Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SSPX: We wait for “serious debate” which will bring ecclesiastic authorities back to Tradition
WDTPRS ^ | July 19, 2012 | Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Posted on 07/20/2012 8:34:15 AM PDT by NYer

At the SSPX site DICI we read the General Chapter Statement.

Bottom line: Not negative, but clarificatory. They left the door open for more discussions under Archbp. Di Noia.

You can read the whole thing there, but here is the most interesting part with my emphases and comments:

[...] We have recovered our profound unity in its essential mission: to preserve and defend the Catholic Faith, to form good priests, and to strive towards the restoration of Christendom. We have determined and approved the necessary conditions for an eventual canonical normalization. We have decided that, in that case, an extraordinary Chapter with deliberative vote will be convened beforehand.

[...]

The Chapter believes that the paramount duty of the Society, in the service which it intends to offer to the Church, is to continue, with God’s help, to profess the Catholic Faith in all its purity and integrity, with a determination matching the intensity of the constant attacks to which this very Faith is subjected nowadays.

For this reason it seems opportune that we reaffirm our faith in the Roman Catholic Church, the unique Church founded by Our Lord Jesus Christ, outside of which there is no salvation nor possibility to find the means leading to salvation; our faith in its monarchical constitution, desired by Our Lord himself, by which the supreme power of government over the universal Church belongs only to the Pope, Vicar of Christ on earth; our faith in the universal Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ, Creator of both the natural and the supernatural orders, to Whom every man and every society must submit. [A reference, I think, to the question of religious liberty.]

The Society continues to uphold the declarations and the teachings of the constant Magisterium of the Church in regard to all the novelties of the Second Vatican Council which remain tainted with errors, ["Pour toutes les nouveautés du Concile Vatican II qui restent entachées d’erreurs et pour les réformes qui en sont issues, la Fraternité ne peut que continuer à s’en tenir aux affirmations et enseignements du Magistère constant de l’Eglise..." If I read this correctly, they make a distinction between, on the one hand the Magisterium and, on the other, the teachings of Vatican II and the reforms that came from it, as if what pertains to Vatican II doesn't really belong to the "constant Magisterium". On the other hand, the SSPX would not see as error what we read in Lumen gentium about the Pope being able to teach infallibly. They would not say that what we read in Gaudium et spes concerning abortion as an abominable sin being in error. So, clearly, some teachings of the Council are fine. They can't be rejecting the entirety of the Council's textual content.] and also in regard to the reforms issued from it. We find our sure guide in this uninterrupted Magisterium which, by its teaching authority, transmits the revealed Deposit of Faith in perfect harmony with the truths that the entire Church has professed, always and everywhere. [Thus, since they perceive errors in what came from Vatican II, Vatican II can't be part of the Magisterium.]

The Society finds its guide as well in the constant Tradition of the Church, which transmits and will transmit until the end of times the teachings required to preserve the Faith and the salvation of souls, while waiting for the day when an open and serious debate will be possible which may allow the return to Tradition of the ecclesiastical authorities. ["...en attendant qu’un débat ouvert et sérieux, visant à un retour des autorités ecclésiastiques à la Tradition, soit rendu possible." The English is not entirely clear. Such a debate would, for them, aim at "ecclesiastical authorities" returning to Tradition. "Authorities" would include, I suppose, Benedict XVI. I hope the "ecclesiastical authorities" don't take that as being inflammatory. I suspect the SSPX did not intend it as inflammatory.]

We wish to unite ourselves to the others [sic] Christians persecuted in different countries of the world who are now suffering for the Catholic Faith, some even to the extent of martyrdom. Their blood, shed in union with the Victim of our altars, is the pledge for a true renewal of the Church in capite et membris, according to the old saying sanguis martyrum semen christianorum. [It seems that the see themselves as being persecuted, perhaps in the role of "confessors".]

Finally, we turn our eyes to the Blessed Virgin Mary, who is also jealous of the privileges of her Divine Son, jealous of His glory, of His Kingdom on earth as in Heaven. How often has she intervened for the defense, even the armed defense, of Christendom against the enemies of the Kingdom of Our Lord! We entreat her to intervene today to chase the enemies out from inside the Church who are trying to destroy it more radically than its enemies from outside. May she deign to keep in the integrity of the Faith, in the love of the Church, in devotion to the Successor of Peter, all the members of the Society of St. Pius X and all the priests and faithful who labor alongside the Society, in order that she may both keep us from schism and preserve us from heresy.

[...]

Given at Ecône, on the 14th of July of the Year of the Lord 2012.

Déclaration du Chapitre général de la Fraternité Saint-Pie X
Dichiarazione del Capitolo generale della Fraternità Sacerdotale San Pio X
Declaración del Capítulo General de la Fraternidad Sacerdotal San Pío X
Grundsatzerklärung des Generalkapitels der Priesterbruderschaft St. Pius X.

Meanwhile, in “Eternal Rome”, there was issued a Communique concerning the SSPX:

Vatican City, (VIS) – Early this afternoon, the Holy See Press Office released the following English-language communique concerning the declaration which emerged from the General Chapter of the Priestly Society of St. Pius X.

“The recently concluded General Chapter of the Priestly Society of St. Pius X has addressed a declaration regarding the possibility of a canonical normalisation in the relationship of the Society and the Holy See. While it has been made public, the declaration remains primarily an internal document for study and discussion among the members of the Society.
“The Holy See has taken note of this declaration, but awaits the forthcoming official communication of the Priestly Society as their dialogue with the Pontifical Commission ‘Ecclesia Dei’ continues”.

So, the Holy See now waits for the SSPX to communicate officially with the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei“. An internal document is one thing, and what they tell the PCED is another. This statement, though internal to the members of the SSPX (priests) is, however, public. It is therefore also aimed at the people who support the SSPX. Over the years we have seen some bombastic public rhetoric even while Bp. Fellay has moved the SSPX into a dialogue (serious or not) with the Holy See.

On the other hand, I am not sure how entering into a “serious debate” with the aim of getting the authorities of the Holy See to “return to Tradition” is going to win them any points. Perhaps they will leave that part out of their next official communication with the Holy See.

In any event, perhaps this will keep the door open for new discussions with Archbishop Di Noia at the helm. Benedict XVI moved him there for a reason.


TOPICS: Catholic; Ministry/Outreach; Worship
KEYWORDS: sspx; vatican
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-57 next last

1 posted on 07/20/2012 8:34:25 AM PDT by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom; thefrankbaum; Tax-chick; GregB; saradippity; Berlin_Freeper; Litany; SumProVita; ...

Fr. Z’s commentary on the most recent statement from the SSPX.


2 posted on 07/20/2012 8:35:30 AM PDT by NYer (Without justice, what else is the State but a great band of robbers? - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Tell em' to hold their breath while they wait, then walk away and let them turn blue.

They've become just another group of Cafeteria Catholics who can be used by Satan to further fragment The Church.
They can talk about being faithful to this or that all they like but when you get right down to it they're doing exactly the same thing as the LCWR crowd.

JMHO

3 posted on 07/20/2012 9:13:27 AM PDT by Rashputin (Only Newt can defeat both the Fascist democrats and the Vichy GOP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin

The Cafeteria didn’t open up until the Second Vatican Council; and the traditionalists refused to dine in it.


4 posted on 07/20/2012 3:19:29 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide
Yeah, sure, whatever you say; but it's functionally identical no matter which items they select or how loudly they whine.

If they had any real faith they'd have stayed put and fought to set things they think are wrong back to what they should be. It's always easier to do the Luther routine and pretend the Church is too far gone than it is to stay and fight. Leaving also gets you name up in lights which I can assure you is a very, very, important thing to several of the SSPX folks.

The more important they claim their reason for leaving was, it was twice that important for them to stay and fight. They didn't. They're Protestant in all but name and fading fast.

People who saw the Corps going to hell in the seventies didn't slink away and write articles, they stayed in the Corps and fought to put it back on the right track. That's my benchmark, and if people can eat the piles of dirt it takes to stay within the military establishment and try to change things in this country people who believe The One True Church is in jeopardy could have stayed and fought, too.

The only thing they refused to do is remain faithful, just like the people who defy Church teaching on contraception or anything else.

5 posted on 07/20/2012 3:59:03 PM PDT by Rashputin (Only Newt can defeat both the Fascist democrats and the Vichy GOP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin

They did stay put. It was Rome who declared they were excommunicated.

I’m sure straight Marines have stayed put (and suffered), even though Washington has declared queers are equals to them.

Straight military chaplains currently getting booted out or disciplined by the Corp for criticizing the sodomite lifestyle is not much different than what Rome has done to the SSPX.


6 posted on 07/20/2012 4:18:05 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide
They did stay put. It was Rome who declared they were excommunicated."

LOL.

I see, they were excommunicated for sticking wads of chewed bubblegum under the pews.

Whatever Luther style spin you want to put on it, be my guest.

7 posted on 07/20/2012 4:37:08 PM PDT by Rashputin (Only Newt can defeat both the Fascist democrats and the Vichy GOP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin

Your Corps example is indicative of your argument. Thanks for nothing.

Yessir, may I have another, sir!.


8 posted on 07/20/2012 4:43:07 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin; ebb tide

“Whatever Luther style spin you want to put on it, be my guest.”

That seems both harsh and inaccurate, Luther created a new religion, the SSPX is far more like the Orthodox that the Protestant and even that isn’t correct, as Rome is treating them as being neither schismatic nor heretical. Why you choose to be “more Catholic than the Pope” in this regards is a puzzle.


9 posted on 07/20/2012 5:10:33 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide; Rashputin

You may wish to consult the Catechism for further enlightenment. It is those in communion with the successor of Peter that are true and traditionalist Catholics...

III. THE INTERPRETATION OF THE HERITAGE OF FAITH

The heritage of faith entrusted to the whole of the Church

84 The apostles entrusted the “Sacred deposit” of the faith (the depositum fidei),45 contained in Sacred Scripture and Tradition, to the whole of the Church. “By adhering to [this heritage] the entire holy people, united to its pastors, remains always faithful to the teaching of the apostles, to the brotherhood, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. So, in maintaining, practicing and professing the faith that has been handed on, there should be a remarkable harmony between the bishops and the faithful.”46

The Magisterium of the Church

85 “The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.”47 This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.

86 “Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it. At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith.”48

87 Mindful of Christ’s words to his apostles: “He who hears you, hears me”,49 the faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their pastors give them in different forms.

The dogmas of the faith

88 The Church’s Magisterium exercises the authority it holds from Christ to the fullest extent when it defines dogmas, that is, when it proposes, in a form obliging the Christian people to an irrevocable adherence of faith, truths contained in divine Revelation or also when it proposes, in a definitive way, truths having a necessary connection with these.

89 There is an organic connection between our spiritual life and the dogmas. Dogmas are lights along the path of faith; they illuminate it and make it secure. Conversely, if our life is upright, our intellect and heart will be open to welcome the light shed by the dogmas of faith.50

90 The mutual connections between dogmas, and their coherence, can be found in the whole of the Revelation of the mystery of Christ.51 “In Catholic doctrine there exists an order or hierarchy of truths, since they vary in their relation to the foundation of the Christian faith.”52

The supernatural sense of faith

91 All the faithful share in understanding and handing on revealed truth. They have received the anointing of the Holy Spirit, who instructs them53 and guides them into all truth.54

92 “The whole body of the faithful. . . cannot err in matters of belief. This characteristic is shown in the supernatural appreciation of faith (sensus fidei) on the part of the whole people, when, from the bishops to the last of the faithful, they manifest a universal consent in matters of faith and morals.”55

93 “By this appreciation of the faith, aroused and sustained by the Spirit of truth, the People of God, guided by the sacred teaching authority (Magisterium),. . . receives. . . the faith, once for all delivered to the saints. . . The People unfailingly adheres to this faith, penetrates it more deeply with right judgment, and applies it more fully in daily life.”56

Growth in understanding the faith

94 Thanks to the assistance of the Holy Spirit, the understanding of both the realities and the words of the heritage of faith is able to grow in the life of the Church:

- “through the contemplation and study of believers who ponder these things in their hearts”;57 it is in particular “theological research [which] deepens knowledge of revealed truth”.58

- “from the intimate sense of spiritual realities which [believers] experience”,59 the sacred Scriptures “grow with the one who reads them.”60

- “from the preaching of those who have received, along with their right of succession in the episcopate, the sure charism of truth”.61

95 “It is clear therefore that, in the supremely wise arrangement of God, sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Magisterium of the Church are so connected and associated that one of them cannot stand without the others. Working together, each in its own way, under the action of the one Holy Spirit, they all contribute effectively to the salvation of souls.”62


10 posted on 07/20/2012 5:11:17 PM PDT by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel, if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr
"You may wish to consult the Catechism for further enlightenment. It is those in communion with the successor of Peter that are true and traditionalist Catholics..."

There's been more than one successor to Peter, Mark. The current successor dished one of his predecessors in regards to the Syllabus of Errors.

What say you?

11 posted on 07/20/2012 5:19:58 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide
Oh, now him is upset. That's so cute.

At least I know the difference between being excommunicated and being an innocent little lamb left by the wayside.

I also know the difference between taking up a cross and following as opposed to sitting down by the roadside and whining which forces everyone who gives a chit to carry an extra load.

Those who can, do. Those who can't give up live in the fantasy that everyone else is responsible for their failure and lack of guts.

have a nice day

12 posted on 07/20/2012 5:33:41 PM PDT by Rashputin (Only Newt can defeat both the Fascist democrats and the Vichy GOP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: narses
Whatever they've been to this point, IMHO they're going down an entirely different road now by playing games with "leaked" documents and such after the Pope has put so much effort into working things out.

I think a significant percentage of these folks will accept what's been arranged already and the balance clearly match what I think of them, just another means to fracture the Church. Whether that's their intention or not is moot. If I'm wrong, I'll be very happy.

Regards

13 posted on 07/20/2012 5:44:03 PM PDT by Rashputin (Only Newt can defeat both the Fascist democrats and the Vichy GOP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin

You assume the leaks are all from SSPX sources, I suspect curial as well. Either way, they are still Catholic, they acknowledge ALL of the dogmatic teachings of the Church and the Pope as sovereign. They deserve our prayers, not our scorn, imho of course.


14 posted on 07/20/2012 5:50:43 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: narses
Ummm, I found a few SSPX folks locally to talk with (by accident, really) and not only do they not accept the Pope as sovereign and insist there hasn't been a legitimate Pope for quite some time. If there are factions within the SSPX or folks claiming to be part and parcel of the SSPX who really aren't, I haven't seen them decried by the SSPX.

The local folks are quite different from what you describe, and from what they said travel a great distance to periodically attend an SSPX Mass rather than going to Mass at any of the local Catholic Churches. Could you point me to someplace where the SSPX officially distances itself from those who do not accept all the dogmatic teaching of the Church and explains that they do accept all the dogma of The Church?

I didn't see it on the sites I've checked out so far but maybe I missed it because I was reading what they claim justifies their original split.

Regards

15 posted on 07/20/2012 6:19:44 PM PDT by Rashputin (Only Newt can defeat both the Fascist democrats and the Vichy GOP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin

“At least I know the difference between being excommunicated and being an innocent little lamb left by the wayside.”

Tell me please who is excommunicated right now. Do you reject the Pope’s actions? Are you more Catholic than him?


16 posted on 07/20/2012 6:21:01 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin

Odd, you talk about “SSPX folks”. There are ordained priests, a few lay brothers and sisters and that group is the SSPX.

If laity espouses sedevacantism, they are schismatic in their belief, but they are not SSPX and the SSPX has denounced that belief here: http://www.sspx.org/sspx_faqs/q15_sedevacantists.htm


17 posted on 07/20/2012 6:24:49 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin

“Ummm, I found a few SSPX folks locally to talk with (by accident, really) and not only do they not accept the Pope as sovereign and insist there hasn’t been a legitimate Pope for quite some time.”

It doesn’t matter what your imagined “folks” think; the SSPX has just proclaimed the supreme government of the Church belongs only to the Pope in his monarchial position.


18 posted on 07/20/2012 6:32:47 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: narses
So why would people be going to a specific church a good distance away to take Mass with a particular priest rather than going to a local Catholic Church?

You know, in a funny way this is an example of what I've been saying. There are people saying they side with SSPX to avoid tipping their hand as being sedevacantism which is a perfect example of the fractures that are facilitated.

If they're in full agreement with the dogma of the Church, what's the issue that led them to the point of seperating themselves in the first place, having some members excommunicated and then having that lifted and so on? I don't see how they're in full agreement and yet deciding whether to be in agreement or not.

They're obviously not in full agreement with something or else there would be nothing to negotiate.

19 posted on 07/20/2012 6:39:24 PM PDT by Rashputin (Only Newt can defeat both the Fascist democrats and the Vichy GOP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide
There's been more than one successor to Peter, Mark. The current successor dished one of his predecessors in regards to the Syllabus of Errors. What say you?

I say that it is up to the Magisterium. That is whom the Lord left in charge. There have been many individual bishops over the years who have rebelled and formed their own theological groups.

Now, I am not accusing SSPX of pulling an Arius or Montanus or Nestorius, but I would view them as wandering in that direction. Probably a more accurate parallel would be the bishops who rebelled after Nicea in 325. Some of them were very well meaning. However, they were wrong.

20 posted on 07/20/2012 6:39:46 PM PDT by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel, if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: narses
Following along from the link you provided, here's a sentence that will make you do a real double take when you're reading rapidly:

The cunningness of the Devil knows no boundaries!

Cunningness isn't as commonly used as a similar word. Anyway, I hurt my eyeballs zapping them back across the page to that sentence then started laughing. Just shows how often some formerly unmentionable things are now mentioned.

Regards

21 posted on 07/20/2012 6:46:13 PM PDT by Rashputin (Only Newt can defeat both the Fascist democrats and the Vichy GOP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr

“I say that it is up to the Magisterium.”

That’s a very interesting statement. You appear to be referring to the current magisterium as opposed to the eternal Magisterium, as if the former trumps the latter whenever there is obvious conflict between the two.

And please don’t try to tell me there isn’t conflict between the two.

“Extra Ecclesiam nulla sallus” will be my first rebuttal to your defense, if any, of the current magisterium and its teachings.


22 posted on 07/20/2012 7:00:48 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr
"Probably a more accurate parallel would be the bishops who rebelled after Nicea in 325. Some of them were very well meaning. However, they were wrong. "

That's a helpful comparison, thanks.

23 posted on 07/20/2012 7:16:31 PM PDT by Rashputin (Only Newt can defeat both the Fascist democrats and the Vichy GOP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: NYer
I am not sure how entering into a “serious debate” with the aim of getting the authorities of the Holy See to “return to Tradition” is going to win them any points.

No, Fr. Z, with all respect, this point is exactly what makes it a serious debate. If a bridge exists between the left wing interpretation of Vatican II and the immutable Holy Tradition, then it is incumbent on the Roman Curia to demonstrate it, and if there isn't such bridge then it is incumbent on the Roman Curia to issue a clarifying doctrinal document that draws a sharp line between the true magisterial teaching and the Catholic liberalism.

It is clear now that SSPX won't reconcile unless the conversation is elevated to this point, and the entire Church is better for it.

24 posted on 07/20/2012 7:21:17 PM PDT by annalex (fear them not)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide
That’s a very interesting statement. You appear to be referring to the current magisterium as opposed to the eternal Magisterium, as if the former trumps the latter whenever there is obvious conflict between the two.

Since the current Magisterium is the portion of the eternal Magisterium that occurs now, they are one and the same. No conflict.

And please don’t try to tell me there isn’t conflict between the two.

There isn't.

“Extra Ecclesiam nulla sallus” will be my first rebuttal to your defense, if any, of the current magisterium and its teachings.

Very good. I will point to the current feeble state of the Feeneyites and their warring factions as a first riposte. If they were the one true and traditional Catholic Church, they would not have broken down so quickly into internecine warfare.

Secondly, we have the words of Paul in Timothy 2:4 in which he says that God wills that all men be saved. Not all men who have died are within the Catholic Church - indeed many have never heard of it, or else have dismissed it. Is that God's fault or ours - who have been charged with evangelizing the world?

Am I a Universalist? Nope. There will be many who will be thrown into the everlasting fire based upon their own particular Judgement.

However, there is the hope of salvation. Aborted babies are rarely baptized before they are murdered. Are they within the Catholic Church? Are they condemned to hell because their mothers decided to have them dismembered alive and sucked into a sink?

Don't know. I ask God for mercy upon them, as I do for myself. Lord knows that I deserve eternal punishment a whole lot more than an innocent baby. How about a Protestant or Jewish or Hindu or Buddhist baby that is aborted. Do you think that they go to eternal hellfire?

We hold out the hope to which St Paul constantly writes, about our salvation. Do you have hope or do you subscribe to OSAS? Or predestination to Heaven or Hell?

25 posted on 07/20/2012 7:26:26 PM PDT by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel, if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin

Are you aware that the < pre > tag you are using is screwing up the formatting for the entire page? It causes all the lines to wrap to the length of your longest line of text formatted with this tag.

Please avoid it.


26 posted on 07/20/2012 7:27:31 PM PDT by annalex (fear them not)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin
"Probably a more accurate parallel would be the bishops who rebelled after Nicea in 325. Some of them were very well meaning. However, they were wrong. "

That's a helpful comparison, thanks.

Very good. There really isn't anything new under the sun w.r.t. Church history. Not much anyway. A lot has been done in the last 2000 years, and some much worse than has been done recently...

27 posted on 07/20/2012 7:30:43 PM PDT by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel, if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr

The Magisterium should condemn the liberal interpretations of the so-called “liberty of conscience” just like it condemned Feeneyism, because both are contrary to the Holy Tradition.


28 posted on 07/20/2012 7:31:23 PM PDT by annalex (fear them not)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: annalex
The Magisterium should condemn the liberal interpretations of the so-called “liberty of conscience” just like it condemned Feeneyism, because both are contrary to the Holy Tradition.

Completely agree. I think that the pendulum is definitely swinging in the right direction - the crackdowns on the renegade priests and nuns are good examples. However, the public declarations have been sorely lacking.

For this particular Catholic, anyway...

29 posted on 07/20/2012 7:34:18 PM PDT by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel, if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: annalex
Sorry. I usually take those out after viewing and editing but have forgotten to do so today, maybe other times, too. You're the first to mention it screwing up the whole page, though, so no, I didn't know that as it doesn't modify a thing on this end or seem to change anything but the line it's on. I'll go back to composing in something else and pasting it here before posting.

Regards

30 posted on 07/20/2012 7:36:22 PM PDT by Rashputin (Only Newt can defeat both the Fascist democrats and the Vichy GOP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr

“Aborted babies are rarely baptized before they are murdered.”

How do you baptize an unborn baby? Secondly, you should have no concern about whether that baby was baptized or not since the current “magisterium” (as Cardinal Ratzinger) has dissed the idea of Limbo of the Unborn. Makes it much easier for a mother to murder her child thinking he’ll go straight to Heaven rather than Limbo, since Limbo doesn’t exist.

Do you not think this recent, and new, teaching of the magisterium has led to abortions, that would not have occurred otherwise without the above encouragement that all unborn babies go to Heaven?


31 posted on 07/20/2012 7:52:53 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin
You may be viewing it in a browser that is open in a sufficiently wide window. Try artificially shrinking the window width: the text inside the < pre > won't wrap.

Or send me some money, I'll buy a bigger monitor.

Try font face="Courier" or something similar to indicate a quote. That will wrap: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

32 posted on 07/20/2012 7:54:24 PM PDT by annalex (fear them not)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide
“Aborted babies are rarely baptized before they are murdered.”

How do you baptize an unborn baby?

It's called sarcasm, a reasonably useful literary device at times.

Secondly, you should have no concern about whether that baby was baptized or not since the current “magisterium” (as Cardinal Ratzinger) has dissed the idea of Limbo of the Unborn. Makes it much easier for a mother to murder her child thinking he’ll go straight to Heaven rather than Limbo, since Limbo doesn’t exist.

That's not the teaching, but I've found that anyone very emotionally attached to a subject may arrive at any justification, grasp at any straw and lie like a Democratic politician in order to try to seem to support their decisions. However, I've known far too many who aborted their babies, and exactly none of them have shared this justification with me.

Do you not think this recent, and new, teaching of the magisterium has led to abortions, that would not have occurred otherwise without the above encouragement that all unborn babies go to Heaven?

Nope. I think that the encouragement of splitting from the Catholic Church and taking theological matters into one's own hands, rather than relying on the Magisterium for correct theological interpretation and instruction has endangered many souls. Were Luther, Zwingli and Calvin evil because of the their persuasive guidance away from the Church?

33 posted on 07/20/2012 8:01:49 PM PDT by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel, if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr
“Not all men who have died are within the Catholic Church - indeed many have never heard of it, or else have dismissed it. Is that God's fault or ours - who have been charged with evangelizing the world?”

That's the big problem, Mark. It is "our (Catholics) fault". Rome has stopped evangelizing, let alone prosletizing. She is now dialoguing and (believe it or not) still searching for some unseen "truth" along with protestants, muslims, hindus, etc. that has not yet been found.

34 posted on 07/20/2012 8:07:13 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr

“However, I’ve known far too many who aborted their babies, and exactly none of them have shared this justification with me.”

“Far too many”? Where do you meet these people, in your church?

I have stood outside abortion clinics, counseling pregnant woman. All of the ones who proceeded with the murder of their child either said, “It’s not a human” or “If it is a baby, he’ll go to Heaven”.

Thanks, Cardinal Ratzinger.


35 posted on 07/20/2012 8:32:56 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr
Nope. I think that the encouragement of splitting from the Catholic Church and taking theological matters into one's own hands, rather than relying on the Magisterium for correct theological interpretation and instruction has endangered many souls.

That's the most awkward and inept attempt to deflect a topic I have ever seen. Congrats!

But, since you've jumped the rails already, what theological principles are in dispute? And since when does one delve into what you call "theological interpretation".

It's very spooky when one talks about "interpreting" theology. Are you a Jesuit?

36 posted on 07/20/2012 9:13:33 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr
How about a Protestant or Jewish or Hindu or Buddhist baby that is aborted. Do you think that they go to eternal hellfire?

There's no difference between them. None will go to Hell.

Their parents might, however!

37 posted on 07/20/2012 9:37:36 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide
“Not all men who have died are within the Catholic Church - indeed many have never heard of it, or else have dismissed it. Is that God's fault or ours - who have been charged with evangelizing the world?”

That's the big problem, Mark. It is "our (Catholics) fault".

Quite agree.

Rome has stopped evangelizing, let alone prosletizing.

Negatory. We are very involved in evangelizing. That does involve some of the, shall we say, folks less adhered to the Faith, unfortunately.

She is now dialoguing and (believe it or not) still searching for some unseen "truth" along with protestants, muslims, hindus, etc. that has not yet been found.

We are looking at drawing them into the Faith. That is a part of evangelizing.

38 posted on 07/20/2012 11:30:18 PM PDT by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel, if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide
“However, I’ve known far too many who aborted their babies, and exactly none of them have shared this justification with me.”

“Far too many”? Where do you meet these people, in your church?

In my everyday life. I do not shun all of those who many find distasteful.

I have stood outside abortion clinics, counseling pregnant woman. All of the ones who proceeded with the murder of their child either said, “It’s not a human” or “If it is a baby, he’ll go to Heaven”.

It'd be interesting if you found out how many of them professed Catholicism. I suspect very few.

Thanks, Cardinal Ratzinger.

He's a better man than I am, Gunga Din.

39 posted on 07/20/2012 11:33:45 PM PDT by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel, if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide
Nope. I think that the encouragement of splitting from the Catholic Church and taking theological matters into one's own hands, rather than relying on the Magisterium for correct theological interpretation and instruction has endangered many souls.

That's the most awkward and inept attempt to deflect a topic I have ever seen. Congrats!

How does one differ from a Protestant when one considers that one can discern theologically better than the Pope and the entire Magisterium?

But, since you've jumped the rails already, what theological principles are in dispute? And since when does one delve into what you call "theological interpretation".

What makes you different from Calvin except that you have not published a theological text and subjugated Geneva?

It's very spooky when one talks about "interpreting" theology. Are you a Jesuit?

Heavens, no. Knight of Columbus, yes.

40 posted on 07/20/2012 11:37:48 PM PDT by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel, if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide
How about a Protestant or Jewish or Hindu or Buddhist baby that is aborted. Do you think that they go to eternal hellfire?

There's no difference between them. None will go to Hell.

Izzat so? Prove it.

Their parents might, however!

Depending on the Judge, so might you and/or I.

41 posted on 07/20/2012 11:39:27 PM PDT by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel, if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr; ebb tide; Rashputin; narses
Where Peter is, THERE is the Church.

As much as I disagree with the disingenuous approach, I will credit the SPPX with recognizing the first mark of the true church. To the above, we can add: Where there are bishops under the pope, there is the Church, even if one is dealing with a progressivist bishop. Remember, the 12 Apostles included a renegade who turned traitor.

42 posted on 07/21/2012 8:44:26 AM PDT by NYer (Without justice, what else is the State but a great band of robbers? - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: NYer; ebb tide; Rashputin; narses
Where Peter is, THERE is the Church.

As much as I disagree with the disingenuous approach, I will credit the SPPX with recognizing the first mark of the true church. To the above, we can add: Where there are bishops under the pope, there is the Church, even if one is dealing with a progressivist bishop. Remember, the 12 Apostles included a renegade who turned traitor.

It is one thing to recognize. It is quite another to separate from the Church on a spectacular basis. At that point, it isn't about the theology, it is about the individual ego.

It has been well pointed out upstream that if individuals were more concerned about the Church, they'd stay in it and contest the goings-on, rather than pull out and pout.

Again, I ask what separates Lefebvre from Luther, Zwingli and Calvin? They thought that they were the true Catholics...

43 posted on 07/21/2012 10:00:54 AM PDT by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel, if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr

I agree wholeheartedly. For that reason, I posted the comment. We’re on the same track ;-)


44 posted on 07/21/2012 11:56:13 AM PDT by NYer (Without justice, what else is the State but a great band of robbers? - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr
Again, I ask what separates Lefebvre from Luther, Zwingli and Calvin?
Let' see, did Luther reject dogmatic teachings of the Church? Did he reject any of the Sacraments? Did Calvin? Zwingli? Well, yes. They all did. And how many of the Sacraments or dogmas of the Church have the SSPX rejected? Oh, none? Maybe there is a difference?
45 posted on 07/21/2012 1:36:49 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Remember, the 12 Apostles included a renegade who turned traitor.
Indeed. So should we blindly follow the Modern Judas types who promote heresy, who deny actual dogmatic teachings of the Church and who fill seminaries with left wing queers? Read "Goodbye, Good Men" by Michael Rose if you doubt these things happen.
46 posted on 07/21/2012 1:41:46 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: narses
Let' see, did Luther reject dogmatic teachings of the Church? Did he reject any of the Sacraments? Did Calvin? Zwingli? Well, yes. They all did. And how many of the Sacraments or dogmas of the Church have the SSPX rejected? Oh, none? Maybe there is a difference?

Then there is hope. The various traditionalist Catholics (Mel Gibson's father's bunch e.g.) also do not reject dogmatic teachings of the Church, or so we think. I'm not so sure about that bunch...

47 posted on 07/21/2012 2:12:11 PM PDT by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel, if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: NYer
I agree wholeheartedly. For that reason, I posted the comment. We’re on the same track ;-)

Very good. When individuals think that they know Catholicism better than the Magisterium, that way lies madness, or at least Protestantism.

48 posted on 07/21/2012 2:14:31 PM PDT by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel, if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr
Then there is hope.
There is, and more, we are certain that the Gates of Hell will not prevail. The Eternal Church will be here, today and forever.The SSPX is a tiny part of a giant, eternal structure but they are not either the whole Church nor a "new" church.
49 posted on 07/21/2012 2:16:51 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr

“Izzat so? Prove it.”

So you’re one of the ones who don’t believe in Limbo of the Unborn? I’m not surprised.


50 posted on 07/21/2012 6:50:36 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-57 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson