Michael Davies and the SSPX

[AltarMan]

Semper Fi:

This doesn’t make any sense at all considering that Una Voce itself is not protestant. Not sure where the protestant thing came in here…

A Catholic can setup an apostolate any time that they wish in order to promote Catholic teachings as long as they are not schismatic and are in line with the Holy See.

My apologies. I thought we were speaking of the SSPX. In that context, I stand by my comments.

 

[GoLatin]

Are there more Priests that leave the SSPX, than Priests that join the SSPX from outside?

 

[GoLatin]

Many of my traditionalist acquaintances admire Michael Davies. They don’t seem to understand WHY he was wrong.

 

[Sean_O_L]

Golatin wrote:

Are there more Priests that leave the SSPX, than Priests that join the SSPX from outside?

I do not have a full list of priests who were NOT ordained for the SSPX, that is, Diocesan priests who are are illicitly associated with the SSPX AND persons ordained for the so-called “Traditional Orders” (such as the so-called “Traditional Redemptorists” who author the periodical “Catholic”, and “Traditional Benedictines”, etc.

However I do have an Excel Data base on Priests ordained for the SSPX and some of the “traditionalist” associate priests (which include the approx. 26 priests of Campos, Brazil) who have been reconciled with the Church.

An incomplete list of SSPX priests who have defected from the SSPX, for varying reasons) may be viewed at jloughnan.tripod.com/priestsleft.htm

I would appreciate corrections and additions.

 

[GoLatin]

Any suggestions as to how we wean people off of Michael Davies’ books?

I am asking this because if people read Michael Davies’ books, they might be led into the SSPX.

 

[bear06]

GoLatin:

Any suggestions as to how we wean people off of Michael Davies’ books?

I am asking this because if people read Michael Davies’ books, they might be led into the SSPX.

jloughnan.tripod.com/index.htm
sspx.agenda.tripod.com/
catholicculture.org
tcrnews2.com

Since the problem isn’t exclusive to Davies, I would recommend you suggest these sites to people who are into Davies. I would also suggest that one should read Pastor Aeternus: ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/ECCLESIA.HTM

 

[bear06]

GoLatin:

Any suggestions as to how we wean people off of Michael Davies’ books?

I am asking this because if people read Michael Davies’ books, they might be led into the SSPX.

jloughnan.tripod.com/index.htm
sspx.agenda.tripod.com/
catholicculture.org
tcrnews2.com

Since the problem isn’t exclusive to Davies, I would recommend you suggest these sites to people who are into Davies. I would also suggest that one should read Pastor Aeternus: ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/ECCLESIA.HTM

 

[Iohannes]

From Stephen Hand:
tcrnews2.com/womengospels.html

But are we baptizing naked today? I do not think so. This will indeed cause more confusion and scandal.

In his TCRnews website he supports married priest, I cannot find that right now.

 

[bear06]

Iohannes:

From Stephen Hand:
tcrnews2.com/womengospels.html

But are we baptizing naked today? I do not think so. This will indeed cause more confusion and scandal.

In his TCRnews website he supports married priest, I cannot find that right now.

I believe this is what you are talking about:

tcrnews2.com/celibacy.html

Please note that he says:

assenting to the decision for the Church at this time, cognizant of the fact that a future Pope, depending on circumstances, could reevaluate the matter without prejudice to any Catholics dogmas.

Don’t you think this to be true?

 

[Iohannes]

To understand the problems of today, I suggest people to read Michael Davies books especially on the liturgy.

remnantnewspaper.com/Davies/Davies%20-%20Rao.htm

The man was not happy about one thing only: that he was obliged to record a history of unparalleled collapse. There were no works from Michael Davies’ hands without the shedding, internally, of an ocean’s worth of horrified tears.

 

[Iohannes]

I have been profoundly touched by the news of the death of Michael Davies. I had the good fortune to meet him several times and I found him as a man of deep faith and ready to embrace suffering. Ever since the Council he put all his energy into the service of the Faith and left us important publications especially about the Sacred Liturgy. Even though he suffered from the Church in many ways in his time, he always truly remained a man of the Church. He knew that the Lord founded His Church on the rock of St Peter and that the Faith can find its fullness and maturity only in union with the successor of St Peter. Therefore we can be confident that the Lord opened wide for him the gates of heaven. We commend his soul to the Lord’s mercy.

Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
(Translated from the original German)
9 November 2004

latin-mass-society.org/2005/michaeldavies.html

 

[Iohannes]

I wish to acknowledge receipt of your letter of 29 October 2004 informing me of the Solemn Requiem for the repose of the soul of Mr Michael Davies to be celebrated according to the typical edition of the Roman Missal of 1962 at Saint James’ Church ,Spanish Place, London on Saturday 20 November. I regret that my duties here in Rome prevent my attendance at that Mass. Nor is it possible for me at this time to send a representative.

Nonetheless I am pleased to associate myself and the officials of the Pontifical Commission ‘Ecclesia Dei’ with the members of the Latin Mass Society, Una Voce International and all of those present for this solemn liturgical celebration in suffrage for the soul of His servant Michael whose attachment to the classical Roman liturgy is well known. May he know the reward of his labours. May Our Merciful Lord grant him eternal rest and consolation to his family and all those who mourn his passing. Lux aeterna luceat ei, Domine, cum sanctis tuis in aeternum quia pius es. Requiescat in pace!

With my blessing I remain
Sincerely yours in Christ,
Dario Cardinal Castrillón Hoyos
17 November 2004

latin-mass-society.org/2005/michaeldavies.html

 

[Sean_O_L]

In response to Iohannes bad-mouthing Stephen Hand for "
Quote:
By the way, Stephen Hand advocates for married priests and women deaconess
Iohannes offers a link to a file which commences:

While it would certainly seem that after the Holy Father’s Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, the question of the ordination of women to the sacerdotal priesthood is closed—since the Church, the Holy Father teaches, does not have the “competence” to change this —it is certainly not on account of any inequality between male and female, but simply a matter of the divine constitution of the Church in all her different charisms of servanthood, bestowed by God for the unity and upbuilding of all, in union with Peter and the living magisterium:

…This certainly does not mean that women must necessarily be excluded from all active and contemplative service around the altar at the Mass as a matter of orthodoxy, whether as altar servers (1), readers of Holy Scripture, or as Eucharistic Ministers, etc. Nor should it necessarily preclude, it seems to us, the reviving of the ancient tradition **of **(theologically orthodox) women participating in a non-ordained deaconate.

It appears, Iohannes, that you take the position of either a misogynist or a tinkling bell. You need to establish that there is something essentially evil in the concepts of 1) married priests and 2) women participating in a non-ordained deaconate. I remember Bro. Rich writing on the matter of women deaconesses in these forums.

 

[Sean_O_L]

As ByzCath pointed out in post #8 in the Apologetics thread on "Deaconesses, really ordainable?

August 4, 2005, 10:54 AM
ByzCath http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/statusicon_cad/user_offline.gif vbmenu_register(“postmenu_832455”, true);
Senior Member
Book Club Member
Join Date: June 9, 2004
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 3,231

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon1.gif Re: Deaconesses, really ordainable?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catholic2003
Should the magisterium decide to rule out the possibility of female deacons, I think this is the argument that they will use.

I would ask that you discontinue using that term, “female deacon”, as there has never been such a thing in the Church.

While the early Church, and the Greek Orthodox Church today, had/have deaconesses, a deaconess is not (and never was) a female deacon.

Quote:
This could be taken as an indication that deacons need not possess the eligibility to be a priest. This is why married deacons are allowed in the Latin Rite, even though married priests are not.

As this is a purely disciplinary matter, and one you get wrong as there are married priests in the Latin Church today, I think this point does nothing for the arguement.

It also ignores the rest of the Church where a married priesthood is alive and well (and even being restored in North America).

 

[Confiteor]

Not that this has anything to do with Michael Davies or SSPX, here is an article that addresses the women deaconesses issue (which this thread seems to have drifted into):

catholicherald.com/saunders/05ws/ws051124.htm

 

[Iohannes]

Sean O L:

In response to Iohannes bad-mouthing Stephen Hand for "
Quote:
By the way, Stephen Hand advocates for married priests and women deaconess
Iohannes offers a link to a file which commences:

It appears, Iohannes, that you take the position of either a misogynist or a tinkling bell. You need to establish that there is something essentially evil in the concepts of 1) married priests and 2) women participating in a non-ordained deaconate. I remember Bro. Rich writing on the matter of women deaconesses in these forums.

Your charity is noted . Do we need more confusion. Do we need to baptize naked women? We have nuns, they are not good enough?

Alas you are bearing false witness. Maybe you should stop using the clickers or mouse and start praying more. I probally need to do the same too. How about praying the full rosary every day if you have time or check out the breviary. It is more constructive than trying to discredit mere layman.

How did the heck do I deserve to be called a mysoginst for opposing women deaconess because in my opinion they are not necessary. I try to live up to Chivary, I know that is outdated in this Novus Ordo World, but I try to live up to chivary and Purity and Charity. We do not baptize in the nude anymore, women deaconess were used to baptize naked women. How about nuns, dont they fullfill the role of women deaconess, I love them and they do an excellent job, the Catholic ones. Before we try to implement women deaconess, why not try to get more nuns. If we are having trouble getting nun what makes you think that women deaconess are easier to get?

No married priest are not necessary either at least in the latin rite, that is our custom, Am I a mysmatromius now? I know that is not a word.

They are not evil concepts, I agree, but they are not necessary. What is necessary is to restore the Traditional Latin Mass, restore the original Church’s discipline on Ecumenism which is it necessary for every soul to become Catholic.

To restore Charity which is badly needed, along with Hope and Faith. That is what we need to restore badly.

Thanks Sean and others for showing how useless this forum is, when time is better spent praying.
I have no malice towards you and wish no ill will towards anyone. I want you to go to heaven, I have no hatred towards you and I have no agenda but to save my own soul in this terrible times we are living in. **I know in order for any restoration to occur, I must start with myself. ** For any restoration to occur, I have to start with myself. I feel abandoned by my own diocese and bishops.
I will probally leave this forum, I think my time will be better spent prayer and penance and frequent visits to Holy Hour.

 

[palmas85]

Iohannes:

Your charity is noted . Do we need more confusion. Do we need to baptize naked women? We have nuns, they are not good enough?

Alas you are bearing false witness. Maybe you should stop using the clickers or mouse and start praying more. I probally need to do the same too. How about praying the full rosary every day if you have time or check out the breviary. It is more constructive than trying to discredit mere layman.

How did the heck do I deserve to be called a mysoginst for opposing women deaconess because in my opinion they are not necessary. I try to live up to Chivary, I know that is outdated in this Novus Ordo World, but I try to live up to chivary and Purity and Charity. We do not baptize in the nude anymore, women deaconess were used to baptize naked women. How about nuns, dont they fullfill the role of women deaconess, I love them and they do an excellent job, the Catholic ones. Before we try to implement women deaconess, why not try to get more nuns. If we are having trouble getting nun what makes you think that women deaconess are easier to get?

No married priest are not necessary either at least in the latin rite, that is our custom, Am I a mysmatromius now? I know that is not a word.

They are not evil concepts, I agree, but they are not necessary. What is necessary is to restore the Traditional Latin Mass, restore the original Church’s discipline on Ecumenism which is it necessary for every soul to become Catholic.

To restore Charity which is badly needed, along with Hope and Faith. That is what we need to restore badly.

Thanks Sean and others for showing how useless this forum is, when time is better spent praying.
I have no malice towards you and wish no ill will towards anyone. I want you to go to heaven, I have no hatred towards you and I have no agenda but to save my own soul in this terrible times we are living in. **I know in order for any restoration to occur, I must start with myself. ** For any restoration to occur, I have to start with myself. I feel abandoned by my own diocese and bishops.
I will probally leave this forum, I think my time will be better spent prayer and penance and frequent visits to Holy Hour.

We still have Nuns??? Where, I haven’t seen a real one in years?. We have a lot of feminist new agers running around who used to be Nuns, but from what I see very very few real Nuns are still around.

Just an aside on that, some orders of “Nuns” have been laicized to the point that they don’t attend Mass anymore in protest of the non-ordination of women.

Brings up an interesting question. I would think that a minimum requirement for being in a Catholic religious order would be the actual practice and belief in Catholicism. From everything that I have seen and heard it appears that many of them don’t fall into that category any longer.

 

[bear06]

Iohannes:

Your charity is noted . Do we need more confusion. Do we need to baptize naked women? We have nuns, they are not good enough?

Alas you are bearing false witness. Maybe you should stop using the clickers or mouse and start praying more. I probally need to do the same too. How about praying the full rosary every day if you have time or check out the breviary. It is more constructive than trying to discredit mere layman.

How did the heck do I deserve to be called a mysoginst for opposing women deaconess because in my opinion they are not necessary. I try to live up to Chivary, I know that is outdated in this Novus Ordo World, but I try to live up to chivary and Purity and Charity. We do not baptize in the nude anymore, women deaconess were used to baptize naked women. How about nuns, dont they fullfill the role of women deaconess, I love them and they do an excellent job, the Catholic ones. Before we try to implement women deaconess, why not try to get more nuns. If we are having trouble getting nun what makes you think that women deaconess are easier to get?

No married priest are not necessary either at least in the latin rite, that is our custom, Am I a mysmatromius now? I know that is not a word.

They are not evil concepts, I agree, but they are not necessary. What is necessary is to restore the Traditional Latin Mass, restore the original Church’s discipline on Ecumenism which is it necessary for every soul to become Catholic.

To restore Charity which is badly needed, along with Hope and Faith. That is what we need to restore badly.

Thanks Sean and others for showing how useless this forum is, when time is better spent praying.
I have no malice towards you and wish no ill will towards anyone. I want you to go to heaven, I have no hatred towards you and I have no agenda but to save my own soul in this terrible times we are living in. **I know in order for any restoration to occur, I must start with myself. ** For any restoration to occur, I have to start with myself. I feel abandoned by my own diocese and bishops.
I will probally leave this forum, I think my time will be better spent prayer and penance and frequent visits to Holy Hour.

So, in other words, you think we should restore what you think we should restore, not what others or the Church think should be restored.

Also, telling people how they should conduct their spiritual lives takes a lot of audacity. How do you know whether or not they spend time in prayer, penance, Holy Hours? How do you know whether or not they do all that and more and participate in these forums?

It seems quite funny that you are doing the same things that Mr. Hand is doing. He is expressing his wishes in what he’s interested in being restored and so are you. Why is this only right when you do it?

 

[bear06]

We still have Nuns??? Where, I haven’t seen a real one in years?.

No EWTN, Palmas? Actually, the wacko orders are on their last legs. When was the last time you saw a young wacko nun? The conservative orders, however, are booming with young women.

Brings up an interesting question. I would think that a minimum requirement for being in a Catholic religious order would be the actual practice and belief in Catholicism.

You’d think that might be kind of important.

 

[GoLatin]

Are there any plans in the works to form an alternative to Una Voce?