Posted on 07/31/2004 3:18:06 PM PDT by Patrick Madrid
Catholic canon lawyer Peter Vere and I have co-authored a new book critiquing the claims and controversies of extreme traditionalism that will come out in September, published by Our Sunday Visitor Publishing.
Written in a popular and accessible style, More Catholic Than the Pope provides a detailed analysis of and response to common arguments raised by extreme traditionalist Catholics (in particular, adherents of the Society of St. Pius X) against the Second Vatican Council, Pope John Paul II, the fact that the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre committed a schismatic act by illicitly ordaining four bishops in 1988, and more. Chapters include a history of the SSPX, a background on the controversy between the SSPX and the so-called "Conciliar Church," and answers to several standard canon-law and historical arguments often raised by extreme traditionalists.
Our hope is that, by God's grace, the evidence presented in this new 224-page book will inform, encourage, and strengthen Catholics who have been shaken or confused by the misguided arguments raised against the Catholic Church by some extreme traditionalists and, with regard to those who have adopted a schismatic mindset, that this book will help them recognize the errors of extreme traditionalist groups, help them to see why they should abandon those errors, and help them come home to the Catholic Church.
Additional details on More Catholic Than the Pope will be available soon at Envoy Encore weblog.
Thanks,but right now personally and with regards the Church,I only have the wit and energy to focus on a few issues. I say that to acknowledge your post and let you know that I appreciate it and see that it does feed into what I am trying to point out but that it goes far beyond what I am capable of discussing right now.But it is good to see that you have illustrated that Popes have erred and rightly or wrongly,action has been taken but the Barque is still afloat.
In a nutshell,that's IT!!!! I also agree with your last paragraph,in total.
What's the error? The term "living hierarchy"? I thought I knew what Dominick meant,I know that I diffrentiate between the Pope and Magisterium and the living hierarchy. It may be the one "subsists" in the other. (A weak LOL).
Was that what you were referring to or was it something else. In any case will you explain? Thanks.
Actually if a pope defines something under the definition in Vatican I which is a very narrow definition with bounderies being oversteped with the conciliar popes, then he is protected from error- that is a doctrine of the Church which we must believe in order to be Catholic.
That comment is on this thread?
Anyway, you're probably sick of it at this point, but the thread and subsequent post numbers I was referrring to was the "More Catholic than the Pope" thread.
You should have been there, by the way, the thread could have used your intellect and cogency.
I mean yes.
I am thinking that the regularization of the SSPX is coming, and the SSPX will soon splinter again, between those that will not return to Rome, and those who shall. In addition, I think there may also be a healing of the rift between some Eastern Orthodox and Catholic Churches, with the same attendent fracture. We will see.I think you are right. Part of the issue will be suspicion on both sides. The more respect shown to each other now, the greater rewards later.
"I am thinking that the regularization of the SSPX is coming, and the SSPX will soon splinter again, between those that will not return to Rome, and those who shall"
Dream on.
These are but opinions. That said, the rhetoric has softened over the years on both sides. Few from the Roman view argue that the Latin Mass needs to be suppressed. Few from the SSPX argue that they are THE Church and Rome is apostate. Campos changed much, as did the Jubilee.
"They can't claim to be 'mistaken' and ignore the excommunication. Logically impossible."
Who has ever claimed to be mistaken? The SSPX is convinced the Archbishop was not at all mistaken, that it was the POPE WHO WAS MISTAKEN. They are therefore neither liars nor speaking illogically. So you are twice wrong. First, for calling SSPX liars. Second, for stating they claim to be mistaken. They do neither. They adhere to Catholic Tradition--and this confirms their stance: it is principled and follows the teachings of the Church and all its previous popes, councils and doctors of the Church. It is the Pope who acts without precedence. His only authority is himself--since not a single pope before him has done what he does. He acts as if he alone is the Church--which is not true.
When the Pope kissed the Koran, he abased himself before Islam.
"That is why Christ gave us a Church with a living hierarchy. It isn't a dead hierarchy, of a lifeless tradition, but it builds on those gifts."
What a load of horse manure. It is Tradition which must remain living, not the dead works and words of an overly-imaginative pope. The Pope cannot create a tradition--he can only abide by it and pass it on. It must live perforce through him. If he refuses to allow it to live--he is not on the side of the Church. In this case, since he will not let it live, the faithful must take up the task and see that it survives. This is the heroic task of the SSPX and all other traditionalist Catholics.
Pope John Paul II has been most successful in getting through to the non-Chalcedonian Churches and getting them to sign declarations on Christology that place them within the Pale of Christian orthodoxy and the Catholic faith.
Such a healing could come in stages first with
The Armenian Church, and its various branches iincluding the Armenian Catholics
The Assyrian Church and the Chaldean Catholic Church
The Egyptian Copts with the Egyptian Catholics
The Ethiopian Church with the Ethiopian Catholics
and so on.A second stage could begin with the Melkites, Syrian Jacobites, Antiochian Orthodox Church, Syro-Malabar Catholics etc. And the Maronites could be helpful in this stage too.
A third stage would involve the Romanian Orthodox Church which really could be the first among the Eastern Europeans. They have always tried to reach out for union with the West, and their Patriarch has had warm relationship with the Holy Father.
As far as hope for the Latin rite goes....well, that is a different kettle of fish. Some die hards will have to die, and perhaps with them the "spirit of Vatican II". The letter of Vatican II is what is real after all, and the Novus Ordo can be changed at the drop of a papal tiara.
The Latin rite needs to be rethought. But I doubt anyone is ready to think on that just yet.
Thank you for allowing me to post my thoughts on the subject.
"Few from the Roman view argue that the Latin Mass needs to be suppressed. Few from the SSPX argue that they are THE Church and Rome is apostate. Campos changed much, as did the Jubilee."
The Jubilee changed absolutely nothing. Neither did Campos. The issues remain the same. The rhetoric has softened because Rome itself has been humbled both by the success of the Traditional Movement and by its own failures. It has nothing to show for its new agenda and much to give it great pause. But the Pope is a stubborn man. He will not admit his own failure. Instead he talks about a "silent apostasy"--as if his policies had nothing to do with driving the faithful away from a Church they no longer recognize as Catholic.
Opinions differ. Both Rome and the SSPX have become more reasonable, in my opinion. They grow closer, this is good.
What is "an SSPX person"? This may be part of the problem you have debating these issues.
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.