Posted on 01/31/2004 5:48:12 AM PST by RockDoc
If you have read Pascendi, then you tell me why it is (other than the meting out of justice against Lefebvre and crew) that JPII is the focal point of the campaign of character assassination waged constantly by the upstarts in sympathy with SSPX schism, rather than, say Benedict XV (the former Cardinal della Chiesa) who cancelled the anti-Modernist efforts of Pope St. Pius X when Pius was scarcely cold in his grave. Never a peep out of any of them about that because Benedict XV loosened the situation binding the Modernist heresy and its attendant forms of impudence.
I you are suggesting that JP II is a "modernist" AND you have read Pascendi of Pope St. Pius X, you are saying that the pope is a heretic. Pius X described modernism as the synthesis of ALL hereises, but you knew that.
No one whomsoever has EVER suggested the invalidity of the Tridentine Mass. It was suppressed by Paul VI and a bad generatio of bishops but, hey, that's no big deal because Paul VI did not excommunicate the Gallican upstart and his co-conspirators. Once JP II excommunicated Marcel the Magnificent (who incidentally blazed the way to the establishment of today's annulment mills through his work on the Rota before he discovered liturgy as an excuse for rebellion), only a pope who rebels against the pope will do.
As to the pope insisting on selecting the bishops for any order, mayI remind you that the actual orders of the Church: Benedictines, Dominicans, Jesuits (sorry mess though they have become), Franciscans, Opus Dei, et al., operate under a rule sumbitted by each order and approved by the Vatican. SSPX is a schism and not an order of the Church. It has never been approved and, absent severe attitude adjustment, is unlikely ever to be. To the best of my knowldge, no bishop, in an order or otherwise, is consecrated licitly (validly perhaps but NOT licitly) without clearing the Vatican through the Congregation for bishops (save a jailhouse consecration or two in a Red Chinese prison).
Again, without details fo those unfamiliar, you are referencing the situation of the ultra-scandalous recently deceased but long retired Bishop Ferrario of Honolulu and suggesting that there is no more to the story than his superficial excuse of attendance at unauthorized Tridentine Masses (probably performed by a schismatic) for excommunicating five genuinely Catholic folks who were otherwise annoying him as well they should have. The rest of the story is that Ferrario had been "outed" by the Wanderer at a bishop's conference which inroduced his former altar boy and longtime lavender lover to the press, to explain that the bishop had been visiting him for imoral purposes with regularity at a bishop-provided love nest in San Francisco. The folks "excommunicated" by Ferrario happened to be critics of the bishop on this matter, as I recall, and were conveniently excommunicated for reasons of liturgy.
The five Honolulu actual traditionalists were perforce not schismatic rebels as evidenced by their resort to the Church's courts to appeal their excommunication and by the decision (not an endorsement of SSPX in any way) that there had existed no grounds for excommunication and ordering Ferrario to rescind his action. His ear-ringed and pony-tailed clerical press flak was not amused when confronted by the press with Rome's slapdown of Ferrario, who "retired" in relatively short order.
If you believe that the keys of Peter have been transferred, do you believe that the Holy See is vacant or that itb is occupied by Fellay or by whom?
As to most of the rest of your post, if you think that Pope St. Pius X was a man who wouldmsupport anti-papal rebellion, you have not the measure of the man. If the SSPX imagines it represents authentic tradition, and that the pope is the voice of the Modernist heresy, then I would say that one reads their hearts by reading their posts and that such impudence merits excommunication and it would be a pleasure to see the games begin. If their attitude is what results from relative toleration, then by all means let us have full-scale retaliation by the Vatican. We can have Tridentine Masses while kissing SSPX a permanent goodbye and good riddance. They have, like Mahoney, not been made to pay an adequate or appropriate price. JP II is far too kind to them. OTOH, he is pope and he makes the decisions. I can hope that he or his immediate successor will act to suppress the schism once and for all and I do.
BTW, I take it that you are younger than my late fifties age bracket. There is nothing about restoring the status quo ante about SSPX. I was there and I don't think you were. Also, if you think everything was wonderful before the Council, did the Modernists arrive from Pluto DURING the Council or was it the suppression of the anti-Modernist program of Pope St. Pius X by Benedict XV that was responsible for an ongoing infection that festered for 50 years courtesy of Benedict XV before bursting forth in the 1960s once Pius XII was safely in his grave?
The Irish monks did what they did to save civilization. SSPX attacks the rock of the papacy and, in so doing, attacks civilization. It is not the business of SSPX to preserve the Tridentine Mass. That is up to JP II to do or not do as he sees fit. The amazing thing, a miracle really, is that he has seen fit and what he gets for his efforts is an endless stream of falsehood and calumny by those who imagine themselves more Catholic than he. Attacks upon the pope are NOT principled. The sin of scandal is NOT principled. The sin of schism is NOT principled.
I will not speak to your circumstances which may well not be o your making and probably are not but my children were baptized ASAP at birth and attend weekly Mass (Tridentine, BTW, for the most part). We don't leave their religious education to others. We take care of that. The eldest have been confirmed in Tridentine confirmations by our quite orthodox bishop.
The more success you have in taking out the trash during the btrief career of the SSPX schism, the easier it will be to gather the actuaklly Faithful to do waht must be done to restore actual tradition.
In your last sentence, you join Luther who infamously said: Here I stand. I can do no other. You also fail to distuinguish between allowance of mere attendance at SSPX Masses which are concededly valid Masses (as are Eastern Orthodox Masses) and endorsement of SSPX by the actual Church but you seem mightily worked up that anyone would remind that those who regularly attend SSPX Masses AND adhere to the schism are, well, schismatics.
If hatred abonds in these discussions, it abounds in two respects: there is the willful persistent hatred o JP II for excommunicating your heroes and declaring SSPX a schism and there is the hatred of schism. The former is not Catholic but the latter is. Remember the traditional admonition to hate the sin and love the sinner. Schism is well worth hating. You are not.
If he happens to be SSPX, the last Guy Who was perfect was crucified for His efforts, but it will not prevent Gibson's doing good in the form of his film. That Mafia dons may fund orphanages does not interfere with them acting otherwise as Mafia dons. That Mel Gibson and Jim Cavaziel make a magnificent film does not mean that the usual tail of self-serving suspects will not attempt to hijack the dog to further advertise their apostasy and recruit others.
So inspired, take out some more of the weak-kneed self worshippers incapable of obedience to Christ's Vicar on Earth.
The SSPX adherents reject papal authority in favor of whatever they happen to imagine to be tradition. THEY are not authorized interpreters of tradition. I have not identified you as SSPX. The Vatican accepts the validity of SSPX Masses and of Eastern Orthodox Masses (which are also held to be performed by schismatics, as Rome sees it). The word schism is a statement of fact and not an insult. I am not insulted if pious members of the Eastern Orthodox Churches regard me as schismatic because I accept the pope's authority and they do not.
I concede and have conceded that those who have wearied themselves in fighting the good fight and wish spiritually to prepare for heaven may understandably resort to SSPX Masses, inter alia, to reduce their level of reasonable anger at Kumbaya twits in local parishes or diocesan chanceries, where authorized alternatives are not available. BUT note the schismatic posts which find that insufficient and insist that the problem is the "CEO" (the pope) and not middle management (the bishops). If JP II were a 30-year old matching the stamina of Hercules with the insight of the Pope St. Pius X of fact and not myth, that would not suffice. Picking bishops is just one job, however important.
You are not here and there has been much recent progress in appointing of orthodox bishops here. We did not get into this mess overnight and we won't get out of it overnight but we certainly won't get out of it being fragged by the pseudo-traditionalists from behind while we carry the brunt of fighting the enemies of all things Catholic before us. If SSPX counted for anything, we might be in the position of Chaing Kai-Shek's army in WW II, fighting the Japs in front and being assassinated by the Maoists behind. We are making progress in the US. If that is not satisfactory to SSPX, too bad.
As to what Masses look like: Before there was any permission for the Tridentine Mass, in the spring of 1970, some Catholic convert student conservatives arrived at Yale for a conference. They spotted a sign outside Christ Church on Broadway advertising a Latin Mass. Thrilled, they attended. Magnificent Mass. Magnificent Gregorian Chant and appropriate music throughout. They asked me how it could be that this Mass, suppressed everywhere else was being allowed in Connecticut but that they had not heard of it. I told them the truth that they had attended a Tridentine "Mass" at a largely lavender but stratospherically High Anglican church. Well, as we say in the Knights of Columbus, judge not lest ye be judged: appearances are oft-times deceiving.
The Archdiocese of Hartford then approved a Tridentine Mass (before any indult), at the seminary in Bloomfield for attendees at a national YAF conference there several months later, courtesy of Archbishop John Whealon. We asked respectfully (noting that we would respect his authority and decision) and we got what we asked for. It is a sort of humility that is appropriate, succeeds and ought to be tried by the self-appointed persecutors of the pope. SSPX was not yet a gleam in Marcel's eye.
You're NOT supposed to be funny, THAT'S NOT FAIR!!!!
Hehe.
Thank you friend, I really needed that and also I just realized I miscounted and owe you one.
LOL. I'm still giggling.
Link Marcel's page if it won't burn your keyboard. Otherwise we can settle for Bishop Williamson: Holocaust denial.com or something.
Going to patrol other neighborhoods for a bit but I will be baaaaack!
I for one don't ascribe to that. I go against the society in some aspects in that I feel as broken as they are, there is a time and place for the NO-masses and think if that's what it takes to get some into church... so be it.
But that still leaves the detestable problem of Vat-II. I just saw a horrid program on EWTN with 2 priests (one very effeminate) going on about "workers right" and a "just wage". What kind of crap are they teaching now? Whatever it is I don't want any part of it.
The thing that bothers me the most is nobody has given me any good reason whatsoever why the trad masses are being shut out to this degree. The only possible answer is that there are evil forces that are very powerful at work, because these masses are nothing but good.
I think it's a combo of both that will reform our church. People like you working from the inside and people like us working on the edge.
I think I've told you, there is no possible way I could go back to the awful services I was attending, and moving up near you (although you seem nice enough) is a ridiculous idea. Are we to move around the country in response to the sluggards who get into the diocese heirharchy?
Sorry, but some of us are listening to Jesus on this, not the politicized and very broken machine. Imagine what it's like to FINALLY find a mass after years of searching only to find out that that it has the status it does with the Vatican.
Re-read, it was POSTS not ever time you mention the word. As I stated in the my original offer, I realize that you use this word so often that I would have to forgo sleep to keep up with the name calling.
Anyway, you won't "sweat this" out of me. I assure you of that.
I owed you one and you made 3 more (silly) posts. That makes two. For those two, first I have completed and uploaded very a basic front end design of angelqueen.org. I've been behind on some graphics but you've caused me to give it a jump start.
That's one.
For the second I cut and pasted the entire chapel locations from the Society's site to angelqueen.org. You'll find this if you hit the "church" link. So now the entire list on two places on the web.
That's two. We're even.
Next I start keyword metatags and search engine submission. You know anything about metatags? I do. They're not good if you DON'T want a website to get further exposure.
Please keep making me sweat (I like the exercise) and thank you for all the help you've provided to my church and the other SSPX chapels. God will bless you for this.
This business of attacking the pope, judging him and what not is up to God and not thee or me.
You must recognize the facts and return to the Church or you may refuse to do so and continue in apostasy.
AAABEST: For AAABEST's accounting system, I will repeat the truth that SSPX is in schism and its bishops excommuinicated. The pope said so and it is so. Roma locuta; causa finita.
Oh, BTW, SSPX is in schism. JP II signed off on that in the moto propriu Ecclesia Dei Afflicta. Put that up too.
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.