Free Republic

"He that heareth you, heareth me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me" (St. Luke x.16).

Rash judgment is a sin. Back off.

"Better that only a few Catholics should be left, staunch and sincere in their religion, than that they should, remaining many, desire as it were, to be in collusion with the Church's enemies and in conformity with the open foes of our faith." - St. Peter Canisius

The question was one I posed to a parish priest in Southeast Missouri a year or so ago. I asked if he thought the Real Presence of Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament was the same as His presence in the congregation at Mass. He said, "Yes." He continued to reiterate his belief even after I attempted several times to assert the dogma of Transubstantiation. He remains a pastor of some 2,500 families to this day.

Just because I don't like the feeling of wool over my eyes doesn't mean I'm a cynic.

By agreeing with my strawman question, you have just relegated that poll question to the trash heap. The point I was trying to make is that the question was purposely vague and therefore a positive response is not necessarily indicative of a Catholic belief in the Real Presence. Those who answered positively with the understanding that the question referred to Transubstantiation are lumped together with those who believe that Christ is present in the same way in the Holy Eucharist as He is "among two or more gathered in His Name," who believe in the heretical notion of "transignification," etc. There is no reason to cheer any "improvement," especially in light of the survey's other revelations.

If you think that's just speculation, take a survey at your next RCIA class.

The same percentage would probably answer "Yes" to the question: "Is Jesus truly present in the congregation at Mass?"

Your enthusiam in the face of apostasy is baffling.

Those pesky periods.

http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/The-Infiltration-of-Modernism-in-the-Church.htm

And here I thought "ecumenism" was the enshrinement of irenicism and relativism. Thanks for clearing that up, Your Emminence.

Amen to that.

"Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) has applied to the Archdiocese of Washington for an annulment of his marriage to Julia Thorne, the mother of his two grown children. Kerry and Thorne divorced in 1988; Kerry married Teresa Heinz, the widow of Sen. John Heinz, in her Nantucket home in 1995.

"Thorne, who lives in Wyoming, has written a letter to the archdiocese opposing Kerry's petition. She could not be reached for comment yesterday. She wrote that she supports her former husband but is disturbed by the Catholic Church's process because she feels it demeans their relationship and their children. And she has written a blurb featured on the book jacket of 'Shattered Faith,' in which Joe's ex Sheila Rauch Kennedy blasts the church's annulment policy as unfair.

"Asked to comment on why Kerry wants to annul his first marriage, and for his response to his ex-wife's opposition, the senator's office released this statement: 'Sen. Kerry very much understands Julia's feelings and appreciates her support. Sen. Kerry believes that this is a private family matter.'"
-- Ann Gerhart and Annie Groer, "The Reliable Source," Washington Post, 10 April 1997

There is no evidence that the annulment he "applied" for was ever granted - although that is an appeal to ignorance, so take it or leave it. It is certain that the Church holds his "marriage" to Teresa Heinz as invalid, whether or not he was validly married to his first wife still, as it took place in a civil ceremony.

Can. 1108 §1 Only those marriages are valid which are contracted in the presence of the local Ordinary or parish priest or of the priest or deacon delegated by either of them, who, in the presence of two witnesses, assists, in accordance however with the rules set out in the following canons, and without prejudice to the exceptions mentioned in cann. 144, 1112 §1, 1116 and 1127 §§2 - 3. (1983 CIC)

"After a brief courtship, a short period of cohabitation, and the signing of a prenuptial agreement, the Kerrys were married in a civil ceremony on Nantucket in 1995."

ROTFL

Here's a question outside of the current conversation:

I noted that in his "Open Letter to Confused Catholics," Abp. Lefebvre said, in regards to the Second Vatican Council schemas, that he would "one day like to publish [the discarded prepatory schemas and the ones introduced by the commissions] so that one can make the comparison and see what was the Church's doctrine on the eve of the Council." He also stated that he was in possession of the seventy-two prepatory schemas, which, in his opinion, were "completely orthodox." The question, then, is: Has His Excellency's idea been given any attention and would the Society consider publishing such a book?

Perhaps I could get more work done at work--and I suspect others of us as well.

I think you just answered your own question. My obligations towards my employer make it difficult to do much more than "lurk" and occasionally post comments. I do appreciate your honest answer to my earlier posted question, though. As soon as Madrid's book shows up at the SSPX chapel bookstore, I will be sure to pick it up and give it a glance.

Big Madrid fan, are you? Well, perhaps you can answer the following question:

"More Catholic than the pope" is:

a) An apt description of you;
b) Not an apt description of you, as you are simply "as Catholic" as the pope;
c) Not an apt description of you, as you are "less Catholic" than the pope;
d) a nonsensical phrase lacking any qualification used to insult Traditionalists.

If you answer the question honestly, I might consider looking at his book.

They never invent new doctrines. They merely teach what has always been taught.

So, which is it? Are there teachings specific to the "last 40 years" or has nothing new been taught?

I'm not sure what a "formal formal" definition is, but you are correct in stating that the council and the popes concurrent and subsequent to the time of the council have not defined any new teaching that is binding upon the faithful.

Nonetheless, they darned sure taught a lot of doctrine.

Again, I'll ask the question, as you seem to be unable to grasp the whole point of this continued conversation: What doctrine taught as a truth of faith or morals has the Society dissented from? What specifically has been proposed in the last forty years that those who adhere to the traditional teachings of the Church need to assent to in order to avoid condemnation?

...that you are not only disobedient but a heretic as well.

Now you are not only guilty of calumny against the Society, but calumny and rash judgment against me also. You have absolutely no basis for your assertion except your own faulty understanding of theology. I strongly recommend that you retract your statement and apologize.

Heresy is the formal denial or doubt by a baptised person of any revealed truth of the Catholic faith. "Challenging" an ecumenical council that defined no doctrine or "challenging" the teachings of popes that pertain to that council but have not been proposed as binding on the conscience of the faithful falls well short of heresy. Your accusation remains unsubstantiated calumny, which is a sin against the Seventh Commandment.

I politely decline your offer to defend me against charges of heresy, as you seem to have enough trouble trying to defend your own arguments.

Accordingly, the Church needs to treat SSPX-ers in such a way as to make it clear the the faithful that these are heretics.

Then, once you realized that calling people who attend Mass offered by the Society "heretics" is an unsubstantiated calumny, you backed off and said:

Catholics who attend SSPX masses are guilty of disobedience, but not necessarily heresy.

Then midway through your posting you became confused again and said:

The SSPX has gone the way...of heresy as well.

So again, giving you the benefit of the doubt, would you like to substantiate your claim that the Society is guilty of heresy or would you like to retract your statement as it amounts to nothing more than further calumny?