ThomasMore1535:
Finally, your argument that lots of canon lawyers disagree over this just further shows the Protestant nature of SSPX. IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT CANON LAWYERS MIGHT SAY ABOUT THE EXCOMMUNICATIONS. The Pope, as the Vicar of Christ, is the authoritative interpreter of canon law. As Vatican I defined, he is the final authority in matters not only of faith and morals, but of discipline as well. You cannot simply pick and choose which statements of the Pope to obey and which not to obey. This has nothing to do with “papolitry.” He has been empowered by Christ to enforce Church discipline, and his word is final.
I only cite the fact that there are canon lawyers on both sides because radical NO’s never hesitate to quote those that agree with them while ignoring those that do not. BTW - even Peter Vere, who does not attend the SSPX, is not this vehemently against the SSPX. In fact he has a lot of respect for them, and credits them with having the Faith and reverence.
This all started with you taking jabs at the SSPX and also insulting any tradtionalists that admit that there are problems in the Church; some that were exasperated by some of the confusing actions of our previous Pontiff and also by his silence and inaction in many cases. You some how linked this with not being Catholic. That is way off base. Again, I reference:
[The faithful] have the right, indeed at times the duty, in keeping with their knowledge, competence, and position, to manifest to the sacred pastors [bishops] their views on matters that concern the good of the Church. They have the right also to make their views known to others of Christ’s faithful, but in doing so must always respect the integrity of faith and morals, show due reverence to the pastors, and take into account both the common good and the dignity of individuals. (Canon Law 212)
I also reference *The Devastated Vineyard * (1973), Dietrich von Hildebrand :
A third false response, and perhaps the most dangerous one, would be to imagine that there is no destruction of the vineyard of the Lord, that it only seems so to us — our task as laymen is simply to adhere with complete loyalty to whatever our bishop says…
At the basis of this attitude is a false idea of loyalty to the hierarchy. When the pope speaks ex cathedra on faith or morals, then unconditional acceptance and submission is required of every Catholic. But it is false to extend this loyalty to encyclicals in which new theses are proposed. This is not to deny that the magisterium of the Church extends much farther than the dogmas. If an encyclical deals with a question of faith or morals and is based on the tradition of the holy Church — that is, expresses something which the Church has always taught — then we should humbly accept its teaching. This is the case with the encyclical Humanae Vitae: although we do not have here the strict infallibility of a defined dogma, the content of the encyclical nevertheless belongs to that sphere of the Church’s magisterium which we must accept as true.
But there are many encyclicals which deal with very different (e.g., sociological) questions and which express a response of the Church to certain new conditions. Thus the encyclical of the great Pope Pius XI, Quadragesimo Anno, with its idea of a corporate state, differs on sociological questions with encyclicals of Paul VI. But when it is a question of practical ordinances such as concordats, or the suppression of the Jesuit order by Pope Clement XIV, or the introduction of the new missal, or the rearrangement of the Church calendar, or the new rubrics for the liturgy, then our obedience (as Vatican I declares), but by no means our agreement, is required… In the history of the Church there have been many unfortunate ordinances and practical decisions by popes, which have then been retracted by other popes. In such matters we may, while obeying an ordinance, with all due respect express opposition to it, pray for its elimination, and address many appeals to the pope.
ThomasMore1535 said:
“Rome has spoken, the case is closed.”
The case is not close, it is still being written, the discussion of which is the topic of this thread. Maybe on Holy Thursday it will be one more step closer to being closed.
B16
