I STILL think the whole point is being missed here.
If I wouldn’t have mentioned the SSPX, then there wouldn’t be this much controversy.
Look at the sitatuation this way:
An area is setup, and has never had any sort of restricitons to who could go in or out. The suddenly, a group of people are prevented from entering becuase ‘x’ is wrong, even though the ‘x’ has never been applied before.
Doesn’t that sound a little hypocritical? This goes beyond the SSPX.
I should emphasize that Im not questioning the honesty of your report, just the accuracy, because the story appears to have come to you through several hands. As in the childrens pass it on game, it can be hard to keep the details correct!
No harm...no foul.
The news comes from a direct account of what happened. This is not 3rd/4th/5th hand information. I am awaiting a release from the archdiocese..the media office did call me back, and stated that the deacon in charge of media matters was in meetings all day, but that he had received my call, and would contact me shortly, if not today, but tommorow.
“Unless I see a report from a reliable news source, rather than “someone said someone said someone said,” it’s really not meaningful to try to interpret the Archbishop’s intentions.”
Will an official statement from the Archdiocese due? I Am awaiting their release. I ahve made contact with the “media office” of teh Archdiocese. They have called me back, and said they are working on a release.
So fine... if you are going to block NON-CATHOLICS from entering the Mission... then the Park should be made “Post Vatican II (Novus Ordo) Catholic Only”..
This has tangented into a whole other conversation, but the bottom line is this:
If the Archbishop is not going to allow Trad Caths into a mission...citing they are not “catholic”...then block ALL OTHERS who are not born, bred, baptized Catholics. That means no Jews, No Muslims, no Protestants...no one else.
Do you see what I am getting at here?
I would LAY MONEY if I was to go to the Mission (the actual church) right now.. it would be open, and plenty of “non-catholics” would be in there. (I am actually thinking about doing this to prove a point.)
So if the point is stop “non-catholics” from entering the Church itself, then the park can remain open to the public...but yet the actual CHURCH should be closed to prevent the possible “non-catholic.”
Or are SSPX’ers and other Traditional Catholics the only ones that are “not Catholic?”
But you did claim that Traditional Catholics arent well intentioned but misguided ever; caveating that with a rather large segment of the Traditional Movement (but by no means a majority). So you do think your side of the Traditional Movement is incapable of being misguided”
A majority of Novus Ordians don’t even know if the Real Presence is for sure. I can’t blame them — with the “glad-handing” of the Host, etc. But thats a whole other topic.
The point here is that a Bishop... who will outreach to ther religons....allow them in these very same missions... will tell a contingent of harmless Catholics...that they are not “Catholic”...while he and his flock claim to be...that is hypocrisy.
So the Novus Ordo back yard needs to be clean up before any of mine gets looked at.
The sedevacanists/conclavists/dogmatists...they have problems.....but o the whole.. I think they are minor in comparison to the problems on the novus ordo side.
“Our only source for this information is someone who thinks his side of Catholicism is incapable of doing anything misguided. (Is Christ divided? dear St. Paul ranted ...) This suggests a lack of objectivity that leaves plenty of benefit of the doubt for Archbishop Gomez.”
Excuse me...but I think that I clearly stated that those who are sedevacanist/conclavist/dogmatists are doing something wrong.
And I love how those who are novus ordo apparently do no wrong..it’s only us traditionalists who are wrong.
“I dont see how he can deny them admission to the Mission, particularly if its run by the Park Service. This is a very strange story. I dont know anything about Gomez, but it would be interesting to learn more from anybody who knows”
It’s a strange relationship.. the parks/area around the churches are run by the park service (from what my knowledge states) but the actual churches are ran by the Archdioscese. I am endeavoring to get clarification on this, but from what my sources tell me...this is the case.
“There is also the highly debated act of the consecration of 4 bishops by the Archbishop Marcel Lefebrve in 1988 which some contest lead to automatic excommunication the highest punishment the Church can bestow.”