Not to worry, this was no doubt for the best. Now you won't need an:
Posted on 09/17/2005 6:24:38 AM PDT by NYer
I never said you did. Perhaps thou dost protest too much...
Oh well, we can count on Williamson as a continuing icon of schism. Does his nibs also believe that the Holocaust never occurred? Do you? That the earth is flat? Do you?
I personally don't speak for Bishop Williamson, nor do I, by the way, go to the SSPX for Mass. I might, though, if they are regularized as I believe they will be. And, it is not my role nor authority to suggest, as you do, that Catholics "run a gaunlet." You also participate in name calling, such as calling me a "schizzy" when you have no position to judge who is and who isn't. You don't know me.
Oh, and the earth is round. Haven't you seen the NASA pictures?
"traditional faith" meaning pre Vatican Council II?
"It must be understood that the bishop is in the Church and the Church in the bishop and he is not in the Church who is not with the bishop" (Epist., lxvi, 8).
St. Cyprian
Hey ... welcome back, Debby! Haven't seen you around here in a while.
If you are a baptized and generally well-instructed Christian, the RCIA is not necessary for reception. One can receive appropriate instruction (depending on what one does or does not already know about the Catholic) and be recieved as an individual at any time of the year. That's how I did it. The RCIA is supposed to be for the unbaptized and non-Christian. Parishes have turned it into a general-purpose adult education program. Since so many of them actually give false information about the faith, serious Christians wishing to be received are in fact well-advised to seek out private instruction (some of the larger, stronger faithful parishes run classes for inquirers but they aren't RCIA. My parish has no RCIA at all. Children of members are given normal relgious education, preparation for First Communion, Confirmation etc. we have a variety of adult education courses, converts are handled as their needs require. That's the way it was done for decades and the introduction of the RCIA program really wasn't supposed to have anything to do with that process. It got hijacked like a lot of other things.
Find a solid priest and take instruction, make your general Confession, and be received in the Church. Some of us can give suggestions privately.
With regard to several other posts which have claimed that schism sometimes was needed to push the Church to reform, I know of no such instance. The Catholic Reform of the 16thc was a direct outgrowth of reform efforts preceding the Protestant Reformation. The popes of the early 16thc dragged their feet, to be sure, and that stimulated some to lose hope and lose patience. But the reforms that did come at Trent were all part of a long history of reforms that sooner or later would have taken place.
Moreover, even if one is convinced (dispairingly) that schism is needed to jolt the main body of the Church into reform, it still would be wrong. Cyprian put it well already in the mid-3rd c. Schism is always wrong because it represents a human judgment that God has abandoned the pope or the bishops to the extent that God wants me to break fellowship with them. From a Catholic theological perspective, I may never, as an individual, make that judgment because Christ appointed his apostles to govern, to bind and loose. If a bishop commands me directly to sin, yes, I must refuse to sin, but even then I may not break fellowship with him. If he unjustly excommunicates me or disciplines me in some other way, again, I may not take matters into my own hands and declare him apostate and shake the dust of my feet from him. Countless saints were falsely accused, falsely disciplined (popes and bishops can and do err in matters of discipline) and the proper attitude is to take the unjust punishment and call on God to vindicate me. The prelate who unjustly disciplines has to answer to God some day; I may not take matters into my own hands, though on occasion one may speak up, respectfully, in protest--but a loyal protest--and of course one may and should use all legitimate canonical avenues for redress and appeal. That's not the issue here--I'm talking about unjust discipline after all appeals have been exhausted.
Many saints and others whose names are known only to God have suffered patiently unjust discipline. Some were vindicated before they died, others were not. Martin Luther did not suffer patiently. Even if Luther was unjustly excommunicated, his response was uncatholic and wrong--he burned the Bull of excommunication. Actually, he began to call the Pope the antichrist and to develop a schismatic rather than reforming ecclesiology some time earlier, in 1518, when he learned that the curia was maneuvering behind his back and behind the pope's back and behind Cardinal Cajetan's back, to persuade Frederick the Wise to hand Luther over for a heresy trial; that curial maneuvering was dishonest and unjust. He certainly was provoked. His patience was sorely tried. But a Catholic has to be patient, even when provoked, even when the situation seems hopeless. Even the most egregious injustice does not justify schism. However much he was convinced that Vatican II was misguided, one cannot "save a Church that has gone astray" by provoking schism and one is never, cannot be, "forced" to go into schism by someone else's wrong behavior. The cure (going into schism to save the misguided other guy) is worse than the disease. It's all there in Cyprian.
Amen. Thank you.
"To tell you the truth, between you and bornacatholic, who both show much lack of charity to non-Catholics, I might seek out the SSPX if I ever convert."
Fortunately, there is now no need to convert since other faiths (and none) are ok according to Ratzinger's 'unity in diversity' programme. Which leaves the serious matter of true conversion to the Catholic Church safer in non-Newchurch hands. In fact, bringing up the matter of conversion in front of Father Joe or Bishop Ted may cause some embarrassment. They could quite well pass you on to Sister Sue for a cosy chat and a hug-in!
non sequitur
Not according to Canon Law, it isn't. It is simply disobedience.
BTW, according to Canon Law, one accused of disobedience ought to have recourse to a hearing on appeal.
Key word here is "yet". =D
I'll remember you in my intentions at mass tomorrow.
When disobedience is an instrument of heresy, when one denies papal teaching authority as one disobeys, disobedience is a heresy. Why claim to be Catholic if one disobeys because one finds the pope's teachings not acceptable? At that one point is a protestant.
They have been invited back when and if they become truly intransigent the pope should declare them to be schismatics with no ifs ands or buts.
"To tell you the truth, between you and bornacatholic, who both show much lack of charity to non-Catholics, I might seek out the SSPX if I ever convert."
Let me extend my regards, and welcome you to the FR (Catholic) religious forum.
You'll see some good discussion here, but remember to watch for the flying furniture. Please also be forewarned that any time you post anything about SSPX that doesn't start with the words: "they're heretics who deserve to burn at the stake...." will result in a rhetorical end table or divan being sent in your general direction.
Please excuse some of my more animated Roman Catholic bretheren. They're simply providing us with their very unique insights on Christian love and charity. Views which are not held by the vast majority of practicing Roman Catholics, I might add.
Also, rather than looking at SSPX, you might want to step back and see what the other 22 churches in the universal Catholic church have to offer.
God Bless and Welcome.
Not to worry, this was no doubt for the best. Now you won't need an:
"Our way or the highway" most certainly has worked. The SSPX bishops are all excommunicated as they ought to be. That works for me. Those who adhere to the SSPX schism are also excommunicated, as they ought to be. That also works for me. The SSPX is declared to be what it is: a schism and quite accurately so. Therefore its members, adherents, supporters or whatever are schismatic. That also works for me. All of these things also work for Catholicism, papal authority, church discipline, and recognition of reality."
Hmmm. There are roughly 180 million Orthodox and 590 million Protestants. It would appear that we both have a very different idea of what a policy that "works" should demonstrate as it's end result.
"It's not at all ironic. Schism breeds further schism. It has always been that way. Once you set yourself up as "knowing better" than the buck-stops-here-authority, there's really nothing to prevent someone else seting himself up as "knowing better" than you. Notice the fissiparity of Protesantism--initially one, then within 4 years (1517-1521) two (Zwingli, Luther), then another 4 years 3 (Anabaptists in Zurich), then an explosion of Anabaptist sects, plus Calvin and the race was on."
Yes, schism does tend to breed schism. And with each successive schism, it becomes harder and harder to sort out the original grievances and bring those who have schismed back into the fold.
Which brings me back to my original point: I favor reunification with SSPX on very generous terms. This is a very recent schism and thus, in my view, probably one that is more likely to be resolved.
Christ was big on obedience to be sure, but He was also big on truth, Lefebvre can be attacked for his lack of obedience but not for telling the truth.
As with most papolators, you claim that popes Never contradict one another, yet Paul VI blatantly contradicted Pius V's Quo Primum.
You'll have to excuse Black Elk, he is overly zealous when he gets into his "Are you now or have you ever been a Lefebvrite?" mode.
To tell you the truth, between you and bornacatholic, who both show much lack of charity to non-Catholics, I might seek out the SSPX if I ever convert.
Please do not judge the church on the basis of these guys' uncharitableness.
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.