Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4

Author Topic: An honest question for those inclined against the Resistance  (Read 1828 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jaynek

Re: An honest question for those inclined against the Resistance
« Reply #10 on: October 06, 2018, 05:49:20 PM »
Quote from: Pax Vobis on October 06, 2018, 05:29:09 PM
Good point.  In reality, “SP” is a legal contradiction.  It admitted that Quo Primum was not changed, therefore the TLM was never outlawed and always permitted.  Then, it contradicts Quo Primum by putting restrictions on the TLM (ie your bishop has to give permission, you have to agree that the Novus Ordo is equal, etc).

Legally, “SP” validates the entire post-V2 Traditionalist movement.  For that, I’m thankful that +Benedict issued it.  Unfortunately, most people read “SP” outside of and ignoring the supremacy of Quo Primum’s commands, so they miss the “big picture” and the factual illegality of the Novus Ordo, and consequent sinfulness of it.  
Technically (yet again) Summorum Pontificuм does not admit or even mention anything about Quo Primum.  It also does not say that the bishop has to give permission.  But I don't want to derail this thread with legal technicalities that are completely irrelevant to it.  It was just something that I mentioned in passing since I am interested in that sort of thing.  We all know exactly what Matthew meant when he referred to the Indult Mass.
Logged

Online Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: An honest question for those inclined against the Resistance
« Reply #11 on: October 06, 2018, 06:33:32 PM »
Quote from: Pax Vobis on October 06, 2018, 02:33:15 PM
Summorum Pontificuм is just an expansion of the indult of JPII.  ... Also, in order to have the latin mass the bishop must approve it.  Yes, ANY diocesan latin mass (including FSSP, ICK) is still an indult.

No, there is a subtle difference, even though in the practical order it reduces to the same thing.  With the motu, the Tridentine Mass is permitted unless forbidden, whereas before it had been forbidden unless permitted.
Logged

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: An honest question for those inclined against the Resistance
« Reply #12 on: October 06, 2018, 11:53:44 PM »

Quote
Technically (yet again) Summorum Pontificuм does not admit or even mention anything about Quo Primum. 
Directly, I agree, Quo Primum isn't mentioned, but the 1962 missal is the legal "child" of Quo Primum, so indirectly, yes, if you mention the 1962 missal you are referencing Quo Primum (and nothing else).  It's like if one mentions the "1st Amendment and free speech".  Technically, you didn't say the word "constitution" but the 1st Amendment can ONLY relate the the Constitution.  It goes without saying...  

(p.s.  Quo Primum was printed in the first few pages of every missal for hundreds of years up until 1960.  Until then, everyone knew what this docuмent was.  Nowadays they do not, but that's because the modernists want people to stay asleep, which is why they only refer to the 1962 missal and not QP specifically).



Quote
With the motu, the Tridentine Mass is permitted unless forbidden, whereas before it had been forbidden unless permitted.
Ok, yes.  But when I say SP was an expansion of the indult, i was talking about having the same conditions, which is the acceptance of the new mass.  Sorry for not being clear.
Logged

Offline Meg

Re: An honest question for those inclined against the Resistance
« Reply #13 on: October 07, 2018, 08:55:50 AM »
Quote from: Carissima on October 06, 2018, 01:55:03 PM
That is not entirely true..the resistance has its problems too.
For one thing it splintered rather quickly, and soon after the get-go. And according to Bp Williamson it is to be known as a ‘loose association’, if I’m quoting HE correctly. So what is there to fear?

I don’t blame people for standing afar off while priests and bishops scatter all over the map. And especially so, when they all have so many different ideas on how to ‘resist’ the SSPX errors in the first place.
And believe me, I’ve been here from close to the beginning..at least from 2013 and have watched it evolve along the way. These things always do, as people find their bearings amongst so much chaos.

I really hope you don’t think that it’s all settled now into some little comfortable corner that anyone can just mosey on over to. It’s not that simple. Many do not have resistance options.

And Catholics definitely do not want to be told they can’t go to Mass at this Church, or that priest, or this bishop, because if they do then they’re a modernist, or are going to lose their Faith.
And that is what some in the resistance do. I admit I was one of them, and I still see it today.

I do attend Mass at an SSPX chapel, and it is for The Sacraments for myself and my children. They need them and so do I. If that is selfish on my part, then so be it. I receive Jesus in the Eucharist on behalf of The Church so I hope it benefits us all.

I pray for unity always.

God bless  :pray:

A very good and reasonable analysis above. I especially agree with what is written above...."That Catholics do not want to be told that they can't go to Mass at this Church, or that priest, or this bishop, because if they do they're a modernist, or are going to lose their faith." Well said!

Are traditional Catholics really in such danger of losing their faith so easily? I can't see that. I don't recall that Resistance priests or bishops themselves are telling the faithful that they cannot attend this or that Mass for the Sacraments. It's mainly the laity who are red-lighting attendance at Mass venues other than Resistance. 

I'm impressed with the integrity of the Resistance bishops and priests. They are strong in the Faith, and they have charity.
Logged

Offline Stanley N

Re: An honest question for those inclined against the Resistance
« Reply #14 on: October 07, 2018, 12:07:57 PM »
Quote from: Matthew on October 06, 2018, 09:04:18 AM
SSPX Faithful are more likely to think the Indult or even Novus Ordo is OK rather than think going to the local Resistance Mass center is OK.
Some people new to tradition may go back and forth. But I rather doubt that reasonably informed traditionalist in the SSPX would think the N.O. is OK.

Assuming a traditional liturgy, however, I think other factors come into play. A single person, educated in the faith, might be able to tolerate one Mass location that parents could not safely take their children to. The individual priest could matter in various ways, too. And one's personal background could as well.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4
« previous next »