C
catharina
Guest
At least once, to my knowledge. (Specifically, once by M. Lefebvre and his followers.)
Now: What is the punishment for ONE unrepented mortal sin?
- Status
Now: What is the punishment for ONE unrepented mortal sin?
C
CWBetts
Guest
Archbishop Lefevbre was told SPECIFICALLY not to ordain Bishops. He ordained four.
R
RoryMcKenzie56
Guest
He asked for examples within the last twenty years, such as when Bp. Fellay was SPECIFICALLY summoned to Rome.
C
CWBetts
Guest
What does that matter? For full reunion with Rome, the SSPX has to say “Whatever Rome says we will do. We will not ask for concessions, because the actions of our founder put us in this situation to begin with.”
R
RoryMcKenzie56
Guest
It seems to matter because the perameters of the question is focussed on the last twenty years. Some have argued that the act of the consecrations would create a mentality that would result in a recalcitrant disobedient spirit. The question seeks an answer to that claim.
The original question was not made in ignorance of the consecrations. Indeed, it presumes the consecrations.
U
Ultima_Ratio
Guest
That was more than 20 years ago. I’m looking for an act of disobedience within the past 20 years.
E
excubitor
Guest
How true. Don’t worry. I saw the humour in it.Oh, font sizes. I am glad you used a. I really just meant it as a joke. God only knows we all could use more humor than rhetoric here.
I agree with you about the SSPX. There are some wonderful and true people in the SSPX who are working hard to bring the organisation back into communion with the church. I commend them of course and I know that it is these people who the Pope regards as sheep of his flock and the reason why he has great longing, desire and love for the SSPX. Surely there are some jewels in the rough there. But we have an interesting quandry which I have seen also in the High Anglican movement. Well meaning people who are torn between staying with their fellowships and influencing their fellowships to unite with Rome and on the other hand their own personal salvation which they have come to realise depends upon their own personal communion with the Pope. What an awful dilemma.
Cardinal Newman is a singular example. He was the leader of the entire High Church Anglican movement but in the end he had to convert and cross the Tiber. He basically abandoned the entire anglo-catholic movement for the sake of his own personal salvation.
I know of another priest in the anglo-catholic movement who served his cathedral for 20 years. He loved his cathedral and his flock. He was the cream of the Anglican church in his country. Loved and cherished by all. And yet he left his beloved heritage to adhere to a greater principle. Allegience to the sovereign pontiff of Rome. Can you imagine that? I’m not sure how many of you know the steadfast Anglicans; but they REALLY love their Anglican heritage, they don’t give it up easily. They LOVE their English mass and their book of prayer. To them these are treasures no less valuable than the Latin Mass is to the Catholic traditionalist. But the greater treasure for Anglicans like Cardinal Newman was not a particular rite, or a style of music, or a particular book of prayer, or a given language. These things come and go with the passing of the decades, centuries and millenia. But what remains constant from the time of Christ’s first advent to the appearing of his second advent? The sovereign Roman pontiff and his rule over all the bishops, priests and layfolk throughout the world. A ROCK. Was the Latin language a ROCK? No it passed away. The gregorian chant (no its gone too, regrettably). A particular prayer book (I don’t think so). Not even the Latin Mass has endured like the Office of the Pope has. Mostly its said (almost)outside the church in the SSPX church. Its said in a few places in the FSSP with unconvincing attendances (I know because I attend an FSSP mass each week).
I have no particular confidence that the Latin Mass will last into the next century in the church. But what WILL last? Where does my confidence lie? Only a ROCK can last throughout the long centuries. And that ROCK was CHRIST, and he conferred that ROCKNESS to Saint Peter who conferred it by apostolic succession to all the Popes throughout all the ages to this last day to our own dear Pope, Benedict XVI where it resides to this day in him alone.
Please. Obey Pope Benedict XVI visibly, immediately, with your whole heart. Give him joy and not grief in these times of crisis, severity and trouble.
C
CWBetts
Guest
see my previous point. Time is irrelevant. The fact that the SSPX does not have a humble and submissive attitude speaks volumes.
R
RoryMcKenzie56
Guest
You did not make your point. You made an unreasonable claim. How can time be irrelevant to the question of how the SSPX has behaved in the last twenty years?
C
CWBetts
Guest
They have still not denounced the actions of their founder. They obstinately persist that he was right, even to the point of suggesting he is worthy of canonization.
C
catharina
Guest
Even here, even now, supporters of M. Lefebvre claim his holiness.They have still not denounced the actions of their founder. They obstinately persist that he was right, even to the point of suggesting he is worthy of canonization.
At issue (then and now) is his disobedience.
A claim of his holines is a claim supporting disobedience.
The event then is still current now due to the recalcitrance of his “admirers.”
R
RoryMcKenzie56
Guest
When has the pope, in the last twenty years, issued a directive to anyone that they must denounce Abp. Lefebvre and desist praying for his intercession?They have still not denounced the actions of their founder. They obstinately persist that he was right, even to the point of suggesting he is worthy of canonization.
C
catharina
Guest
What faithful Catholic would require such a directive?
To agree with M. Lefebvre’s disobedience is to oppose the Catholic Church.
Truly, it goes without saying. Logic leads one there. Faith confirms it.
C
CWBetts
Guest
When has the any Pope issued a directive not to pray for the intercession of anybody? As we do not know their final fate. Truly, Martin Luther may very well be able to intercede on our behalf. But there is no directive do denounce him for his disobedience. It is common sense that Martin Luther suffer criticism. The same is true for Lefebvre. A formal pronouncement is not needed. To honor him is to praise his disobedience.
R
RoryMcKenzie56
Guest
The question was about whether or not the Society has, in the past 20 years, resisted a papal demand that they now denounce Abp. Lefebvre and stop praying for his intercession. I suggest that the pope has no wish or intention to impose such a demand, and even if he did, that it is unreasonable to cite the absence of denunciations, as an example of disobedience, until such denunciations are requested by the pope.
C
CWBetts
Guest
The denunciation of an excommunicate and a schismatic is unreasonable?
O
Onegin
Guest
Just as a historical side note, St. Athanasius did, in fact, consecrate bishops to serve against the Arian heresy without the approval of the current pope at the time. So yes, he did openly defy the Pope’s wishes. This is one of the things in addition to open opposition to the Arian heresy that got him excommunicated. Twice. Expelled from his diocese five times. He was also accused of murder by his enemies.
So, in a sense, one could say that St. Athanasius was a far more “disobedient” and “renegade” character than Archbishop Lefebvre could ever have hoped to be.
The bottom line is that the Church so far in history has survived every crisis in Her history with Her doctrinal teachings intact. Let us hope that this happens in our modern day as well, where doctrine is often muddied, ignored or outright rejected by many of those who are entrusted with it.
I am thankful that those who stood up against heresy in the Church did so when they did so and, as with all things in life, I believe that time and God will ultimately be the judge.
C
catharina
Guest
Quoting carl as well:
**When has the any Pope issued a directive not to pray for the intercession of anybody? As we do not know their final fate. Truly, Martin Luther may very well be able to intercede on our behalf. But there is no directive do denounce him for his disobedience. It is common sense that Martin Luther suffer criticism. The same is true for Lefebvre. A formal pronouncement is not needed. To honor him is to praise his disobedience. **
So very obvious, I would think!
O
Onegin
Guest
Oh, and Betts, there are no “excommunicates” in the SSPX anymore. Quit using that label in the context of modern day discussions. Thanks.
C
catharina
Guest
In some fantasy world, maybe.
- Status