Sspx

[fbl9]

The same inspiration of the Holy Spirit does not move the hardened of heart.

Read the Bible pleeez,

That is why God calls people to “Repent” because it is in “your prerogative” to repent not His own powe nor one of His gifts.

The Holy Spirit can however “preserve one from sinning.”

St. John the Baptist, Blessed Virgin Mary, etc.

source :an explanation of the Baltimore Catechism,Baltimore Catechism#4 by reverend Thomas L.Kinkead,questions numbered to agree with Baltimore Catechisms 1 and 2…191,pg183:…when we are about to go to confession the first thing we should do is to pray to the Holy Ghost to give us light to KNOW and remember all our sins:…i captalized the word know for a reason to know something is to be convicted of it…like you know the Eucharist is true…to truly know one’s sins does indeed cause a great anguish…so it is by the Holy Spirit we KNOW our sins…carefully note i stated it was in conjuction with man’s freewill…

 

[pnewton]

To get back to the topic, let me throw out one more reason to avoid the SSPX.

I am Catholic from faith. In brief, faith in God, faith in Jesus and faith in His Church. When I go to Mass, I have a priest who says Mass under a bishop, who in turn is under the authority of the Holy Father. He, in turn, was chosen in succession from the time of Peter by Jesus Himself. In this structure I have a tie to the Church from the beginning unto the present. Even if the Holy Father himself makes an imprudent decision, I can still find salvation and the grace of the sacraments because the Church is the instrument of salvation to the world.

Now with the SSPX, we have a sect that has been described as in schism and has been described as imperfect communion. They freely admit that the Holy Father is Benedict XVI and acknowledge him as the leader of the Church, even if that does not entail obedience. So taking the best case scenario that a communion exists, but one that is imperfect. Why give up perfect communion with the Church for the imperfect? Furthermore, since we are dealing with our salvation, how perfect does communion have to be to be “inside” the Church. I don’t know the answer, although I don’t doubt some anonymous SSPX poster will claim to know. But for those who have yet to be indoctinated into this sect, consider the ramifications of rolling the dice as opposed to staying inside the Church in perfect communion with the Bride of Christ. You don’t want to be outside chasing down some more oil if the bridegroom arrives.

 

[fbl9]

You used the document to miquote what it really means. Are you paying attention now?

I don’t think I called you a clown (I challenge you). Circus doesn’t need to mean clown… You judge too much.

Who is “theirs”?

God giveth the grace and men is to Respond to that grace. Salvation is not Faith alone…

One is saved because God made the first move. So man should not boast of his works because it is God who decided to open the doors to salvation towards a person.

And, we are judge of how well we respond to God’s grace — Works… Read St. James

And oh… do these to the least of your brethren…

**
are you saying the Holy Spirit doesn’t convict one of thier sins???
**

Read the catechism back and i think there is a statement about mortal sin.

now what did you just say let’s see ONE IS SAVED BECAUSE GOD MADE THE FIRST MOVE…just what is that movement of God??why it is the Holy Spirit giving us KNOWLEDGE of our sins…since i am so judgemental clear it up then tell us all what did you mean by that remark then or the other remark “so you like clowns,your worse off …”

 

[fbl9]

so then much sparks over the same thing …so far we agree then…i hold that those on the outside indeed are other christian denominations…but they are not in the same boat as those who have never heard the gospel…same water different boat…can you specifically say which doctrines have alledgely changed…if any…

…SFD…could you address the question in regards to exactly which doctrines have been changed by V2

 

[SFD]

To get back to the topic, let me throw out one more reason to avoid the SSPX.

I am Catholic from faith. In brief, faith in God, faith in Jesus and faith in His Church. When I go to Mass, I have a priest who says Mass under a bishop, who in turn is under the authority of the Holy Father. He, in turn, was chosen in succession from the time of Peter by Jesus Himself. In this structure I have a tie to the Church from the beginning unto the present. Even if the Holy Father himself makes an imprudent decision, I can still find salvation and the grace of the sacraments because the Church is the instrument of salvation to the world.

Participation in those Sacraments is what is important for salvation. If we are baptised and pass the age of reason we will need the Sacraments…Holy Communion, Confession and absolution, and extreme unction. Belonging to the Catholic Church is not only a necessity of precept (outside of which there is no salvation) but it is also a necessity of MEANS. One needs to be inside the Church to participate in these Sacraments … those who are outside do not have these means.

Now with the SSPX, we have a sect that has been described as in schism and has been described as imperfect communion.

The idea of “imperfect communion” is a novelty and is nowhere to be found in the teaching of the Church prior to Vatican II. It contradicts traditional ecclesiology. I have asked you to show where this doctrine comes from and you have just ignored the question repeatedly.

They freely admit that the Holy Father is Benedict XVI and acknowledge him as the leader of the Church, even if that does not entail obedience. So taking the best case scenario that a communion exists, but one that is imperfect. Why give up perfect communion with the Church for the imperfect?

This is all based on the bogus “partial communion” doctrine.

Furthermore, since we are dealing with our salvation, how perfect does communion have to be to be “inside” the Church.

One is either inside the Church or outside the Church. Just because we don’t know the status of every individual person does not mean we cannot know the status of anyone.

I don’t know the answer, although I don’t doubt some anonymous SSPX poster will claim to know.

You’re anonymous too, newton. Anyway, we can know the definition of membership given by Pope Pius XII in Mystici Corporis. There is no “partial membership” in that definition.

But for those who have yet to be indoctinated into this sect, consider the ramifications of rolling the dice as opposed to staying inside the Church in perfect communion with the Bride of Christ. You don’t want to be outside chasing down some more oil if the bridegroom arrives.

Here it is again…those who were outside the ark in the flood were not “rolling the dice”…they were lost. The ark was a necessity of MEANS in the flood…it didn’t matter why you were outside it, if you were…you drowned.

SFD

 

[pnewton]

The idea of “imperfect communion” is a novelty and is nowhere to be found in the teaching of the Church prior to Vatican II.

I agree. There is no such thing, at least in my opinion. That is just a term I picked up here by SSPX to avoid the term schism.

 

[SFD]

I agree. There is no such thing, at least in my opinion. That is just a term I picked up here by SSPX to avoid the term schism.

The ill informed SSPX adherent is merely using a term of the conciliar Church…they didn’t make it up. I actually shocked that you didn’t know that…really.

SFD

P.S.
This is no different that the typical traditionalist using the “pastoral council” line to defend the rejection of parts of the Council. Where did that term come from? The liberals at Vatican II.

 

[SFD]

so then much sparks over the same thing …so far we agree then…i hold that those on the outside indeed are other christian denominations…but they are not in the same boat as those who have never heard the gospel…same water different boat…can you specifically say which doctrines have alledgely changed…if any…

The Church is the Ark of Salvation. Neither of these two you mention are inside the Ark. They are in the same water…but neither one has a boat…there is only one boat…the Ark.

SFD

 

[nbjayme]

source :an explanation of the Baltimore Catechism,Baltimore Catechism#4 by reverend Thomas L.Kinkead,questions numbered to agree with Baltimore Catechisms 1 and 2…191,pg183:…when we are about to go to confession the first thing we should do is to pray to the Holy Ghost to give us light to KNOW and remember all our sins:…i captalized the word know for a reason to know something is to be convicted of it…like you know the Eucharist is true…to truly know one’s sins does indeed cause a great anguish…so it is by the Holy Spirit we KNOW our sins…carefully note i stated it was in conjuction with man’s freewill…

That is to know of our grave faults… yet before that you have already resolved wanting to Repent… what the Holy Ghost does is assist you in discovering other sins that you may have forgotten.

Repentance is still yours … FREEWILL.

 

[nbjayme]

I have the right to state my opinion, even repeatedly.

Repeating even against facts presented is no more an opinion. And, if it is indeed an opinion then you ought not to repeat and insist on it when facts have been presented.

What you say flies in the face of facts, only flies in what you sees as facts, not anything that would be considered factual by anyone outside of this SSPX.

It’s not a surprise that you choose to have your own version of truth amidst all facts that say otherwise.

Why don’t you get back to the topic and discontinue this fixation with me, unless you want to start another thread?

Ah, so you just want to post your insults and defamation and we just let it be… I thought we are all sincere to get to know the Truth. When a person is sick a Doctor pays special attention unless he wants the patient to be succumbed of his illness.
Those who love Truth does not rejoice in iniquity. If your brothers pays special attention to lead you to the right facts you ought to be happy that they have given enough time that you will save from insulting yourself further.

If a man in the street shouts 1+1 = 5 what would that tell of him?
Telling him 1+1=2 is not insulting him and if that same fellow continues to say 1+1=5 he is only insulting himself in light of Truth.

For a new poster, you sure do not hesitate to throw the insults at people.

The Truth hurts… and nothing is much worse than insulting Truth itself.

 

[nbjayme]

now what did you just say let’s see ONE IS SAVED BECAUSE GOD MADE THE FIRST MOVE…just what is that movement of God??

God loved us first. And, he established His Religion for us to know, love and serve Him.

If God did not open the door of Salvation … we wouldn’t make it even if you were to give your life to other people or friends. Simply because God decided not to open the door of salvation.

why it is the Holy Spirit giving us KNOWLEDGE of our sins…

You decided to Repent. And you call upon the Holy Spirit to assist you further by uncovering other hidden sins. The Decision to Repent have already been made by no other than YOU.

since i am so judgemental clear it up then tell us all what did you mean by that remark then or the other remark “so you like clowns,your worse off …”

“So you like clowns?” is not “You are a clown.” Big big big difference. If someone called somebody a clown … that ain’t me… review the posts…

 

[nbjayme]

Originally Posted by SFD View Post
The idea of “imperfect communion” is a novelty and is nowhere to be found in the teaching of the Church prior to Vatican II.

I agree. There is no such thing, at least in my opinion. That is just a term I picked up here by SSPX to avoid the term schism.

Imperfect communion is a term coming from Vatican II.

So “there is no such thing” in your opinion. Are you really sure?
Make up your mind. Read the doctrine of V2 regarding the Church and of those protestants…

And, we thought we need to listen to the Church doctrine before our opinion.



Care to open a thread and discuss that issue to fbl9.

 

[pnewton]

The Truth hurts… and nothing is much worse than insulting Truth itself.

Another prime example of circular reasoning. Equating one’s opinion to truth shows a haughty opinion of oneself, a trait not uncommon in the SSPX. I notice you do not tolerate difference of opinion well. That is the inherent problem with disregarding authority in favor of self-interpretation of Church tradition.

 

[nbjayme]

Another prime example of circular reasoning.

Those who defame (amidst all facts) does not respect Truth and will only let one accept a thing void of reality.

Equating one’s opinion to truth shows a haughty opinion of oneself, a trait not uncommon in the SSPX. I notice you do not tolerate difference of opinion well.

Really now… please do pay attention. Opinion is good… defamation is another.

The facts are facts not an opinion.

That is the inherent problem with disregarding authority in favor of self-interpretation of Church tradition.

Those who disregard the Faith have only themselves disregard the Authority of the Church… see St. Athanasius discourse.

It’s not the premises … it’s the Faith. And, Athanasius is not one fellow who regard authorities in the church that spread heresies.

So where does the idea of “imperfect communion” come from again? Are you to put your opinion above V2 doctrines?

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

The idea of perfect communion comes from the erroneous belief that they have never been separated.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[SFD]

The idea of perfect communion comes from the erroneous belief that they have never been separated.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

So you think it is erroneous as well?

SFD

 

[SFD]

pnewton,

…]

Marcel Lefebvre’s reason for consecration is not just about the TLM

In response to a query made by Cardinal Ottaviani, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (the Holy Office), Archbishop Lefebvre, then Superior General of the Holy Ghost Fathers, made these comments about the immediate and disastrous effects of the 2nd Vatican Council.

Rome
20 December 1966

Your Eminence,

Your letter of July 24, concerning the questioning of certain truths was communicated through the good offices of our secretariat to all our major superiors.

Few replies have reached us. Those which have come to us from Africa do not deny that there is great confusion of mind at the present time. Even if these truths do not appear to be called in question, we are witnessing in practice a diminution of fervor and of regularity in receiving the sacraments, above all the Sacrament of Penance. A greatly diminished respect for the Holy Eucharist is found, above all on the part of priests, and a scarcity of priestly vocations in French-speaking missions: vocations in the English and Portuguese-speaking missions are less affected by the new spirit, but already the magazines and newspapers are spreading the most advanced theories.

It would seem that the reason for the small number of replies received is due to the difficulty in grasping these errors which are diffused everywhere. The seat of the evil lies chiefly in a literature which sows confusion in the mind by descriptions which are ambiguous and equivocal, but under the cloak of which one discovers a new religion.

I believe it my duty to put before you fully and clearly what is evident from my conversations with numerous bishops, priests and laymen in Europe and in Africa and which emerges also from what I have read in English and French territories.

I would willingly follow the order of the truths listed in your letter, but I venture to say that the present evil appears to be much more serious than the denial or calling in question of some truth of our faith. In these times it shows itself in an extreme confusion of ideas, in the breaking up of the Church’s institutions, religious foundations, seminaries, Catholic schools—in short, of what has been the permanent support of the Church. It is nothing less than the logical continuation of the heresies and errors which have been undermining the Church in recent centuries, especially since the Liberalism of the last century which has striven at all costs to reconcile the Church with the ideas that led to the French Revolution.

To the measure in which the Church has opposed these ideas, which run counter to sound philosophy and theology, she has made progress. On the other hand, any compromise with these subversive ideas has brought about an alignment of the Church with civil law with the attendant danger of enslaving her to civil society.

Moreover, every time that groups of Catholics have allowed themselves to be attracted by these myths, the Popes have courageously called them to order, enlightening, and if necessary condemning them. Catholic Liberalism was condemned by Pope Pius IX, Modernism by Pope Leo XIII, the Sillon Movement by Pope St. Pius X, Communism by Pope Pius XI and Neo-Modernism by Pope Pius XII.

Thanks to this admirable vigilance, the Church grew firm and spread; conversions of pagans and Protestants were very numerous; heresy was completely routed; states accepted a more Catholic legislation.

Groups of religious imbued with these false ideas, however, succeeded in infiltrating them into Catholic Action and into the seminaries, thanks to a certain indulgence on the part of the bishops and the tolerance of certain Roman authorities. Soon it would be among such priests that the bishops would be chosen. This was the point at which the Council found itself while preparing, by preliminary commissions, to proclaim the truth in the face of such errors in order to banish them from the midst of the Church for a long time to come. This would have been the end of Protestantism and the beginning of a new and fruitful era for the Church.

Now this preparation was odiously rejected in order to make way for the gravest tragedy the Church has ever suffered. We have lived to see the marriage of the Catholic Church with Liberal ideas. It would be to deny the evidence, to be willfully blind, not to state courageously that the Council has allowed those who profess the errors and tendencies condemned by the Popes named above, legitimately to believe that their doctrines were approved and sanctioned.

Whereas the Council was preparing itself to be a shining light in today’s world (if those pre-conciliar documents in which we find a solemn profession of safe doctrine with regard to today’s problems, had been accepted), we can and we must unfortunately state that:

In a more or less general way, when the Council has introduced innovations, it has unsettled the certainty of truths taught by the authentic Magisterium of the Church as unquestionably belonging to the treasure of Tradition.

The transmission of the jurisdiction of the bishops, the two sources of Revelation, the inspiration of Scripture, the necessity of grace for justification, the necessity of Catholic baptism, the life of grace among heretics, schismatics and pagans, the ends of marriage, religious liberty, the last ends, etc. On all these fundamental points the traditional doctrine was clear and unanimously taught in Catholic universities. Now, numerous texts of the Council on these truths will henceforward permit doubt to be cast upon them.

The consequences of this have rapidly been drawn and applied in the life of the Church:doubts about the necessity of the Church and the sacraments lead to the disappearance of priestly vocations, doubts on the necessity for and nature of the “conversion” of every soul involve the disappearance of religious vocations, the destruction of traditional spirituality in the novitiates, and the uselessness of the missions, doubts on the lawfulness of authority and the need for obedience, caused by the exaltation of human dignity, the autonomy of conscience and liberty, are unsettling all societies beginning with the Church—religious societies, dioceses, secular society, the family.

Pride has as its normal consequence the concupiscence of the eyes and the flesh. It is perhaps one of the most appalling signs of our age to see to what moral decadence the majority of Catholic publications have fallen. They speak without any restraint of sexuality, of birth control by every method, of the lawfulness of divorce, of mixed education, of flirtation, of dances as a necessary means of Christian upbringing, of the celibacy of the clergy, etc.

Doubts on the necessity of grace in order to be saved cause baptism to be held in low esteem, so that for the future it is to be put off until later, and occasion the neglect of the sacrament of Penance. Moreover, this is particularly an attitude of the clergy and not the faithful. It is the same with regard to the Real Presence: it is the clergy who act as though they no longer believe by hiding away the Blessed Sacrament, by suppressing all marks of respect towards the Sacred Species and all ceremonies in Its honour.

Doubts on the necessity of the Church, the sole source of salvation, on the Catholic Church as the only true religion, emanating from the declarations on ecumenism and religious liberty are destroying the authority of the Church’s Magisterium. In fact, Rome is no longer the unique and necessary Magistra Veritatis.

Thus, driven to this by the facts, we are forced to conclude that the Council has encouraged, in an inconceivable manner, the spreading of Liberal errors. Faith, morals and ecclesiastical discipline are shaken to their foundations, fulfilling the predictions of all the Popes.

The destruction of the Church is advancing at a rapid pace. By giving an exaggerated authority to the episcopal conferences, the Sovereign Pontiff has rendered himself powerless. What painful lessons in one single year! Yet the Successor of Peter and he alone can save the Church.

Let the Holy Father surround himself with strong defenders of the faith: let him appoint them to the important dioceses. Let him by documents of outstanding importance proclaim the truth, search out error without fear of contradictions, without fear of schisms, without fear of calling in question the pastoral dispositions of the Council.

Let the Holy Father deign: to encourage the bishops to correct faith and morals, each individually in his respective diocese as it behoves every good pastor to uphold the courageous bishops, to urge them to reform their seminaries and to restore them to the study of St. Thomas; to encourage Superiors General to maintain in novitiates and communities the fundamental principles of all Christian asceticism, and above all, obedience; to encourage the development of Catholic schools, a press informed by sound doctrine, associations of Christian families; and finally, to rebuke the instigators of errors and reduce them to silence. The Wednesday allocutions cannot replace encyclicals, decrees and letters to the bishops.

Doubtless I am reckless in expressing myself in this manner! But it is with ardent love that I compose these lines, love of God’s glory, love of Jesus, love of Mary, of the Church, of the Successor of Peter, Bishop of Rome, Vicar of Jesus Christ.

May the Holy Ghost, to Whom our Congregation is dedicated, deign to come to the assistance of the Pastor of the Universal Church. May Your Eminence deign to accept the assurance of my most respectful devotion in Our Lord.

Marcel Lefebvre,

Titular Archbishop of Synnada in Phrygia,
Superior General of the Congregation of the Holy Ghost.

 

[Claudius]

The Anglican orders are and have always been null and void as declared by Pope Leo XIII in Apostolicae Curae.

Since the Old Catholics had valid orders and they mixed with the invalid Anglicans there was a problem. Who are you suggesting that the SSPX is mixing ordinations with that may suggest invalidity?

SFD

I have not said that they are doing it yet, but I pray they never do so that the door to reconciliation will be open to them. As they are now, they are kind of like the schismatics in the east. We must pray for the unity of Christ’s Church. All these schism need to come to an end.

 

[SFD]

I have not said that they are doing it yet, but I pray they never do so that the door to reconciliation will be open to them. As they are now, they are kind of like the schismatics in the east. We must pray for the unity of Christ’s Church. All these schism need to come to an end.

Who would they mix order with and why would they need to? They have four Bishops with valid orders right now. Are you suggesting that their acceptance of some who were ordained in the new rite would be that invalid source?

SFD

 

[fbl9]

God loved us first. And, he established His Religion for us to know, love and serve Him.

If God did not open the door of Salvation … we wouldn’t make it even if you were to give your life to other people or friends. Simply because God decided not to open the door of salvation.

You decided to Repent. And you call upon the Holy Spirit to assist you further by uncovering other hidden sins. The Decision to Repent have already been made by no other than YOU.

“So you like clowns?” is not “You are a clown.” Big big big difference. If someone called somebody a clown … that ain’t me… review the posts…

babble on…doesn’t make clear your intent of the post…and again your failure to read the actual words causes you miss the mark…"…to know and remember…"do you not understand what the word remember means,if God doesn’t open the door for salvation all the freewill repenting in the world isn’t going to help you…