Posted on 02/11/2005 11:43:24 AM PST by xm177e2
You are right that SSPX (is that what you mean by "independent Traditional") does not share the blame with the Vatican, but then the topic on hand is restoration of true Inquisition, which must come from the Pope.
I absolutely agree that the little pro-orthodoxy rhetoric coming from the Vatican is of no value when there is no penalty attacehd to the violators. That is the point of my post.
Interesting. Yet you seem little concerned with the far more devastating "anti-pain" philosophy which characterizes our society. Certainly, there are no Catholic hospitals denying pain medications to patients. Moreover, with the exception of the unsubstantiated blatherings you posted about Mother Teresa, there is nothing to indicate either the Pope particularly or Catholics generally, hold to such a "pro-pain" policy beyond the recognition that mortification -either spiritual of physical- assists in the command we 'die to self' to 'live in Christ.'
In contrast, our society has become so 'anti-pain' we see the destuction of civil liberties up to and including the right to life itself. From speech codes which prohibit forms of expression some might find offensive(i.e. painful) to rampant drug use to escape the hellishness of our brutal, materialistic culture to the right to an aobrtion to prevent the natural suffering concomittant with parenthood, our modern obsession with the elimination of virtually all pain has led to such monstrous acts as the Supreme Court's 'Casey' decision which, far more than Roe, exalsts the individual as the ultimate god.
But, then, you really couldn't bash Catholics if this were your concern, now could you? Indeed, you would be forced, if you were to truly look at that which most threatens our very culture, to recognize the Enlightenment's contribution in this regard and, indeed, perhaps even the role the Reformation played in giving rise to the Enlightenment. And that just wouldn't be as much fun, now would it?
The non-punitive heirarchy since Vatican II is directly connected with the pederasty scandal. They say Cardinal Mahony has been facing some 500 cases, but none of them have gone to court, nor is he being called to task by the Vatican for this looming catastrophy. For the Inquisition to be resumed, the principle of penalty for behavior opposed to the Faith of Catholics would have to be restored, first. As it is, from the very top on down the only penalties has been for those who behave IN ACCORD with the Faith of Catholics, inasmuch as they have refused to follow the deconstruction demanded of them from authority (and rightly so, because the demand was unjust). The problem is at the top. Corruptio optima pessima est (The corruption of the best is the worst). And the fish rots from the head. Mahony has been making homosexuality a PREREQUISITE for continuing in his seminaries, and any seminarian discovered to be morally opposed to homos are expelled (ostensibly for some other reason, of course). This has been going on for years, and the Vatican has done nothing to stop it. An official prohibition against admitting any candidate with homosexual tendencies to any seminary in the world was issued by Pope John XXIII in 1961, but it was ignored by almost all the bishops. Now we pay the price. Oh, the new answer to the recent public emergence of this long forgotten official directive is to - guess what? - put teeth in the offense? Noooo! They (Ratzinger or Hoyos or one of those guys) is going to issue a NEW directive that eliminates the prohibition! If that's not D2, I don't know what is. Sister Lucy warned us there would be trouble if the Pope and bishops ignored the command of heaven, and now we know...
Oh, by the way, Sister Lucy of Fatima has passed away. May God have mercy on her soul, and may her soul and all the souls of the faithful departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace.
I know. We are in for very trying times.
God bless Sister Lucia.
You asked if the SSPX is what I mean by "independent traditional." Actually, no, I do not. While the SSPX in the main is doing the best they can under the circumstances, and while they are the only reliable source of traditional ordinations on a formidable scale, when I say independent traditional I am referring to the even more numerous priests, a number which is growing on two fronts, who have vowed to God to abandon the Novus Ordo abomination, inherently dangerous to the Faith, for the Mass of ages known and loved by all the saints of heaven throughout the ages, up until the revolution of the 1960's. The two fronts are either priests who were ordained before the changes, or after the changes, and have now come over to Tradition, or else those who have been ordained as SSPX priests and have exercised their option to leave that structure to become independent while remaining traditional.
One might ask, "how does a priest remain traditional if he leaves behind his submission to his local bishop?" That will have to wait for a later time. Have to go now...
One simple word showing up the deviance makes all the deviants run for cover.
When you turn on the light in a dark room full of cockroaches, they all hide.
Since you’ve been under the impression that you’ve “heard nothing but good about Ratzinger,” perhaps you would be willing to become better informed. Then again, maybe not. But I’ll give it a try.
In 2001, Ratzinger approved as “valid” a Eucharisitc prayer which lacks the words of consecration. Criticism of that move has come from many voices, but there has not been any reversal or any papal decree in this controversial matter of 4 years’ standing.
Another “beastly” approval from his hands is that he’s approved a plan to have canonizations without any need for there having been miracles attributed to the intercession of the candidate. The affirmation by miracles of the work of God is of apostolic origin, used by Jesus Himself, and holds prominent place even in the Old Testament. But in spite of the traditional requirement of 4 miracles for canonization, John Paul II reduced it in 1983 (early in his pontificate) to only 2, and for martyrs, only one. Ratzinger apparently is urging him now to declare all miracles unnecessary for canonizations, in yet further defiance of tradition.
This amounts to the secularization and politicization of the very existence of saints in the minds of the Faithful. Subjectively speaking, the elimination of the special nature of sainthood destroys the veneration of saints, as then anyone can be thought of as a “saintly person” regardless of any objective verification by miraculous intervention.
At this rate, pretty soon EVERYBODY will be a saint, and the Scripture will be fulfilled: “And it was given unto him to make war with the saints and to overcome them” (Apocalypse 13:7).
Yup. Not good.
This made my day!
Old thread, but I just thought I'd let you know Christopher Hitchens is an anti-Christian scumbag by all accounts. You may want to find better references.
Old thread, but I just thought I'd let you know Christopher Hitchens is an anti-Christian scumbag by all accounts. You may want to find better references.
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.