Posted on 09/20/2004 7:38:56 AM PDT by NYer
Taking a break from judging annulments earlier today, I visited a number of French traditionalist websites. I also had the opportunity, yesterday, to speak with a friend of mine who is a canonist from France following the situation as well as another friend who keeps tabs on the traditionalist movement in both the English and the French speaking world. Everyone agrees -- the situation has degenerated into total chaos, as nobody knows exactly what is going on with the highly-respected French SSPX clergy that have criticized what they see as the SSPX's growing rigidity.
It does appear that Rome has refused to take competency over the case, more-or-less stating that the SSPX denied Rome's jurisdiction over them when Lefebvre carried out a schismatic act through the 1988 episcopal consecrations. Beyond that, Rome refuses to comment other than to say, "Our door remains open for their return to full communion."
Beyond that, the rhetoric, polemic and accusations suggest that indeed civil war is breaking out among the laity and clergy within the SSPX's French District. In fact, two websites have now popped up that are exclusively devoted to tracing all the news stories associated with the crisis. What I find personally find interesting is that every news report, commentary, polemic, etc... mentions Fr. Aulagnier's expulsion from the SSPX around this time last year.
In the months that followed, it appears that the SSPX more-or-less tried to sweep Fr. Aulagnier's expulsion under the rug. But in so doing, even the regime currently in charge of the SSPX had to admit the important role played by Fr. Aulagnier in the founding of the SSPX. This is probably why the SSPX appeared to hope the issue would go away.
Yet it is also well-known that Fr. Aulagnier was a close friend of Fr. Laguerie as well as Fr. de Tanouarn -- two of the SSPX's leading priests. (As Fr. Laguerie's assistant, Fr. Henri appears to have just happened into the situation). It is also well-known that a number of French (and some American) SSPX priests were not happy with Fr. Aulagnier's expulsion. Therefore, I will venture to guess that the current SSPX chaos is the effect of Fr. Aulagnier's expulsion coming back to haunt Bishop Fellay. As for the particular details, this is the first time in almost fourteen years of being a traditionalist that I find the fog of war too thick to reasonably discern what is going on. (What I find even more troubling is that behind the scenes, under the flag of truce, other SSPX and traditionalist commentators with whom I am in contact have admitted to having the same problem.)
So if I can end on a personal note to the moderate SSPX clergy and their supporters who follow this blog, I'm more than happy to abide by the flag of truce and keep you guys in prayer while you fight whatever battles need to be fought, but I honestly cannot make heads-or-tails of what is happening. But like Rome has said, the door is open for you to return. I will pray that God gives you the necessary strength to walk through it.
Following this line of thinking, then I, as a practicing catholic, must also allow the VOTF "their" voice, when they also say "we also must be allowed to question .....". At what point in time did the members of the Catholic Church becoming a voting block? Who gave you the 'authority' to question what the Holy Spirit does through the Holy Father in the church that Christ established? Essentially, and I hope you realize this, you are questioning God's authority to use the Catholic Church to bring ALL faiths together. Who are you to question God?
Your arrogant attack is typical. You can't win an argument, so you claim someone isn't Catholic. By my perspective the question is whether the Pope is Catholic, not whether traditionalists are. No traditionalists I know would have worshiped with animists--an act already defined as heretical by preconciliar popes--and one which certainly offends against the first commandment. And yet JPII had done just this. By what authority does he do this? His own? Since when has a pope the power to abrogate the Divine Law?
As long as you address any of us, you are subject to our responses. You don't make the rules around here.
For sure, we lost Fr. Aulagnier several months ago. Yes, we have just lost Fr. Philippe Laguérie and Fr. Christophe Héry. This is a great loss and a great sadness for us. The Society is going to miss their fine qualities.
To you he's nothing more than a "silly hothead frog priest." Talk about turning on your own. Lovely. One minute he's a fine memmber of SSPX. The next he's a silly hothead frog priest.
Somebody may already have said this to you but your invective and polemics says far more about you than it does about your intended targets.
Yet another one who denies the work of the Holy Spirit in the church. Your misguided faith in 'tradition only' removes you from the spiritual well of faith entrusted by Christ to His church. You have locked yourself into a closet and expect the entire church to join you in your inner sanctum.
Gold-trimmed lace albs? Better than priests wearing clown noses or naked lectors reading the Epistle or bikers at papal Masses chasing-down the Holy Eucharist with beer.
By default ordinary Catholics must protect Sacred Tradition when the pope himself will not. The authority comes from Gid--it is a given in times of emergency.
Heh-heh. Was it the gold, or the lace that got your goat?
Er... we know.
The doctrine of the Mystical Body of Christ compares the Church to a human body. It is made up of many different parts, some visible and large, others hidden and small. Together, they complement each other and form a beautiful creation. Not all have the same job. Likewise with the Church. Not all are apostles, not all are prophets or healers or teachers. Yet all have an important role to play.
The 2004 version of the Mystical Body will be a great deal healthier when significant numbers of individuals humbly accept their true role in the Church, desist from acting as if they were the head, i.e. the Pope, and cease their attempts to assume charisms which are not proper to them.
"Yet another one who denies the work of the Holy Spirit in the church"
Not at all. Of course the Holy Spirit is at work in the Church--but He helps traditionalists, not Rome. And since the true Catholic faith is sustained by traditionalism, not by the Novus Ordo religion, we must turn to that surviving remnant of Catholicism to appreciate where Christ is actually working his wonders. Beyond the traditionalist movement there is just devastation--hardly the work of the Holy Spirit.
These "neo-Catholics" are a total fantasy in your brain. I've never met anybody who believes such rubbish. And yes, your use of the term demonstrates that you believe the Vatican II Council created a new religion. You share this belief with many modernist dissenters. You completely caricature and misrepresent what the Catholic Church stands for, what the Catholic Church teaches, what the Pope believes and teaches. You create fantasy straw men in order to impugn faithful and orthodox Catholics and equate them with liberal dissenters who are the true enemies of the faith. You have no desire to build up orthodoxy in the Church. You simply want to tear down the Catholic Church and the Pope and build up your schismatic sect. And as I have said to you countless times, your utterly subjective private judgment that it is necessary to disobey legitimate authority of an orthodox pope because you disagree with certain liturgical legislation that is not part of the deposit of faith (and especially when the Tridentine rite is allowed by the authority you thumb your nose at) simply makes a mockery of the entire concept of legitimate authority. It swallows up the entire concept. It makes mincemeat of the whole notion of authentic magisterium It is pure Protestant private judgment. Luther and Calvin would be proud of you!
Neither got my goat. I am not one for fancy costumes either. But I care about the dogmas of faith--and the Novus Ordo trashes these. That is why I abhor it. Has nothing to do with what priests wear.
The "Spirit" of Vatican Council II is not the Holy Ghost. As a matter of fact, guidance from the Holy Ghost was not even invoked at that purely pastoral council that declared no new dogma.
For a smart man, you can certainly let some brain-dead verbage drip from those lips.
Let me get this straight: the Holy Spirit has abandoned the Pope and has cozied up to those who challenge his authority?
You're not a traditionalist; you're an integrist.
But popes must defend the faith. When they do not, but command what is harmful to the Church, their commands lose legitimacy. You need to understand this important truth better. When a pope actually attacks Sacred Tradition, he forces ordinary Catholics to resist--and to defend the faith by default.
"I've never met anybody who believes such rubbish."
You yourself, along with other neo-Catholics, accept Assisi I and II. I rest my case.
"Talk about turning on your own."
Turning on his own (because his insatiable pride has been somewhat bruised) is exactly what this silly hothead frog priest has done. There's nothing gracious about that.
And THERE you have it. IMHO!
The VOTF have their opinion, as do Cardinals Ratzinger and Mahony, Bishops Raymond Burke and Howard Hubbard, Sinkspur, myself and countless others. But ... we were not elected pope and neither were you! Karol Jozef Wojtyla was validly elected by the College of Cardinals.
The Fathers attest to the fact that the church of Rome was the central and most authoritative church. They attest to the Church’s reliance on Rome for advice, for mediation of disputes, and for guidance on doctrinal issues. They note, as Ignatius of Antioch does, that Rome "holds the presidency" among the other churches, and that, as Irenaeus explains, "because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree" with Rome. They are also clear on the fact that it is communion with Rome and the bishop of Rome that causes one to be in communion with the Catholic Church. This displays a recognition that, as Cyprian of Carthage puts it, Rome is "the principal church, in which sacerdotal unity has its source."
That remains true, despite your 'opinions'.
"You create fantasy straw men in order to impugn faithful and orthodox Catholics"
Assisi I and 2 aren't "fantasy straw men",
http://www.traditioninaction.org/RevolutionPhotos/A068rcAssisi_TreeFire.htm
nor is papal endorsement of hindus...
http://www.traditioninaction.org/RevolutionPhotos/A063rcGhandiTomb.htm
nor is the kissing of the koran...
http://www.traditioninaction.org/RevolutionPhotos/A055rcKoran.htm
nor is the treatment of arch-laymen Rowan Williams as though he were a bishop...
http://www.traditioninaction.org/RevolutionPhotos/A033rcRowanWilliams.htm
Now who were you calling an orthodox Catholic?
I see you're still lifting quotes and using them as if they were your own. I'm not surprised. http://www.catholic.com/library/Authority_of_the_Pope_Part_1.asp
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.