No Pope

[piouswoman]

I agree with you 100%. I have nothing against Tradition with a capital T. When we confuse Tradition with holding on to the old for its own sake, instead of Tradition for its sanctifying effects, then we have a problem.

Obedience to the Holy Father, trust in the promises of Christ to the Church that the gates of hell will not prevail against it, and the belief that there is only one saviour, Jesus Christ, not a renegade bishop or lay man are part of our Holy Tradition.

JR

It is not so simple as stated above…and it can be difficult trying to understand the infallibility of the pope and his teaching authority…this is a good article and explains it well, although it certainly takes thought and patience to read and understand…at least in my case.
sspxasia.com/Documents/SiSiNoNo/2002_January/Popes_Infallible_Magisterium.htm

 

[elts1956]

Yeah, but it’s true that this thread went from discussion on whether or not a certain phenomenon is possible, and turned into a debate over the Second Vatican Council.

That’s usually what happens when PW is allowed to take over a thread.

 

[elts1956]

Yeah, but it’s true that this thread went from discussion on whether or not a certain phenomenon is possible, and turned into a debate over the Second Vatican Council.

It is not so simple as stated above…and it can be difficult trying to understand the infallibility of the pope and his teaching authority…this is a good article and explains it well, although it certainly takes thought and patience to read and understand…at least in my case.
sspxasia.com/Documents/SiSiNoNo/2002_January/Popes_Infallible_Magisterium.htm

Dearest PW. Why do you insist on posting websites that are not recognzed as an authority by the Catholic Church??? I think you have indoctrinated yourself with too much sspxasia.

 

[NicPais83]

It is not so simple as stated above…and it can be difficult trying to understand the infallibility of the pope and his teaching authority…this is a good article and explains it well, although it certainly takes thought and patience to read and understand…at least in my case.
sspxasia.com/Documents/SiSiNoNo/2002_January/Popes_Infallible_Magisterium.htm

That’s a very heady article, I must say. Also, I apologize since I think I dismissed an article you might have given me earlier as one that you had given me days ago.

Anyway, this article does read very legalistically, especially in the case of defining the different levels of magesterium. But it concludes by stating that Paul VI is in contradiction with previous teachings on concelebration. However, concelebration is in fact a valid Western practice that had simply fallen into disuse (see the Catholic Encyclopedia). In terms of the authenticity within the Church, while you may have to go back far to find it in the West, in the East concelebration had not fallen into disuse.

The conclusions in the paragraph then lack a historical basis to support themselves.

 

[JReducation]

It is not so simple as stated above…and it can be difficult trying to understand the infallibility of the pope and his teaching authority…this is a good article and explains it well, although it certainly takes thought and patience to read and understand…at least in my case.
sspxasia.com/Documents/SiSiNoNo/2002_January/Popes_Infallible_Magisterium.htm

There is nothing new in this article. We studied this in grad school many many years ago.

Where the problem lies with the SSPX is the area of obedience. The theology is very clear. Disobedience is not defiance or moral culpable when the thing required is contrary to the faith.

However, there has been nothing required of Catholics in modern times that are contrary to the faith. Therefore, disobedience is not justified.

JR

 

[catharina]

IMO -

No Pope = sedevacantism.
Only ‘bad’ Popes = rebellious Catholics

.

 

[JReducation]

PW I have one question. Are you a member of SSPX?

I am not asking this to be rude. I’m asking because I notice that you often use their literature as a point of reference.

There are many theologians, theological schools and other Catholic sources within the Catholic Church and in good standing with Rome that discuss the same topics. Our chances of being informed and in communion with Rome are better.

JR

 

[piouswoman]

Dearest PW. Why do you insist on posting websites that are not recognzed as an authority by the Catholic Church??? I think you have indoctrinated yourself with too much sspxasia.

Oh, that is just too funny, elt…do you think there would be any controversy at all if it were required by all, that only websites “recognized” by the Vatican could be used? That is illogical. What has the fight for tradition been about all these long years then? It is a perfectly good and useful essay, written well and completely correct, and it is a fact that the SSPX remains faithful to Holy Mother Church and to Tradition, and they always have. There is no reason not to read it. Be careful if you want to remain ignorant though, the truth may just take you by surprise and turn on a light in your head.

 

[piouswoman]

PW I have one question. Are you a member of SSPX?

I am not asking this to be rude. I’m asking because I notice that you often use their literature as a point of reference.

There are many theologians, theological schools and other Catholic sources within the Catholic Church and in good standing with Rome that discuss the same topics. Our chances of being informed and in communion with Rome are better.

JR

There is no such thing as being a “member” of the SSPX, I am a traditional Roman Catholic that assists at the Holy Mass at an SSPX chapel.

 

[catharina]

There is no such thing as being a “member” of the SSPX, I am a traditional Roman Catholic that assists at the Holy Mass at an SSPX chapel.

In what manner can a Catholic woman assist at an sspx Mass?

 

[piouswoman]

IMO -

No Pope = sedevacantism.
Only ‘bad’ Popes = rebellious Catholics

.

Are you saying:

Rebellious Catholic=Piouswoman?

 

[piouswoman]

In what manner can a Catholic woman assist at an sspx Mass?

That’s easy catharina…you grab you missal, drive to the chapel, walk in the door and when Mass begins, you pray the Holy Mass. I know my answer sounds saucy, but I am serious.

 

[catharina]

Are you saying:

Rebellious Catholic=Piouswoman?

No, I’m not.
Are you saying that?

 

[catharina]

That’s easy catharina…you grab you missal, drive to the chapel, walk in the door and when Mass begins, you pray the Holy Mass. I know my answer sounds saucy, but I am serious.

I wondered if you were presenting ‘new’ terminology.
That use of “assist at Mass” is definitely unfamiliar to me.

 

[LilyM]

There is no such thing as being a “member” of the SSPX, I am a traditional Roman Catholic that assists at the Holy Mass at an SSPX chapel.

Of course there is - there ARE Third Order (Lay) members of the Society as well as clergy.

And there certainly are ‘supporters’. I suppose you don’t give money to the collection (thus supporting the Society and going expressly against instructions of His Holiness JP2) do you?

“I wish especially to make an appeal both solemn and heartfelt, paternal and fraternal, to all those who until now have been linked in various ways to the movement of Archbishop Lefebvre, that they may fulfill the … duty … of ceasing their support **in any way **for that movement” (John Paul II, Ecclesia Dei)

 

[piouswoman]

There is nothing new in this article. We studied this in grad school many many years ago.

Where the problem lies with the SSPX is the area of obedience. The theology is very clear. Disobedience is not defiance or moral culpable when the thing required is contrary to the faith.

However, there has been nothing required of Catholics in modern times that are contrary to the faith. Therefore, disobedience is not justified.

JR

Obedience is addressed in this essay I provided, in the section under the heading:
The Danger of Being Drawn into Error

 

[JReducation]

There is no such thing as being a “member” of the SSPX, I am a traditional Roman Catholic that assists at the Holy Mass at an SSPX chapel.

There is a slight problem here. I agree that the liturgy is valid and that the priest is validly ordained. No questions there.

However, the logic is questionable.

We have an EF celebrated by priests who are in communion with Rome. Reason would say that a Catholic would celebrate the liturgy with a community that is in full communion with Rome instead of one that is in conflict with Rome.

My other concern here, not just with PW, but with anyone who calls themselves Catholic is that celebrating liturgy at an SSPX chapel reinforces the Society’s stance, rather than promote union with the Holy See.

No matter how much the SSPX claims to be in union with the Holy See, if the Holy See does not accept their terms, the union is very weak and the thread can snap at any moment. If the thread snaps, the SSPX is then a schismatic group.

This has not yet happened, but they are pushing the envelop. I don’t believe that Pope Benedict is going to concede every point that SSPX wants.

Therefore, at some point the dialogue is going to reach a conclusion. If the conclusion is that SSPX must return under the terms set by the Holy See or be excommunicated, then I feer for the SSPX supporters.

I would not take such a risk. I would find an EF in a parish that is in full communion with the Holy See.

Even the document written by the SSPX stresses the importance of union with Rome. So why provide reinforcement to a society that is running a great risk when there is no need to do so?

JR

 

[piouswoman]

I wondered if you were presenting ‘new’ terminology.
That use of “assist at Mass” is definitely unfamiliar to me.

Oh, I see. It is commonly referred to as “assisting at the Mass” in traditional circles, so to speak…it was unfamiliar to me also at one time.

 

[piouswoman]

Of course there is - there ARE Third Order (Lay) members of the Society as well as clergy.

And there certainly are ‘supporters’. I suppose you don’t give money to the collection (thus supporting the Society and going expressly against instructions of His Holiness JP2) do you?

“I wish especially to make an appeal both solemn and heartfelt, paternal and fraternal, to all those who until now have been linked in various ways to the movement of Archbishop Lefebvre, that they may fulfill the … duty … of ceasing their support **in any way **for that movement” (John Paul II, Ecclesia Dei)

Of course one may become a member of the Third Order of the SSPX. The original question was asked, but could leave the impression to those unknowing, that one must “join” the SSPX as though it were its own Church, without faithfulness to the Pope, and not Roman Catholic, all of which are untrue.

 

[JReducation]

Of course one may become a member of the Third Order of the SSPX. The original question was asked, but could leave the impression to those unknowing, that one must “join” the SSPX as though it were its own Church, without faithfulness to the Pope, and not Roman Catholic, all of which are untrue.

I know that one does not joing the SSPX by signing up. I was using the term the way that our Holy Father John Paul II used it in Ecclesia Dei, lending support in any way.

The Holy Father could not have been much clearer. Our Holy Father Benedict has repeated that same call to all Catholics who participate in SSPX liturgies to return to the EF or OF with priests who are in communion with Rome, not with priests who believe they are in communion, even though Rome does not recognize the communion.

JR