J
- Status
W
wasserfall
Guest
Hmm I didn’t hear him defend the council. I heard him say many people interpret the council in a way that the council itself did not intend.I’m happy to hear him defend the Second Vatican Council
T
TrueLight
Guest
Whaddya know.You see, we don’t always disagree.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
J
JReducation
Guest
That’s exactly what he said. But that’s a more honest assessment than to refer to it as the Council From Hell as I saw on another site. That’s exactly what happened. I know, because I lived through it. We almost lost our community because of it.
However, I did notice that when they asked him about religious liberty and the Church/state relationship, he did say that the Vatican had clarified what the council meant by religious liberty and he also said that the Church and state have always been in conflict. I also liked that he was practical. When he mentioned the Muslim countries. He was very careful to say that it was not the place to play heroics. I forgot how he said it, but there was almost a mischievous look on his face.
As a Jew, I appreciated that he did not categorize us as heathens or the Devil’s spawn. Instead he sad something that is actually true. There is a segment in Judaism that blames Catholicism for the tragedy of the Shoah. What he didn’t say, because it was not the right time to say it, is that this segment of Judaism is very very orthodox. The think of Catholicism the same way that they think of Judaism and it does not work. We Jews have been trying to get them to understand it, but they don’t budge.
In their mind, if you’re born a Jew, even if you convert to Christianity or become an atheist, you remain a Jew. This is true, because Judaism is both a faith and a culture. You don’t lose your heritage. But they apply the same rule to Catholics and it does not work. Catholicism is a culture, but it’s not the same kind of culture as Judaism. Someone like Hitler and his minions can be baptized Catholics, but be very much outside of the Catholic faith, which they were. They were not representative of the Catholic culture.
He couldn’t get into those details, because the interview was about the SSPX, but at least he gave a hint that he understood the Jewish problem. That came out when he spoke about Hitler being baptized, but not being Catholic.
There is always something new under the sun.Whaddya know.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
W
wasserfall
Guest
That’s true, but people can indeed contribute to the loss of their neighbor’s soul by scandalizing their neighbor, tempting their neighbor to sin, confirming their neighbor in error, etc.
So even though when Jane* is suffering the torments of hell for all eternity, she will know that she is there through her own fault; Dick*, also suffering the torments of hell for all eternity, will know that he is there through his own fault, in that he knowingly led Jane into mortal sin.
- Standard CAF disclaimer : Situation is hypothetical. No one can know for certain whether Dick and Jane are in hell.
W
wasserfall
Guest
Truelight, I don’t find him vague in this video. However, a couple of times there is a cut in the video that disrupts his line of thought. I would very much prefer to see an unedited video.In his own words:
Video
I hope this wasn’t posted elsewhere.
This is good. Very good. Yet…
Why do I feel so pained watching him speak. Why is he using the vague language he so abhorred?
J
JReducation
Guest
On this we agree. I just hate that phrase, “souls are being lost” because someone did something wrong. If you’re smart enough to know that something is wrong, you should be smart enough not to follow.
I think that the person who goes on the Internet and accuses and points the finger at everyone else’s objective sins probably has more to fear. I was on another site the other day. This same subject was being discussed.
The things they were saying about other Catholics, about each other, about the pope, bishops, even bishop Fellay were horrible. Then there was the evil wishes. There were people wishing that this bad thing or that other bad thing would happen to this person or that one because they’re Modernists.
Excuse me, but the Modernist who acts honestly and out of sincere convictions is probably in a safer state than the Catholic who wishes him harm. Some people were even using four-letter words. I was embarrassed at the thought that a non-Catholic would find that site and think that Catholics really talk and think that way about each other, not knowing that the 10,000 on the Internet are a drop in the bucket compared to the one billion Catholics around the world.
That kind of aggression really bothers me, because it’s plain wrong. No matter how good your mass or your catechism, there is no excuse for attacks, vulgarity and wishing others evil.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
J
JReducation
Guest
Wasser, you’re right about that. I had not thought of it. I saw the transcript to the interview. It’s on Catholic Culture, I think. It flows much better. The editing may be sloppy. Good observation. You’re not just a pretty face.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
Y
YoungTradCath
Guest
There are many other groups, ahem, on the other side of the spectrum, as we all know. Yet they have not received such threats from the Holy See, nor have they received invitations back.
Would the readership say this is because the SSPX is in the unique circumstance, as opposed to these liberal groups, that it should know better?
Would the readership say this is because the SSPX is in the unique circumstance, as opposed to these liberal groups, that it should know better?
J
JReducation
Guest
The SSPX is a greater threat to Christian unity because it has bishops. It can perpetuate itself. Those other liberal wing groups don’t have their own bishops, seminaries, clergy etc.
The SSPX has money to sustain itself indefinitely. These other groups can’t do that. They’ll fade away only to be replaced by another group. This has been going on for centuries on the left.
History has proven that heretical movements begin from the right, usually with very scrupulous leaders.
The SSPX has often taken positions and made statements that threaten the pope’s personal apostolate, which is ecumenism, positions that endanger the lives of Christians in certain countries.
The SSPX has been blamed for dissent among religious of other orders, which have led to excommunications of these religious. Obviously, these are big boys and girls who have to take responsibility for their behavior. But there have been SSPX superiors who have encouraged them. You can’t mess with three of the top 10 religious orders in the Church without people getting very concerned. Something has to be done with those religious, because they cannot be readmitted to their original communities. A prelature may help. You can group them into one body under the prelate.
Left-wing groups have been around since the time of Adam. None survives more than two generations.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
I
ImmaculataFides
Guest
So many traditionalists are calling him a traitor.
I watch anxiously! I hope nothing bad happens from this preamble! I watch anxiously!
God’s will be done…
God’s will be done…
God’s will be done…
St. Pius X, protect us!
I watch anxiously! I hope nothing bad happens from this preamble! I watch anxiously!
God’s will be done…
God’s will be done…
God’s will be done…
St. Pius X, protect us!
I
ImmaculataFides
Guest
I don’t want to accuse, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to believe that the ‘controversial’ or more ‘trad’ moments were edited out by the news service! The news service isn’t trad after all!Wasser, you’re right about that. I had not thought of it. I saw the transcript to the interview. It’s on Catholic Culture, I think. It flows much better. The editing may be sloppy. Good observation. You’re not just a pretty face.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
I
ImmaculataFides
Guest
I
ImmaculataFides
Guest
Here’s a comment from Rorate Caeli. I found it interesting!
Bill:
I indeed believe that the video had very dishonest editing to further an agenda!
I
ImmaculataFides
Guest
Here’s a comment from Rorate Caeli. I found it interesting!
Bill:
I indeed believe there’s a possibility that video was dishonestly edited to further an agenda! It is the Catholic news service after all, hardly favorable to tradition!
C
choliks
Guest
Don’t worry I.F. Let God do His work. Let go.
J
JReducation
Guest
Just observe the word, “traitor”. That’s not a word of love. It’s a word of hate. Even Judas is not called a traitor in the Scriptures. He is referred to as the one who betrayed the Lord. The Evangelists describe his actions, but do not label him. These people who are going out of their way to label this man have a reason. Their reason is an intense hatred for the Vatican. They think that it’s about tradition, but it’s running away with them. I tend to agree with Bishop Fellays letter to the bishops. They’re getting worse rather than better, because they’re beginning to place too much trust in their own efforts and forgetting that the Church belongs to Christ. If one wants to truly do Christ’s will, one works for unity and peace. One does not declare war.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
I
ImmaculataFides
Guest
I don’t want to nit pick, but I do believe that he is called a ‘traitor’, depending on the translation.Just observe the word, “traitor”. That’s not a word of love. It’s a word of hate. Even Judas is not called a traitor in the Scriptures. He is referred to as the one who betrayed the Lord. The Evangelists describe his actions, but do not label him. These people who are going out of their way to label this man have a reason. Their reason is an intense hatred for the Vatican. They think that it’s about tradition, but it’s running away with them. I tend to agree with Bishop Fellays letter to the bishops. They’re getting worse rather than better, because they’re beginning to place too much trust in their own efforts and forgetting that the Church belongs to Christ. If one wants to truly do Christ’s will, one works for unity and peace. One does not declare war.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
In the Douay Rheims:
C
choliks
Guest
I’m beginning to think that the radical traditionalists who say such things are putting themselves in the same boat as those they accuse as modernists and liberals. The only difference is how they placed their selves out of the Church.Just observe the word, “traitor”. That’s not a word of love. It’s a word of hate. Even Judas is not called a traitor in the Scriptures. He is referred to as the one who betrayed the Lord. The Evangelists describe his actions, but do not label him. These people who are going out of their way to label this man have a reason. Their reason is an intense hatred for the Vatican. They think that it’s about tradition, but it’s running away with them. I tend to agree with Bishop Fellays letter to the bishops. They’re getting worse rather than better, because they’re beginning to place too much trust in their own efforts and forgetting that the Church belongs to Christ. If one wants to truly do Christ’s will, one works for unity and peace. One does not declare war.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
J
JReducation
Guest
That’s a major accusation of a very reputable news service. You may want to step back from this, Immaculata. You’re beginning to see conspiracies where there have never been any. The CNS also did an excellent article from that interview, which flows much better. The video is obviously poorly edited, but it does not seem to have been for the purpose of propaganda… Otherwise, their article would be been prejudiced and it was quite objective.
We have to shy away from seeing out Church as our enemy. That’s very dangerous to the soul of the individual and to the soul of the Church. On the other hand, I can’t say the same thing about this writer that you quoted. He goes out of his way to label and be aggressive toward the mainstream Catholic. If you read the article in CNS, they do not paint Bishop Fellay or the SSPX in negative terms as this writer does to the Church.
It seems that the name calling and finger pointing is coming from one side. What these folks are not listening to is what the Bishop has said at least three times this week. “The Pope wants this NOW.” None of us are being given an option here. Those inside are not being asked if we want the SSPX back. The SSPX is not being asked if it wants to remain in its current state. The pope wants closure on this NOW. He wants the SSPX in or gone out of the Catholic Church, not in an irregular status. He prefers that they stay, because he really cares for them. But they can’t take advantage of his love either.
These people seem to believe too much in their own power and are forgetting who calls the shots. If the SSPX does not sign this preamble, they have already been told that there will be a schism and it’s their fault. Bishop Fellay said, “Rome will no longer tolerate this.” Those are very strong words. I the past, he could care less what Rome tolerated or not. Somehow, Rome has made it perfectly clear to him that the SSPX has pushed the envelop more than Rome is willing to tolerate.
The first time it was excommunication of four bishops and suspension of all priests. The next step is either an interdict or a decree of schism. If the Holy See decrees a schism, there will be no place to turn, except to form their own Church. People better stop finding more ghosts and more conspiracies and start thinking how to make peace with the pope.
They wanted a pope who was not afraid to use his power. They have one and now they don’t like it. They now have a pope who has put his foot down and said, “Enough. This has to be finished now.” Suddenly they don’t like this. Why? Because they didn’t really want a “traditional pope”. They wanted a pope who would slam dunk those whom they single out. And it’s turning out that many people are being slammed and dunked, including the SSPX, the LCWR, the bishops in Austria and Germany and the Catholics in the USA.
As the saying goes, “Be careful what you wish for.”
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
- Status