I wanna see this "doctrinal preamble." I'm pretty sure it's NOT the Athanasian Creed...

I would like to draw your attention to the words "de facto".

He was de-facto forced into early retirement.

He hasn't chosen to retire, or officially retired.

BUT he has been removed from any professorial/rector position, as well as from any public work of the SSPX -- including confirmations and any public teaching/sermons.

So although he hasn't officially retired, he might as well have. The result is the same as if he had. That's the definition of "de facto".

This is ridiculous agitprop for Sedes and malcontents.

Sorry, but I have to pull the bull card here mr. Stevus, my friend. Suffice it to say, all here who are familiar with your posts, know you are to the SSPX, what NeoCaths are to the VII sect. The idea, and theory, that the Society can do no evil is just plain wrong. The fact that they do much good, possibly more than most other groups in this crisis (in the way of administering the sacraments, bringing many to tradition, etc.) is noted. But it is silly to think that an intelligent person as you would really believe that this is simply daft 'agitprop for Sedes and malcontents.'

Again, its this 'camp' mentality which does the most harm in Traddie land, IMHO. It seems, when someone disagrees with another, they throw themselves, and their opponents, into "camps". "You're over there, I'm over here, and since we're apart, we'll never be together." And perhaps its quite natural for the Catholic to think that way; but I believe if he really thought about the disaster that's at hand, he would focus on what it is that makes us in the same camp.

ABL always talked with Rome and simply wished for Rome to allow the "experiment of Tradition" to exist in the Church unimpeded.

WRONG. Its true, and you are correct, to say that he may have taken that offer, to "simply" allow Tradition to continue, at the time, considering his circuмstances, but I would highly doubt that he would "simply" stopped there. He wasn't stupid; he realized that, at that time, he had to crawl before he would walk; his group of seminarians and young priests at that time, were very fragile. At this point, they hardly need to take such 'simply' simple offers (toung twister :wink:). And also consider that the fruits of VII have shown themselves considerably since the mid-60's and 70's. And this not only in the Church, but the world she is to rule in (of course the Concilliar church wouldn't recognize this latter fact). If anything, there should be much more leverage on the part of the SSPX to push for more!


+Lefebvre wasn't a defender of traditionalism because it was superficial to him, as it is to most in FSSP, ICK, and Indult, and as it is to many in the SSPX. He defended it at its core. If he seemed to be submissive to the idea that Tradition would be "simply allowed", it was due to the circuмstances he was in, at that time. Times have changed brother.

Thats why Matt feared, " that the Crisis would get worse before it gets better". Do you consider Matt a malcontent? Is it such a far fetched idea? I mean, if the whole of the church could be lead astray, as it has, why not the Society? Has it some divine protection or has it been revealed it would then be that much smaller of a target? Does the Society (and the SSPX-friendly) exclusively comprise the last of the Catholics on Earth? I answer strongly, while restraining a laugh: No way!

This is a far better situation for Tradition than under the wrath of Paul VI who dolled out censures and treated the Society with disdain. And even then ABL talked to Paul VI and only asked that he leave them alone.

Maybe it was better under Paul VI? I remember having a black friend who moved here from the South. And I remember asking him about racism and he said he thought it was easier in the south, because "at least you know who's racist." Capiche?

If some would have their way, the Society would just go into open schism, refusing to accept communion with the man they recognize as the Roman Pontiff when they can do so with no doctrinal compromise.

They already refuse full communion with him. ..?

They may as well be Sedes if they do so, for that is the only way they could remain consistent. BW has been a crypto-Sede for years.

And? I see you fail to quote +Lefebvre here.  

The Society was meant to be a "lifeboat" for Tradition, not a parallel Church who does their own thing in perpetuity.

Yes, and preserving that tradition is exactly what those here are concerned with. What would be the point of jumping off a "lifeboat" onto the sinking titanic?

...I think I gained a few IQ points just for having read that post!

Thanks, s2s!

I wish there were a "high five" feature along with the thumbs-up feature...

EDIT: I think I just lost my newly-acquired IQ points after reading the post which followed it...

The debate, Stevus, is:

How can regularization without compromise -- without danger -- occur when the crisis is FAR FROM OVER?

How can the SSPX accept the rightful Roman authority when it is still a hive of modernism? Doesn't some kind of conversion have to take place first?

Rome is the one that left. They need to convert. The SSPX represents a specific portion of the Church that stayed traditional -- and since our religion is inherently traditional, you could also say "stayed Catholic". There is no onus on the SSPX to prove anything. They need not apologize.

I don't see how something Catholic can be re-absorbed into something non-Catholic and still remain Catholic. Does not compute.

I'm no theologian, but I play one on the Internet (just kidding). Seriously, I'm no theologian, but I am a down to earth guy with common sense (thanks be to God).

Matthew

The debate, Stevus, is:

How can regularization without compromise -- without danger -- occur when the crisis is FAR FROM OVER?

How can the SSPX accept the rightful Roman authority when it is still a hive of modernism? Doesn't some kind of conversion have to take place first?

Rome is the one that left. They need to convert. The SSPX represents a specific portion of the Church that stayed traditional -- and since our religion is inherently traditional, you could also say "stayed Catholic". There is no onus on the SSPX to prove anything. They need not apologize.

I don't see how something Catholic can be re-absorbed into something non-Catholic and still remain Catholic. Does not compute.

I'm no theologian, but I play one on the Internet (just kidding). Seriously, I'm no theologian, but I am a down to earth guy with common sense (thanks be to God).

Matthew

If you concede that the SSPX is already within the Catholic Church, then this concern is really moot, for if they are in the Church and continue their work, juridical recognition will not affect the Society one iota.  You're not thinking in concrete terms.  When a regularization comes about, the little chapel that you attend will still be the little chapel you attend; same Mass, same sacraments, same doctrine, same tradition.  You also don't seem to realize the need for juridical legitimacy viz. the crisis of the Church.  You have it precisely backwards: that the crisis must end and then the Society will and should be recognized.  On the contrary, it is precisely this regularization that will bring about the restoration from within the Church because there are many Catholics who mistakenly think the Society is "outside the Church."  The crisis will never be resolved until the Society is recognized.  It will be from within the Church that the restoration shall come about.  On the other hand, if you hold the untenable position that the entire conciliar church is a "sect" then you must deal with impossible theological enormities.  Those who live in a self-constructed fantasy world, who rely on mere gossip and rumors (such as PereJoseph) do not fully comprehend the implications of their own opinions.

The restoration will come about when the Papacy is occupied by a traditional Pope and the Bishops follow suit.  When the anathemas come thundering again from Rome, you will see the Church dwindle dramatically in size as the schismatic, errant and heretical Bishops and Priests will have to finally come to terms with the authority of the Roman Catholic Church.

     

If you concede that the SSPX is already within the Catholic Church, then this concern is really moot, for if they are in the Church and continue their work, juridical recognition will not affect the Society one iota.  You're not thinking in concrete terms.  When a regularization comes about, the little chapel that you attend will still be the little chapel you attend; same Mass, same sacraments, same doctrine, same tradition.  You also don't seem to realize the need for juridical legitimacy viz. the crisis of the Church.  You have it precisely backwards: that the crisis must end and then the Society will and should be recognized.

I disagree. First of all I don't think that's what Matthew was saying, and secondly the Society is already recognized. Not by the Vatican II church, but by the true Catholic Church. They never lost Communion with it, but actually could as a result of selling out! Are you saying this whole thing is a good thing because it makes people "recognize" the Society more?

The restoration will come about when the Papacy is occupied by a traditional Pope and the Bishops follow suit.  When the anathemas come thundering again from Rome, you will see the Church dwindle dramatically in size as the schismatic, errant and heretical Bishops and Priests will have to finally come to terms with the authority of the Roman Catholic Church.

Actually that is not correct. The Church will never be fully restored until the chastizement.