Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: rogator
My post regarded affiliation with and support of schismatics on SSPX in direct contradiction of Papal orders. Yours had to do with respect for the Latin liturgy. I have no problem with respect for the Latin liturgy. I grew up with it.

Your post is non sequitur. What does it mean, following mine? That Catholics can disobey the pope and attend SSPX liturgies? Sorry. Not true.
100 posted on 06/27/2006 4:37:26 PM PDT by TheGeezer (I.will.never.vote.for.John.McCain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies ]


To: TheGeezer

What it means is that if you are going to condemn the "disobedient" Catholics who disregard Ecclesia Dei's call for "ceasing their support in any way for that movement.";
you also must condemn those hundreds of bishops who do not provide "a wide and generous application of the directives already issued some time ago by the Apostolic See, for the use of the Roman Missal ... of 1962."
Ecclesia Dei calls for both of these things. You can't take the cafeteria approach. Either accept all parts of the encyclical or not.

Is your bishop one of the hundreds who do not provide "a wide and generous application of the directives already issued some time ago by the Apostolic See"? If so, do you support him in his disobedience to papal authority?
My point is that there are worse problems out there than the irregularity of the SSPX folks. Too many of our own bishops have done to our liturgy the same thing that they have allowed pervert padres to do to our children.


101 posted on 06/27/2006 5:33:28 PM PDT by rogator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies ]

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