P
ProVobis
Guest
Br JR, of course, now that he’s shown us how to do it correctly.
- Status
J
JReducation
Guest
Thanks for your kindness folks.The truth is that the SSPX bishops and priests have no authority from the Church at all. A very long time ago, they tried to bind my conscience regarding the new Mass. That is when my eyes began to open. I knew they couldn’t do that. And I found it completely baffling that they would bind my conscience regarding the Mass that the pope, whom they acknowledge to the the Vicar of Christ, himself says.
The most amazing thing is that this thread is still in existence without being locked after 25 pages…will wonders ever cease???
I won’t be bothering you too much longer. We’re going through a quiet period right now. I’ll not be here much longer. Things are going to pick up next week and I’ll be disappearing again.
At the end of August, I’m going on retreat. If I can get permission from the house chapter, I may be attending my daughter’s wedding after that. I’m not scheduled to visit my family for another three years. We have no attachments to people, places or things.
My daughter wants me to give her away. I can’t go, because the constitutions says that I cannot do so. It takes a house chapter to clear it, even for a major superior. Goes to show you, none of us can do what we would like to do. All of this depends on my health cooperating. God always has a plan.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
J
JReducation
Guest
I would agree with that. I would also suspect that he has a different vantage point, now that he’s pope. From his vantage point he can see that what the reform is supposed to look like. He can see that many of us do it correctly and I truly believe that he appreciates it. he can also see that those who have made mistakes,have not been modernists or the like. They are simple people trying to do the best with the little they knew.Br JR, of course, now that he’s shown us how to do it correctly.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
S
severus68
Guest
I for one will miss your enlightening and charitable posts. I am in awe of people like you who have given up so much for Christ. God bless you.Thanks for your kindness folks.
I won’t be bothering you too much longer. We’re going through a quiet period right now. I’ll not be here much longer. Things are going to pick up next week and I’ll be disappearing again.
At the end of August, I’m going on retreat. If I can get permission from the house chapter, I may be attending my daughter’s wedding after that. I’m not scheduled to visit my family for another three years. We have no attachments to people, places or things.
My daughter wants me to give her away. I can’t go, because the constitutions says that I cannot do so. It takes a house chapter to clear it, even for a major superior. Goes to show you, none of us can do what we would like to do. All of this depends on my health cooperating. God always has a plan.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
J
JReducation
Guest
Nothing to be in awe about. We must be always be willing to give what he takes and welcome what he gives.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
T
TrueLight
Guest
You don’t at all.
T
TrueLight
Guest
Much blessings on your endeavors. Please stay in touch.Thanks for your kindness folks.
I won’t be bothering you too much longer. We’re going through a quiet period right now. I’ll not be here much longer. Things are going to pick up next week and I’ll be disappearing again.
At the end of August, I’m going on retreat. If I can get permission from the house chapter, I may be attending my daughter’s wedding after that. I’m not scheduled to visit my family for another three years. We have no attachments to people, places or things.
My daughter wants me to give her away. I can’t go, because the constitutions says that I cannot do so. It takes a house chapter to clear it, even for a major superior. Goes to show you, none of us can do what we would like to do. All of this depends on my health cooperating. God always has a plan.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
J
JReducation
Guest
I’m not disappearing. I’m just gong to be busy for a few weeks. Then I’ll have a quiet period during which I’ll be around and then busy again and so forth. If I don’t get permission to attend the wedding, I’ll have more time on my hands.Much blessings on your endeavors. Please stay in touch.
I may not get that permission. Remember what we say at profession: ***“I vow and promise to almighty God, to the Blessed Virgin Mary, to all the angels and saints, to you Father General and to the holy catholic church, to live according to the Gospel, obedient **to the Holy Rule revealed by our Lord Jesus Christ to our Holy Father Francis, approved by our Lord Pope Honorius and to the constitutions of this fraternity, without property or attachments, and in chastity, all the days of my life. May God have mercy on my eternal soul if I should fail in this endeavor.”
“And I, as the canonical successor of our Holy Father St. Francis,and delegate of Holy Mother Church, promise you eternal salvation of you fulfill all these things. I solemnly confirm your resolve in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.”*
We obey, we detach and we accept, no questions asked.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
J
Justin_Swanton
Guest
Yes, I think my post was deleted because of that.
I take the point. Granted that one may have reasons for thinking Fr X is heterodox one shouldn’t call any priest a ‘heretic’ until the Church does. It’s enough to state that Fr X holds such and such a doctrinal position provided one can substantiate it.
I deliberately avoided naming names or parishes as I do not want to get personal but still, ‘heretic’ applied to an individual is a term to avoid unless the Church herself has applied it. My apologies.
(I guess the same goes for the term ‘schismatic’?
)
D
Dee_S
Guest
What model Bonnie did you have? I’d love to restore an older one.
It belonged to a friend of my brother’s (who I ended up marrying)
I really only argue on here to get back in the groove since I haven’t discussed theology for over a decade so it’s all a learning curve for me.
Me too!
I’d like to be able to just pick up a book and read, but I learn through discussion, and an argument gives me the push to go research.
I read lots, especially Papal Encyclicals - believe it or not, I love the precise languange used and the way the subject matter is comprehensively delivered.
The reason why I “enjoy” the SSPX threads are because they shoot to the heart of what it means to be Catholic.
That they do…well said.
I hope I don’t come across as an arrogant SOB 'cos I’m not really - but I do like a good “barney.”
Me too . . or so I’m discovering this side to myself,never before guessed at
D
Dee_S
Guest
You are certainly not a bother to us and I’m sure I speak for all here in thanking you for giving of your time to bring a dimension into these discussions which would be missed if you were no longer around.Can you hold on to that until Sep 6? That’s my birthday.
That little something is for now, will bring cake for all to celebrate your birthday
By the way, I’m far from a Modernist. I can’t bet more orthodox, because there are not enough letters in the word.
That’s good to know, thanks.
You missed my point in that other post. I was trying to make the point that the article was being used in the typical traditionalist manner that is often done on TC Forum. In this case, the article was written before the interviews with the two archbishops.
Sorry, but I had to defend Dr Mirus at CatholicCulture.org as is not at all Traditionalist (in the ‘bad’ sense of the word) and it would have been unjust to allow any members to assume this was the case.
I’ll give you another example to help you understand what I’m talking about. Many years ago, Cardinal Ratzinger wrote about the reforms in the liturgy.
If you have time, could you please let me know what form these reforms took that the Holy Father wrote about as Cardinal Ratzinger? and where they can be found.
About two years ago, in Light of the World, he is asked about those comments. He has reworked his position. In other words, he does not hold the exact same position that he did when he wrote in the past. Which comments, might even be of help to me, as I could search for information on that basis?
However, every time people want to sustain an argument against the liturgical reforms, they quote Cardinal Ratzinger, but they fail to mention that Pope Ratzinger has modified his position.
An argument in favour of, or against? Which position needed modifying?
I’m really curious now. I have read The Ratzinger Report some years back and liked what the Pope said in there. He’s a man well ahead of his time, as only now people are beginning to realise that he had a point - way back then.
This is what happened with the articles. There was nothing wrong with what the Doctor said. His work was being used to say “this is what’s going to happen.” In the meantime, we have recent interviews with the two archbishops who are proposing something slightly different.
For the most up to date news and commentary, I can recommend his site as excellent. He does provide links to the news articles he bases his short news flashes on, which I think is great so one can access the source immediately and compare it to what he says.
So far, there have been no discrepancies. An interesting feature of his site is that he offers readers to “sound off” on all that is posted there. Not as lively a forum as here, but keeps one very current in knowing how others think and react to situations as they are actually unfolding.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
Congratulations on your daughter’s wedding (my first was married just 2 weeks ago) and I wish you and your family every blessing on this happiest of occasions
https://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/i...PmNx4l0MOCDhaCxXGahW5Al2p8X996GacxKf60g6PXp0A
M
Marie5890
Guest
Thanks Bro.JR,
I appreciate your knowledge of church government and how you take the time to explain it to us. Especially when our passions and emotions/biases may get in our way of understanding of how the Holy See works and why. And also how the vast deposit of what is Tradition touches it.
For me, I know your posts are always a good and healthy “reality check”. And you demonstrate the wisdom of a spirit of detachment. In our culture, that is a challenge.
May your daughter’s marriage be blessed.
ENJOY YOUR RETREAT!!!..
Thank you always, for sharing.
I appreciate your knowledge of church government and how you take the time to explain it to us. Especially when our passions and emotions/biases may get in our way of understanding of how the Holy See works and why. And also how the vast deposit of what is Tradition touches it.
For me, I know your posts are always a good and healthy “reality check”. And you demonstrate the wisdom of a spirit of detachment. In our culture, that is a challenge.
May your daughter’s marriage be blessed.
ENJOY YOUR RETREAT!!!..
Thank you always, for sharing.
M
Marie5890
Guest
If I recall correctly, there was a time when Joseph Ratzinger had the label of “modernist” tossed his way. (back in the 50’s?)I would agree with that. I would also suspect that he has a different vantage point, now that he’s pope. From his vantage point he can see that what the reform is supposed to look like. He can see that many of us do it correctly and I truly believe that he appreciates it. he can also see that those who have made mistakes,have not been modernists or the like. They are simple people trying to do the best with the little they knew.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
I think it was because he draw towards Augustine and Bonaventure and his not falling in line with Aquinis was the reason?
J
JReducation
Guest
Somewhere along the line he said that Aquinas’ method is self-serving. Trads took it as “Aquinas is self-serving.” That’s not what he said at all.
What he means is that the method that Aquinas uses compared to the method that Augustine and Bonaventure use is self-serving. Where is he going with this? He’s saying that in the end, Aquinas method proves that reason can prove faith.
Augustine and Bonaventure, on the other hand, use faith to enlighten reason.
Put into a diagram model, this is the way that Pope Benedict sees the two systems.
Augustine/Bonaventure: Reason <===== Faith <===== Grace
Reson is undestood through faith and faith is a gift of grace.
Aquinas: Reason <===== Faith <===== Reason
Reason is guided by faith, which is understood through reason.
Whether one agrees with his assessment or not is irrelevant. The question on the table is whether the man is a Modernist or was ever a Modernist. The answer is, ABSOLUTELY NOT.
Once we settle that question, the next question is, must a theologian be a Thomist? The answer is, ABSOLUTELY NOT. It is neither a commandment of God or of the Church. The Church has always said that Aquinas’ work must be studied. She has never said that his work must be the only source of theological knowledge, nor has she ever said that his work is infallible. There are parts of his work that will remain on the shelves forever, because they are in error. There are other parts of the work that will remain on the shelves indefinitely, until someone has need for them, because they deal with subjects that the Church does not tackle every day. This reduces the amount of his work that we actually use.
There is another question. Must everyone who studies theology study Aquinas? Absolutely not. The mandates that regulate the study of theology apply only to secular priests. Priests, brothers and sisters who belong to religious communities are subject to the mandates the educational requirements of their respective communities, which is known as Proper Law. Only when the community does not have its own regulation regarding theological requirements, then do they follow the general instructions given in Canon Law and by the Conference of Bishops.
Conferences of bishops have no authority over religious communities or priests, brothers, sisters or mixed.
Neither Cardinal Ratzinger, nor those who follow the same line of thinking as he does, which are almost all of the mendicants except the Dominicans and most of the monastic communities are opposed to the person of Aquinas. They simply do not use his method.
Aquinas is venerated for being a heroic son of our Holy Father Dominic, a simple friar, a man of great prayer and penance. a contemplative and a man of incredible charity. He is respected as a theological genius and a masterful writer. Hence, he is called the Angelic Doctor.
Many people forget that Bonaventure is the Seraphic Doctor. They get upset when the Pope prefers the seraph over the angel. Go figure.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
J
justme
Guest
What are “Conciliar clergy”?
The only non-conciliar clergy are the apostles and those they (the apostles) made before the council of Jerusalem that took place in the book of Acts.
Y
YoungTradCath
Guest
Br., why are secular clergy required to study Aquinas? Is it because he is the “generic” theologian to study?
D
Dee_S
Guest
Perhaps this might be helpful… not very sure myself.
What are “Conciliar clergy”?
The only non-conciliar clergy are the apostles and those they (the apostles) made before the council of Jerusalem that took place in the book of Acts.
"This Council represents, both in the opinion of the Roman authorities as in our own, A NEW CHURCH which they call themselves the “CONCILIAR CHURCH”.
“All those who cooperate in the application of this overturning accept and adhere to this new “Conciliar Church”, as His Excellency Mgr. Benelli called it in the letter that he sent me in the name of the Holy Father last June 25, and they enter into the schism.”
“We believe that we can affirm, taking into consideration the internal and external critique (review) on Vatican II, that is, in analysing the texts and in studying its circumstances and its consequences, that the Council, turning its back on Tradition and breaking with the Church of the past, is a SCHISMATIC COUNCIL.”
Interview with Archbishop Lefebvre in Écône, of August 2nd, 1976 and published in the French magazine Le Figaro, August 4, 1976.
strobertbellarmine.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1083
J
Justin_Swanton
Guest
The term ‘conciliar’ originated from the Vatican in the 1970’s, to describe the post-Vatican II Council Church:
What are “Conciliar clergy”?
The only non-conciliar clergy are the apostles and those they (the apostles) made before the council of Jerusalem that took place in the book of Acts.
…s’ils sont de bonne volonté et sérieusement préparés à un ministère presbytéral dans la fidélité véritable à l’Église conciliaire, on se chargera de trouver ensuite la meilleure solution pour eux…
…if they are of good will and thoroughly prepared for a priestly ministry in true fidelity to the conciliar Church, finding the best solution for them will be taken care of afterwards… Letter of Mgr Benelli to Archbishop Lefebvre, 26 June 1976. Source here.
I just used the term to distinguish the regular clergy from the Traditionalist priests, SSPX and others. The term seemed suitable as there was more of difference between them than whether they had been legally incardinated in a diocese or not.
S
Stylites
Guest
It is generally used today as a put-down of the Catholic Church by those who either have, or enable in others, a schismatic mindset.
What are “Conciliar clergy”?
S
Stylites
Guest
The only suitable terms to describe priests are those used by the Catholic Church, since we all want to have the same mind of Christ. If the Church doesn’t differentiate between “conciliar” clergy and “Big-T Traditionalist” clergy (whatever those mean) when describing priests with faculties then neither should we.
- Status