Posted on 01/30/2006 5:59:11 PM PST by TaxachusettsMan
Thanks for the prayers, Hermann.
Regarding the current situation: "Man proposes, but God disposes." More and more I find that God's dispositions are the opposite of what I would have chosen if I ran the zoo. But God's dispositions are perfect and mine are not.
More bitterness I see, much like another man who can not get over bad experiences with the SSPX and wrote around 300 pages on the web of material that spins and takes out of context facts even more than Clinton ever did when he was president.
Anyways, as for your calling the SSPX Protestants, sorry, Protestants do not have a valid Eucharist or Ordinations, while the SSPX do have these sacraments as being valid.
As for the text then Cdl. Ratzinger trashed, can you name it please?
*Not at all. I am happiest when I defend the Faith against schismatics. You've heard of happy warriors, no?
Card Ratzinger; "I mention this strange opposition between the Passover and sacrifice, because it represents the architectonic principle of a book recently published by the Society of St. Pius X, claiming that a dogmatic rupture exists between the new liturgy of Paul VI and the preceding catholic liturgical tradition. This rupture is seen precisely in the fact that everything is interpreted henceforth on the basis of the "paschal mystery," instead of the redeeming sacrifice of expiation of Christ; the category of the paschal mystery is said to be the heart of the liturgical reform, and it is precisely that which appears to be the proof of the rupture with the classical doctrine of the Church. It is clear that there are authors who lay themselves open to such a misunderstanding; but that it is a misunderstanding is completely evident for those who look more closely. In reality, the term "paschal mystery" clearly refers to the realities which took place in the days following Holy Thursday up until the morning of Easter Sunday: the Last Supper as the anticipation of the Cross, the drama of Golgotha and the Lord’s Resurrection. In the expression "paschal mystery" these happenings are seen synthetically as a single, united event, as "the work of Christ," as we heard the Council say at the beginning, which took place historically and at the same time transcends that precise point in time. As this event is, inwardly, an act of worship rendered to God, it could become divine worship, and in that way be present to all times. The paschal theology of the New Testament, upon which we have cast a quick glance, gives us to understand precisely this: the seemingly profane episode of the Crucifixion of Christ is a sacrifice of expiation, a saving act of the reconciling love of God made man. The theology of the Passover is a theology of the redemption, a liturgy of expiatory sacrifice. The Shepherd has become a Lamb. The vision of the lamb, which appears in the story of Isaac, the lamb which gets entangled in the undergrowth and ransoms the son, has become a reality; the Lord became a Lamb; He allows Himself to be bound and sacrificed, to deliver us. ...
*SSPX is the Forrest Gump of Theology
You have heard of the blind leading the blind. In politics, we have the drunk leading the dumb (Kennedy and his protege, Kerry). In ecclesiastical/theological circles we have schismtaic heretics leading the gullible
Thanks for providing the texts, but I do not see where he calles them "idiots". Anyways, your extreme bitterness shows though like it does for the likes of Stephen Hand and I Shawn McIlheny, and this is coming from someone who doesnt go to SSPX chapels, and doesnt even go to the TLM every week, and doesnt care for Bp. Williamson. I think the 3 of you need to move on with your lives to be blunt.
The following has just appeared on Dom's blog. It is from an SSPX priest and originally came from Angel Queen.
1) It is wrongly reported that there was a meeting between Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos and Bishop Fellay on December 7th, at which the two prelates discussed the “turning over” of the Society to Rome. Also, it is wrongly reported that, at this meeting, the Cardinal was given a list of all SSPX priests, their names and locations. A meeting took place in November, but it was in no way such a meeting as has been described. Nothing happened on December 7th. No list of SSPX priests has been given to Rome. A list was given of the various COUNTRIES the SSPX works in, with the NUMBER of priests assigned in each. That is all.
2) The “summit” meeting of the religious orders associated with the Society has nothing to do with a definitive “deal” which is “in the works.” The meeting of the General Council is nothing out of the ordinary: they meet regularly to advise the Superior General, as is their duty and right according to the Statutes. If anyone wonders why there are so many meetings coming up, let them remember that we have a General Chapter coming up in July. This is a significant event in the life of the Society, happening only once every 12 years, and it requires a great deal of consultation and preparation.
As a final note, let all the people who are so concerned about the Society’s imminent “betrayal” spend their time praying for its Superiors rather than in forming judgments which they have no basis to form and posting equally baseless messages to internet fora.
God Bless.
In Christo,
Fr. (name withheld)
Once again folks, this is either a trial balloon or more likely, nothing more than internet blog gossip.
*you're welcome.
but I do not see where he calles them "idiots". Anyways, your extreme bitterness shows though
* Really? I assure you I enjoy defending the Bride against those who schismatics trying to eviscerate her, but, you probably know my intentions far better than do I
like it does for the likes of Stephen Hand and I Shawn McIlheny,
*McElhinney is especialy hated because he exposes and deconstructs the innumerable inanities of the SSPX.
I think the 3 of you need to move on with your lives to be blunt.
* I though I was already sufficiently blunt. If you desire, I can abandon my temperate approach to the schism and really cut loose; you know, like real Traditionalists have always treated schisms.
Here is an example
St Irenaeus Against Heresies
He shall also judge those who give rise to schisms, who are destitute of the love of God, and who look to their own special advantage rather than to the unity of the Church; and who for trifling reasons, or any kind of reason which occurs to them, cut in pieces and divide the great and glorious body of Christ, and so far as in them lies, [positively] destroy it -- men who prate of peace while they give rise to war, and do in truth strain out a gnat, but swallow a camel. For no reformation of so great importance can be effected by them, as will compensate for the mischief arising from their schism.
*That was back in the day when men still talked like men and before men let the women feminize AmChurch. Now, we get queer clergy and apologias for Schisms and "be nice."
Cooperatio materialis immediata illicita est
So, thanks for the info
Actually, it is more like a Nor'easter when it comes to the SSPX
Should I mention the reference to SSPX and the north is probably appropriate because the Bible says the "Devil took up sides in the North?" Nah, too uncharitable
The missal of Pius V was promulgated around the year 1568. Thus, the Tridentine rite is only 550 years old, not 1000 years old. Before the Council of Trent, several rites were used in the Church. Moreover, the Roman rite itself had changed over the course of the centuries before Trent. However, since the Roman rite changed very little after the Council of Trent, many Catholics mistakenly believe that it never changed and that, therefore, the changes that Vatican II made to the liturgy were "wrong." I certainly think that the changes to the liturgy were not explained well to the laity and that they were made much too quickly. I also realize that many Catholics were bewildered by these changes and felt as though the Church didn't care about their feelings or opinions. My father almost left the Church because he was so upset by the changes; and I don't like alot of the changes that were made. However, the Second Vatican Council had the authority to order that the liturgical rites be revised since it was an ecumenical council.
An "ultra-trad" is someone who thinks that Vatican II was "illegitimate" and who thinks that it created a "new Mass." Actually, the Missal of Paul VI is just a revision of the Missal of Pius V; it is not a new rite. It's the Roman rite.
The Missal of Pius V merely formalized the Mass that had already been in use for a Millenium and did away with the liurgical abuses of the time.
An "ultra-trad" is someone who thinks that Vatican II was "illegitimate" and who thinks that it created a "new Mass." Actually, the Missal of Paul VI is just a revision of the Missal of Pius V; it is not a new rite. It's the Roman rite.
Well, I'm not sure where I stand, as I recognize Rome's authority in the matter. However, in English it did become a new Mass where they somehow felt it necessary to change the words of Christ in the consecration. http://www.latinmass.org/faq.html
"SSSX teaches the Jews are condemned."
Actually 'catholicguy' (that is the name you uswed to post under, right?), the SSPX teachhes about the Jews exactly what the Church has always taught. Your calumnies and flame war attempts grow old. I will call you on those attempts every chance I get, as it is wrong in an absolute sense and it is against the rules here.
"15 The Lord thy God will raise up to thee a PROPHET of thy nation and of thy brethren like unto me: him thou shalt hear: 16 As thou desiredst of the Lord thy God in Horeb, when the assembly was gathered together, and saidst: Let me not hear any more the voice of the Lord my God, neither let me see any more this exceeding great fire, lest I die. 17 And the Lord said to me: They have spoken all things well. 18 I will raise them up a prophet out of the midst of their brethren like to thee: and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I shall command him. 19 And he that will not hear his words, which he shall speak in my name, I will be the revenger."
-Deuteronomy 18:15-19
DECLARATION ON THE RELATION OF THE CHURCH TO NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIONS NOSTRA AETATE PROCLAIMED BY HIS HOLINESS POPE PAUL VI ON OCTOBER 28, 1965
14. As the sacred synod searches into the mystery of the Church, it remembers the bond that spiritually ties the people of the New Covenant to Abraham's stock.
Thus the Church of Christ acknowledges that, according to God's saving design, the beginnings of her faith and her election are found already among the Patriarchs, Moses and the prophets. She professes that all who believe in Christ-Abraham's sons according to faith (6)-are included in the same Patriarch's call, and likewise that the salvation of the Church is mysteriously foreshadowed by the chosen people's exodus from the land of bondage. The Church, therefore, cannot forget that she received the revelation of the Old Testament through the people with whom God in His inexpressible mercy concluded the Ancient Covenant. Nor can she forget that she draws sustenance from the root of that well-cultivated olive tree onto which have been grafted the wild shoots, the Gentiles.(7) Indeed, the Church believes that by His cross Christ, Our Peace, reconciled Jews and Gentiles. making both one in Himself.(8)
The Church keeps ever in mind the words of the Apostle about his kinsmen: "theirs is the sonship and the glory and the covenants and the law and the worship and the promises; theirs are the fathers and from them is the Christ according to the flesh" (Rom. 9:4-5), the Son of the Virgin Mary. She also recalls that the Apostles, the Church's main-stay and pillars, as well as most of the early disciples who proclaimed Christ's Gospel to the world, sprang from the Jewish people.
As Holy Scripture testifies, Jerusalem did not recognize the time of her visitation,(9) nor did the Jews in large number, accept the Gospel; indeed not a few opposed its spreading.(10) Nevertheless, God holds the Jews most dear for the sake of their Fathers; He does not repent of the gifts He makes or of the calls He issues-such is the witness of the Apostle.(11) In company with the Prophets and the same Apostle, the Church awaits that day, known to God alone, on which all peoples will address the Lord in a single voice and "serve him shoulder to shoulder" (Soph. 3:9).(12)
Since the spiritual patrimony common to Christians and Jews is thus so great, this sacred synod wants to foster and recommend that mutual understanding and respect which is the fruit, above all, of biblical and theological studies as well as of fraternal dialogues.
True, the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ;(13) still, what happened in His passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today. Although the Church is the new people of God, the Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God, as if this followed from the Holy Scriptures. All should see to it, then, that in catechetical work or in the preaching of the word of God they do not teach anything that does not conform to the truth of the Gospel and the spirit of Christ.
*Now, the founder of the SSPX, Lefebvre, signed this Document. If that doesn't mean he agred with it then it means he was a liar. Whicvh is it?
So, it appears that, due to the rampant hateful antismetism of so many in the shcism, the SSPX could not even maintain the tradiiton if its founder - to say nothing about maintaining actual Tradition.
The sspx spreads enmity and hatred of the Jews through their heretical teaching the Jews as a race are cursed.
Your ignorance, combined with your protestant position that a schims defines Tradition, not the Magisterium, combined with your arrogance is pitiable.
The antisemitism within the schism is just one reason they will never be reconciled to the Church. Their's is a foul, evil "teaching" they cannot abandon of their antisemitic supporters will revolt.
This is not to say all sspx suporters are antisemitic but there is no question the sspx is heretical and hateful vis a vis the Jews.
Pointing out facts are not calumnies nor are they flame wars.
I know the sspx pretends they are the defenders of the truth, but, like all schims, they are deadly wrong; deadly in the sense that their teachings are anchors on the souls of their supporters dragging them into Hell.
You have Free Will. Use it wisely. You WILL get what you choose.
< What you do not get to do is define Tradition. That is a rank protestant position. THe Living Magisterium defines Traditon.
THAT is Tradition.
So, make all the false accusations you desire. I ain't scairt. I know what he sppsx teaches and THAT is the real problem. I lift the veil of the faux "tradition" and using their own words, expose their stupidities, their heresies, and their hatreds
Dear narses,
Not every word of what the SSPX teaches about the Jews is noxious. However, not all of it seems to pass the smell test, either:
"The curse is then the punishment for the hardhearted rebelliousness of a people that has refused the time of its visitation, that has refused to convert and to live a moral, spiritual life, directed towards heaven."
Do you believe that Jews, as a whole, don't live moral or spiritual lives? Do you affirm this teaching of the SSPX?
"This curse is the punishment of blindness to the things of God and eternity, of deafness to the call of conscience and to the love of good and hatred of evil which is the basis of all moral life, of spiritual paralysis, of total preoccupation with an earthly kingdom."
Do you believe that the whole of Jews are deaf to the call of conscience?
That they do not love the good and hate the evil?
Thay they are totally preoccupied with an earthly kingdom?
Frankly, when I read this cr@p, I'm appalled. Why don't we just call the Jews a bunch of greedy, grubbing moneychangers, assign them to their ghettos and be done with it??
This is anti-semitism, pure and simple, and is offensive not only to Jews but to actual Catholics, in whose name the SSPX illegitimately teach this garbage.
sitetest
[The] Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion is a forged document purportedly drawn up in 1897 by Jews and Freemasons, plotting to bring about the collapse of Christian society as a prelude to establishing a non-Christian society under their control. The origin of the document has been traced to an obscure political satire published in 1864, Dialogues aux enfers entre Machiavel et Montesquieu, by Maurice Joly. ¹
The actual Protocols appeared in Russia in 1905 as an addendum to a fanatical book by Sergius Nilius predicting the imminent arrival of the Antichrist. In 1921, Philip Graves of the London Times demonstrated the similarity of Protocols to Dialogues aux enfers entre Machiavel et Montesquieu. A Russian historian, Vladimir Burtsev, traced the forgeries to the Russian secret police. The Protocols are, in the vernacular, phony as a three dollar bill. ²
Nevertheless, over the years, Protocols has often served as an effective tool for those who hate the Jews. Unsurprisingly, Adolf Hitler was among it devotees. Here are his own words in Mein Kampf.
"The extent to which the whole existence of (the Jewish) people is based on a continual life is show in an incomparable manner in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which the Jews hate so tremendously. The Frankfurter Zeitung is forever moaning to the public that they are supposed to be based on a forgery; which is the surest proof that they are genuine. What many Jews do, perhaps unconsciously, is here consciously exposed. But that is what matters. It is a matter of indifference which Jewish brain produced these revelations. What matters is that they uncover, with really horrifying reliability, the nature and activity of the Jewish people, and expose them in their inner logic and their final aims. But reality provides the best commentary. Whoever examines the historical development of the last hundred years from the standpoint of this book will at once understand why the Jewish press makes such an uproar. Far when once this book becomes generally familiar to a people, the Jewish menace can be regarded as already vanquished." 3
How does this have any connection to the Society of St. Pius X? In his November 1, 1990 letter to 'Dear Friends and Benefactors of the SSPX St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary, Bishop Richard Williamson writes that "nearly 100 years ago" Christ's enemies were bragging:
"We have long past taken care to discredit the priesthood of the goyim, and thereby to ruin their mission on earth, which in these days might still be a great hindrance to us. Day by day its influence on the peoples of the world is falling lower. Freedom of conscience has been declared everywhere, so that now only years divide us from the moment of the complete wrecking of that Christian religion... We shall set clericalism and clericals into such narrow frames as to make their influence move in retrogressive proportion to its former progress."
Bishop Williamson is smart enough not to tell the seminary’s friends and benefactors the origin of this citation. May I quote from Protocol No. 17 of Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion?
"We have long past taken care to discredit the priesthood of the goyim, and, thereby, to ruin their mission on earth which in these days might still be a great hindrance to us. Day by day its influence on the peoples of the world is falling lower. Freedom of conscience has been declared everywhere, so that now only years divide us from the moment of the complete wrecking of that Christian religion. We shall set clericalism and clericals into such narrow frames as to make their influence move in retrogressive proportion to its former progress." 4
Here is Bishop Williamson's quote, word for word, straight out of Protocols. I challenge anyone to find another source from 'nearly one hundred years' before 1990 which contains this same quote verbatim. Just in case someone is able do so, I further adduce Williamson's November 3, 1991 letter to 'Dear Friends and Benefactors' of St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary as evidence that he believes in Protocols. In this letter, speaking of the sexual harassment charges against Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas, Bishop Williamson wntes:
"Now the vile media played no doubt a large part in inflating the issue out of all proportion, in order amongst other things, whichever side won, to bring the Supreme Court into disrepute: ‘...it is indispensable to stir up the people's relations with their governments in all countries so as utterly to exhaust humanity with dissension, hatred, struggle, envy... so that the goyim see no other course open to them than to take refuge in our complete sovereignty in money and all else’" (Pr. 10).
Perhaps Bishop Williamson thinks that the unsuspecting reader would see "Pr. 10 and assume the material in quotation marks came from Proverbs. However. to the best of my knowledge, the word 'goyim' is nowhere to be found in Proverbs. This quote is directly from Protocol No. 10 of Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, wherein one finds these words:
"...it is indispensable to trouble in all countries the people’s relations with their governments so as to utterly exhaust humanity with dissension, hatred, struggle...so that the goyim see no other issue than to take refuge in our complete sovereignty in money and all else." 5
The very slight differences between this quote from Protocol No. 10 and Williamson's quote from 'Pr 10' are simply due to the fact that different translations of Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion exist.
One quote from Protocols would bad enough. To make matters far worse, later in the same November 3, 1991 letter Williamson writes:
"Take another example of this grave disruption of nature in the U.S.A. today: the invasion of public life by gays and lesbians, men and women being ‘delivered up to shameful affections...changing the natural use into that which is against nature’ (Rom. I, 26, 27), then flaunting their unnatural vice in public and being rewarded by the vile media with a blaze of publicity. And decent citizens seem unable to do much about it, partly no doubt because ‘in countries known as progressive and enlightened, we have created a senseless, filthy, abominable literature’ (Pr. 14)..."
No, the quote from 'Pr. 14' is not from Proverbs either, for in Protocol No. 14 of Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion one finds:
"In countries known as progressive and enlightened we have created a senseless, filthy, abominable literature." 6
How does this make matters far worse? In the same paragraph, Williamson has included a quote from the Epistle of St Paul to the Romans and a quote from Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. He is putting the New Testament on an equal footing with Protocols. That is utterly obscene.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Encyclopedia Americana, 'Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion', Vol. 22 p. 694, 1996.
2 Ibid.
3 Mein Kampf, Eleventh edition, Munich, 1942, p. 337.
4 Marsden, V., The Protocols of the Meetings of the Learned Elders of Zion, 1934, p 204.
5 Marsden, pp. 178-9.
6 Marsden, pp. 191.
*The schism carries with it the soul-destroying virus of antisemitism and yet we are supposed to welcome a reconciliation?
BTW, is there a SINGLE IOTA, ONE WORD, of protest by those supporters of the SSPX denouncing this vile antisemitism?
*The SSPX Schims bears with itself the soul-destroying virus of antisemitism and yet I am faulted for bringing this to the attention of FR Christians.
Why in the world would anyone in their right Christian mind want to commune with this deadly virus? Why would any Catholic not think a recocniliation with the as-now-constitued SSPX would bring the vile antisemitic infection into the Body of Christ and posion it?
And do people really think the Pope doesn't know this and isn't insisiting they repudiate this evil prior to any reconciliation
I have never read an SSPX supporter denounce the antisemitism rampant inside the SSPX.
They know if they do, they are OUT.
All the time I read sspx supporters defending the SSPX teachings on the Jews.
The SSPX is where it belongs; outside the Church
Dear bornacatholic,
The anti-semitic positions of the SSPX are indeed dreadful and frightening. One hopes that should reconciliation take place, Pope Benedict at least requires that SSPX clergy and leadership abstain from teaching things like that the Jews generally do not live a "moral, spiritual life...," or that they are deaf "to the call of conscience and to the love of good and hatred of evil which is the basis of all moral life...," and other inanities.
However, I know SSPXers who aren't anti-semites. These, I'd welcome joyously in reconciliation. But even if many anti-semites come in at the time of reconciliation, remember, the Church is for sinners. It's more likely that they will be purged of their anti-semitism INSIDE the Church than outside of her.
Some of the pernicious teachings of the SSPX really don't belong inside the Church. But EVERYONE belongs inside the Catholic Church, including all the folks in the SSPX.
I sorta suspect, however, that some of the worst of the anti-semites aren't going to go along with the whole reconciliation program.
sitetest
The Missal of Paul VI is a revision of the Missal of Pius V. It's the same Mass, the same rite, the Roman rite. The latinmass.org website does not have the authority (or the competence!) to state that the Missal of Paul VI is a new Mass.
Not everyone who prefers the Tridentine Mass is an "ultra-trad." Just those people who are so self-righteous that they reject the legitimacy of Vatican II. I know many traditionalist Catholics who accept the legitimacy of Vatican II and of the Missal of Paul VI even though they prefer the Tridentine Mass. They are not "ultra-trads." But I also know some really obnoxious traditionalists who are hyper-critical of the Holy See and who are completely lacking in charity. Since these same people had the nerve to slap me with the insulting and inaccurate label of "neo-con," I thought I would return the favor and give them their own label.
BTW, my college-aged son coined the term "ultra-trad" and he is still a server at a Tridentine Mass.
True, but in the English translation of the ICEL which 99% of us have to endure, they have changed the words of Christ. I don't think that the Magisterium through the ICEL has the power to change history.
But I also know some really obnoxious traditionalists who are hyper-critical of the Holy See and who are completely lacking in charity.
Lack of charity seems to be contagious on these threads.
Since these same people had the nerve to slap me with the insulting and inaccurate label of "neo-con," I thought I would return the favor and give them their own label.
You haven't struck me so far as a neo-con, but then, you haven't struck me as a steadfast conservative either.
Then you are appalled at Catholic teaching. I don't know what context you ripped the quotes from, like this one:
"The curse is then the punishment for the hardhearted rebelliousness of a people that has refused the time of its visitation, that has refused to convert and to live a moral, spiritual life, directed towards heaven."
but the goodness they are speaking of which Jews lack - is not "natural goodness", which even atheists and pagans can have, and of course Jews can have.
The goodness these quotes speak of is "supernatural goodness", the goodness which the saints possess which is impossible to possess apart from the grace of Our Lord Jesus Christ through the sacraments of the Church. It is impossible to do anything "good" or worthy of merit in the eyes of Our Lord outside of the state of sanctifying grace. As a Catholic you should know this.
There is no true goodness, that is "supernatural goodness", apart from the grace of Our Lord.
Let's take another one:
"This curse is the punishment of blindness to the things of God and eternity, of deafness to the call of conscience and to the love of good and hatred of evil which is the basis of all moral life, of spiritual paralysis, of total preoccupation with an earthly kingdom."
Christ is the source of all good, all supernatural life, all that is moral. If you don't recognize Christ as the source wouldn't that make you spiritually paralyzed, unable to proceed in virtue without supernatural grace? There is no salvation apart from Christ. Wouldn't it be fair to say that those who do not accept, worship and adore Him are blind to the things of God and eternity?
There is only one Heavenly Kingdom and Christ is King. Do you think it unfair to say that this Heavenly Kingdom is of no concern to those who deny the rightful King?
Be appalled all you like, this is not antisemitism. True enough, it is not the touchy feel good universalistic ecumania that is so widely accepted, "We all worship the same God so it's all good", but it is Catholic teaching.
I took the username "steadfastconservative" because it describes my political views. I don't think that terms such as "liberal" and "conservative," which denote political ideology, should be applied to Catholics.
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.