An Open Letter to the Church Renouncing My Service on I.C.E.L.

<> Post 749 has the Catholic Profession of Faith. Ultima, Zv and their ilk cannot make that Profession. Real Catholics can, and should:)<>

What do you do for fun on weekends? You know, when you just kick off your shoes and let your hair down???? Normal folks want to know!

I am still waiting to hear your thoughts on the golden age...

Dear Catholicguy,

Long article, but a good read.

Here is a brief excerpt:

"Papal and conciliar infallibility are correlated but not identical. A council's decrees approved by the pope are infallible by reason of that approbation, because the pope is infallible also extra concilium, without the support of a council. The infallibility proper to the pope is not, however, the only formal adequate ground of the council's infallibility. The Divine constitution of the Church and the promises of Divine assistance made by her Founder, guarantee her inerrancy, in matters pertaining to faith and morals, independently of the pope's infallibility: a fallible pope supporting, and supported by, a council, would still pronounce infallible decisions. This accounts for the fact that, before the Vatican decree concerning the supreme pontiff's ex-cathedra judgments, Ecumenical councils were generally held to be infallible even by those who denied the papal infallibility; it also explains the concessions largely made to the opponents of the papal privilege that it is not necessarily implied in the infallibility of councils, and the claims that it can be proved separately and independently on its proper merits. The infallibility of the council is intrinsic, i.e. springs from its nature."

sitetest

That first picture looks like what happens every day at St. Mary's Oratory in Rockford, Illinois, in full communion with Bishop Doran and with Pope John Paul II. Our altar is a lot more ornate and we usually have two or more altar boys.

The second picture does not resemble any of the Novus Ordo churches which I also attend.

Assuming that the first is not SSPX, the action depicted in each case is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (I am guessing here of necessity) in which Jesus Christ and the Sacrifice of the Cross are made immanent upon each of the altars under the authority of the Pope and the relevant diocesan bishop appointed by the pope.

If the first depicts an SSPX event, it is still the same nature of act but utterly unauthorized by relevant authority and performed by one who has excluded himself from Holy Mother the Church.

As I recall, you have been attending Tridentine Masses for about three years. That makes you a Zviadist-come-lately. You would not know a golden age if it jumped up and bit you. I did not claim that ours is a golden age only that 1958 was no golden age either.

As I recall, you have been attending Tridentine Masses for about three years.

I was born into the traditional Mass. That was taken away from me for quite a while. I returned to the real Mass about three years or so ago.

See #825.

Is it something you made up or is the new Profession of Faith. Some of this language I have never seen.

Hey, man, this is the living faith! You can just make up new creeds as you like. Fun fun fun! I think I need a little more reform. I think I'll have a double-decaf reform with skim milk. Mmmmm, aint the modern Church deeeeelicious?

Dear smevin,

"'Is that really you, Bud?'

"I'll respond like you responded yesterday - with another question:

"What do you think?"

Good answer.

;-)

I don't know if you are Bud or not. In this, I can guess, but ultimately, I'm ignorant. Unfortunately, the answer isn't readily available through a quick google.

sitetest

1. Encyclicals were meant to be understood by the faithful. They are letters to the faithful. Once again you show your ignorance. How else do you think popes communicate with the rest of us. Do you think it is by mental telepathy? Or do you get your messages from the Pope over the internet or from the newspapers or from other neo-Catholics as badly informed as yourself?

2. The ordinary magisterium has no binding authority when it issues novelties. It is only infallible when it is aligned with the teachings of past popes and councils. That you don't realize this is part of the current scandal these days--a sign of wretched catechesis designed to keep slavish neo-Catholics docile. Rome WANTS you to believe every burp of the Pope is divine revelation--to distract you from the ongoing and deliberate destruction of the Catholic faith.

3. It's very easy to tell me from Luther. I'm the one who follows Trent--the nemesis of Luther; I'm the one who follows past popes and councils and rejects altars being made into tables and turned towards the people as in Lutheran churches. I'm the one who insists the Mass is a Sacrifice and not primarily a memorial meal, which is the Protestant's doctrine, not the true Catholic's and which had been unambiguously condemned by Trent. If you weren't so docile you would see you have been protestantized by modernists who have fomented a revolution, clearly intending to emulate Luther's rebellion.

4. I have said over and over that Tradition is no secret. Any little old lady over sixty knows what it is--and it ain't found in mosques or synagogues and it ain't found in the universal suppression of central Catholic doctrines and it ain't found in clown Masses or the Lutheran notion of justification or in the hiding of tabernacles or the outlawing of genuflections. But you are so used to telling yourself lies and making excuses for this new thing that calls itself Catholic, that you haven't got the foggiest idea what might be a Catholic tradition and what might be just another papal romp among the mullahs and witchdoctors. To you, if the Pope does it that's proof enough.

5. I do not lack submission to this pontiff, though I abhor his persistant assaults on Tradition. But in fact, I submit to all the popes before the Council which you and your fellow neo-Catholics would dismiss as irrelevant. I revere the pre-conciliar popes who warned us time and again that the modernists were poised to strike. I take now what they have warned to heart--we can see the damage everywhere. You pretend they never existed and what they predicted is of no consequence. Yet it is the WHOLE of the Catholic Tradition which tells us what is valuable and what is not, not the words and teachings of those who now pursue an agenda whose purpose is to wreck that Tradition. This Pope deserves obedience, yes--but only when he does not harm the Church he has sworn to protect by guarding its Tradition. When he attacks the very Tradition he has taken a solemn oath to uphold, then I withdraw my obedience because he has exceeded his authority. He may not demand binding obedience to his novelties since novelties are not divinely protected from error as you and others who place the Pope before the faith wrongly suppose.

This is utter nonsense. No new dogmas were defined by Vatican II. The pastoral counsels were routinely disregarded by your guys--including the abandonment of Latin and Gregorian Chant in the Liturgy which were supposed to be given primacy of place in any potential reform. Instead we got Bugnini's concoction which would have horrified the Council Fathers. So don't make me laugh. There is NO divine protection for speculations or suggestions or pastoral advice or conciliar opinion. None. Zilch. Dogmas must be declared as binding explicitly and very clearly--and Vatican II was a masterpiece of muddled thinking. That you don't realize this tells me why your thinking is as confused as it is. No wonder you prefer not to think anything through on your own.

Glad you think you get the better end of the deal. In 1621 the Algonquins thought those beads and trinkets looked mighty good too when compared to that barren island of Manahatta. :0)

Actually I am a Georgia boy who is transplanted to the bayou. Still learnin' cajun.

***What do you think?***

This bud is You!

Ummmm, the Busch family are NO Catholics, not "traditionalists." Black sheep, faults and all.