Posted on 07/15/2004 6:17:56 PM PDT by AskStPhilomena
He has the right to say the Tridentine Mass. If his bishop denies him this right, the bishop is the disobedient one, not the priest, since Quo Primum has never been abrogated. Fr. Z is on very firm legal ground.
You realize that this guy was sent for "psychlogical counseling"?
Are you married? If so, I pity your husband, I'd have to buy earplugs. You are hard to listen to woman.
You have an exaggerated sense of denial.
Many of you will wake up far too late. I'm reminded of that image from a play I read back in high school (The Glass Menagerie?) where one of the characters sits alone in a room with a music box playing having lost his or her mind. Some posters here will be in the same situation once they realize the house of cards they supported has fallen.
The Bishop was disobedient to the Faith. He should be forced to defend his decision by canon law. He will lose.
Did I say those guys were obedient?
I will let Our Savior judge my mind and soul, not you AAABEST.
I pray that he has mercy on both of us... because we are more like the fags, heretics, apostates, leftists and worshippers of false Gods than we are to our Savior...
You SSPXers need to realize this... you are sinners and you are not better than any other person...you are not the judge of anyone's heart... you don't know... so stop being judge, jury and executioner of everyone else...
I am loyal to Christ and His Church who JPII is his vicar... and I will not let SSPXers attack her as if she was the whore of Babylon.
It's a fruit of the N.O.
Be not afraid.
Modernism may be the whore of Babylon, so don't be so sure.
AAABEST,
even if SSPX was true, I would not any part of it with attitudes like that...
you definitely need to re-read 1 Corinthians 13!
"I see sinkspurt the mystery deacon is up to his old stalking games again. I'm getting his oddball FReepmails ( as have so many others) with the usual ominous warnings that coincide with my posts being pulled. "
Yeah, those private mails are pretty creepy, aren't they? They have something of the obscene phone call about them.
It's also quite unsettling the way one can be suspended for something one didn't do, and no one in management will even lean over from Olympus to discuss it.
According to who? You...
Father Zigrang was disobedient... and the Bishop would win.
You might not like the fact that the Bishop has not given the indult (except to two parishes), but saying the Latin Mass without his permission is disobedience.
Pope ultima has spoken. Even Michael Davies admits that Quo Primum was (likely) obrogated by Missale Romanum. Any right to say the 1962 Missal today would come from immemorial custom.
We have no official prohibition and I think that the Pope would never establish an official prohibition not because of the words of Pius V, who said this was a Mass forever. Those words of Pius V were common for an important decision of the Pope. He always said, "This is valid forever." But this was not a theological, it was not a dogmatic statement, this decree of the Pope promulgting his Tridentine Mass order. And so it could be changed by his successors....In Italian, they say that one pope gives the bull and another takes the bull again, that is, he can change the disposition of his predecessor...
So what about a bishop forbidding the Mass in the case of a priest or a whole dioceses? You must realize that a bishop is the only one who has responsibility for his dioceses....Bishops have no jurisdiction over their collegues. A bishop in his dioceses, for his dioceses and his subjects, can find the arguments to forbid it. He can say, "This is disturbing to the peace in the dioceses."
It is necessary to notice that the privilege is given to the bishops, not the faithful. So a bishop can use the privilege or not. (Alfons Cardinal Stickler, Interview in Latin Mass Magazine Summer 1995)
Quo Primum guaranteed priests the right to say the Traditional Mass. It has never been abrogated. The Bishop will lose.
Bishops are not God. Obedience to them is not absolute. One must obey the Faith first.
Same old same old. I'm even weary of correcting you, but correct you I must. Here is a post I sent to Black Elk two days ago--it applies to your rigid way of thinking as well:
You state Ecclesia is authoritative. Fine. The only problem is that it is in direct conflict with a more authoritative document--Canon Law. Canon 1323 allows for a subject to disobey if he fears a state of necessity. It says nothing about whether such a state must exist or not. The canon is only concerned with the interior state of the subject and how he perceives a situation. If said subject sincerely believed there was a state of necessity which forced him to disobey, no penalty is incurred according to canon 1323. The Archbishop evoked the canon--legally and honestly.
But this is not all. Not only does a canon allow for disobedience under certain conditions, but another canon stated that even if the individual were WRONG about such a state of necessity, as long as he sincerely believed there was an emergency, no penalty is incurred. How much clearer can this be? It was not up to the Pope to decide what was in the Archbishop's mind when he "disobeyed", it was the Archbishop's call, not the Pope's.
If the Pope had wanted to prove that the Archbishop was culpable, he ought not to have relied on a latae sententiae decree, but on a formal tribunal, the traditional route for disciplining high churchmen. Such a tribunal would have called witnesses, allowed for a full airing of the dispute, and rendered a fair-and-square verdict, ferendae sententiae. He didn't do this--probably because this would have given the Archbishop the right to defend himself. It would have meant bringing up embarrassing conflicts regarding matters of faith in which the papacy was at loggerheads with the Church's own Tradition. So the Pope did an end-run and used the pretext of an automatic latae sententiae to falsely charge the Archbishop with excommunication and schism. \
As for what the Pontiff owes me or doesn't owe me--that is a ridiculous point to bring up. I am not important--but the faith itself is. The Pope owes explanations not to me, but to millions like myself who expect more from a pope than poetry. We expect a vigorous defense of the traditional faith--not novelties that have nothing to do with the faith. We want faith-affirming Masses and clearly Catholic catechesis for our children. We want bishops who are devout and orthodox not corrupt and apostate. It is all well and good that he is so worried about Buddhists and Jews and Muslims. But his own Catholic sheep are starving. He needs to follow Christ's injunction to feed his lambs and his sheep before he attends to the Hindus.
Hey! How come I never got one?
Wrong again. He went to the SSPX because he recognized in them the true Catholic faith.
The Novus Ordo IS a sacrilege. It ignores the Real Presence and Propitiatory sacrifice. It is an abomination that must be destroyed for the Church to be well again.
He invoked it after multiple warnings from the Apostolic See that there was no state of necessity. As the PCILT said, there can hardly be ignorance in such a situation.
he ought not to have relied on a latae sententiae decree, but on a formal tribunal, the traditional route for disciplining high churchmen.
And I pointed out that there is plenty of precedent for disciplining high churchmen as schismatic without a trial, and that the Apostolic See generally uses latae sententiae excommunications - this wasn't a special case for Msgr. Lefebvre.
Msgr. Lefebvre was stubborn because of his mistakes on various doctrines, especially religious liberty, in which he effectively rejected Pius XII's teaching in "Ci Riesce". At the end, he couldn't even accept
Moreover, I adhere with religious submission of will and intellect to the teachings which either the Roman pontiff or the College of Bishops enunciate when they exercise their authentic Magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim these teachings by a definitive act.insisting that a clause needed to be added to allow for private judgment. Sola Traditio!
Dollinger always considered himself a Catholic, too.
Funny how everybody you disagree with is schismatic. In fact, they are Catholics. That you don't recognize this speaks to the fact that we've really got two different religions, both claiming to be Catholic. One is pushed by a heterodox pope enamored of novelties, the other has two thousand years of popes, saints, councils, doctrines and practice behind it. Which one was founded by Christ, do you suppose?
These silly claims concerning the Novus Ordo have been refuted time and time again. When confronted with texts from the Missal and GIRM which affirm those two dogmas, you just ignore them.
At the anamnesis or memorial, the priest, addressing God in the name of all the people, offers in thanksgiving the holy and living sacrifice: the Church's offering and the Victim whose death has reconciled us with God. The priest also prays that the body and blood of Christ may be a sacrifice acceptable to the Father, bringing salvation to the whole world. In this new Missal, then, the Church's rule of prayer corresponds to its constant rule of faith. This rule of faith instructs us that the sacrifice of the cross and its sacramental renewal in the Mass, which Christ instituted at the Last Supper and commanded his apostles to do in his memory, are one and the same, differing only in the manner of offering and that consequently the Mass is at once a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, of reconciliation and expiation ... The Mass does this not only by means of the very words of consecration, by which Christ becomes present through transubstantiation, but also by that spirit and expression of reverence and adoration in which the eucharistic liturgy is carried out. For the same reason the Christian people are invited in Holy Week on Holy Thursday and on the solemnity of Corpus Christi to honor this wonderful sacrament in a special way by their adoration. (GIRM 2-3)
Quam oblationem tu, Deus, in omnibus, quaesumus, benedictam, adscriptam, ratam, rationabilem, acceptabilemquw facere digneris: ut nobis Corpus et Sanguis fiat dilectissimi Filii tui, Domini nostri Iesu Christi.Unde et memores, Domine, nos servi tui, sed et plebs tua sancta, eiusdem Christi, Filii Tui, Domini nostri, tam beatae passionis, necnon et ab inferis resurrectionis, sed et in caelos gloriosae ascensionis: offerimus praeclarae maiestati tuae de tuis donis ac datis hostiam puram, hostiam sanctam, hostiam immaculatam, Panem sanctam vitae aeternae et Calicem salutis perpetuae.
Supra quae propitio ac sereno vultu respicere digneris: et accepta habere, siculti accepta habere dignatus es munera pueri tui iusti Abel, et sacrificium Patriarchae nostri Abrahae, et quod tibi obtulit summus sacerdos tuus Melchisedech, sanctum sacrificium, immaculatam hostiam. (From EP I)
Haec ergo dona, quaesumus, Spiritus tui rore sanctifica, ut nobis Corpus et + Sanguis fiant Domini nostri Iesu Christi.Memores igitur mortis et resurrectionis eius, tibi, Domine, panem vitae et calicem salutis afferimus, gratias agentes quia nos dignos habuisti astare coram te et tibi ministrare. (From EP II)
Supplices ergo te, Domine, deprecamur, ut haec munera, quae tibi sacranda detulimus, eodem Spiritu sanctificare digneris, ut Corpus et + Sanguis fiant Filii tui Domini nostri Iesu Christi, cuius mandato haec mysteria celebramus.Memores igitur, Domine, eiusdem Filii tui salutiferae passionis necnon mirabilis resurrectionis et ascensionis in caelum, sed et praestolantes alterum eius adventum, offerimus tibi, gratias referentes, hoc sacrificium vivum et sanctum.
Respice, quaesumus, in oblationem Ecclesiae tuae et, agnoscens Hostiam, cuius voluisti immolatione placari, concede, ut qui Corpore et Sanguine Filii tui reficimur, Spiritu eius Sancto repleti, unum corpus et unus spiritus inveniamur in Christo. (From EP III)
Quaesumus igitur, Domine, ut idem Spiritus Sanctus haec munera sanctificare dignetur, ut Corpus et + Sanguis fiant Domini nostri Iesu Christi ad hoc magnum mysterium celebrandum, quod ipse nobis reliquit in foedus aeternum.Unde et nos, Domine, redemtionis nostrae memoriale nunc celebrantes, mortem Christi eiusque descensum ad inferos recolimus, eius resurrectionem et ascensionem ad tuam dexteram profitemur, et, exspectantes ipsius adventum in gloria, offerimus tibi eius Corpus et Sanguinem, sacrificium tibi acceptabile et toti mundo salutare.
Respice, Domine, in Hostiam, quam Ecclesiae tuae ipse parasti, et concede benignus omnibus qui ex hoc uno pane participabunt et calice, ut, in unum corpus a Sancto Spiritu congregati, in Christo hostia viva perficiantur, ad laudem gloriae tuae. (From EP IV)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.