Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SSPX FRANCE REPORTEDLY IN CHAOS
Envoy Magazine ^ | September 18, 2004 | Pete Vere

Posted on 09/20/2004 7:38:56 AM PDT by NYer

Taking a break from judging annulments earlier today, I visited a number of French traditionalist websites.  I also had the opportunity, yesterday, to speak with a friend of mine who is a canonist from France following the situation as well as another friend who keeps tabs on the traditionalist movement in both the English and the French speaking world.  Everyone agrees -- the situation has degenerated into total chaos, as nobody knows exactly what is going on with the highly-respected French SSPX clergy that have criticized what they see as the SSPX's growing rigidity. 


It does appear that Rome has refused to take competency over the case, more-or-less stating that the SSPX denied Rome's jurisdiction over them when Lefebvre carried out a schismatic act through the 1988 episcopal consecrations.  Beyond that, Rome refuses to comment other than to say, "Our door remains open for their return to full communion."

Beyond that, the rhetoric, polemic and accusations suggest that indeed civil war is breaking out among the laity and clergy within the SSPX's French District.  In fact, two websites have now popped up that are exclusively devoted to tracing all the news stories associated with the crisis.  What I find personally find interesting is that every news report, commentary, polemic, etc... mentions Fr. Aulagnier's expulsion from the SSPX around this time last year.

In the months that followed, it appears that the SSPX more-or-less tried to sweep Fr. Aulagnier's expulsion under the rug.  But in so doing, even the regime currently in charge of the SSPX had to admit the important role played by Fr. Aulagnier in the founding of the SSPX.  This is probably why the SSPX appeared to hope the issue would go away.

Yet it is also well-known that Fr. Aulagnier was a close friend of Fr. Laguerie as well as Fr. de Tanouarn -- two of the SSPX's leading priests.  (As Fr. Laguerie's assistant, Fr. Henri appears to have just happened into the situation).  It is also well-known that a number of French (and some American) SSPX priests were not happy with Fr. Aulagnier's expulsion.  Therefore, I will venture to guess that the current SSPX chaos is the effect of Fr. Aulagnier's expulsion coming back to haunt Bishop Fellay.  As for the particular details, this is the first time in almost fourteen years of being a traditionalist that I find the fog of war too thick to reasonably discern what is going on.  (What I find even more troubling is that behind the scenes, under the flag of truce, other SSPX and traditionalist commentators with whom I am in contact have admitted to having the same problem.)

So if I can end on a personal note to the moderate SSPX clergy and their supporters who follow this blog, I'm more than happy to abide by the flag of truce and keep you guys in prayer while you fight whatever battles need to be fought, but I honestly cannot make heads-or-tails of what is happening. But like Rome has said, the door is open for you to return.  I will pray that God gives you the necessary strength to walk through it.


TOPICS: Activism; Apologetics; Catholic; Current Events; Ecumenism; General Discusssion; History; Religion & Culture; Religion & Politics; Theology; Worship
KEYWORDS: france
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250 ... 401-435 next last
To: AskStPhilomena; ninenot; GirlShortstop
Do you really think you should talk that way about impudent Marcel? Or are you talking about his fraudulency Fellay?

Also, the remains of a young girl were found in an ancient grave (1st century A.D.). She appears to have died of a head injury which fractured her skull. The marble over her burial (whether related to her or not) was broken up and was in bad condition but ONE of several ways of piecing it back together suggested the name Philomena. If you have anything else as to this St. Philomena of provable facts of her life and the sources of those facts, I WOULD be interested. If I understand correctly, a group of local enthusiasts living where she had been buried, decided that she must have been martyred (in defense of her chastity and the Faith) and invented a legend out of whole cloth. She might have fallen off a crumbling wall onto her head quite accidentally. I will be happy to learn that I am wrong on this score because every actual saint is an encouragement and a victory of and for God. As a certain TV talkmeister might say: What am I missing here (about Philomena, saint or otherwise only!)?

I only respond to you because you ping me when I have asked not to be pinged by SSPX and its sympathizers.

151 posted on 09/21/2004 7:28:36 AM PDT by BlackElk ( Illicit consecrations of rebel bishops are grand theft ecclesiastical)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: AskStPhilomena

Nice attempt at obfuscation.


152 posted on 09/21/2004 7:38:16 AM PDT by Mershon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Fifthmark
I can. those who defend the sspx on these threads repeatedly say Rome has lost the faith, blah, blah, blah.

That denies the Dogma of Vatican 1 which teaches the perpetuity of the Papacy etc

153 posted on 09/21/2004 7:39:01 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: Wessex

"Yes, in particular, this ex-Occultist and ex-SSPX with a personal grudge, Pete Vere, now chief bottom licker of Patrick Madrid."

Now THERE is faith, hope and charity. And the greatest of these is CHARITY.

Oh, let me guess... You have your own personal definition of charity.


154 posted on 09/21/2004 7:41:35 AM PDT by Mershon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: ultima ratio; ninenot; GirlShortstop
Good. Stay out. Remain anathema. Stop making believe you are Catholic when you reject the pope and the papacy. As you well know, your masquerade as though you were Catholic is merely the platform for you to launch ineffective missiles at His Holiness.

The quality of a man (JP II) or of an institution (the Roman Catholic Church) can be judged by the nature of his and its enemies. I feel sure that JP II and the RCC will always enjoy the good reputation that arises from the hatred launched at both by the nasty little schism of self-important excommunicated and dead Marcel and his remarkable cult of self-deluded trick ponies.

155 posted on 09/21/2004 7:43:00 AM PDT by BlackElk ( Illicit consecrations of rebel bishops are grand theft ecclesiastical)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: ultima ratio; ninenot; GirlShortstop

Looks like you have slippage on your sedevacantist wing, huh???? Gee, too bad!!!! You better hurry and do something before you look like "moderates." Sedevacantism does not matter, huh???


156 posted on 09/21/2004 7:48:32 AM PDT by BlackElk ( Illicit consecrations of rebel bishops are grand theft ecclesiastical)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: bornacatholic

So that's an official position of the Society? "Lost the faith," "blah, blah, blah," and "Papacy etc" are purposefully vague, as you don't wish to really test your argument. Given the state of discourse on this forum, I don't blame you.


157 posted on 09/21/2004 7:50:53 AM PDT by Fifthmark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: Land of the Irish
Can you read? I said nothing about the powers of future popes. I have noted the incapacity of one pope (St. Pius V)to bind his successors in matters merely prudential.

Popes may well have the power to lift excommunications posthumously. I am predicting that they will not in the case of dead Marcel or dead anyone else in that schism other than, perhaps, Castro de Meyer. Why on earth would a pope lift such a meritorious excommunication?

158 posted on 09/21/2004 7:53:13 AM PDT by BlackElk ( Illicit consecrations of rebel bishops are grand theft ecclesiastical)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk

I attend Society masses. Do you wish to impugn that I "reject the pope and the papacy"? Do you wish to substantiate that argument? Do you still not realize what the sin of rash judgment is and how it can be mortal given a grave matter such as whether or not one is excommunicated from the Catholic Church?


159 posted on 09/21/2004 7:53:43 AM PDT by Fifthmark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: AskStPhilomena

Where is Lavrenti Beria when you really need him?


160 posted on 09/21/2004 7:54:46 AM PDT by BlackElk ( Illicit consecrations of rebel bishops are grand theft ecclesiastical)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk

"No less devoted to the little saint was our beloved St. Pius X. Costly gifts, among them the magnificent gold ring already mentioned, were given by him to her shrine. He often spoke warmly of her and manifested his devotion to her in various ways. Pope Saint Pius X raised the Archconfraternity of Saint Philomena to a Universal Archconfraternity and named St. John Vianney its Patron. This Pope and great Saint of Holy Mother the Church solemnly declared:

'...to discredit the present decisions and declarations concerning Saint Philomena as not being permanent, stable, valid and effective, necessary of obedience, and in full-effect for all eternity, proceeds from an element that is null and void and without merit or authority.' (1912)"

Why, it almost seems as though you are calling a Sainted Pope a liar. Interesting.


161 posted on 09/21/2004 7:56:54 AM PDT by Fifthmark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam
Re: "The SSPX has refused obedience to legitimate authority as regards lawful commands and without necessity" Let me repeat "WITHOUT NECESSITY"

That is really the sticking point is it not? You think it is without necessity and we do. It is a wonder to me but clearly you think the problems of the Church are minor or at least do not rise to the level our Blessed Archbishop did. I'll stand with the Archbishop. I have been reading the book Vows of Silence, it is so depressing. Many Protestants have no clue how bad the rot is in the Church and many more Catholics refuse it see it. It is so depressing. It has cleared on thing up for me. When reading the Gospels I could not quite understand why Christ was so hard on the Jewish leaders of His day. Consider how bad the Hebrews had been in the past, idol worship, temple prostitutes, child sacrifice to strange gods, none of that was happening at the time of Christ except by the Romans so why the hard words. I can see now how an institution can become so corrupted, so valueless that they loose sight of their higher calling. Unfortunately pride, avarice and lust seems to be more attractive to some.

So in conclusion,I very much doubt there will ever be a point where fans of Vatican II will smell that pot of coffee. And those priest in SSPX who are unhappy? You can have them if you want. One word of caution you get them "as is", if you think the SSPX is being unfair and too hard on them just remember Urriogotty, you rescued him from those mean old SSPX Bishops as well.
162 posted on 09/21/2004 8:01:46 AM PDT by Mark in the Old South
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Fifthmark

Yes, but has JPII endorsed her?
Although the sky is blue where I am, the pope was overheard this morning saying it looked like rain today, so I am carrying my umbrella so as not to be schismatic.


163 posted on 09/21/2004 8:03:04 AM PDT by charliemarlow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: ninenot; GirlShortstop; saradippity; Siobhan; Marcellinus; Cap'n Crunch; Land of the Irish; ...
BlackElk does not wish to be pinged. Please all make a note of it. It would appear he feels free to post comments on a thread but feels even more free to dictate to others on if they can respond.

Please note I have not included him in the list of addresses. I do not wish to violate FR manners but only to please, even when faced with such a glaring double standard.

Please forgive me if I wonder where such a myopic world view was developed. Could we be seeing evidence of an "only child", over indulgent parents, maybe it is his part of the country, perhaps college taught him to behave thus? *sigh* I don't suppose we will ever know, rarely do such people see it thus.
164 posted on 09/21/2004 8:14:31 AM PDT by Mark in the Old South
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Fifthmark
Do you still not realize what the sin of rash judgment is and how it can be mortal given a grave matter such as whether or not one is excommunicated from the Catholic Church?

LOL! "Rash judgement" is not grave matter unless it involves my taking your life.

Merely pointing out that all priests and bishops of the SSPX are excommunicates is a fact. Nothing rash about that.

165 posted on 09/21/2004 8:20:42 AM PDT by sinkspur ("John Kerry's gonna win on his juices. "--Cardinal Fanfani)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: Fifthmark
Do you still not realize what the sin of rash judgment is and how it can be mortal given a grave matter such as whether or not one is excommunicated from the Catholic Church?

LOL! "Rash judgement" is not grave matter unless it involves my taking your life.

Merely pointing out that all priests and bishops of the SSPX are excommunicates is a fact. Nothing rash about that.

166 posted on 09/21/2004 8:20:42 AM PDT by sinkspur ("John Kerry's gonna win on his juices. "--Cardinal Fanfani)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: charliemarlow

To my knowledge, Pope John Paul has not said anything regarding St. Philomenia, but since when does a Saint need to be personally accepted by each pope in order to be venerated?


167 posted on 09/21/2004 8:22:17 AM PDT by Fifthmark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur

Helllllloooooo...the rash judgment is that he is personally "excommunicating" all those who defend the Society.


168 posted on 09/21/2004 8:23:27 AM PDT by Fifthmark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
"Rash judgement" is not grave matter unless it involves my taking your life.

You honestly believe that?

169 posted on 09/21/2004 8:30:25 AM PDT by Fifthmark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: ultima ratio; ninenot; GirlShortstop
OK by me. Unless and until this forum is suppressed, let the wars resume. We can postpone fighting the enemy without in order to deal with the enemies within. The left must really love this schismatic and divisive baloney at election time, but hey, we would have been back to war in six weeks anyhow.

If I do not answer some particular post by the sulfurous schism, as ever, that silence ought not be construed as agreement. Many of the schismatic posts do not merit response and many of us have real lives to live. SSPX is engaged in a never-ending ad campaign which is nothing more than a recruiting scheme based upon the schismatic profession of hatred toward pope and Church as though that might make the schism the Church.

It IS remarkable how seldom any of the schizzies are seen on threads not dealing with advertisement of the schism. They are about as Catholic in confrontation with the world as is Ketchupboy. That silence is truly deafening and quite determinative of what the schism is.

170 posted on 09/21/2004 8:32:29 AM PDT by BlackElk ( Illicit consecrations of rebel bishops are grand theft ecclesiastical)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Fifthmark

Sorry, it was sarcasm.


171 posted on 09/21/2004 8:40:42 AM PDT by charliemarlow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: Fifthmark
You honestly believe that?

Absolutely. You believe that jumping to a conclusion merits eternal fire? What's wrong with you?

172 posted on 09/21/2004 8:42:23 AM PDT by sinkspur ("John Kerry's gonna win on his juices. "--Cardinal Fanfani)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: charliemarlow

Whoops - didn't realize which side of the debate you were on.


173 posted on 09/21/2004 8:43:04 AM PDT by Fifthmark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur

You don't think that rashly judging someone to be excommunicated from the Church is a grave sin against the Eighth Commandment?


174 posted on 09/21/2004 8:47:01 AM PDT by Fifthmark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: Fifthmark

Not even venial.


175 posted on 09/21/2004 8:50:28 AM PDT by sinkspur ("John Kerry's gonna win on his juices. "--Cardinal Fanfani)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: Fifthmark; ninenot; GirlShortstop
Fifthmark:

You do not get to subjectively define yourself as a Catholic any more than Ketchupboy gets to define himself as pro-American.

1. JP II excommunicated each and every one of the SSPX bishops. I accept papal judgments. You apparently do not. You are not alone in this. However, it marks you as not Catholic.

2. You attend "Society" Masses. So what? I have never claimed that you are not allowed even by the Vatican to do so. As has been hashed out here endlessly, SSPX Masses are valid and may serve to fulfill Sunday Mass obligations. The Vatican says so. You may even give money to SSPX solely to defray the expense of such Masses. That is your strawman, not mine.

3. I never said YOU were excommunicated. If you adhere to SSPX, you may well be excommunicated, according to the Vatican. I follow the Vatican. If you are an SSPX bishop, it is quite clear that you are excommunicated. The pope says so and he, not you and not Fellay or any other excommunicated bishop, makes those decisions. JP II has the keys. The schismatics and excommunicati do not and will not.

4. I lose no sleep over the disposition of the souls of Luther, Calvin, or Zwingli and I lose no sleep over the disposition of Marcel, patron whatever of the maliciously and malignantly perturbed and disturbed.

5. I cannot imagine that it is grave matter, much less mortally sinful, to agree with the pope's judgment as to the status of SSPX and its excommunicated heroes and leaders. This is well-considered judgment and not rash at all. SSPX is just another YOPIOS, YOPIOT, YOPIOF smog factory against the Faith and against John Paul II and against the papacy itself.

6. If you want to call yourself Catholic, you need to submit humbly to papal authority and reject the schism.

7. If you are in danger of ADHERING to SSPX, then the SSPX Mass is, for you, a near occasion of sin that, when you receive the sacrament of penance, you promise God you will avoid.

Proof:

A. Do you accept the fact that John Paul II is pope since the moment he was installed in 1978?

B. Did John Paul II excommunicate Marcel Lefebvre and his illicitly consecrated Econe 4 for his and their schismatic act of refusing obedience to the Holy Father whom Marcel and they swore solemnly before God, as a condition of his ordination, to obey?

C. Did John Paul II declare SSPX a schism?

D. Do you think that self-serving schismatic rationalizations are an adequate substitute for papal authority?

Game, set, match, regardless of answers. You are either Catholic or you are not and, IF you are schismatic, you are not. You may not adhere to the schism but I would be hard-pressed to prove your non-adherence. If your tastes have been offended, too bad. Grow up!

176 posted on 09/21/2004 8:59:10 AM PDT by BlackElk ( Illicit consecrations of rebel bishops are grand theft ecclesiastical)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: Fifthmark; sinkspur

Fifthmark: If you think it is morally acceptable to call yourself Cathlic while defending the "Society?" Draw the line between "defending" and adhering. Do you adhere to the "Society?"


177 posted on 09/21/2004 9:01:43 AM PDT by BlackElk ( Illicit consecrations of rebel bishops are grand theft ecclesiastical)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: Fifthmark; sinkspur
Revised edition:

Fifthmark: If you think it is morally acceptable to call yourself Catholic while defending the "Society," draw the line between "defending" and adhering. Do you adhere to the "Society?"

178 posted on 09/21/2004 9:02:37 AM PDT by BlackElk ( Illicit consecrations of rebel bishops are grand theft ecclesiastical)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: Mark in the Old South
See #170. Disregard prior ceasefire which was rendered ineffective by the usual poor manners of SSPX types. That was my only offer of ceasefire. Don't bother sending any my way. I reject them in advance.

Say's Law works on the Internet too. If bad money drives good money out of circulation, bad manners drive good manners off the web.

179 posted on 09/21/2004 9:08:10 AM PDT by BlackElk ( Illicit consecrations of rebel bishops are grand theft ecclesiastical)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Let me know when you start teaching Catholic moral theology.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1997), 2477-2478:

"Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury. He becomes guilty:

- of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor;

- of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another's faults and failings to persons who did not know them;

- of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them.

To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor's thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way:

Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another's statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. And if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved."

180 posted on 09/21/2004 9:13:17 AM PDT by Fifthmark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: Mark in the Old South; sinkspur; GirlShortstop; ninenot
Oh, and my "myopic" view (that refuses to imagine Marcel's nasty little band of schismatics, excommunicates and sheep as the actual Roman Catholic Church) was developed in a Jesuit prep school so long ago that hey were still Catholic. Did you go to a schismatic prep? There must be a reason why you cannot distinguish between the pope and a few uppity and taste-offended excommunicated bishops.

As the streetwise in New Yawk might say, you do appear to be a real Mark at least if not a real Catholic.

181 posted on 09/21/2004 9:13:33 AM PDT by BlackElk ( Illicit consecrations of rebel bishops are grand theft ecclesiastical)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk; NYer; ultima ratio

Looks like Vere just blogged another update. Interesting background information:

"Okay, things have sufficiently calmed down in the SSPX's French District for me to more-or-less patch together what is going on. By calmed down, I don't mean the fighting has stopped -- far from it -- but that the rhetoric and polemic has been lowered a notch to allow for outsiders to follow along more easily. In fact, "gorilla" is probably the worst insult I have heard one priest call another in the last two days. So here we go:

"Fr. Laguerie, who was ordained by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1979, and is a popular folk hero among French SSPX supporters (he was the leader of thousands of SSPX supporters who squatted St. Nicholas-de-Chardonet church back in the eighties) denies being a traitor or insurgent within the SSPX. He claims to have only the good of the SSPX in mind, as he remembers it when the Archbishop was alive. He refuses to engage in further polemic, stating he seeks only the spiritual welfare of those within the SSPX who persecute him. Thus he stands on principle, but will turn the other cheek to insults. Additionally, it is being reported by the locals on both sides that Fr. Laguerie enjoys the support of most of his SSPX parishioners.

"Fr Hery, who was expelled along with Fr. Laguerie, is still quite upset. I wasn't sure how he got caught in the middle of this, since he is a younger priest, and had speculated the reason likely had something to do with him being Fr. Laguerie's pastoral assistant. Turns out I was wrong. Fr. Hery had agreed to act as Fr. Laguerie's canonical advocate when Bishop Fellay first took action against Fr. Laguerie. This reportedly did not sit well with Bishop Fellay, and as a result he expelled Fr. Hery as well. Needless to say -- and having acted as a canonical advocate myself before several tribunals, I can understand why -- Fr Hery is pretty sore about this injustice. First of all, it is a well-established legal principle that every accused enjoys the right to legal defense. Secondly, it is a well-established legal principle that an advocate cannot be punished for defending his client.

"Fr. de Tanouarn, publisher of a popular French SSPX newsletter and one of the SSPX's young intellectual lights, continues to defend the rights of Fr. Laguerie and Fr. Hery. Thus the speculation continues that Fr. de Tanouarn may also be targetted for expulsion from the SSPX in the near future.

"While a number of SSPX clergy have quietly supported these three priests (and Fr. Aulagnier) in their attempt to restore the spirit of Archbishop Lefebvre to the SSPX, most of the clergy have been reluctant to do so in public. Nevertheless, several French traditionalist sources seem to suggest that Fr. Celier has now weighed in on the side of these three priests. I have not actually read any statements from Fr. Celier, but everyone is listing his name along with the other three.

"Bishop Fellay made the comment that he consulted the other three bishops before expelling Fr. Aulagnier, Fr. Laguerie and Fr. Henry, and he insinuates that it was a joint decision of the four bishops to purge the SSPX of these priests. This is not sitting well with many Lefebvre purists in France, who point out that Lefebvre never wanted the bishops in charge of the SSPX, and deliberately chose not to consecrate the SSPX's Tier 1 priests (ie Schmidberger, Aulagnier, Bisig, Laguerie) for this reason. The bishops were consecrated by Lefebvre purely to fulfill a sacramental function, and that when Lefebvre was alive, no bishop was to be elected superior or hold any other position that involved the exercise of jurisdiction within the SSPX.

"Although unrelated to the above, the English translation of Dom Calvet's traditionalist masterpiece Demain La Chretiente completed by Raymond Lesvesque and I heads out to the printer next week, and should be ready by Christmas."



182 posted on 09/21/2004 9:14:50 AM PDT by GratianGasparri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk
I defend the Society and attend Masses said by Society priests; I adhere to the Catholic Faith without compromise. Is that sufficient for you?
183 posted on 09/21/2004 9:15:17 AM PDT by Fifthmark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: Fifthmark; ninenot; GirlShortstop

And again: What are the documentable and proven facts of the life of "St. Philomena"? Was there a cult of St. Philomena 200 years after her death? Why not? Is my favorite pope (Pope St. Pius X) guilty of "novelty"? She may well be a saint. I have asked for bread in the form of the provable and documented facts of her life. You give me stones. Quelle surprise!


184 posted on 09/21/2004 9:18:27 AM PDT by BlackElk ( Illicit consecrations of rebel bishops are grand theft ecclesiastical)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk

Ping post No. 176.

Pretty straightforward and outlined. Perhaps it is the fact that the confessions heard by SSPX priests are invalid keeps the lay people in their confessed sins.

This seems to me to be the most dangerous of slippery slopes to rely upon. Of course, they will claim "universal jurisdiction in a time of crisis," but I am quite certain that there are posted confession times in the Diocese of Charlotte by Catholic priests.

So only if they are in ignorance (not vincible ignorance) that these confessions are invalid, would they actually be valid.

Hmm... Perhaps lots of invalid confessions piled on top of each other over the years could explain some things...


185 posted on 09/21/2004 9:21:57 AM PDT by Mershon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: Tantumergo; Maximilian

He was an SSPX adherent before he was anti-SSPX and before he was again friendly to the SSPX, or at least some of the SSPX. Sounds like Kerry on Iraq!


186 posted on 09/21/2004 9:21:59 AM PDT by Hermann the Cherusker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #187 Removed by Moderator

To: Hermann the Cherusker; Mershon; Unam Sanctam; sinkspur; Tantumergo; BlackElk
PING TO POST 182 - UPDATE ON SSPX FRANCE
188 posted on 09/21/2004 10:06:48 AM PDT by NYer (When you have done something good, remember the words "without Me you can do nothing." (John 15:5).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: Mershon
I didn't think Novus Ordo folks believed in confession anymore? When was the last time you saw a line at the confessional booth...er..the box? Oh yes they did away with those...it's reconciliation rooms now-a-days. Oh yes those ain't used no more neither, well unless the altar boys need some "counseling"
:-D

I really shouldn't laugh, I really shouldn't
189 posted on 09/21/2004 10:09:21 AM PDT by Mark in the Old South
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: GratianGasparri
Fr. Laguerie, who was ordained by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1979, and is a popular folk hero among French SSPX supporters (he was the leader of thousands of SSPX supporters who squatted St. Nicholas-de-Chardonet church back in the eighties) denies being a traitor or insurgent within the SSPX.

So Fr. Laguerie has been around a long time. Wasn't there an SSPX bishop, also from Lefebvre's original group, who was recently expelled?

190 posted on 09/21/2004 10:15:30 AM PDT by NYer (When you have done something good, remember the words "without Me you can do nothing." (John 15:5).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: bornacatholic

The magisterium has been, but I do have to agree with the traditionalists that Rome has tolerated far too many bishops and universities spreading heresies and lies.


191 posted on 09/21/2004 10:15:42 AM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: Hermann the Cherusker
He was an SSPX adherent before he was anti-SSPX and before he was again friendly to the SSPX, or at least some of the SSPX. Sounds like Kerry on Iraq! Except that he's French. Kerry is not.
192 posted on 09/21/2004 10:20:41 AM PDT by GratianGasparri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk
Are you capable of responding to one person alone, or must you always include others? Concerning St. Philomena, I am disinclined to dismiss a Saint who has been widely embraced by most of the Church for two centuries prior to 1970 when the new Calendarium Romanum removed her feast day and whose cult was held in the highest honor by the likes of St. John Vianney, Bl. Pius XI, and St. Pius X. There is also a proponderance of documented miracles attributed to her intercession, which is what led to her cult in the first place. The following may interest you:

http://www.sacramentals.com/sacramentals.org/StPhilomena.htm

193 posted on 09/21/2004 10:30:39 AM PDT by Fifthmark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Mershon
Perhaps it is the fact that the confessions heard by SSPX priests are invalid...

Would you also agree, then, that all the confessions heard by the Schismatic Orthodox Churches are invalid, as the priests lack proper jurisdiction?

194 posted on 09/21/2004 10:32:56 AM PDT by Fifthmark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: FrankWild; BlackElk
And you support the bugger priests.

Enjoy the fruits of the SSPX Schism!

When you get the SSPX supporters in a corner, they make a wild accusation to justify the injustice.

Let me explode this now. I pray for those guys accused of molestation. I hope they can repent, get help and make it to heaven. There would be no injustice in saving such a wretched soul from the fires of Hell. So yes, I do support the "bugger Priests", the same way I hope that all people can enjoy the company of Christ. God made them all, no man should hope for the eternal torment of another man, unless that is the will of God.

Perhaps you need to read Matt 20:1-16
195 posted on 09/21/2004 10:46:15 AM PDT by Dominick ("Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought." - JP II)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: Dominick
...no man should hope for the eternal torment of another man, unless that is the will of God.

Watch your mouth - are you saying that God wills men to be damned?

196 posted on 09/21/2004 10:48:33 AM PDT by Fifthmark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: Mark in the Old South
When was the last time you saw a line at the confessional booth...er..the box?

Many of the novus ordo faith communities have general reconcillations where you don't even have to go into the box...just get absolved by walking in the door. Of course it's invalid, but then again sins are just an imaginary byproduct of that harmful condition called guilt.

197 posted on 09/21/2004 10:51:51 AM PDT by Grey Ghost II
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: Fifthmark
God will have justice, and if that is the Judgment then that shall happen. Do not change the subject. This isn't a comment on predestination.

It is about a comment made by a schismatic. This person thinks that by pointing to another person's crime, he can justify his own wrongdoing.
198 posted on 09/21/2004 10:53:09 AM PDT by Dominick ("Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought." - JP II)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: Mark in the Old South
Consider how bad the Hebrews had been in the past, idol worship, temple prostitutes, child sacrifice to strange gods,

And STILL they are the chosen people.

History matters. The Church is still indefectible, too, you know.

199 posted on 09/21/2004 10:54:44 AM PDT by ninenot (Minister of Membership, TomasTorquemadaGentlemen'sClub)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: Grey Ghost II
Many of the novus ordo faith communities have general reconcillations where you don't even have to go into the box...just get absolved by walking in the door. Of course it's invalid, but then again sins are just an imaginary byproduct of that harmful condition called guilt.

This is a lie. This is such an untruth, it borders on the sinful.

The contrary position is repeated over and over again by the Bishops. Individual confession is indeed the rule in Catholic Churches. General Absolution can't be given except under extreme circumstances. Any Priest with valid faculties can give a General Absolution, like before a battle or just before a natural disaster.

SSPX Priests can give any type of absolution at all, since they are suspended.
200 posted on 09/21/2004 10:56:54 AM PDT by Dominick ("Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought." - JP II)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250 ... 401-435 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson