Author Topic: How do you think the crisis in the Church will be resolved? (Read 3355 times)

Belloc · « **Reply #30 on:** July 09, 2010, 02:15:44 PM »

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

Quote from: Matto
Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

Raising people from the dead isn't the only thing that makes someone qualify for sainthood. You need to do some research. This man helped save the Catholic faith! How can he not be canonized? And miracles have been attributed to LeFebvre. Aside from preserving the faith, there are stories of his relics performing miracles. LeFebvre is truely worthy of sainthood, not John Paul II who didn't do wonders for the Church at all.

You are demanding that he must be canonized as soon as possible. Raising people from the dead is the kind of miracle I would expect from someone who deserves to be "instantly canonized." St. Joan of Arc had to wait five hundred years. You are not saying he is a saint, you are suggesting he is some kind of super saint above other saints who did do things like raise people from the dead. If I had to bet, I would bet on him being in Heaven, but you are putting him on the level of St. Patrick or St. Anthony.

You say you want LeFebvre to be canonized, but in this post I quoted you sound as if you could care less. That's contradicting yourself. It's not putting LeFebvre on a higher level than other saints. And really, even though some saints are better than others (such as our Blessed Mother Mary, who is the greatest saint of all) we shouldn't be saying LeFebvre should be on a low level just because he has yet to be canonized, nor should we treat saints who aren't as good as others as bad people. LeFebvre is no greater than St. Patrick or St. Anthony, but that does mean LeFebvre should be treated as a person who was not important until he is canonized? He saved the TLM for crying out loud, he is worthy of instant canonization. And a person has to raise people from the dead to be instantly canonized? That is ridiculous.

:applause:

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #31 on:** July 09, 2010, 02:23:35 PM »

Quote from: Raoul76

SpiritusSanctus said:
Quote
But most sedevacanists are Traditional Catholics. Think of where the TLM would be today if not for LeFebvre! You know where it would be? In the trash can. The modernists attempted to sweep away the Mass of All Times, and God chose LeFebvre to save the TLM. As a Traditional Catholic, you should show more gratitude towards LeFebvre. Just think about it. If the TLM was no longer existant, this forum would not exist either.

No doubt about that. The Mass would not have died, but it would have had much less exposure without SSPX. Nevertheless, SSPX still could have been part of a plot. I mean, 9/11 theories would have much less exposure without Alex Jones, but that doesn't mean he's right about everything; obviously, since he thinks the Catholic Church is evil.

I am someone who is all about the WHOLE truth, not about half-truths that serve as a comfortable placeholder, not "good enough for now" truths. What keeps Lefebvre from being another Athanasius is that he lacked consistency and firmness, and he didn't have the humility, apparently, to listen to the remonstrances of those who had valuable insights. He may have been more of a leader than Father Barbara, but he wasn't as clear-headed and lucid. He just put his fingers in his ears and went NA NA NA, THE POPE IS STILL THE POPE, while often implying just the opposite, especially when he spoke of the "Conciliar Church."

It pains me a little to know that if the sedevacantist thesis proves true, they will go back through Lefebvre's writings and say he was really a sedevacantist at heart, even though he treated sedes like a dog's dinner. He played it both ways. There's no way he can lose, at least as far as his earthly reputation is concerned. If he does become a saint, he won't be my favorite, but at least that would confirm that his heart was in the right place and that his mistakes were honest mistakes. Just hope that I don't become Pope because he won't be canonized by me

What pains me a little is to read the way you dis-respect Archbishop LeFebvre. You'd almost certainly be attending a modernist Novus Ordo Mass right now if not for LeFebvre. There is nothing wrong with sedevacanism, but let's not go to the extremes and say anyone who is not a sedevacanist isn't good. That's almost the same as saying all saints who weren't sedevacanists are not good.

Archbishop LeFebvre had actually considered sedevacanism at one point, but never did go down that path. Why? Most likely for two reasons. 1- He was an Archbishop. 2- He probably realized John Paul II (who was Pope at the time LeFebvre had considered sedevacanism) was Pope as punishment from God. He never treated sedevacanists badly and probably admired many of them for atleast being able to see that what the Pope was doing was wrong. The Popes we have had starting with John XXIII are Popes, they've just been bad ones.

The SSPX has not been involved in any kind of modernist plot with Rome. The SSPX has even stated that the reason they keep talking with Rome is to convert them, not go along with their beliefs. They had every right to ask for their excommunication to be lifted, they were excommunicated un-fairly. Heck, there are even sedevacanists in the SSPX. Obviously not everyone in the SSPX is a sede, but some people are. So while the FSSP isn't allowed to say anything negative about the Novus Ordo, the SSPX will come right out and speak out against it. So, you can criticize LeFebvre all you want, but you owe him more gratitude. Afterall, you'd probably be a Novus Ordite if not for him. How could you be a Traditionalist if Tradition were extinct? It would be without him.

Wessex · « **Reply #32 on:** July 11, 2010, 06:55:10 AM »

I feel we are now in a post-Church era or at least thinking as though we are. Rome and the dioceses have defected and have constructed a new religion over the remains of the old one. If the Church exists anywhere on earth, it is to be found in isolated pockets, not as conservative plasters on terrible sores or as classical liturgical entertainment. And for those who want a leader to idolise authority is less important than truth as Bp. Williamson admits.

Matto · « **Reply #33 on:** July 11, 2010, 08:01:12 PM »

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

You say you want LeFebvre to be canonized, but in this post I quoted you sound as if you could care less. That's contradicting yourself. . . .

He saved the TLM for crying out loud, he is worthy of instant canonization. And a person has to raise people from the dead to be instantly canonized? That is ridiculous.

I apologize for speaking so strongly, S. S., but let me try to explain my position. I am grateful for the work of Archbishop LeFebvre (I attend an SSPX Mass), and I believe he is likely in Heaven and have prayed for his intercession. I have heard about two miracles credited to the intercession of the Archbishop and would like to hear about more. However, I worry that some of his supporters tend to idolize the man. Could you even consider the possibility that Archbishop LeFebvre died with a single mortal sin on his soul, just one, and was damned?

I think the Archbishop is in Heaven, I hope the Archbishop is in Heaven, but I do not know the Archbishop is in Heaven. I would support the Archbishop's canonization, but I do not consider it very important compared to the major events that I hope to happen in the Church such as the suppression of the Novus Ordo and the annulment of the Second Vatican Council. I hope this doesn't make anyone angry.

MyrnaM · « **Reply #34 on:** July 11, 2010, 09:08:43 PM »

Whether he is canonized or not, if he is in Heaven he is in Heaven. He doesn't get a higher place after canonization or does he? ?

Raoul76 · « **Reply #35 on:** July 12, 2010, 12:42:34 AM »

SpiritusSanctus, your post is amazing in that it contains almost every error of the SSPX. This proves to me almost beyond a doubt that there is a cultish aspect to the Fraternity. You are coming off as flat-out indoctrinated.

SpiritusSanctus said:

Quote

They [ the Fantastic Four SSPX bishops ] had every right to ask for their excommunication to be lifted, they were excommunicated un-fairly.

They weren't excommunicated at all because the Pope is not a Pope and has no authority. That SSPX actually celebrated the lifting of nonexistent excommunications is a sad farce. When I see something like this, I have to wonder if those in the Frat like to be fooled. Have you read Father Meramo's letter where he lambasts Fellay for this travesty? Who would ever expect this gang of wet noodles to be the ones to "convert Rome"? More on that later.

Here is the link to Father Meramo's letter --
http://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/f030ht_OpenLetterSSPX.htm

SpiritusSanctus said:

Quote

You'd almost certainly be attending a modernist Novus Ordo Mass right now if not for LeFebvre.

Horse-apples. CMRI began independently of Lefebvre, so I'd be attending the exact same place. Not to mention that this idea that Lefebvre saved the Church is propaganda you are fed in your SSPX chapel while kneeling at the base of the statue of the Archbishop in the guise of Apollo. You have practically made this man your Pope and that is why your theology is incoherent. To wit --

SpiritusSanctus said:

Quote

The SSPX has even stated that the reason they keep talking with Rome is to convert them, not go along with their beliefs.

This is the biggest gaffe of the SSPX. Rome, the spotless bride of Christ, needs to be converted by Abp. Lefebvre? This is borderline heresy, although I know you don't intend it that way. A Pope who is a heretic in his private life may be corrected by a bishop, but when the errors and heresies get into the Magisterium, that's how you know whoever put them there was no Pope at all.

As Abp. Lefebvre himself said, "One does not dialogue with the devil!" If only he had stuck to his own advice.

SpiritusSanctus said:

Quote

2- He probably realized John Paul II (who was Pope at the time LeFebvre had considered sedevacanism) was Pope as punishment from God.

This is not SSPX theology, so I assume it is yours? You are a nice guy, and I know where you're coming from, so I'm going to try to put this gently -- that is a masochistic and offensive theory that you should drop immediately. God may deliver the Jєωs to exile in Babylon, he may occasionally chastise his people, but God is not the one who sends wolves to deceive the sheep. The idea that God would send a Pope to teach people the wrong thing in order to punish them, is like saying that Christ Himself would lie or slip into error to punish some of the more lukewarm types who followed him. The Pope does not err on faith and morals, any more than Christ errs on faith and morals.

Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum --

Quote

"Wherefore, as appears from what has been said, Christ instituted in the Church a living, authoritative and permanent Magisterium, which by His own power He strengthened, by the Spirit of truth He taught, and by miracles confirmed. He willed and ordered, under the gravest penalties, that its teachings should be received as if they were His own. As often, therefore, as it is declared on the authority of this teaching that this or that is contained in the deposit of divine revelation, it must be believed by every one as true. If it could in any way be false, an evident contradiction follows; for then God Himself would be the author of error in man. "Lord, if we be in error, we are being deceived by Thee" (Richardus de S. Victore, De Trin., lib. i., cap. 2)

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #36 on:** July 12, 2010, 02:18:28 PM »

Raoul, a few things.

1.- LeFebvre is not my "Pope".

2.- God simply allowed a bad Pope to get in. He certainly did not choose him. God prefers a Traditional Pope.

3.- I don't attend an SSPX chapel actually, I attend a FSSP chapel. Though if I could I would attend an SSPX chapel instead.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #37 on:** July 12, 2010, 09:13:26 PM »

Quote from: Matto

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
You say you want LeFebvre to be canonized, but in this post I quoted you sound as if you could care less. That's contradicting yourself. . . .

He saved the TLM for crying out loud, he is worthy of instant canonization. And a person has to raise people from the dead to be instantly canonized? That is ridiculous.

I apologize for speaking so strongly, S. S., but let me try to explain my position. I am grateful for the work of Archbishop LeFebvre (I attend an SSPX Mass), and I believe he is likely in Heaven and have prayed for his intercession. I have heard about two miracles credited to the intercession of the Archbishop and would like to hear about more. However, I worry that some of his supporters tend to idolize the man. Could you even consider the possibility that Archbishop LeFebvre died with a single mortal sin on his soul, just one, and was damned?

I think the Archbishop is in Heaven, I hope the Archbishop is in Heaven, but I do not know the Archbishop is in Heaven. I would support the Archbishop's canonization, but I do not consider it very important compared to the major events that I hope to happen in the Church such as the suppression of the Novus Ordo and the annulment of the Second Vatican Council. I hope this doesn't make anyone angry.

Matto, obviously it is God's place to judge who lives and who dies so we can't be certain of whether or not someone is in Heaven after they die. It is possible that LeFebvre had a mortal sin on his soul, but highly un-likely. A Traditional Catholic man like this would likely not have a mortal sin on his soul. I'm not saying it's impossible, just saying it's un-likely. The TLM would not still be here if not for LeFebvre. Canonization is a must for a man like this. Afterall, don't you think he is MUCH more worthy of canonization than John Paul II, the Pope who excommunicated him?

MyrnaM · « **Reply #38 on:** July 13, 2010, 11:26:52 PM »

Reading the Bible this evening, and I came upon these verses; when do you think this will occur, after the crisis in the Church or just before the Second Coming, or are they both the same thing?

Just curious, since I don't see this happening for a long time, yet I realize God can do anything in His perfect timing.

Roman 11 <<Now if the first handful of the dough is holy, so also is the lump of dough; and if the root is holy, so also are the branches . But if some of the branches have been broken off, and if thou, being a wild olive, art grafted in their place, and hast become a partaker of the stem and fatness of the olive tree, do not boast against the branches. But if thou dost boast, still it is not thou that supportest the stem, but the stem thee, Thou wilt say, then, “Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in.” True, but they were broken off because of unbelief, whereas thou by faith standest. Be not highminded, but fear. For if God has not spared the natural branches, perhaps He may not spare thee either. See, then, the goodness and the severity of God; His severity towards those who have fallen, but the goodness of God towards thee if thou abidest in His goodness; otherwise thou also wilt be cut off. And they also, if they do not continue in unbelief, will be grafted in; for God is able to graft them back. For if thou hast been cut off from the wild olive tree which is natural to thee, and contrary to nature, hast been grafted into the cultivated olive tree, how much more shall these, the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree!

For I would not, brethren have you ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own conceits, that a partial blindness only has befallen Israel, until the full number of the Gentiles should enter. And thus all Israel should be saved, as it is written, “There will come out of Sion the deliverer and he will turn away impiety from Jacob; and this is my covenant with them, when I shall take away their sins.”

In view of the gospel, they are enemies for your sake; but in view of the divine choice, they are most dear for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the call of God are without repentance.

For as you also at one time did not believe God, but now have obtained mercy by reason of their unbelief, so they too have not now believed by reason of the mercy shown you, that they too may obtain mercy. For God has shut up all in unbelief, that he may have mercy upon all. >>>