I know I don’t understand what these people are whining about. Yea I agree that the SSPX is not the Church, however I do agree with many of you that the TLM is better. However that’s no reason to leave the Papacy.“Principal minister?”
Holden, the priest will be, with you, facing the Lord. Praise God!
We cannot judge what has happened to many people. Without a doubt there are people who were excommunicated and are in Heaven. St. Joan of Arc is a great example. However this does not mean we should follow the teachings of Archbishop Lefebrve as he is excommunicated.Remaining faithful to the teachings of the Church damns someone?
St. Joan of Arc died excommunicated for not submitting to her bishop. St. Athanasius was unjustly excommunicated, what if he died? You believe he’d be damned?
Besides, using the words “schismatic” and “heretic” are not in line with the Vatican II mentality.
Except that he broke many Canon Laws, i.e. ordaining Bishops.I personally think Archbishop Lefebvre will be exonerated and eventually even canonized. As others have stated, great saints have been excommunicated in the past, only to later be vindicated. Archbishop Lefebvre didn’t teach anything outside the Catholic Faith, and even Pope Benedict admitted to the possibility of a “case of necessity” in France and Germany. Certainly Lefebvre himself was utterly convinced of this necessity, and had patiently taken every avenue of recourse possible with the Vatican until he realized his impending death, and also realized that the Vatican seemingly did not wish to proceed in ordaining bishops for Lefebvre.
I hope everyone who refers to the SSPX as schismatic here would be twice as quick to label the Eastern Orthodox as schismatic, just for the sake of logical consistency.
Your Abbot, you say that traditional Catholics use Vatican II when it suits them but curse it when it doesn’t. I think the point others were trying to make is the hypocrisy that is rife in the liberal position of rushing to call the SSPX schismatic, but seemingly never saying this about the Eastern or Oriental Orthodox, and refusing to label Protestants as heretics. Instead of showing a truly “liberal,” position, it only serves to show a very thinly-veiled hatred towards all things traditional.
I’d just like to point out for a moment here that we’re comparing apples to oranges. First of all, Joan wasn’t excommunicated by the Supreme Legislator, Lefebvre was. Secondly, just because I’m sure it’ll be brought up, Liberius was under duress (or at least that’s the common thought on the subject), John Paul II was not.And what of St. Joan of Arc, who died under the excommunication? I bring her up to show that it is possible for an excommunication to be invalid. You may not think that it applies to the Archbishop, but you can’t deny that it’s impossible.
Whoo hoo! I think there is some strange fantasy going around that people (at least the ones in this conversation would be upset). I’m sure there are some raging liberals who might be but upset but that’s not the majority here. Again, I think the SSPX is looking for a declaration of nullity. I don’t think lifting actually says that Lefebvre was never excommunicated, only that he isn’t now. In other words, I think one says it never existed and the other says that the person has been absolved but I could be wrong.Just out of curiousity, what would you think if Pope Benedict lifted the excommunications, no strings attached?
I’m not taking sides here however, you do have a point. I don’t think anyone else here understands Papal Infallibility. They can’t just do whatever they want. They have to stay within the boundaries of the Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition. Many of you people act as if the Pope speaks with the Holy Spirit Himself everyday, and knows what to do. Here are some articles that may help.We’re not Mormon; if he’s cast into that eternal darkness, there is no mercy for him.
And what of St. Joan of Arc, who died under the excommunication? I bring her up to show that it is possible for an excommunication to be invalid. You may not think that it applies to the Archbishop, but you can’t deny that it’s impossible.
Just out of curiousity, what would you think if Pope Benedict lifted the excommunications, no strings attached?
Oh yeah, I brought up Vatican II because you seem to be very fond of it, and therefore it applies to you very much.
The law of the Roman Catholic Church, 1983 edition. It says in various places, ‘he can do what he wants’. He answers to noone; no General Council can be called without his voice. Its provisions must be approved by him. He not only calls a council to orde, he is the one who orders its close. No Cardinal, no archbishop, no dicastery, no commission, no college (of Cardinals), no synod can so much as blink without him saying, “Go ahead, blink!”“He can do what he wants cause he is the Vicar of Christ on earth.”
This is the reality? Which document is *that *from?
Pretty haughty, supersillious of you, if you ask me. You can’t see the agenda here. They are closing down these threads left and right. How blind can you be?How would you know about promoting an agenda after three days and 23 posts? That is rather a quick snap judgment for one so new.
Show me.The law of the Roman Catholic Church, 1983 edition. It says in various places, ‘he can do what he wants’. He answers to noone; no General Council can be called without his voice. Its provisions must be approved by him. He not only calls a council to orde, he is the one who orders its close. No Cardinal, no archbishop, no dicastery, no commission, no college (of Cardinals), no synod can so much as blink without him saying, “Go ahead, blink!”
Your Abbott
Why do you think that. Because everyone is just yelling at each other. Nothing is coming out of this.Pretty haughty, supersillious of you, if you ask me. You can’t see the agenda here. They are closing down these threads left and right. How blind can you be
Not if there was a state of necessity. If there was, he was completely within the canonical bounds. It is, of course, the position of the SSPX (and many outside of it) that there WAS a state of necessity, since Lefebvre was dying and there would be no way to ordain new traditional priests without an episcopacy willing to do so. He was guided by the Vatican into thinking that these concerns of his would probably be met; when he realized both that (1) his death was drawing near and (2) the Vatican had no intention of allowing any traditional episcopal consecrations, he acted. Anyway, recently Pope Benedict said that IN FRANCE AND GERMANY (just to be fair, I don’t want to misrepresent it to imply that he said “everywhere”) there possible was an actual state of necessity in this regard. The Vatican continues to come closer and closer to the SSPX demands.Except that he broke many Canon Laws, i.e. ordaining Bishops.
I think they will be to proud.Not if there was a state of necessity. If there was, he was completely within the canonical bounds. It is, of course, the position of the SSPX (and many outside of it) that there WAS a state of necessity, since Lefebvre was dying and there would be no way to ordain new traditional priests without an episcopacy willing to do so. He was guided by the Vatican into thinking that these concerns of his would probably be met; when he realized both that (1) his death was drawing near and (2) the Vatican had no intention of allowing any traditional episcopal consecrations, he acted. Anyway, recently Pope Benedict said that IN FRANCE AND GERMANY (just to be fair, I don’t want to misrepresent it to imply that he said “everywhere”) there possible was an actual state of necessity in this regard. The Vatican continues to come closer and closer to the SSPX demands.
I do think, though, that the Vatican will stop short at declaring the excommunications null and void. I just don’t see that happening. I think the excommunications will be LIFTED, but not declared invalid. And I hope that when the excommunications are lifted the SSPX isn’t too proud to accept the terms of reconciliation, although I think they very well might be.
I find the interesting thing that he considered it a necessity to ordain bishops of like-mindedness. Good thing he didn’t have the ability to clone.Not if there was a state of necessity. If there was, he was completely within the canonical bounds. It is, of course, the position of the SSPX (and many outside of it) that there WAS a state of necessity, since Lefebvre was dying and there would be no way to ordain new traditional priests without an episcopacy willing to do so.
There is no problem lifting the excommunications. The redemy is in the law. ASK FOR FORGIVENESS!I do think, though, that the Vatican will stop short at declaring the excommunications null and void. I just don’t see that happening. I think the excommunications will be LIFTED, but not declared invalid. And I hope that when the excommunications are lifted the SSPX isn’t too proud to accept the terms of reconciliation, although I think they very well might be.
What are you from Missouri, or just unbelieving?Show me.
That doesn’t mean that he can just make up anything and it is true.What are you from Missouri, or just unbelieving?
You could go on line to the Vatican site, and check out the Code of Canon Law, Canons 330-341, for starters.
Just a taste, though. Canon 331: The pope 'possesses supreme, full, immediate, and universal ordinary power in the Church, which he is always able to exercise freely".
Okay, you can blink, now.
Your Abbott
You don’t read well. Who else has supreme power, which cannot be hampered in any way? The Pope, that’s it (unless some tribal chieftain whom I don’t know). It’s not life and death, but pretty close.That doesn’t mean that he can just make up anything and it is true.
So the Pope could say the Papacy no longer exists and it would be true. Or the Pope could say there is no such thing as gravity and it would be true.You don’t read well. Who else has supreme power, which cannot be hampered in any way? The Pope, that’s it (unless some tribal chieftain whom I don’t know). It’s not life and death, but pretty close.
Supreme, absolute power - think about it.
Your Abbott
But our faith is that the Holy Spirit protects the Church from such fantasy situations. If we have not faith in the Holy Spirit today, why would we trust in His leading the church for the last 2000 years?So the Pope could say the Papacy no longer exists and it would be true. Or the Pope could say there is no such thing as gravity and it would be true.
No argument there.I know I don’t understand what these people are whining about. Yea I agree that the SSPX is not the Church, however I do agree with many of you that the TLM is better. However that’s no reason to leave the Papacy.
We follow him as we would any priest who teaches the Faith, who is in line with the teachings of the Church. He didn’t found a church, he just chose not to conform to the world’s mentality regarding certain matters of the Faith. Some take it to extremes, but that’s to be found everywhere.We cannot judge what has happened to many people. Without a doubt there are people who were excommunicated and are in Heaven. St. Joan of Arc is a great example. However this does not mean we should follow the teachings of Archbishop Lefebrve as he is excommunicated.