Posted on 05/13/2005 1:15:36 PM PDT by NYer
In particular, the point that the whole affair in the SSPX is illicit. No priest in the SSPX who is no incardinated can licitly offer Mass. The Mass norms are set out in the GIRM, approved by the SEE, who makes these rules.
I believe that the Pope is authorized by his office as successor to Peter to set the discipline and norms of Church governance, and nobody else.
I guess the choice was to shut up.
You know what? You rejected the Church founded by Jesus Christ and guaranteed by Him. He gave you free will to use or abuse. You took one from Category B and rejected His promises.
What I do know is that you won't even try to prove your assertions.
Stay lost. It will be no skin off the nose of any actual Catholic.
A real Catholic wouldn't behave like that. What a poorer Church it would be if St. Monica and St. Ambrose had your attitude.
Your bile is lightweight because of its schismatic nature and its rejection of Church and pope.
Uh....yeah...that makes sense.
Despising papal authority is NOT Catholicism.
Another error. I despise the abuse and negligence of papal authority. I love papal authority for the good of the Church.
If the SSPX dupes ever managed to see one of theirs elected pope (fat chance of that!), he would be without effective authority since the schizzies themselves have set the pattern of attack on papal authority.
Fellay is still young. There is plenty of time. It will really throw the neos into an uproar though. Maybe we'll both be around to see that glorious day.
What lie will the schizzies develop .... to shore up one of their own who will watch every "progressive" heretic bishop do what the schizzies' own schismatic and excommunicated bishops have done to consecrate renegade bishops and ordain renegade priests and pretend to be Catholic?
They'll do what every other good pre-conciliar Pope has done. Speak the truth and let the chips fall where they may.
You are the ecclesiastical Mordreds of our time.
Parcifal would be more accurate.
I don't think that the gifts of the Holy Spirit include kissing the backsides of schismatics and excommunicati.
Then your problem is with JPII and the Koran, the Orthodox and the Lutherans.
Gerard P. and Marcel the Rightfully Excommunicated OR John Paul II and Benedict XVI? I am going with those popes. It is a sure bet. It isn't as though the schismatic deserve to be taken seriously.
False dilemma. Follow the teaching of the Church.
You should become a novelist. You promote fantasies (however ludicrous) far better than you practice pop psychobabble.
I'll take it under consideration. I'll call my first novel "Post Conciliar Pop Psychobabble" Or maybe I'll write about the Springtime of the Church in empty high language and go on EWTN and sell it.
I belong to the same Catholic Church that I belonged to from baptism in about 1946.
No you don't. You were led by the nose out of it for all practical purposes.
It is headquartered in the Vatican and headed by this pope as it was headed by Pius XII when I was born and by John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II and Benedict XVI ever since.
One of those heads was screwed on right. One we didn't get to find out. One we're waiting to see with dimishing optimism. The rest were clearly unbalanced.
Before the criminal consecrations at Econe, I was actually sympathetic to now dead Marcel. The criminal consecrations made quite obvious that SSPXism is a false God and so was Marcel. I am not going to trade the Roman Catholic Church and its papacy for Marcel and his petty angers over his offended tastes.
That whole paragraph proves you weren't even aware of LeFebvre's reasons which had much more to do with doctrine than tastes.
It was rebellious Marcel and his dupes who followed the example of Lucifer against God and of Luther, et al., in their attacks on papacy and Church.
I see you think the Pope is God. Figures.
As to The Great Facade, neither Chris Ferraro nor Tom Woods have the guts to go formally schismatic but each is pleased to promote the views of many schismatics while claiming Catholicism.
You seriously have no clue. Anything you don't like is "schism" You probably hear the word in your electric shaver in the morning.
Ferraro even tried to shop the merely disobedient Fr. Gruner door-to-door at the Curial offices to get the nonresponse deserved by the Gruners who start off by disobeying legitimate authority and their vows of obedience and end up as eccentric as loons.
No. They were non-responsive because they were too busy undermining doctrine, spending time at the local mosque and getting "some" from their catamite lovers who they'd pay off with the nickels and dimes of the unfed faithful.
Yes, I believe in hell and I believe that many go there.
You certainly didn't learn that in the post conciliar era.
You ought to review the bidding lest you join them by purposeful rejection of the Church when you knew better or ought to have.
It's part of my daily contemplation of the four last things. Ever hear of it?
If I don't die in the right state, I will go to hell. Same with you and everyone else and already (one way or another) the same for dead rebellious and and apparently unrepentant Marcel.
You know. When you put it like that. You are better at expressing Catholic Doctrine than JPII was.
Whatever God decides as to any of us or Marcel will be based upon His knowledge and not our speculations but I feel safer siding with His Vicar on Earth than anyone should feel by siding with the criminal sect of Econe.
Even when his Vicar on Earth is working at crossed purposes it seems.
AND, don't tell me about "Cheerios" in the pews which may reveal more than you might like as to your rejection of the legitimacy of the Novus Ordo consecrations.
I don't have to "reveal" anything. I'm plainly open about my reasons for being a traditional Catholic.
I once made the mistake ......the actual Nicaraguan Sandanistas and every penny would go to the cause.
So you are aware of the obvious problems and you ignore the subtle ones. You made a mistake then and you are still making mistakes now by backing SuckerChurch.
This was Bernard Cardinal Law's Boston where NAMBLA's founders included Fr. Shanley, where Fr, Geoghan was molesting children to a fare thee well and Boston College was referring coeds to Brookline abortion mills. Note that actual Traditional Catholics (the ones in communion with the Holy See) are far angrier at the Bernard Cardinal Laws, the Bishop Anthony Pillas, the Roger Cardinal McPhonys, and their ilk than the smug, self-worshipping schizzies will ever be.
Oh sure. And with all that anger, you turn a blind eye to their boss. Who did nothing.
To you, these disgraces are proof of your impious charges against Church and popes. To actual Catholics, they are the primary set of ecclesiastical vipers to be dealt with.
By who? Certainly not the Pope who appointed them. And promoted them and turned a blind eye, and protected them from prosecution with cushy assignments in Rome. Here's a newsflash. They don't care about you in Rome. You want a saint? Sure. Name it. You want doctrine and discipline and the truth? Go somewhere else. The shop is closed until the renovations are done.
They are the business of actual Catholics and not that of schismatics or excommunicati who are, by definition, not members of the Catholic Church, since you and they have rejected the Catholic Church.
Another unprovable assertion. You don't even know the Catholic Faith anymore. You've got it all twisted around. Bad is good, Truth is false and lies are true.
SSPX was raised by someone, someone preternatural who was the original spokesman for "Non serviam."
Nah. As Malachi Martin said, "Lucifer doesn't do things like that. It's cutting his nose off to spite his face." Full strong doctrinal teaching, valid sacraments, solid understanding of the present crisis. That's the last thing he wants. But your argument sounds good like all Prot accusations sound.
Not in your lifetime, not in my lifetime and not in God's lifetime will I ever resort to the Marcellian schism.
Hard to resort to something that doesn't exist.
Hold your breath waiting if you like. The schism is not preserving the Faith. It is a parasite feeding off the edges of the Faith while rejecting the Church and popes entrusted with the Faith.
Sounds nice. Not even close to reality.
Nothing new there.
Just good Ol' Tradition.
Catholics cannot stand you and with good reason. Attack my mother and I will not admire you. Oh, wait, that is exactly what you did.
No. Cowards are those that watch as their Mother is raped and you applaud because the rapist tells you to are so admirable.
If I am the poster boy you describe, then I serve a purpose by helping to separate the Catholic wheat from the SSPX schismatic chaff.
Have they started saying Mass backwards at your parish yet? It will be in the rubrics soon, I'm sure.
It is not uncharitable to treat the schismatics and excommunicati as, well, schismatics and excommunicati.
Then again, you have a problem with JPII in regards to the Orthodox.
You were expecting a little hand-holding, a little Kumbaya, a little: "There, there, poor baby?" Look elsewhere.
Nope. Just civility. And maybe some intelligence behind the discussion. Not childish antics and empty puffery.
Charity consists not in telling those who are in error what they want to hear but in telling them what they must hear. You reject that charity. So be it!
Here's a little charity. You've lost on this one. You're fighting a battle that you can't even delineate the sides of.
Unprovoked cruelty?????? No one goes to hell without sending him/herself there and then it is God's judgment upon the misuse of free will by the individual that paves the individual's personal road to hell.
What about Limbo?
If God renders judgment, His judgment must be better than yours, mine or even Marcel's or Usurper Williamson's.
His judgement can't be better than the Pope's? Can it?
By your smartass elocution "SuckerChurch" as a reference to the Roman Catholic Church of recent decades, you prove your rejection of the Church and your embrace of its enemies.
You don't like the term "SuckerChurch?" Awwww. Maybe a little Kum Bah Ya to help you out. No. I'm acknowledging in today's language what the pre-conciliar Pope's or 120 years warned of again and again. The invasion of the Church by those intent on taking it over for humanistic purposes.
The energy I spend on your little platoon is necessitated only by the schismatic passion for persistently embracing and practicing the publishing of scandal (including the claim that you are Catholic) against the Roman Catholic Church and its recent popes in service to your dark lords, the SSPX excommunicated bishops (arch or otherwise) and their rage at papal authority particularly when applied against their rebellion.
It's called zeal. As opposed to conciliar complacency. Church Militant vs. Church Milquetoast
As Richard Weaver wrote: Ideas Have Consequences. That includes toxic ideas like SSPX's impious vanities.
You don't know anything about what you're talking about. So much wasted energy.
Shambles?????? Would that equate to dying unrepentant after being excommunicated like a certain French archbishop?????
No. I'm talking wholesale apostasy.
Would that include creating a sect of make-believe Catholics whose very existence defames the legitimate Roman Catholic Church (HQd in the Vatican) and then re-creating the usual self-serving lies to make believe that SSPX has become the Church and that the indefectible Church has, well, defected all because your tastes almighty have been offended.
Tell me more about your Masses in Boston with John Kerry and the NAMBLA priests, All with the approval of the bishop I suppose. Just who is kidding who?
You wanted a peaceful discussion here in which I would join you in discussing why Rome is wrong and Econe is right, thereby making believe that the schism has standing to argue against the Church?????
You might try to prove that there really is a schism. But you can't. So you won't.
I did not accommodate you in your effort to undermine the Faith of Catholics and seduce them into joining you in the darknes of schism.
If you felt confident that you were on the right side of the issues, you would not be afraid. Catholicism is not afraid to take on all comers.
What can I say other than darned right! As people who have rejected the Roman Catholic Church, you have nothing, absolutely nothing to offer and Catholics should not accommodate you by making believe that you have something to offer.
Oh you are so unecumenical! Don't forget JPII 'the Great" often talked about an "exchange of gifts" between those not in communion with the Church.
I paid you and other SSPXers no respect because you deserve no respect. This is not self-esteem time at the local gummint kindergarten.
You pay no respect because you've got no self-respect. The hallmark of a miserable curmudgeon. You've sold yourself to the regime of novelty. So you rail at anyone and anything that reminds you of what you've denied.
You might consider the even more "traditional" Society of Saint Pius I (alleged here recently) which requires Mass to be said by the rubrics used in the first two centuries underground in catacombs not in these new-fangled above-ground Churches. Their motto is: "To be more tradional, you would have to be Jewish!"
I believe that was a parody posting and a funny one at that. Sort of like the joke, How many traditionalists does it take to change a lightbulb? Wait a minute.....you want to...Change? ...a lightbulb?
Lefebvre was, of course, part of the same club as Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, et al., because of their mutual hatred of the papacy (particularly when it had the nerve to disagree with each of them).
Nah, LeFebvre was closer to St. Paul, St. Athanasius, St. Patrick and virtually all of the bishops of the world when they revolted against Paschal II and his blunders.
Each led numbers of Catholics out of the true Faith.
You must mean Bugnini and Kung and Tyrell, and Loisy and Chenu and McBrien and Greeley and Brown and Mahoney and Kaspar are the ones who led numbers out of the Faith. And let's not forget Card. O'Connor and his blessing of a Catholic who converted to Judaism on national television.
You guys are nothing new.
No. We are around 1972 years old. Give or take a few years
You only THINK you are different from ecclesiastical miscreants past.
Unsupported.
You keep telling yourselves you are Catholic when you are not.
Keep telling yourself that.
Deep down, I know the schizzes are right????
Oh yeah.
Lyndon Johnso had a response to Barry Gldwater's "In your heart, you know he is right." The response of LBJ was: In your guts, you know he is nuts. Catholics KNOW that SSPX is nuts.
Keep quoting your favorite liberals. Johnson was also a disaster of a leader.
I know that your temper tantrums are among my rewards. Thank you.
Said the grinning face of the Devil.
Ubi Petrus, Ibi Ecclesia: Since Simon bar Jonah was renamed Peter by Jesus Christ, ever since, now and at all times future.
My such high sounding words, wish you'd been relevant in citing them.
The scandal of popes like John IX and Alexander VI was a punishment and a chastisement of actual Catholics sent by God in response to the sins of the actually faithful. Ubi Petrus, Ibi Ecclesia.
You mean: The scandal of popes like Paul VI and JPII was a punishment and a chastisement of actual Catholics sent by God in response to the sins of the actually faithful. Ubi Petrus, Ibi Ecclesia.
This isn't even an well written response. It sounds more like a temper tantrum given by an 8 year old. You insult ad nauseum and don't even care about the soul of the alleged "schismatic". Give it up.
2. If you are serious about Quo Primum, you then become a sedevacantist since you cannot very well seriously suggest that several consecutive reigning popes are anathema for tolerating a misaal changed from that of Pope St.Pius V. In that event, we have a 45 year interregnum.
3. Other than pop psychobabble and bad psychoanalysis and worse religious arguments, what is your point? SSPX is dishonest, schismatic as ruled and led by excommunicati. I should offer SSPX warm fuzzies because.........????????
4. I am supposed to care how I am regarded by schismatics because......... ????????
5. It is charity at all, much less required charity to make believe schism is Catholicvism because.........?????
6. What you call insults are simply colorful truths.
7. I care about the souls of others but also recognize that they have free will to use or abuse as they see fit. If they abuse and do not repent, then justice dictates unpleasant results. I did not make the rules. God did. His Vicar rules as you do not.
8. Your argument is with the Vatican and not with me.
9. I will not give up the Faith. Schism or no schism. Your little band of anti-Catholic and anti-papal detractors is irrelevant. After you guys have confessed, renounced your prior acts, turned in the credentials of each and every bishop of stolen consecrations, publicly denounced your schism, ad publicly performed profound penance, be sure to get back to me and I will give reconsideration a thought. The fate of the soul of the schismatic is chosen by the schismatic. If the schismatic does not care about the results of schism as to the schismatic's soul, what good would it do for any Catholic to care more than the schismatic as to the schismatic's soul?
10. I have no intention, now or ever, to attempt to slake the schismatic yearnings of SSPXers. That will never change. Your fate is your problem and your challenge. I assume no oblgation whatsoever to confect arguments to subjectively satisfy your rebellious defiant pretensions and those o yourfellow schismatics. Nor will I try. Square circles and all that. All you want is the sanction of the Church that you despise. You'll not get it.
11. Ecclesia Dei is the proof you ceaselessly demand and then ignore. No, I am not interested in your perverse rejections of papal authority as embodied therein. You made your bed and now you will lie in it.
What makes you think I care whether you want my admiration? You won't get it in any event until you repent, renounce, denounce and do penance as publicly as you have joined those SSPX in their attack on the Church. Your subjective self-definition availeth not against objective reality. If you side with and adhere to the schism you are inschism and have rejected the Roman Catholic Church.
No, I meant what I posted.
I fear many of the people here are lost. They refuse to think. They have a wanderer mentality, i.e. they will condemn liberal ideas such as altar serviettes, communion in the hand, ecumenism, etc. when approved by the local bishop but once they are approved by Rome, than they think its not only good, but infallible, the previous condemnation of the Church not withstanding.
AFAIK, serious cooks still use a "steel" to sharpen carbon steel knives.
The Church cannot be destroyed by any man, for it is Divine. The pope cannot bind anyone to believe heresy, but what's to stop any pope, through actions or inactions from harming the Church and the faithful, intentionally or unintentionally?
"What you call insults are simply colorful truths."
Indeed:
"Your little band of anti-Catholic and anti-papal detractors is irrelevant."
"You should become a novelist. You promote fantasies (however ludicrous) far better than you practice pop psychobabble."
"Stop taking those SSPX pills."
And judging from your posts on other threads, you make it your duty to flail insults at all who displease you. Go take some ritalin and sit this one out.
I bought a copy of Catholicism for Dummies. It has already gotten loaned out.
Despite the title, it is a good book for people wanting to know more about the Faith, without crushing them. It is topical, an easy read, and absolutly orthodox and unflinching.
You are funny little boy.
When your catamite bishop tells you to bend over,(hey, he's already done it to you spiritually) Remember that you are obedient to the Vicar of Christ who will hear about it and say, "that's a shame, tell whatsisname I said to tell no one. Send him a note that he's on the "prayer intentions" hahahah! of some nun with all the others. What's for lunch?"
Business as usual in SuckerChurch.
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.