Author Topic: Catholic Culture: Schismatic Traditionalists  (Read 2047 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online 2Vermont

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4753
  • Reputation: +2199/-1143
  • Gender: Female
Catholic Culture: Schismatic Traditionalists
« on: October 28, 2013, 04:28:44 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=1056


    Since the time of the Second Vatican Council and the changes it brought, a considerable number of disaffected traditional Catholics have joined schismatic sects such as the Society of St. Pius X (founded by the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre) and the sedevacantists (who believe, for dubious reasons explained later, that the Chair of Peter is currently vacant). While there are certain peripheral differences between these traditionalist sects, they share the same common denominator: the exclusive use of the Tridentine Mass and the rejection of Vatican II. The angry traditionalist fringe blames Vatican II for causing the current crisis in the Church. They claim that the changes decreed by the Council are heretical; hence, it was a false council and "true" Catholics should not assent to its teachings. But there is an obvious problem with this argument: It has been the traditional teaching of the Church that an ecumenical council is guided by the Holy Spirit and thus protected from error.

    Please discuss.....
    "For there is not any thing secret that shall not be made manifest, nor hidden, that shall not be known and come abroad."- Luke 8:17

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 19052
    • Reputation: +10501/-5025
    • Gender: Male
    Catholic Culture: Schismatic Traditionalists
    « Reply #1 on: October 28, 2013, 10:57:03 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    But there is an obvious problem with this argument: It has been the traditional teaching of the Church that an ecumenical council is guided by the Holy Spirit and thus protected from error.


    He glosses over the distinction between SSPX and sedevacantists (lumps them together), but it's precisely for the reason above that the sedevacantists differ from SSPX.


    Offline Mabel

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1893
    • Reputation: +1384/-25
    • Gender: Female
    Catholic Culture: Schismatic Traditionalists
    « Reply #2 on: October 28, 2013, 11:34:46 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It is how they see it.

    It isn't about the mass or rejection of Vatican 2. It is about keeping the Faith. In order to keep the faith passed down to us, those innovations must be rejected but they are not the basis for our end, which is holding fast to our traditions and the Catholic Church that made saints and saved souls. They can't tell me it is the same religion.

    The life of a Catholic prior to the 60's:

    Born
    Day 3, get baptized
    Parish catechism with sisters or a priest for 12 years
    Receive Catholic education
    Mass every Sunday and Holy day
    7-8 First Communion
    Participate in school and church related activities
    Family has at minimum a few statues, prayer books, a Bible in the home
    Child graduates from school
    Gets married with a nuptial mass
    Has 6-10 children
    Dies after Extreme Unction and holding the rosary, surrounded by family
    Buried in Catholic cemetery, family and parish pray for the soul

    Now:
    Possible baptism 3-6 months after birth
    Public school
    Random attendance at CCD, free babysitting service, taught by old lady in polyester pants
    Go home after CCD or participate in school sports teams
    Novus Ordo when grandma visits or Christmas
    First communion at 8-9, if grandma pushes
    No Catholic items in home, save an old rosary because it is pretty
    Age 14 forced to attend confirmation classes
    Confirmed, and graduates from going to church
    Graduate public school
    Go to college and graduate
    Get engaged, get married five years later after living in sin
    Contracept for at least one year
    Have two children
    Divorce
    Remarry
    Die alone in a nursing home on morphine
    Cremated and buried in town cemetery, Novus Ordo priest tells everyone that the person is in heaven


    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8522
    • Reputation: +1094/-833
    • Gender: Male
    Catholic Culture: Schismatic Traditionalists
    « Reply #3 on: October 28, 2013, 01:17:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: 2Vermont
    http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=1056


    Since the time of the Second Vatican Council and the changes it brought, a considerable number of disaffected traditional Catholics have joined schismatic sects such as the Society of St. Pius X (founded by the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre) and the sedevacantists (who believe, for dubious reasons explained later, that the Chair of Peter is currently vacant). While there are certain peripheral differences between these traditionalist sects, they share the same common denominator: the exclusive use of the Tridentine Mass and the rejection of Vatican II. The angry traditionalist fringe blames Vatican II for causing the current crisis in the Church. They claim that the changes decreed by the Council are heretical; hence, it was a false council and "true" Catholics should not assent to its teachings. But there is an obvious problem with this argument: It has been the traditional teaching of the Church that an ecumenical council is guided by the Holy Spirit and thus protected from error.

    Please discuss.....


    The above is correct and the point could not have been made better by a sedevacantist.  Ecumenical councils approved by a valid Pope are guided by the Holy Ghost and protected from error.  So if Paul 6 and those his successors who have maintained the council since are valid Popes then the doctrine's which Vatican 2 teaches in regards to ecumenism, religious liberty and the mystical body of Christ are as true as the doctrine's it contradicts.  Truth is relative and the Holy Ghost is schizophrenic.  Because it sure is not a false Pope that approved a council which contradicts and teaches the opposite of previous infallible doctrine.  It's the Holy Ghost's fault, I mean our faults that we do not accept the fact that two contraries can both be true.

    All the problems since vatican 2 have nothing to do with a false pope approving it.  That's crazy talk.  In fact there is no problem.  The traditionalists are just too stupid to realize it.  



     
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church

    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8522
    • Reputation: +1094/-833
    • Gender: Male
    Catholic Culture: Schismatic Traditionalists
    « Reply #4 on: October 28, 2013, 01:19:12 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Mabel
    It is how they see it.

    It isn't about the mass or rejection of Vatican 2. It is about keeping the Faith. In order to keep the faith passed down to us, those innovations must be rejected but they are not the basis for our end, which is holding fast to our traditions and the Catholic Church that made saints and saved souls. They can't tell me it is the same religion.

    The life of a Catholic prior to the 60's:

    Born
    Day 3, get baptized
    Parish catechism with sisters or a priest for 12 years
    Receive Catholic education
    Mass every Sunday and Holy day
    7-8 First Communion
    Participate in school and church related activities
    Family has at minimum a few statues, prayer books, a Bible in the home
    Child graduates from school
    Gets married with a nuptial mass
    Has 6-10 children
    Dies after Extreme Unction and holding the rosary, surrounded by family
    Buried in Catholic cemetery, family and parish pray for the soul

    Now:
    Possible baptism 3-6 months after birth
    Public school
    Random attendance at CCD, free babysitting service, taught by old lady in polyester pants
    Go home after CCD or participate in school sports teams
    Novus Ordo when grandma visits or Christmas
    First communion at 8-9, if grandma pushes
    No Catholic items in home, save an old rosary because it is pretty
    Age 14 forced to attend confirmation classes
    Confirmed, and graduates from going to church
    Graduate public school
    Go to college and graduate
    Get engaged, get married five years later after living in sin
    Contracept for at least one year
    Have two children
    Divorce
    Remarry
    Die alone in a nursing home on morphine
    Cremated and buried in town cemetery, Novus Ordo priest tells everyone that the person is in heaven



    Nice post!   :applause: :applause: :applause:
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church


    Offline Capt McQuigg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4669
    • Reputation: +2622/-10
    • Gender: Male
    Catholic Culture: Schismatic Traditionalists
    « Reply #5 on: October 28, 2013, 01:44:03 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Matt Abbott is the author of the OP citation.  I don't see a date on the article because he's defending "For all" in place of "pro multis".

    I just skimmed the beginning.  

    He also encourages reading from a hack named Kenneth Whitehead who referred to Pius X's actions against Paul VI's dad, who was an editor of a socialist newspaper, as a "witch hunt".

    It the trads are schismatic, what are they schisming from?  Who actually changed their teaching?  That is the real question to ask.

     

    Offline Capt McQuigg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4669
    • Reputation: +2622/-10
    • Gender: Male
    Catholic Culture: Schismatic Traditionalists
    « Reply #6 on: October 28, 2013, 01:55:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Matt Abbott was a student of business in some nearby college at the time he wrote that article so it's understandable the conclusions he draws.  For instance, he wouldn't really grasp the 1974 visit to Econe from those two marxists in clerical garb and the deliberate provocative statements made by them.  

    The concept that Archbishop LeFebrvre taught and believed what he received, this is the Catholic Faith, and he remained the same throughout his ecclesial career and that the other group underwent a complete rewrite and new creation would be lost on him because being a kid, he would have a hard time grasping a historical perspective.    


    Online 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4753
    • Reputation: +2199/-1143
    • Gender: Female
    Catholic Culture: Schismatic Traditionalists
    « Reply #7 on: October 28, 2013, 03:51:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Lover of Truth
    Quote from: 2Vermont
    http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=1056


    Since the time of the Second Vatican Council and the changes it brought, a considerable number of disaffected traditional Catholics have joined schismatic sects such as the Society of St. Pius X (founded by the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre) and the sedevacantists (who believe, for dubious reasons explained later, that the Chair of Peter is currently vacant). While there are certain peripheral differences between these traditionalist sects, they share the same common denominator: the exclusive use of the Tridentine Mass and the rejection of Vatican II. The angry traditionalist fringe blames Vatican II for causing the current crisis in the Church. They claim that the changes decreed by the Council are heretical; hence, it was a false council and "true" Catholics should not assent to its teachings. But there is an obvious problem with this argument: It has been the traditional teaching of the Church that an ecumenical council is guided by the Holy Spirit and thus protected from error.

    Please discuss.....


    The above is correct and the point could not have been made better by a sedevacantist.  Ecumenical councils approved by a valid Pope are guided by the Holy Ghost and protected from error.  So if Paul 6 and those his successors who have maintained the council since are valid Popes then the doctrine's which Vatican 2 teaches in regards to ecumenism, religious liberty and the mystical body of Christ are as true as the doctrine's it contradicts.  Truth is relative and the Holy Ghost is schizophrenic.  Because it sure is not a false Pope that approved a council which contradicts and teaches the opposite of previous infallible doctrine.  It's the Holy Ghost's fault, I mean our faults that we do not accept the fact that two contraries can both be true.

    All the problems since vatican 2 have nothing to do with a false pope approving it.  That's crazy talk.  In fact there is no problem.  The traditionalists are just too stupid to realize it.  



     

    OK, I think that makes sense to me, but I need clarification on something because I want to be able to defend it.  Bare with me.  

    Does the HS guide an ecumenical council or the pope who initiates/presides over it? I'm asking because the quote from the article states that the HS guides the Council.  Is it possible for the HS to guide a council from error even if it is presided over by a false pope?

     :confused1:  
    "For there is not any thing secret that shall not be made manifest, nor hidden, that shall not be known and come abroad."- Luke 8:17


    Offline Jehanne

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2561
    • Reputation: +458/-10
    • Gender: Male
    Catholic Culture: Schismatic Traditionalists
    « Reply #8 on: October 29, 2013, 03:53:25 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: 2Vermont
    Does the HS guide an ecumenical council or the pope who initiates/presides over it? I'm asking because the quote from the article states that the HS guides the Council.  Is it possible for the HS to guide a council from error even if it is presided over by a false pope?

     :confused1:  


    The Holy Spirit is willing to guide anyone who is willingly to be lead to the Truth; from the First Vatican Council:

    Quote
    To this witness is added the effective help of power from on high. For, the kind Lord stirs up those who go astray and helps them by his grace so that they may come to the knowledge of the truth; and also confirms by his grace those whom he has translated into his admirable light, so that they may persevere in this light, not abandoning them unless he is first abandoned.


    Heresy, however, is defined as choice:

    Quote
    Middle English heresie, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin haeresis, from Late Greek hairesis, from Greek, action of taking, choice, sect, from hairein to take
    First Known Use: 13th century


    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/heresy

    Therefore, if Pope Paul VI was a human being with free will, it stands to reason that he could choose to embrace false beliefs, and by that choice, he would cease to be Catholic, and hence, Pope, which means that he would lose his charism of infallibility, assuming, of course, that such was ever his to begin with.  As Bishop Williamson has said, the Extraordinary Magisterium is the servant of the Ordinary Magisterium and not her master, and as the latter is every bit as infallible as the former, Vatican II cannot be regarded as having taught without error, if only by the omissions which the council made.

    Decide for yourself:

    http://www.cmri.org/sedevacantist-position.shtml

    Offline LaramieHirsch

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2592
    • Reputation: +876/-222
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Catholic Culture: Schismatic Traditionalists
    « Reply #9 on: October 29, 2013, 04:17:03 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Good find.  I may get back to you on this.  
    .........................

    Before some audiences not even the possession of the exactest knowledge will make it easy for what we say to produce conviction. For argument based on knowledge implies instruction, and there are people whom one cannot instruct.  - Aristotle

    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8522
    • Reputation: +1094/-833
    • Gender: Male
    Catholic Culture: Schismatic Traditionalists
    « Reply #10 on: October 30, 2013, 12:07:41 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: 2Vermont
    Quote from: Lover of Truth
    Quote from: 2Vermont
    http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=1056


    Since the time of the Second Vatican Council and the changes it brought, a considerable number of disaffected traditional Catholics have joined schismatic sects such as the Society of St. Pius X (founded by the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre) and the sedevacantists (who believe, for dubious reasons explained later, that the Chair of Peter is currently vacant). While there are certain peripheral differences between these traditionalist sects, they share the same common denominator: the exclusive use of the Tridentine Mass and the rejection of Vatican II. The angry traditionalist fringe blames Vatican II for causing the current crisis in the Church. They claim that the changes decreed by the Council are heretical; hence, it was a false council and "true" Catholics should not assent to its teachings. But there is an obvious problem with this argument: It has been the traditional teaching of the Church that an ecumenical council is guided by the Holy Spirit and thus protected from error.

    Please discuss.....


    The above is correct and the point could not have been made better by a sedevacantist.  Ecumenical councils approved by a valid Pope are guided by the Holy Ghost and protected from error.  So if Paul 6 and those his successors who have maintained the council since are valid Popes then the doctrine's which Vatican 2 teaches in regards to ecumenism, religious liberty and the mystical body of Christ are as true as the doctrine's it contradicts.  Truth is relative and the Holy Ghost is schizophrenic.  Because it sure is not a false Pope that approved a council which contradicts and teaches the opposite of previous infallible doctrine.  It's the Holy Ghost's fault, I mean our faults that we do not accept the fact that two contraries can both be true.

    All the problems since vatican 2 have nothing to do with a false pope approving it.  That's crazy talk.  In fact there is no problem.  The traditionalists are just too stupid to realize it.  



     

    OK, I think that makes sense to me, but I need clarification on something because I want to be able to defend it.  Bare with me.  

    Does the HS guide an ecumenical council or the pope who initiates/presides over it? I'm asking because the quote from the article states that the HS guides the Council.  Is it possible for the HS to guide a council from error even if it is presided over by a false pope?

     :confused1:  


    The Holy Ghost does not guide it so much as prevents a council that teaches error and or heresy from being approved by a valid Pope.

    Infallibility is a negative charism in that it prevents from error rather than causing the truth.  

    Holy Scripture was inspired.  The Holy Ghost both inspired the writers of Scripture to write truth and prevented them from erring.

    But strictly speaking Infallibility does not cause the Pope to speak the truth but prevents him from erring.  

    Does that make sense?


    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church


    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8522
    • Reputation: +1094/-833
    • Gender: Male
    Catholic Culture: Schismatic Traditionalists
    « Reply #11 on: October 30, 2013, 12:13:04 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Reading that persons nonsense that I quoted in the previous post caused me to err as I used his own words against him in claiming that the Holy Ghost guides the council.  Sorry about that.  

    I see where you were confused.  It was because I wrote incorrectly.

    His point was that the Holy Ghost guides councils so if we reject the council we reject the Popes He is guiding.  My point is if the Holy Ghost was really guiding the council and the Pope then the problem would be with the Holy Ghost rather than with the Pope or the council.  But of course that cannot be true so we are left with SV  :scared2:

    He should have said the Holy Ghost prevents the Pope from approving a heretical council which is true.  But if he further insisted "therefore the council did not err because a valid Pope approved it" he would be incorrect.  Because it begs the question, did the council err?  Then a valid Pope did not approve it.  Did it avoid error, then previous Popes erred when teaching infallibly.

    If you force me to pick Peter - Pius XII or those after the choice is easy.  
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church

    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8522
    • Reputation: +1094/-833
    • Gender: Male
    Catholic Culture: Schismatic Traditionalists
    « Reply #12 on: October 30, 2013, 12:22:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I just re-read your question.  The Holy Ghost does not guide a council presided over by an invalid Pope.  It is a group of mostly heretics that barfed out some nonsense and a primary anti-Christ approved it.  Had nothing to do with the Holy Ghost other than His disappearing from the scene.  

    Poor Father Fenton could not believe what they were pushing through and knew it could not be approved, until he saw that it was.  He disappeared from the public scene after that.  Much easier to look back than to live through it.

    I read a writing of Father Gommar DePauw where he was trying to convince himself that Paul 6 just had to be Pope as well.  He couldn't see how but he figured he just had to be.  The Holy Ghost would not allow a false Pope to be elected in his mind.  The Holy Ghost probably did not allow a false Pope to be "elected".  The freemasons got their man in John 23, but he probably was not validly elected and the apostates have taken firm hold ever since.  

    But it is probably possible for a false pope to be elected as the Bull by Paul IV seems to suggest when he writes on how one should be treated if a heretic appeared to take the seat of Peter explaining how he would lose his office ipso facto if he ever held it in the first place.  It would seem that a public heretic could get elected hypothetically, but Catholic Cardinals would not elect such a man unless they were evil and or ignorant but those who claim ecclesiastical office do not have ignorance as an excuse.  They could easily elect a private heretic though.  
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16