Traditio website

[PrayforMallory]

Stay away from Traditio. There is strong doubt that Morrison is even a validly ordained priest.(if you were on his old mailing list, whenever someone asked that question…they were killfiled) I actually went to his “church” it’s a secular chapel in San Francisco where Buddhists, Protestants, Muslims, Hindus, or anyone can show up and worship (didn’t know he was so Eccumenical did you? ) , he has it locked down on Sunday mornings…or used to…I haven’t been in about 5 years. He has the Sede look down pat…ill-fitting Vestments bought at a thrift store or estate sale 40 years ago, unkempt hair, etc. (do all these Sedes avoid barbers as well?). He does have flawless Latin, though.

He’ll list indults from all over the country except the only Indult in the SF Bay Area because it would cost him half his “congregation” if they knew the truth.

There are some shady things in the rad-trad world, for sure.

 

[ProVobis]

Stay away from Traditio.

Until the Church restores its Forbidden Books list or creates a Forbidden Website or Blog list, I don’t think we need to follow this piece of advice, unless you find it a personal occasion of sin. There are some legitimate articles listed there.

 

[PrayforMallory]

In many cases, they (at least those listed on Fr Moderator’s list) do report to bishops who are in communion with Rome. The problem is that generally they run their chapels inside other bishops’ diocese and they generally aren’t given permission to hear confession or marry. You didn’t expect all bishops to get along with one another, did you?

Really? I didn’t know that. So for example, a Bishop in Ecuador supervises an Independent chapel in Columbia, and the two Bishops are at odds?

That’s weird. That would just mean that the faithful at those chapels didn’t respect the territorial sovereignty of one bishop in favor of another.

 

[childofmary1143]

Gerard, any doubts I have had about you being a sedevacantist were wiped away with this post.

Just a few points:

1) Traditio:

Traditio is outright hostile to the SSPX and virtually any good things that may come out of Rome. Fr. Moderator is not above stretching the truth to help his own cause for Independent Traditional Chapels. But he is not a sedevacantist.

**2) Sedevacantism: **

Sedevacantism is not a heresy. Until the Bishop of Rome declares it a heresy and condemns the teaching of St. Robt. Bellarmine and other great scholars, it’s not within the authority of any lay person, priest or bishop to declare it so.

**3) Schism: **

Schism is not disobedience. Schism is the refusal to acknowledge the fact of the Pope’s authority to govern the Church. It’s not saying, “He is the Pope, he does have the authority but I’m disobeying for this or that good or bad reason.” That is disobedience.

Schism is, “I’m not going to listen to the Pope because the Pope doesn’t have the authority to govern the Church.”

4) Confessions at SSPX or valid Independent Chapels:

Jurisdiction is required for the Church during the “normal” mode of the Church. We are not in the “normal” mode. We are in a time of emergency. Many people do not trust the pastoral advice or in some cases the validity of the orders of the priest, the form of absolution or any other number of factors that prevent the faithful from approaching their local diocesan Church.

Holy Mother Church provides the jurisdiction lacking in traditional priests who respond to the requests of the faithful in the emergency for their spiritual benefit. This reality is reflected in Canon Law. (Canon Law doesn’t grant the jurisdiction, it just describes the phenomena)

So one can go to the SSPX, SSPV or any validly ordained priest and request confession for their spiritual benefit.

 

[GerardP]

Gerard, any doubts I have had about you being a sedevacantist were wiped away with this post.

1. I’m not a sedevacantist.
2. For you to conclude such from my post is about as logical as you conclude that you’ve figured out my height and weight from the same post.
3. Quit the personal attacks. If you disagree with the substance of what I’ve written, address it.
4. If I were as uncharitable as you, I’d conclude something publicly about you from your posts that you wouldn’t like very much. And it would be a logical conclusion.

 

[Mike_Searson]

Until the Church restores its Forbidden Books list or creates a Forbidden Website or Blog list, I don’t think we need to follow this piece of advice, unless you find it a personal occasion of sin. There are some legitimate articles listed there.

Which is precisely the danger.

When a site claiming to be catholic advises people to not attend a Novus Ordo Mass or to go to a Sedevacantist or schismatic cult or to “stay home and read the missal or pray the rosary instead”…that is an occassion of sin.

It’s your soul, dude.

 

[GerardP]

Until the Church restores its Forbidden Books list or creates a Forbidden Website or Blog list, I don’t think we need to follow this piece of advice, unless you find it a personal occasion of sin. There are some legitimate articles listed there.

That’s true. About 5 or 6 years ago, Traditio was offering much more sound analysis in the commentaries and it was much more charitable in tone. Still tough, but much more fair. Today with the advent of multiple priests, it has become much more strident, almost a caricature of what it was years ago.

Even in 2005, you could still see a bit of charity. Fr. “Moderator” was encouraging prayers for JPII prior to his death and commented on his courage while suffering. And his explanation of the ceremonies involving the death of the Pope, the interregnum and the Conclave were all first rate.

I think he’s primarily an embattled and embittered victim of Vatican II, he doesn’t have the support that the Traditionalist groups have in community prayer and formation for today’s crisis. He’s a West Coast version of Fr. Gomar DePauw, he’s a brilliant guy who saw the crisis early, took steps to preserve tradition and got so untrusting that eventually no one was traditional enough for him. The SSPX couldn’t even offer the Mass correctly according to him.

Fr. Mod often cites the late Fr. Paul Wickens as a fellow traveler, but by contrast Fr. Wickens had good relations in Rome, was friends with the SSPX and other independent priests of varying status. The fact that he didn’t get along with his bishop primarily because he refused to teach an immoral sex education course is the bishop’s fault and not his.

 

[Mike_Searson]

That’s true. About 5 or 6 years ago, Traditio was offering much more sound analysis in the commentaries and it was much more charitable in tone. Still tough, but much more fair. Today with the advent of multiple priests, it has become much more strident, almost a caricature of what it was years ago.

Even in 2005, you could still see a bit of charity. Fr. “Moderator” was encouraging prayers for JPII prior to his death and commented on his courage while suffering. And his explanation of the ceremonies involving the death of the Pope, the interregnum and the Conclave were all first rate.

I think he’s primarily an embattled and embittered victim of Vatican II, he doesn’t have the support that the Traditionalist groups have in community prayer and formation for today’s crisis. He’s a West Coast version of Fr. Gomar DePauw, he’s a brilliant guy who saw the crisis early, took steps to preserve tradition and got so untrusting that eventually no one was traditional enough for him. The SSPX couldn’t even offer the Mass correctly according to him.

Fr. Mod often cites the late Fr. Paul Wickens as a fellow traveler, but by contrast Fr. Wickens had good relations in Rome, was friends with the SSPX and other independent priests of varying status. The fact that he didn’t get along with his bishop primarily because he refused to teach an immoral sex education course is the bishop’s fault and not his.

Agreed.

It was about 5 years ago he seemed to start going off the deep end, frothing at the mouth about “NEWCHURCH” and “NEWROME”, etc. Of course when you see the guy in person, it comes as no surprise.

 

[GerardP]

Which is precisely the danger.

When a site claiming to be catholic advises people to not attend a Novus Ordo Mass or to go to a Sedevacantist or schismatic cult or to “stay home and read the missal or pray the rosary instead”…that is an occassion of sin.

It’s your soul, dude.

Under normal circumstances that would be true. But we don’t live in normal circumstances. Just like in Elizabethan England there are circumstances that prevent the normal operation of the Church.

The Novus Ordo is in such shambles, the sacrilege, dubious consecrations and poison to the faith from unbelieving priests and parisioners make it impossible to protect your faith in a number of places.

To give an anecdote, I only know of one parish priest (about 30 miles from me, which is about 20 parishes away) who actually believes in the Catholic faith. Post-summorum pontificum, he tried to say a non-Sunday TLM, the archbishop, called the pastor and the pastor put a stop to it with a lot of half-baked excuses. That priest has since been transferred.

One shouldn’t let false definitions of “schismatic” or priests that obey the highest law of the Church in defiance of “partisans of error” who have no interest in Catholicism but wear collars and miters, who long ago betrayed their vows, stop them from keeping the faith…

 

[GerardP]

Agreed.

It was about 5 years ago he seemed to start going off the deep end, frothing at the mouth about “NEWCHURCH” and “NEWROME”, etc. Of course when you see the guy in person, it comes as no surprise.

Old men who are alone often lose sight of “grooming” priorities. I see it all over the place, not just at Churches. Perhaps it would be a good penance or act of charity to try and help him out with this aspect of his personality. Maybe he needs a friend.

 

[PrayforMallory]

Agreed.

It was about 5 years ago he seemed to start going off the deep end, frothing at the mouth about “NEWCHURCH” and “NEWROME”, etc. Of course when you see the guy in person, it comes as no surprise.

Do you guys think that maybe the steps Rome has taken to restore tradition have created a more rigid and hostile stance on the part of sedes? Do you guys also think that the positive elements of the SSPX/Rome dialogue have created a lot of insecurity and paranoia in sede groups?

It seems to me like their rhetoric is worse now. The stuff that was said on Traditio about Summorum Pontificum seemed venomous to me.

 

[GerardP]

Do you guys think that maybe the steps Rome has taken to restore tradition have created a more rigid and hostile stance on the part of sedes? Do you guys also think that the positive elements of the SSPX/Rome dialogue have created a lot of insecurity and paranoia in sede groups?

It seems to me like their rhetoric is worse now. The stuff that was said on Traditio about Summorum Pontificum seemed venomous to me.

My personal opinion is that sedes adopt a “shunning” attitude that comes more from Puritanism than Catholicism.

Nothing will make them turn around short of a condemnation of liberal errors by the Pope. He can restore whatever he likes, but until he restores the so-called “harshness” that John XXIII abandoned when it comes to the liberal errors in the Church nothing will change.

When Benedict speaks with the full voice of Peter, they will either hear it and recant their position, or they will have a very tough time reconciling their position as different from the Old Catholic position or the Orthodox.

Suddenly seeing a Pope clearly defending and defining the doctrine of the Church from her enemies would go along way to winning a majority of them back.

It just goes to show you how beneficial it would be if Benedict would dogmatically declare the next Marian dogma as Mediatrix and Co-Redemptrix with all the condemnatory language accompanying it for anyone who denies it.

 

[SenorSalsa]

Under normal circumstances that would be true. But we don’t live in normal circumstances. Just like in Elizabethan England there are circumstances that prevent the normal operation of the Church.

The Novus Ordo is in such shambles, the sacrilege, dubious consecrations and poison to the faith from unbelieving priests and parisioners make it impossible to protect your faith in a number of places.

To give an anecdote, I only know of one parish priest (about 30 miles from me, which is about 20 parishes away) who actually believes in the Catholic faith. Post-summorum pontificum, he tried to say a non-Sunday TLM, the archbishop, called the pastor and the pastor put a stop to it with a lot of half-baked excuses. That priest has since been transferred.

One shouldn’t let false definitions of “schismatic” or priests that obey the highest law of the Church in defiance of “partisans of error” who have no interest in Catholicism but wear collars and miters, who long ago betrayed their vows, stop them from keeping the faith…

Certainly todays times are normal. There is no persecution of the Church going on. Priests and Religious are not being systematically killed and laypeople being arrested.

It is scary to think that you feel the consecrations are “dubious”. The priests are priests, whether they are good or not. There is no doubt about the validity of the consecration.

You say that you are not a Sede, and yet you call bishops, Pope included, as people who are not even Catholic, and simply dress as such. That sounds like a pretty harsh position for somebody who believes the Pope is a true Pope. And of his hand picked Bishops.

And it isn’t the job of priests to obey only “the highest law”, but rather every law. If they feel they are right they can always take it to a higher authority and see if they can get the decision reversed.

My personal opinion is that sedes adopt a “shunning” attitude that comes more from Puritanism than Catholicism.

Nothing will make them turn around short of a condemnation of liberal errors by the Pope. He can restore whatever he likes, but until he restores the so-called “harshness” that John XXIII abandoned when it comes to the liberal errors in the Church nothing will change.

When Benedict speaks with the full voice of Peter, they will either hear it and recant their position, or they will have a very tough time reconciling their position as different from the Old Catholic position or the Orthodox.

Suddenly seeing a Pope clearly defending and defining the doctrine of the Church from her enemies would go along way to winning a majority of them back.

It just goes to show you how beneficial it would be if Benedict would dogmatically declare the next Marian dogma as Mediatrix and Co-Redemptrix with all the condemnatory language accompanying it for anyone who denies it.

Benedict speaks with the full voice of Peter every time that he makes an infallible statement, no matter how harsh it is. Last I checked Peter and Jesus were pretty mellow, loving people, and very rarely did Jesus resort to harsh sayings.

Benedict should not have to do anything for Sedes to come back. He is correct and is where he should be. It is also not up to Benedict on what to define.