C
catharina
Guest
Your fantasies regarding the future have no bearing on the faithfulness required of all today.
- Status
H
hosemonkey
Guest
I and my family attended a SSPX chapel for over five years. Although the Mass was celebrated beautifully, there was a spirit of bitterness and rancor toward the Magisterium that was pervasive. There was an “us against them” mentality. The longer that we attended, the more that I realized their lip service regarding their “respect” for the Pope was nothing more than that, lip service. The one major flaw of the SSPX is disobedience. If one is not in obedience to the Holy Father and to the Magisterium, you cannot call yourself “Catholic.” We returned to our home parish and work to correct the damage that has been done to the Church. You cannot effect change if you are an outsider, you must work from within. We were damaged from within, not from without. The SSPX are outsiders, they could repair the Church far more effectively as insiders.
(Further note) The SSPX would be better off accepting the olive branch now and exerting their influence for change from within instead of trying to pull a stick-up by continuing to say “Non Serviam” and stirring the pot. Excommunicated “Bishops” have no clout. They are outsiders.
C
catharina
Guest
sspx is at grave risk because they “report up” to excommunicants.
Those excommunicants are far outside the circle of Church.
sspx, for the moment, is within the Church but in irregular status.
The situation is a heartbreaker.
J
JReducation
Guest
Pope John Paul II makes it clear in Ecclesia Dei that the Magisterium is posessed by the Pope and the body of bishops. It is not the collective teachings of the Popes. Those are part of Tradition.
But especially contradictory is a notion of Tradition which opposes the universal Magisterium of the Church possessed by the Bishop of Rome and the Body of Bishops. It is impossible to remain faithful to the Tradition while breaking the ecclesial bond with him to whom, in the person of the Apostle Peter, Christ himself entrusted the ministry of unity in his Church.
Observe that he says that the Church’s Tradition is interpreted by the ecclesiastical Magisterium, ordinary and extraordinary, especially the councils up to Vatican II.
There is no room here to translate the term Magisterium as equivalent with Tradition and teachings of the Church. He also makes it clear that Councils are also part of the Magisterium.
It is clear in John Paul’s writing that Magisterium applies to people, not to documents. You are right to say that the documents are the way that we preserve history, because they become part of our tradtion, some with a lower case t and others with an upper case T.
a) The outcome of the movement promoted by Mons. Lefebvre can and must be, for all the Catholic faithful, a motive for sincere reflection concerning their own fidelity to the Church’s Tradition, authentically interpreted by the ecclesiastical Magisterium, ordinary and extraordinary, especially in the Ecumenical Councils from Nicaea to Vatican II.
JR
S
saint_rafael
Guest
Well I am glad that you admit that the SSPX are inside the Church.
What is the problem? They are faithful Catholics who are part of the Church.
They continue their great work for the cause of tradition.
C
catharina
Guest
Here’s the thing, l-t. Yesterday I never took a minute to respond to your off-the-wall public scolding of me. Remember that? Remember that you announced:
Code:
"Jun 28, '08, 1:06 pm
laudamus te
Senior Member Join Date: May 30, 2007
Posts: 642
Re: SSPX Could Return This Week - Agreement With Rome Near
This is a good example of charity. Catharina, pnewton, Margarite et al, take note. The venomous lies spewed forth on this thread towards the SSPX is disgusting. I wonder how some of you can sleep at night."I hope you get over your creepy feeling soon.
(Were you acting strangely yesterday? Yes.)
Feels so odd when a post like this comes out of the blue, huh?
C
catharina
Guest
young fella’? check it out.Well I am glad that you admit that the SSPX are inside the Church.
What is the problem? They are faithful Catholics who are part of the Church.
They continue their great work for the cause of tradition.
i’ve NEVER said otherwise.
S
saint_rafael
Guest
No traditionalist including the SSPX, is breaking communion with Pope Benedict. We are loyal to him and his Magisterial teachings that are in harmony and union with Ordinary Magisterium of the Church.**But especially contradictory is a notion of Tradition which opposes the universal Magisterium of the Church possessed by the Bishop of Rome and the Body of Bishops. **It is impossible to remain faithful to the Tradition while breaking the ecclesial bond with him to whom, in the person of the Apostle Peter, Christ himself entrusted the ministry of unity in his Church.
a) The outcome of the movement promoted by Mons. Lefebvre can and must be, for all the Catholic faithful, a motive for sincere reflection concerning their own fidelity to the Church’s Tradition, authentically interpreted by the ecclesiastical Magisterium, ordinary and extraordinary, especially in the Ecumenical Councils from Nicaea to Vatican II.
JR
When Pope Benedict errs or contradicts with his teaching, prior Church teaching, it is our duty to speak out in defense of the prior infallible Church teaching.
Vatican II is the main dispute. Vatican II is not part of the Extraordinary or Ordinary Magisteriums. The other Councils are part of the Ordinary Magisterium because they produced dogmatic and infallible decrees.
Vatican II being a non-binding, non-dogmatic pastoral Council, is in its own Category from the other Councils.
The Conilliar Popes have used Vatican II as an excuse to contradict Church teaching.
S
saint_rafael
Guest
You have repeatedly stated over so many threads, that SSPX are schismatic and now you say that you have never said otherwise?
Are you serious?
L
laudamus_te
Guest
See, catharina, the difference is my post which obviously got on your nerves yesterday was in reference to some of your responses on that thread. It wasn’t an out of the blue regurgitating of some past offense taken. I see that you carry grudges, as well as seeming to be a very angry person, and I’d rather not have anything to do with you, so take heart - I’ll not respond to you anymore.
C
catharina
Guest
There might be some truth in this statement if one agrees that the excommunicated are outside of the Church and therefore are living in opposition to the will of the Holy Father. Is that what you’re saying? The excommunicated bishops are not traditionalists; they are not Catholics.
Yes? Yes.
C
catharina
Guest
Thanks be to God. You’ll refrain from slamming me? YIPPEE!
P
piouswoman
Guest
The spirit of Christ, which dictated the Holy Scriptures, and the spirit which animates and guides the Church of Christ, and teaches her all truth, is the same; and therefore in all ages her conduct on this point has been uniformly the same as what the Holy Scripture teaches. She has constantly forbidden her children to hold any communication, in religious matters, with those who are separated from her communion; and this she has sometimes done under the most severe penalties. In the apostolical canons, which are of very ancient standing, and for the most part handed down from the apostolical age, it is thus decreed: “If any bishop, or priest, or deacon, shall join in prayers with heretics, let him be suspended from Communion”. (Can. 44)Ut Unum Sint does not encourage any Catholic to take part in non Catholic Services. It encourages unity in prayer. An ecumenical prayer service is just that, a prayer service where people of different faiths come to pray. It is neither one nor the other.
Didn’t you see the services on TV when Benedict XVI came to the USA?
Those were not services of other faiths. They were ecumenical. They were prayer services, but very neutral.
Those are not forbidden.
JR
Also, “If any clergyman or laic shall go into the synagogue of the Jews, or the meetings of heretics, to join in prayer with them, let him be deposed, and deprived of communion”. (Can. 63)
So also, in one of her most respected councils, held in the year 398, at which the great St. Augustine was present, she speaks thus: “None must either pray or sing psalms with heretics; and whosoever shall communicate with those who are cut off from the Communion of the Church, whether clergyman or laic, let him be excommunicated”. (Coun. Carth. iv. 72 and 73)
source:cfnews.org/Hay-Ecu.htm
S
saint_rafael
Guest
Those ex-communications were unjust and history will vindicate those bishops. Serious traditional Catholics know that Pope John Paul II erred.
By the grace of God, if all goes well, I am young enough that in a few months or years, the truth will win, and the ex-communications will be made void.
I am even young enough, and I pray to God I live long enough, to see St. Archbishop Lefebvre proclaimed by a future Vicar of Christ.
J
JReducation
Guest
This is not the teaching of the Catholic Church and has never been. The Catholic Church has always condemned schismatics and schisms. That remains in effect.That is absurd.
The Orthodox religion is a schismatic religion by defintion. The Orthodox Church rejects the primacy of Peter as Supreme Pontiff and universal leader of the Church.
The Patriarch of Constantinople is a schismatic who has not abandoned his error. He has reached the age of reason and is a learned man. He is outside the one true Church.
Bishop Lefebvre had a valid doctrinal case in a “state of necessity”. The Church has ignored it.
Disobedience is just that, disobedience. One still remains a Catholic.
For the schismatics, of the Orthodox Church, there is no salvation outside of Catholicism.
However, the current Orthodox Christians are not schismatics. Their anscestors who broke with the Church of Rome were. The anathema and condemnation, and excommunication applied to them. This is why Paul VI lifted the excommunication of the Orthodox Christians, because it was not fair to hold them accountable for a schism that was caused by their anscestors and ours.
By orders of the Holy See Catholics must accept the Orthodox Churches as Sister Churches, while still holding that the Catholic Church is the Mother of the Churches and the only one that has the Petrine succession and also has the place of primacy.
The Orthodox Patriarchs have accepted that the Bishop of Rome is the legitimate successor of Peter. The issues that are being discussed are the primacy of Peter among the Apostles, the infallibility of Peter and whether Mary was conceived without orginal sin or born without original sin.
Theologians on both sides have been working for years to understand each other and have made significant progress. They have agree that the problem begins with hermaneutics rather than ill will on either side.
In the case of SSPX the Archbishop and the bishops that he ordained were excommunicated as were the original patriarchs of the Orthodox Churches, for the same reason, disobedience. There is no change in policy and practice.
In addition, the Orthodox Churches were founded by the Apostles. SSPX was not. The Orthodox Churches have direct appostolic succession. The SSPX has apostolic successiong in sacris. The Archbishop was a valid bishop and the SSPX bishops are validly ordained bishops. The Sacrament of Holy Orders within the SSPX is valid, though ilicit.
In the Orthodox Churches, the Sacrament of Holy Orders is not ilicit. They did not need the permission of the Pontiff to ordain bishops. They had that permission from the Apostles and the Pontiffs that succeeded Peter.
To conclude, John Paul II says in Ecclesia Dei
3. In itself, this act was one of disobedience to the Roman Pontiff in a very grave matter and of supreme importance for the unity of the church, such as is the ordination of bishops whereby the apostolic succession is sacramentally perpetuated. Hence such disobedience - which implies in practice the rejection of the Roman primacy - constitutes a schismatic act.(3) In performing such an act, notwithstanding the formal canonical warning sent to them by the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops on 17 June last, Mons. Lefebvre and the priests Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta, have incurred the grave penalty of excommunication envisaged by ecclesiastical law.(4)
The crucial problem here is that this constitutes a grave act of disobedience.
JR
C
catharina
Guest
You are very confused if you believe that. I have NEVER said it. I’ve said that sspx LEADERS are excommunicated schismatics. THEY ARE. sspx priests are at grave risk and in irrgegular status because thy FOLLOW excommunicated leaders. If you would pay attention to what individuals say to you rather than assuming you know what they say/think, you could learn a lot. Maybe that day will come for you; maybe not.You have repeatedly stated over so many threads, that SSPX are schismatic and now you say that you have never said otherwise?
Are you serious?
J
JReducation
Guest
But the Magisterium can change these rules, because they are matters of discipline, not dogma. To use an example, the fact that a group is Lutheran, does not change their status, because a Catholic or Catholics pray with them. They are still Protestants and not in full communion witht he Church. No one has said that they are.
Also, the Magisterium feels very strongly that charity must prevail in matters of prayer. It is not permmissable for a Catholic to receive the sacraments of a Protestant Church or even the Orthodox churches, which do have valid sacraments, but it is considered an act of charity to pray together, especially for souls, peace, unity, and the salvation of the world.
For example, it would be a lack of charity to refuse to attend a person’s funeral because it’s a Protestant service. The purpose of attending to pray for the soul of the deceased and to pray for the surviving family and friends. Such acts of charity are not contrary to doctrine.
Therefore, since they are not in conflict with docrine, the disciplines which you cite can be dispensed with in certain situations for the sake of charity.
JR
S
saint_rafael
Guest
The SSPx was founded by a Catholic Bishop with full Canonical approval by Rome in 1970.This is not the teaching of the Catholic Church and has never been. The Catholic Church has always condemned schismatics and schisms. That remains in effect.
However, the current Orthodox Christians are not schismatics. Their anscestors who broke with the Church of Rome were. The anathema and condemnation, and excommunication applied to them. This is why Paul VI lifted the excommunication of the Orthodox Christians, because it was not fair to hold them accountable for a schism that was caused by their anscestors and ours.
By orders of the Holy See Catholics must accept the Orthodox Churches as Sister Churches, while still holding that the Catholic Church is the Mother of the Churches and the only one that has the Petrine succession and also has the place of primacy.
The Orthodox Patriarchs have accepted that the Bishop of Rome is the legitimate successor of Peter. The issues that are being discussed are the primacy of Peter among the Apostles, the infallibility of Peter and whether Mary was conceived without orginal sin or born without original sin.
Theologians on both sides have been working for years to understand each other and have made significant progress. They have agree that the problem begins with hermaneutics rather than ill will on either side.
In the case of SSPX the Archbishop and the bishops that he ordained were excommunicated as were the original patriarchs of the Orthodox Churches, for the same reason, disobedience. There is no change in policy and practice.
In addition, the Orthodox Churches were founded by the Apostles. SSPX was not. The Orthodox Churches have direct appostolic succession. The SSPX has apostolic successiong in sacris. The Archbishop was a valid bishop and the SSPX bishops are validly ordained bishops. The Sacrament of Holy Orders within the SSPX is valid, though ilicit.
In the Orthodox Churches, the Sacrament of Holy Orders is not ilicit. They did not need the permission of the Pontiff to ordain bishops. They had that permission from the Apostles and the Pontiffs that succeeded Peter.
To conclude, John Paul II says in Ecclesia Dei
**3. In itself, this act was one of disobedience to the Roman Pontiff in a very grave matter **and of supreme importance for the unity of the church, such as is the ordination of bishops whereby the apostolic succession is sacramentally perpetuated. Hence such disobedience - which implies in practice the rejection of the Roman primacy - constitutes a schismatic act.(3) In performing such an act, notwithstanding the formal canonical warning sent to them by the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops on 17 June last, Mons. Lefebvre and the priests Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta, have incurred the grave penalty of excommunication envisaged by ecclesiastical law.(4)
The crucial problem here is that this constitutes a grave act of disobedience.
JR
The Orthodox have always been schismatic and remain outside the Catholic Church.
The Orthodox Church denies Papal Infallibility which is a heresy. The Orthodox started out as schismatic in 1054, and by remaining outside of the Church, have picked up some heresies because they do not believe in the dogma of the Immaculate Conception.
This has always been the teaching of the Church:
olrl.org/doctrine/eens2.shtml
“We declare, say , define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” Pope Boniface VIII, (Unam Sanctam, 1302).
St. Fulgentius (468-533), Bishop: “Most firmly hold and never doubt that not only pagans, but also Jews, all heretics, and all schismatics who finish this life outside of the Catholic Church, will go into eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.”
“Some say they are not bound by the doctrine which teaches that the Mystical Body of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church are one and the same thing. Some reduce to a meaningless formula the necessity of belonging to the true Church in order to gain eternal salvation. Others finally belittle the reasonable character of the credibility of Christian Faith. These and like ERRORS, it is clear, have crept in among certain of our sons who are deceived by imprudent zeal for souls or by false science.” - Pope Pius XII
**
It is a strange world and shows a lack of knowing the Catholic faith,
when Catholics are treated as schismatics and schismatics like Catholics.**
L
laudamus_te
Guest
C
catharina
Guest
It is a strange world and shows astounding rebellion when ordained Catholic priests follow a consecrated Catholic bishop into active schism and excommunication.
- Status