P
Pax_et_Caritas
Guest
Aside from the Bishops and Priests, the only people who might be considered members are those who belong to the SSPX third order. The laity who attend are not members.
- Status
J
JKirkLVNV
Guest
But the SSPX still keeps him in a position of authority, doesn’t it? They don’t seem to be correcting him. And since they don’t, well, what are we suppposed to think? And no, it wouldn’t do any good to compare him to, let’s say, Cardinal Mahoney. Whatever the Cardinal does say, he doesn’t overtly and explicitly deny Church teaching nor does he go around saying wing-nutty stuff that the Church has to step in and correct. The Church WILL do that when necessary, as in the instance of Archbishop Milingo. The Society doesn’t seem to do the same with it’s wayward bishop.
Let me ask you directly, why are you so sympathetic to the SSPX?
J
JKirkLVNV
Guest
This IS correct. And I doubt the third order qualify, as I don’t think the Church regards the other third orders in the same way they do the religious to whom they are affiliated.
T
Timothysis
Guest
You don’t even know what you’re talking about. There are no lay members of the sspx. The only members are the clergy. That is why Pope John Paul II warned people, not about joining the society, but by supporting them.The SSPX has members, but I’m pretty sure there are none on this site. Has someone been saying they don’t? It wouldn’t make much sense to have a Society with no members
B
BrendanD
Guest
That’s true, they haven’t been correcting him. Williamson is totally nuts, but I still wouldn’t attribute his insanity to all the SSPX.
Mostly for amusement/discussion on the forums, and also because I respect that they’re mostly just devout Catholics living the faith as it was taught to them. I don’t actually attend the SSPX (although I would definitely consider it if there weren’t a good parish in my area.)
B
BrendanD
Guest
Huh? That’s exactly what I’m talking about. I don’t think there are any members of the SSPX on this forum. You’ll notice that I never say “the SSPX” to refer to the laity. I always call them “attendees of the SSPX”, “the SSPX faithful”, etc.
P
Pax_et_Caritas
Guest
Yeah, I think you are right.
U
UKcatholicGuy
Guest
Vegas, that’s not a very charitable way in which to speak of a bishop of the Church!
E
ethelzguy
Guest
Well, at least you said “the Church” with a “small t”, acknowledging that he isn’t a bishop of “THE Church”.
S
Sepharad
Guest
There are some very good reasons why many very traditional religious people (in both Christianity and Judaism) oppose college. I oppose college; I would not send my children to one. Neither would many ultraOrthodox Jews (I am not ultraOrthodox but I agree with them on this).
I don’t know Bishop Williamson’s reasons, but they may be similar to the reasons of very Orthodox Jews: because universities teach secular theories which run counter to Torah (the Bible), and they encourage immoral behaviors and immodesty by allowing students to attend on a co-ed basis (Orthodox Jewish schools, like many Catholic schools, have segregated gender schooling.)
Among Chasidic (ultraOrthodox) Jews, most women would not need college education anyway, since almost all become wives and mothers (with an average of 10 children per family, so they are kept busy!)
J
JKirkLVNV
Guest
Honestly, did you type that with a straight face? All of the venemous things said about the Vicars of Christ on these threads and you’re taken aback that someone might view Bishop Williamson a bit dubiously? Archbishop Milingo was also a bishop in the Church. It doesn’t detract from the fact that he was off-beam.
B
BrendanD
Guest
Very interesting. Orthodox Judaism sounds a lot like the traditional Catholic families I know, in terms of family life.
P
Pax_et_Caritas
Guest
I was just thinking that Sepharad would make a good Traditional Catholic. Some of his/her other posts have been very good as well.
S
Sepharad
Guest
Bingo, you got it! In fact we have some of the same rules about modesty in dress, too…no sheer fabrics, long sleeves, long skirts, no bare legs, no lowcut tops, etc. Married Jewish women must cover their hair also (btw this is why the virgin Mary is always portrayed with her hair covered by a veil…that is a Jewish law.) Ultraorthodox Jews are also against birth control and certainly abortion on demand. Among many other similarities, we also have our religious services almost entirely in an ancient language (for us, its Hebrew…for you guys, its Latin.)
You guys might not like the fact that our marriages are arranged
(but the children involved DO have a say)…but we have a very low rate of divorce too, probably because arranged marriages seem to work. And boys and girls do not “date”, they meet with potential partners selected by their parents and a matchmaker…they are also never alone for modesty reasons, until they are actually married. They cannot even hold hands due to the temptation involved.The irony of all this is: if not for the bad blood that has passed between (traditional) Catholicism and traditional Judaism, we’d find we have a lot in common, morally.
BTW to keep thsi thread from going off topic, check this new thread out where I can answer questions along these lines):
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=3881824#post3881824
T
Timothysis
Guest
Yes, if we can only get him to agree that women shouldn’t wear shorts, play sports, seek a career and have a minimum of one child every 18 months he might even be elected Pope.
T
Timothysis
Guest
Yeah, God forbid anyone should actually fall in love with the person they marry.
S
Sepharad
Guest
I’m a “she”, and I DO agree women should not wear shorts (or any slacks at all, actually), and very Orthodox Jews do not use any form of birth control, so they usually have very large families (10 children is the average in most Chasidic Jewish communities.)
I don’t know any Orthodox Jewish women who play sports either, btw, most likely because the clothing required to do so are usually not considered tsnius (modest). And as I said earlier, few have careers because they are too busy taking care of their average of 10 children.
S
Sepharad
Guest
In traditional Jewish thought, love comes later. People learn to love one another. It might not make sense to you, but it works. The divorce rate is extremely low in Chasidic communities. And yes we do allow divorce, but it is extremely rare.
When a young couple (full of raging hormones) decide “we’re in love”, they don’t know what they mean…love is something which grows over time, it doesn’t happen in an instant. What many immature youngsters call “love” is really infatuation, and it wears off…which is probably why the US divorce rate is so high!
T
Timothysis
Guest
Love is a commitment, not a “we’re in love” feeling. What you are talking about is maturity. Older, mature people who marry have a much less rate of divorce than those who marry young and immature. The problem lies in the culture of society.
I can certainly respect your cultural belief about marriage even though I don’t necessarily agree totally. I still, however, do not think that a woman’s “role” is to remain ignorant, barefoot and pregnant.
B
bear06
Guest
The problem is that nobody condemns Williamson. Now before you say that nobody condmens the loons in the “Novus Ordo” side, this isn’t true for me. I’ve fought abuses in my diocese for years and have been on the outs with our old bishop and many of the priests. Now I’m an individual but there are many groups out there that do the same such as the Adoremus and Catholic Media Coaltion. In other words, you should have the same courtesy to the OF types as you do the SSPX. Lumping everyone into the same boat is bad.
- Status