Guest
Unregistered
|
| Nadir said: | | Guest said: | | Nadir said: |
I have no idea who is writing this, however, whoever it is, you have either expessed yourself poorly or you don't understand what the Catholic Church is.
Bishop Fellay can no more virtually end the raison etre of Tradition than pigs can fly. And no true priest trained under the present SSPX system could think that his Traditional Catholic Priesthood is redundant
As another unidentified guest said, (or was it the same one?!) Lots of falsities going around.
 for Asia. |
According to Bishop Fellay Vatican II can be understood in the light of Tradition and the Council of Trent. Hence, the poster obviously meant that Tradition, as practiced and promoted outside the official structures of the Church, has no "raison d'etre".
When you say that no true priest trained under the present SSPX system could think that his Tradition Catholic Priesthood is redundant, are you not aware that some of your own SSPX graduates from Australia are now cab drivers instead of priests, and that not so long ago, Fr Brendan Arthur joined the Novus Ordo? If the latter can still be called a Traditional Catholic Priest then there's no problem in saying that Fellay has ended the "raison d'etre" of Tradition.
Are you aware of how many SSPX priests have quit? |
Dear Anynomous,
Are you the poster or are you mind reading? Anyway Bishop Fellay is wrong.
Can you define Tradition, as practiced and promoted outside the official structures of the Church?
I am not acquainted with any Australian SSPX graduates (do you mean priests?) who are now cab drivers.
Fr BA joined the Novus Ordo? I heard that. Fr A is a validly ordained priest, full stop. I am sorry that he went to the NO, just as it is tragic if SSPX goes over. I do not know his thoughts but I doubt very much if he thinks that his Traditional Catholic Priesthood is redundant
It is not surprising in the present longstanding crisis if many SSPX priests have quit. But I wonder if they might return to the practice of their priesthood sometime in the future. For this we might pray. |
Dear Nadir,
I am a mind reader ....or maybe I could get the gist of what the original poster was trying to say. For the N.O. all Catholics are Traditionalists, being followers of both Scripture and Tradition ( unlike protestants who follow Scripture alone). A priest preached this whilst condemning the SSPX. JPII ( and even BXVI I think) said that the SSPX has an incomplete notion of Tradition.
A notorious anti-SSPXer ( once an ardent supporter) claims us SSPXers to be in schism - forget about being Traditionalists. He is an Australian like yourself and runs on his website a list of priests who have "defected" or "reverted". It is an incomplete list as I know at least 6 priests, if not more, who are not on that list. But the Australian ones will undoubtedly be on it.
Index For Sean Ó Lachtnáin's Home Page
jloughnan.tripod/
Homepage for F. John Loughnan. ... in schism following the illicit consecration, in 1988, of four bishops contrary to the express command of Pope John Paul II.
|
|
| Posted Jun 14, 2012, 6:27 am |
|
|
|
|
Guest
Unregistered
|
| Guest said: | Text of the Doctrinal Declaration of 1988
I, Marcel Lefebvre, Archbishop-Bishop emeritus of Tulle, as well as the members of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X founded by me:
1. Promise to be always faithful to the Catholic Church and the Roman Pontiff, her Supreme Pastor, Vicar of Christ, Successor of Blessed Peter in his primacy as Head of the Body of Bishops.
2. We declare our acceptance of the doctrine contained in number 25 of the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium of the Second Vatican Council on the ecclesial Magisterium and the adherence which is due to that magisterium.
3. With regard to certain points taught by the Second Vatican Council or concerning later reforms of the liturgy and law, and which seem to us able to be reconciled with the Tradition only with difficulty, we commit ourselves to have a positive attitude of study and of communication with the Holy See, avoiding all polemics.
4. We declare in addition to recognize the validity of the Sacrifice of the Mass and of the Sacraments celebrated with the intention of doing that which the Church does and according to the rites indicated in the typical editions of the Roman Missal and the Rituals of the Sacraments promulgated by Popes Paul VI and John Paul II.
5. Finally, we promise to respect the common discipline of the Church and ecclesiastical laws, especially those contained in the Code of Canon Law promulgated by Pope John Paul II, without prejudice to the special discipline granted to the Society by particular law."
Let's see how different will the declaration of 2012 be.  |
"Many accused Archbishop Lefebvre of having reneged on the Protocol by this letter [the May 6, 1988 Letter of Archbishop Lefebvre to Cardinal Ratzinger]. However, a careful reading of both cannot show any opposition between them. No date was mentioned in the Protocol, therefore he asked for a date. This was not to oppose the protocol, but rather to take steps to put it in practice. Archbishop Lefebvre did threaten in this letter, because, as he said, every step forward in the negotiation had only been obtained upon the pressure of such threats."
—Fr. François Laisney, Archbishop Lefebvre & the Vatican
|
|
| Posted Jun 16, 2012, 3:31 pm |
|
|
|
|
Guest
Unregistered
|
A poster "Brian from New Zealand" said this, among other things, on today's Traditio.
"....Fellay's loyal henchman, Daniel Couture, his District Superior, is coming here to New Zealand for three weeks to extend the "Damage Control Tour." As one who has been observing the NSSPX's shenanigans in Oceania, let me tell you: many of the NSSPXers, who have been so bombarded with Fellay's Novus Ordo propaganda, will lap up the lies.
|
|
| Posted Aug 7, 2012, 10:12 am |
|
|
|
|
|
|
