Posted on 07/15/2004 6:17:56 PM PDT by AskStPhilomena
You are immune from those rules, though.
Your posts about Polycarp are about as vile as a personal attack could get.
And of course there is no sanction against you.
You apparently know how to play the game. Too bad the real scorecard is held by Him and not the FR moderators, all of whom you have either fooled or all of whom are alligned with the non-Catholic views you hold.
No. I know that someone hit the abuse button on his post to me, but it was not pulled. He must have an "in" with one of the mods, because he is notorious for making FReepmail threats to multiple Catholics here that he'll get their posts pulled or get them banned.
Lovely to hear from you, Hermann.
My post regarded his term as President of the USCCB and the incredibly poor guidance he received from canon lawyers in drafting his letters to Fr. Zigrang.
With regard to Bishop Fiorenza and his issues, I quote this portion of Lument Gentium, No. 27, concerning the role of the bishop:
"Sent as he is by the Father to govern his family, a bishop should keep before his eyes the example of the Good Shepherd, who came not to be waited upon but to serve (cf. Mt. 20:28; Mk. 10:45) and to lay down his life for his sheep (cf. Jn. 10:11). Taken from among men and oppressed by the weakness that surrounds him, he can compassionate those who are ignorant and erring (cf. Heb. 5:1-2). He should not refuse to listen to his subjects whose welfare he promotes as of his very own children and whom he urges to collaborate readily with him."
You make the Church to be a creature of US Law, when it was before it. The Catholic Church has existed here in what is now the US since 1513. It certainly doesn't operate at the mercy of US Law.
$$$talks.
The Mormons then were a bunch of American rebels who has illegally seized US territory and were pretending to govern it as a sovereign entity against US Laws under the shade of a recently invented religion of convenience. What could you possibly expect except for the US Army to come in and enforce US claims and statutes???
Whatever the conjunction may be between such a poster and a mod -- even if they are married - the burden you have endured because of such a person is a cross you have borne better than I.
SSPXers: What is your take on posts #149 and #160?
That is a very pious affirmation. Holy Mother Church only operates under the mercy of God. Since she is not underground in America as she must be in China, she functions within the corporate and legal structures of the nation and is permitted to function by the State as an untaxed entity through her several apostolates, orders, and ministries. As long as she is 'above ground' and functioning within the legal and governmental system of the United States her resources and fuctions are not sovereign.
I agree with how Bruskewitz handled the situation... throw out all those who are disobedient... the guys on the left and those on the right...
Of course Bishop Fiorenza doesn't do that (at least to my knowledge), but he is correct to suspend Father Zigrang...
I wish he would come down hard on both.
P.S. I knew someone was going to get technical after I posted Latin Mass... :)
19. The Church is not a true and perfect society, entirely free- nor is she endowed with proper and perpetual rights of her own, conferred upon her by her Divine Founder; but it appertains to the civil power to define what are the rights of the Church, and the limits within which she may exercise those rights.—Allocution "Singulari quadam," Dec. 9, 1854, etc.20. The ecclesiastical power ought not to exercise its authority without the permission and assent of the civil government.—Allocution "Meminit unusquisque," Sept. 30, 1861.
24. The Church has not the power of using force, nor has she any temporal power, direct or indirect.—Apostolic Letter "Ad Apostolicae," Aug. 22, 1851.
30. The immunity of the Church and of ecclesiastical persons derived its origin from civil law.—Damnatio "Multiplices inter," June 10, 1851.
31. The ecclesiastical forum or tribunal for the temporal causes, whether civil or criminal, of clerics, ought by all means to be abolished, even without consulting and against the protest of the Holy See.—Allocution "Nunquam fore," Dec. 15, 1856; Allocution "Acerbissimum," Sept. 27, 1852. (Bl. Pius IX, Syllabus of Modern Errors)
I guess #171 answers your assumptions, sinkspur. Where do you find these documents so quickly?
Yes, they do. They answer them positively.
Thank you.
1. Nobody's abandoned ship. But Fr. Z realizes it's the captain and officers who are wrecking it, and he's decided as a member of the crew not to be complicit in the wreckage. Obedience should never be blind, and should never be posited in violation of the faith itself. That is the bottom line. It's clear Fr. Z understood that he could no longer in good conscience say the Novus Ordo, that he saw clearly it was in violation of Trent, that its false theology was wrecking the Church itself, and that it was a real and present danger to the souls in his care. In such a situation he was obliged to do what was morally right, regardless of the bishop's command.
2. The SSPX has supplied jurisdiction. Even Rome acknowledges as much. It recently "regularized" the status of Campos and fully accepted the previous Campos assumptions of supplied jurisdiction. Not a single one of their marriages or confessions was declared null and void nor even declared conditional; all were fully and unconditionally accepted. Implicit in this acceptance was the acknowledgement that we are living in days of unprecedented crisis in which priests are right to do what is necessary to save souls. If you don't agree, then you don't fully appreciate the scope of the present moral and doctrinal catastrophe.
No, they don't deny validity, only efficacy. They believe the Novus Ordo is doctrinally unsound and subversive of the Catholic faith.
=== That is where the true Church is since the Holy See is no longer fully Catholic
I have a problem with this.
While we may be witnessing one of the most diabolical of revolutions from within the Church has ever undergone, for SSPX to aver it's the real Church flies in the face of Christ's promises re: his vicar on earth.
You had an excellent and what I thought was a fair criticism of JPII the other day. I agree with everything you said. But the fact remains that JPII hasn't actually departed from Church teaching regardless his sins of omission, negligence, startling actions or liberal philosophical bent. Not the best Pope we've ever had (save where rave ticket sales are concerned, perhaps) but certainly not the worst either.
If SSPX wishes to assert that it is the "true Church," I'd prefer they appoint their own Pope and be done with it.
When you receive the authority to make these decisions, I feel sure that the Vatican will notify you promptly after the conclave that confers the authority.
Bruskewitz can no more excommunicate SSPXers than he can excommunicate Catholics who say the rosary. He should merely be ignored, since such an excommunication would be a nullity. It does prove, however, that there is no such thing as a traditional bishop in the present Church--outside of the SSPX.
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.