Now that Matthew has tenderly reminded us that this is a SSPX forum, and I for one forgot it was.  

Anyhow, I guess it is only natural that the forces will come out in full military garb for SSPX, I wish everyone would agree we are Roman Catholics, but that is too much to ask for in this age of confusion.  

I don't mind being last, for it is said, "But many who are first now will be last, and many who are last now will be first."

P.S. I am not anti-SSPX  I am Roman Catholic period

I'm with Ladislaus, R76, Dawn and Patman on this one.

What amazes me the most is how an SSPXer can't see his/her own inconsistencies, or that the SSPX has become an ABL cult - Lefebvre is your very own JPII.

Sorry, Matthew.   I spent, as you all know, almost ten years with the SSPX.  I am sick and tired of sedes being denigrated and looked down upon as third class Catholics by neo-Cats and the SSPX.  Does it make you all feel better about yourselves to have a common enemy - "the enemy of my enemy is my friend."

Matthew, what I don't understand is why you allowed Charlie to come on here and try to shut down his local SSPX school.  Were you just trying to be fair because you allowed the SGG thread - equal time maybe?  As much as I do not care for the SSPX, even I was appalled by that thread since I know the problems there and, like in everything, there are two sides to every story, and I know the other side.  To me, THAT was worse than anything on here.

What baffles me is how some sedevacanists can look at the FSSP for instance and see that they aren't allowed to even speak out against the Novus Ordo and Vatican II, then look at the SSPX and see that they do speak out against such things at free will, yet still not like the SSPX. If the SSPX is fighting modernism and preserving the TLM more than any other group than how can someone not like them? As I pointed out earlier, some sedes (not you in particular Alexandria) don't like any group unless it's a sedevacanist group.

Although I will say the comment "LeFebvre is your JPII" was un-called for and in fact makes little sense. ABL and JPII were nothing alike, really. LeFebvre was Traditional, JPII was not. I do not at all think JPII should be canonized, nor do I think he should even be considered venerable. I got so tired of the people over at CAF acting as if they worshipped JPII by usually saying "The venerable JPII". SSPX memebers don't worship LeFebvre, we respect him but don't worship him. As a matter of fact, I don't even attend an SSPX parish. I'd like to, but am forced instead to attend a FSSP parish. I have no complaint though as long as I get to see the TLM.

I actually don't mind the sedevacanists being here at all. Not that I always agree with them, but most of them are Traditional and most of them here are nice. And after posting with modernists and Novus Ordites on CAF for a little while, I can certainly tolerate posting with sedes. I'd rather post with sedes than NO people. CAF got so frustrating it just made me want to  :smash-pc:

I wish everyone would agree we are Roman Catholics,

Anyone who disagrees should reference the rules and decide if they really belong here.

Spiritus, don't bait me.  This isn't CAF.  I stand by what I wrote whether you see it or not.  I don't expect you to.

 :confused1:

I wasn't baiting you. I was merely pointing out what the people at CAF do. I respect your opinion. I don't always agree with it, but respect it. Besides, you're easy to get along with IMO. You're one of the nicer members here.  :dancing-banana:

Flattery will get you no where with me.

But thanks anyway! :wink:

Just being friendly. Not really using flattery. I am using a virtual banana though!   :dancing-banana:

jhfromsf68  
Why can't we all get along is how I feel too.

Sedevacantist and non sedevacantist Traditional Catholics both believe in the same doctrines and dogmas, attend the same mass, have the same customs and devotional practices. Other than the the pope issue there's doesn't seem to very little dividing us in matters of faith and morals.

I believe this division is a trick of the devil to keep Traditional Catholics fighting and bickering and and less effective in sprending the faith and evangeling lost souls.

God bless
James  

James, I believe this below quote is the reason why catholics, [those who believe the see of Peter is vacant at present, and  those  catholics who believe Joseph Ratzinger is the Vicar of Christ], are so divided.

The issues are very important.

Cecelia said:

Catholic truth is immutable.  Either the Benedict XVI is the Pope or he is not...it is important for every catholic to know who the Pope is.  There cannot be a conciliar church, and a traditional church;  there is only  one, holy, catholic and apostolic church.  And we recognise this by the possession of the 4 marks.

The true Pope is the shepherd of the ONE true church;  he is not Pope of the conciliar church and of the true church.  One fold and one shepherd, not two folds and one shepherd.

The divine will of Christ placed Peter and His lawful succesors as head of the Church, to confirm the brethren in the faith and to feed the universal flock.  He established him [Peter]AS THE GUARANTOR AND CUSTODIAN OF THE DEPOSIT OF FAITH.  Not Archbishop Lefebvre, nor Bishop Fellay or anybody else.  If SSPX or anyone departs from this teaching, we have to dissent.

The SSPX cannot convert the Pope!!  The Pope confirms them in the deposit of faith. No one else has the divine mission, but that given to Peter [and his successors] alone.

There is no guarantee or safeguard for anyone else.  SSPX say they are keeping to tradition but who decides what traditions are to be kept?  Is it for this group [SSPX] not the pope; not the college of bishops; not the ecuмenical council, to decide which among the innumerable traditions must be considered as the norm of faith?

The reason why there is so much dissention among traditionalist catholics is precisely because there is no pope to unify and confirm the faithful.

The reason why the SSPX cannot move from their middle of the road position is because they do not recognise the times we are living through.  They cannot see that this is the Great Apostasy, which is unprecedented.

Perhaps with more prayers and sacrifices, they may look again objectively at their position.  It is fearful they may end up like Campos or Papa Stronsay, which have been absorbed into the one world church.  

 

And another problem you have is confusing the man with the office.  You seem to think that men become perfect in all virtue upon ascending to the Papal throne.  The mere thought of an imperfect Pope seems to you a metaphysical impossibility.  Thus, you say that no one can convert him from his errors because a true pope, so you think, could never err in any way.  That is a perversion of catholic doctrine.  The doctrine of infallibility has been exaggerated and distorted in your mind and thus you are a sedevacantist because of it, at least in part.

Caminus said:

You are so confused it isn't even funny anymore. If the fact of Benedict's papacy was part of "immutable catholic truth" then his papacy would have no end, it would exist as a universal, abstract truth transcending time and place. It would be thrust into the realm of speculative truth ceasing to be a contingent fact.

Matthew said:

Well said, and well said.

I wasn't going to post here anymore for a while, but I just want to briefly defend Cecilia.

Almost every trick of the sophist is here in Caminus' post.  Making Cecelia say what she didn't say ( deformation ) setting up his straw man ( divagation ), and then throwing up a smokescreen ( obscuration ).  

Caminus always asks me for proof of his sophistry, but lacking the intestinal fortitude to read through his previous posts, I decided to wait, knowing it was only a matter of time before he did what he did best once again -- evading, obscuring, and falsifying.  Here it is.  

Cecelia never said that Ratzinger's "papacy" or lack thereof was part of immutable Catholic truth, so the rest of your ravings are pointless.  She just said that the question of whether we have a Pope in Rome is of the utmost importance, and it is.  

It's not Cecelia with her simple English and clearly-laid out facts who is being emotional, believe me.  And she is not stepping out of her place by trying to save her soul.