Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: stevusmagnus on March 15, 2012, 10:09:34 AM
-
Demonstrating once again the charity, patience, tolerance, seriousness, depth, and maturity of Fr. John Zuhlsdorf...
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2012/03/love-notes-from-the-gallery-gotta-chuckle/
-
We have seen his type fall more than once. Those who place attention on themselves rather than Our Lord walk a dangerous path.
-
Demonstrating once again the charity, patience, tolerance, seriousness, depth, and maturity of Fr. John Zuhlsdorf...
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2012/03/love-notes-from-the-gallery-gotta-chuckle/
Father "Z" and his Neo-Catholic, Neo-Trad yes-men are as much a problem as the unmasked modernists. In a way they are more dangerous since so many think that their "smells and bells" traditionalism is true Catholic Tradition.
There are currently many SSPX priests working in the Philippians, India and other places to save as many souls as possible while Father "Z" sips red wine and eats gourmet meals from behind his computer screen.
-
We have seen his type fall more than once. Those who place attention on themselves rather than Our Lord walk a dangerous path.
Fr. Z really does draw men after himself rather than Christ.
-
Demonstrating once again the charity, patience, tolerance, seriousness, depth, and maturity of Fr. John Zuhlsdorf...
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2012/03/love-notes-from-the-gallery-gotta-chuckle/
I have attempted to post this:
Not merely pedantic, Rev. Zuhldsorf's showboating repartee is disparaging, non-responsive, prideful, not at all Christ-like, not evidence of grace, not remotely priestly. It is not empty talk or trivial to discuss the matter of supplied jurisdiction, but a serious concern for many practicing Catholics. In these days of diabolical disorientation, who can be surprised that 32 of Rev. Zuhlsdorf's devotees have cheered his proud tongue and failed to notice that his interlocutor deserved a charitable, substantive, and priestly response?
Likely it will be "moderated."
-
Surprisingly, the comment was not "moderated."
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2012/03/love-notes-from-the-gallery-gotta-chuckle/#comment-330144
Who can imagine the Curee d'Ars seeking such "vote for me [and my blog]" celebrity status?
-
With all due respect; what was he supposed to do? The note to him simply said "Learn Canon Law". He responded with pretty much "Learn to spell before accusing me".
-
Mr. Zuhlsdorf's critic raised the question of supplied jurisdiction. Mr. Zuhlsdorf dodged the issue with non-responsive, proud, and insulting repartee. Mr. Zuhlsdorf is no alter-Christus.
-
Nothing new here. The debate will rage on until the Pope settles the issue. In the meantime, I believe Positive Doubt comes into play. I'll have to look at the argument again. If I remember right, there are multiple reasons supplied jurisdiction can come into play.
-
If Fr. Zuhlsdorf had an argument he should have made it. I don't buy the SSPX's arguments for suplied jurisdiction, but I assume they are made in good faith and feel no personal need to argue against them. If Fr. Z does, he really does his cause no service by being insulting.
-
I wish he'd do a better job of arguing against supplied jurisdiction, or better still, agree that the Society has a point.
-
I tried presenting the case for supplied jurisdiction on his blog a few years ago. He called it "canonical fandancing", gave no substantive response and banned myself and Catholic writer, Brian Mershon for our time. Typical Neo-Cath response. If you can't win the argument call their position a name and end the discussion. Same tactic he used with the SSPX'er who made a typo. No matter how much he ignores it, the issue remains. It will continue on long after Fr. Z fades from the blogosphere. It is a serious issue worth discussing.
-
I tried presenting the case for supplied jurisdiction on his blog a few years ago. He called it "canonical fandancing", gave no substantive response and banned myself and Catholic writer, Brian Mershon for our time. Typical Neo-Cath response. If you can't win the argument call their position a name and end the discussion. Same tactic he used with the SSPX'er who made a typo. No matter how much he ignores it, the issue remains. It will continue on long after Fr. Z fades from the blogosphere. It is a serious issue worth discussing.
Their hostility is borne of fear and ignorance.
-
Just for the record, I went to the website and took a peek. After collecting over 30 hollow, cult-like replies from readers, the following day, Fr. Z posted a single additional reply that does somewhat give his opinion on the topic, so to speak:
Fr. John Zuhlsdorf says:
15 March 2012 at 8:49 am
Everyone: Keep in mind that this whole entry has nothing to do with poor Fr. Guarnizo and his circuмstances, unless of course he were to join the SSPX. At that point he would have no faculties to hear confessions except in cases of danger of death.
IOW no supplied jurisdiction, barring the most extreme emergency, and even then, for "hearing confessions" only. Notice: he didn't say anything about giving a valid absolution!
That post was shortly followed (24 hrs) by Diego's, which was the final post on this topic:
Diego says:
16 March 2012 at 8:22 am
Not merely pedantic, Rev. Zuhldsorf’s showboating repartee is disparaging, non-responsive, prideful, not at all Christ-like, not evidence of grace, not remotely priestly. It is not empty talk or trivial to discuss the matter of supplied jurisdiction, but a serious concern for many practicing Catholics. In these days of diabolical disorientation, who can be surprised that 32 of Rev. Zuhlsdorf’s devotees have cheered his proud tongue and failed to notice that his interlocutor deserved a charitable, substantive, and priestly response?
[Don't forget to vote for me in the About.com awards for best blog, okay?]