Would you think this course of action still stupid if the man had a family to concern himself with as well? The order of his life might suffer a bit short-term, but would it not be in the best long-term interest of especially his children?

Indeed, each man's circuмstances are his own.  However, I have seen families suffer tremendously, too.  There is a strain in uprooting, and it often leads no more to holiness on a family scale than if they had kept their original roots (grace building upon nature, really).  IMO, the atmosphere within many chapels is quite weird and unhealthy, although we do not see it as such when we are 'on the inside', breathing the stale air on a daily basis.

But, if I'm correct, none of you--Gladius, Cletus, Roscoe--have children at home.

You are correct in stating this, and I willingly grant that such a difference is not unimportant.  I do not have any children at all - at home or otherwise! :wink:

Children at home?

In the "Home Aloner" mind that's where all children belong when it comes to training them in Faith and morals.

I don't see why things would ever be more likely to work out short-term or long-term for Mom or the kids in an unacceptable spiritual transplant situation than it would for the Dad.

The Church CHRIST set up seems to have failed miserably as a Visible Institution. That's reality, however much it pains us to attempt to explain the reality in an orthodox manner that allows for some extraordinary apocalyptic manner in which a Visible Church survives.

Now is not the time to try to set up our own visible institutions and call them Catholic.

Quote from: Cletus

I don't think that Modern Man is so horrendously disordered philosophically.

I think that it is only the desperately flailing post-Vatican II would-be faithful Catholic who is so horrendously disordered.

RESPECTFUL letters to so-called bishops who entice little children into Unnatural Vice as part of required catechetical training, as they generally do in most countries? THAT'S horrendously disordered. Your better class of Freethinking pimp and psychokiller doesn't dig corrupting kids in the name of Holy Jesus and just couldn't begin to think in terms of showing respect towards those who do so. THAT shows a basic Godliness and sanity which would-be faithful Catholics should pray to acquire, as they pray twice as hard for the grace of living down the falsehood of their more "nuanced" and "theologically savvy" and "pious" attitude towards the demonic Conciliar Church top management.

I know, I know, the conciliar church is quite messed up. Now what? Let's talk about what WE, TRADITIONAL CATHOLICS, should do about it.

Matthew

Resist all efforts of the Traditional "left wing" to downplay and excuse and doublethink these abominations and work to put SSPX adherents into closer "jurisdictional" contact with the demonic Novus Ordo top management.

I think most of all take a peek at the other Traditional boards from time to time. It's appalling. But I would say that the fatal flaw of inconsistency is a sine qua non of the Traditional system and that the "Rome is still our Mother" tendency will win out over the "Rome is Antichrist" tendency.

Still, the latter tendency of the SSPX is a good in this world and has to be encouraged, as far as that goes.

Demand that all copies of the "Holy Father's" atrocious new apologia for Modernistic antichristology, "Jesus of Nazareth", be banned from all SSPX schools and seminaries. (Except that in the latter it could be stacked with Kung's and Rahner;s books for the more advanced students.)

The Concilar Church is a false church. Of COURSE it is "messed up." But it's also the Catholic Church outside of which there is no salvation? Now that's REALLY messed up!

It SEEMS to have failed as a Visible Institution.

"Rome has lost the Faith! It is incredible, that! But we see! We see! They are working to dethrone Him! They are dechristianizing souls, society! One would not believe it! It is grave, that! Most grave!"

We can't justly penalize people for making points logically and frankly with which we agree when they are expressed in terms of Gallic hysteria.

It's a sine qua non of traditional Traditionalism to have reality acceptance issues. "Incredible!" No. Quite credible. "Whatever is, can be."

A Vicar of Christ who is an Antichrist.

When the spiritual catastrophe is unspeakable but we still have to speak about it, we have to be careful about taking scandal too easily.

Seeming to fail as a visible institution is not the same as failing.

Where are the marks of Holiness and Unity in the Visible Church run by Benedict XVI?

Come on now, folks. That so-called church is all unholy chaos and we all avoid it like the Plague. What's the point of maintaining a pietistic way of speaking of the Visible Kingdom of Hell on earth- the Conciliar Church?

What's wrong is to start trading in sound classic philosopy for fake emergecy pietism. What's blasphemous is to mix up our categories to the extent that we equate the physical sufferings of Jesus with the wickedness of the Conciliar Church and say to simpletons: "Then you would have fled from Our Lord TOO just because He had some spittle in His beard?"

That's another thing Traditionalists need to DO. Keep the discourse honest. It is NOT honest to draw tit-for-tat parallels between Jesus's sufferings and the Antichrists's abominations.

Quote from: gladius_veritatis

As you know, Cletus, such is actually fairly common.  I have done it myself.  However, I am now, after much experience, convinced that this is the WRONG way to go about it.  I am disappointed, although not surprised, that priests do not discourage such a stupid course of action.  How many lives, decently ordered previous to such a relocation, retard, regress, or unravel afterwards, in one way or another?  People relocate for more frequent access to the Sacraments, yet they often were making MUCH MORE spiritual progress in their former situation.  Bloom where you are planted, even if there is no Mass within an hour's drive.  God does not NEED the Sacraments to give grace to anyone.

Would you think this course of action still stupid if the man had a family to concern himself with as well? The order of his life might suffer a bit short-term, but would it not be in the best long-term interest of especially his children?

I'm, of course, a woman, so any personal conclusions are much more convincing for me if I knew the individual had a larger picture in mind than just himself. But, if I'm correct, none of you--Gladius, Cletus, Roscoe--have children at home.

The reason the priesthood was made celibate was not to impose a disciplinary routine on the fathers but to give them a freedom to apply themselves to all in their jurisdiction without being preoccupied with a physical family of their own that would distract them. Keeping the 'larger picture ' in mind is more efficiently accomplished when one DOESN'T have to worry about ones own. So really it is those WITH  a family that CAN be preoccupied with themselves--in theory at any rate. If I was concerned with only myself, I wouldn't even bother posting.

The entire structure and Authority of the Roman Church has been overthrown as part of Biblical Prophecy. The anti-christ could not take over the world without accomplishing this. If one believes in Biblical Prophecy, then one must admit the state of affairs will have come to this at some point. The words of Jesus have given us a Church that the gates of Hell will not prevail against UNTIL the end of time.  The key word here is UNTIL.  I got news for everyone--the UNTIL is here!!!!

It is going to take Divne intervention to re-establish the Authority of the Concilar Church--and by this I mean the Vatican( the tern Vatican I Church is not used here because it may imply to some that there is such a thing) Council Church that existed prior to 1958.

The Divine Intervention that is coming in 2012 may have to do with the Sun being in motion. Galileo thought the Sun was stationary and in the center of the Universe--both wrong postulations.

Has anyone here ever heard the famous excuse of the "un-churched"?

"I can find God out on a boat while I'm fishing as easily as I can find Him in church".

BUT -- the Catholic says, how often DO YOU ACTUALLY PRAY when you stop going to church regularly? How soon until you live like the complete unbeliever? And how in the world do you pass on what morals you acquired (from going to church, and from your parents WHO WENT TO CHURCH) to your sons and daughters?

Most of those criticisms can be applied to the "home aloner" Catholic as well.

Matthew

My parents learned their good morals from the pre-Vatican II Catholic Church.

The Conciliar Church teaches corrupt morals and corrupts morals.

For me it would be the highest immorality to be in communion with that Church.

Catholic morals survive without priests or chapels or ordinary sacraments. They are engraved in the hearts of those who knew the True Church in its ordinary visible Roman form.

Recently I came across an on-line gaggle of devout chapel goers who did not think that it was wrong to out and out lie for a good cause and proceded to justify this extreme laxist position theologically. I, the ungodly, the Christ-defaming, Home Aloner knew the authentic Catholic teaching on this subject, most famously expounded by St Augustine. It can be found in old books by those who never knew and will never know the True Church in its ordinary hierarchical form.  But it is also part of a holy tradition to be found in faithful hearts and it can be passed on from them.

Other Traditional message boards provide much nauseating evidence that devout TLM goers, especially the younger ones, are much given to thinking and writing like complete unbelievers. I don't think that anyone here has ever known a so-called Home Aloner of whom the same could be honestly said.

Listen to yourself man!

Listen to YOURSELF, as Cletus' paraphrase of your position is as accurate as the day is long:

The Concilar Church is a false church. Of COURSE it is "messed up." But it's also the Catholic Church outside of which there is no salvation? Now that's REALLY messed up!

If this is inaccurate, in any way, as a description of the SSPX (and 'recognize and resist') position, please show us HOW?

Are you calling Christ a failure?

Even conceding, for the moment, every point Cletus has made until now, that would not be any more true than to say that Christ's crucifixion was the equivalent of His failure in His earthly mission.  He DIED, a rather sudden and ignominious death; His followers could not even BEGIN to comprehend, or even accept, that such had occurred.  St. Thomas would not even believe He had risen until he put his own fingers into the very wounds!  Is this situation really that different?  Very few even consider, for a moment, that the Mystical Body has undergone, or could ever undergo, anything like a mystical death - but what would be more fitting?

Where are the marks of Holiness and Unity in the Visible Church run by Benedict XVI?

Don't ask such pointed, unanswerable questions, Cletus!  It is embarrassing.

Come on now, folks. That so-called church is all unholy chaos and we all avoid it like the Plague. What's the point of maintaining a pietistic way of speaking of the Visible Kingdom of Hell on earth- the Conciliar Church?

Oh, Cletus!  You just don't understand obedience properly!