark and let things settle then arise an attack, again. The same thing CM criticizes the USCCB and ROME of doing...
"There is nothing more pleasing to God, than to see a soul who patiently and serenely bears whatever crosses it is sent; this is how love is made, by putting lover and loved one on the same level. . . A soul who loves Jesus Christ desires to be treated the way Christ was treated-desires to be poor, despised and humiliated."

St Alphonsus Ligouri
Reply
#16
(05-06-2020, 09:40 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote:
(05-06-2020, 09:28 PM)josh987654321 Wrote: This day and age nothing would surprise me, I don't know how true the accusations are against the SSPX, like them all there are good and bad apples. Only issue I have with the SSPX though is the break away from Rome, which puts them in a similar (albeit much closer to the Church because much more recent) position to the Orthodox. Unless they are in communion with Rome I don't fully trust it, and even those in communion I don't trust when it comes to sound teaching given Francis at the moment and all the wolves there too, but at least I know for sure the sacraments are valid, because Our Lord promised the gates of Hell would not prevail, and I believe I'll witness the truth of this teaching in my lifetime.

God Bless You

Let's not trot out those 40-year-old talking points.

One is either in Communion or is not. There is no such thing as partial communion, no matter what people might claim. It's repugnant to theology. Either the triple bond exists or it doesn't.

Pope Francis has given faculties to the SSPX priests. Those not in communion are incapable of receiving faculties.

In the midst of the salacious CM reports it is seen that the CDF (which is the first instance tribunal for priests accused of crimes with those under 16), delegated to Bishop Fellay and the SSPX the power to try one of their priests who was so accused. He was convicted, Rome confirmed this sentence and was ordered to live out his days in a cloistered house for priests. He refused and joined the "Resistance" and is given full access to children. Note, however, that the CDF gave jurisdiction to Msgr Fellay to try a case, and they accepted this as a normal Canonical tribunal. Schismatics cannot be given jurisdiction.

You don't have to like the SSPX, but let's address reality and not just canned and false old talking points.

Reality or not, it is a mixed bag in the SSPX, even if they are in full communion. People come across Sedes, conspiracy theorists, Holocaust deniers, etc. within the SSPX and it is a bit perturbing to come across that. Now, this doesn't personally sway me from attending an SSPX chapel, but I'm sure you can all see that in the same way that a mess can be seen in the NO and no one seems to care, one can equally see no one caring about such issues and folks within the SSPX; they just let them run amok. Now, it is true that this is not (so far as I'm aware) something one should connect to what the SSPX teaches and that is perfectly understandable.

However, it does seem to be a pattern when disturbing things are found within the SSPX, irrespective of all that CM is claiming, it is commonly met with a criticism of the NO and their sins are because of the NO..........but nothing that occurs in the SSPX is because of the SSPX. That doesn't instill confidence.........communion or not.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Adventus's post:
  • Fionnchu
Reply
#17
(05-07-2020, 12:42 PM)rose0325 Wrote:
(05-07-2020, 10:45 AM)Adventus Wrote: However, it does seem to be a pattern when disturbing things are found within the SSPX, irrespective of all that CM is claiming, it is commonly met with a criticism of the NO and their sins are because of the NO..........but nothing that occurs in the SSPX is because of the SSPX. That doesn't instill confidence.........communion or not.

The SSPX, like any organization, isn't perfect. None of us are free from the effects of the Fall, and all of us today have been negatively influenced (to varying degrees) by the rampant modernism and immorality that's everywhere to be found. But if there are errors and scandals in the SSPX, it is due to fallen human nature and demonic influence, just as errors and scandals in the mainstream Church arise as a result of fallen human nature and demonic influence. The Novus Ordo simply amplifies those things and renders one less able to resist temptation; however, this doesn't mean (and no sane person claims this) that traditionalists are immune simply by being traditionalists.

The media and the Internet have artificially amplified the negative things about the SSPX and rarely, if ever, highlight its positives. It is not those who wish to have a rational, charitable conversation whose voices are usually heard, but those who screech the loudest, regardless of whether their words make sense or not. There are the official positions of the SSPX, and then there are the caricatures floating around about these positions--and the two substantially differ. In a world that has become so illogical and left-wing that anyone even slightly right-of-center is at risk of being labeled a "facist," how can we expect a proper representation of traditional Catholic viewpoints?

Take the example of anti-semitism which you mentioned. There have been problems with certain anti-semitic individuals in the SSPX, but one would be very petty-minded to forget that the SSPX has done a very good job in the past several years expunging them from their ranks. And in the aftermath of the establishment of Bp. Williamson’s “Resistance,” the SSPX lost under 2% of its membership. As a comparison, a large number of Catholics in the United States support abortion, but it would be ridiculous for me to say, “The Catholic Church is pro-abortion.” Likewise, that 2% of the SSPX’s membership was made up of secret anti-semites does not make “The SSPX is anti-semitic” a logical statement.

And conflating the “Resistance” with the SSPX, or otherwise misrepresenting the views of the SSPX, has led to dangerous situations in the past. In 2009, there were many reporters, lawyers, and Jewish protesters showing up at some American SSPX chapels on Sundays for the purpose of harassing the priests and the faithful there. I find it very interesting that this half of the story is almost never told--just as the story about Erich Priebke's post-war conversion to Catholicism and public apology for his war crimes was left mostly untold as the media gleefully delighted in the uproar surrounding the SSPX's decision to grant him an ecclesiastical funeral.

As a final point, no one has claimed that nothing bad in the SSPX could be in some way due to its own shortcomings: indeed, the US District itself recognized that the small size of the Society compared to the mainstream Church and the lack of infrastructure in earlier days rendered it less-equipped to deal with certain problems. However, what is true is that nothing scandalous--be it sexual abuse, anti-semitism, Holocaust denial, etc--is ever a result of adherence to the Catholic faith and the Mass of All Time.

As I alluded to earlier, this doesn't sway me from attending SSPX for some of the reasons you've alluded to. 

I will, however, note that the things I noted aren't just something from the past; I'm rather new at entering these sort of discussions and saw this rather quickly.
Reply
#18
I think an important thing of note here is that Church Militant really doesn't care about victims or about 90% of what they are reporting.
It is relatively clear that CM is just a cult of personality where Voris projects his insecurities on others to tear them down. He doesn't want the Diocese he attacks to reform or do better, he doesn't actually want the SSPX to do well (even though they are despite him), he wants outrage and clicks.
The points he makes are moot whether they are correct or not.
Here is an archive of a testimony from one of his former employees that they forced to remove.
https://web.archive.org/web/201512180250...-left.html
[-] The following 5 users Like Quickbeam's post:
  • CopiosaApudEumRedemptio, Fionnchu, HailGilbert, jovan66102, MagisterMusicae
Reply
#19
(05-07-2020, 02:40 PM)Quickbeam Wrote: I think an important thing of note here is that Church Militant really doesn't care about victims or about 90% of what they are reporting.
It is relatively clear that CM is just a cult of personality where Voris projects his insecurities on others to tear them down. He doesn't want the Diocese he attacks to reform or do better, he doesn't actually want the SSPX to do well (even though they are despite him), he wants outrage and clicks.
The points he makes are moot whether they are correct or not.
Here is an archive of a testimony from one of his former employees that they forced to remove.
https://web.archive.org/web/201512180250...-left.html

Definitely not SSPX folks commenting on that post, nor an SSPX-sympathetic guy making the post, and interesting how many people in the comments said they stopped watching The Vortex and CM.

I'm also wondering if that cold day in Hell is finally here. I mean SSPX folks and Mark Shea agreeing on something ... yikes!
Reply
#20
(05-07-2020, 04:32 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote: I'm also wondering if that cold day in Hell is finally here. I mean SSPX folks and Mark Shea agreeing on something ... yikes!

Oh, I'm sure the Fat One will find something in the agreement to disagree with! LOL!
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 1 user Likes jovan66102's post:
  • HailGilbert
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)