« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8]

Author Topic: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"  (Read 2919 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SeanJohnson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4684
  • Reputation: +4113/-1432
  • Gender: Male
Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
« Reply #105 on: October 06, 2019, 03:26:45 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!4
    • Just wanted to congratulate Ladislaus for rambling off 9 successive posts in 23 minutes (until Meg broke his streak) from 1:45PM - 2:08 PM.

    This is all in one thread, mind you!

    Volume to cover substance, and shout down the opposition.

    He recovered from Meg's "interruption," and fired off another 9 posts within an hour...on the same thread!!!!

    Note that he was active in other threads during this time!

    :( :o ??? :laugh2:

    NB: Oops, I guess I was too slow: In the 1 minute it took me to write this post, Ladialaus has fired off another barage!

    :facepalm:
    Logged
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18300
    • Reputation: +10161/-4815
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
    « Reply #106 on: October 06, 2019, 03:37:14 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • That's how I participate in threads.  I make short responses rather than long ones.  You'll sometimes find that I also take apart lengthy posts and instead of posting a lengthy response, I respond to one piece at a time.

    Then later I decided to participate in a discussion with ByzCat.  So sue me.
    Logged

    Offline ByzCat3000

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 652
    • Reputation: +125/-41
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
    « Reply #107 on: October 06, 2019, 03:41:34 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on October 06, 2019, 03:24:26 PM
    Then I would accept that as well.  I don't believe that it can happen or ever will happen.  In that case, then, I would have to retroactively revise my rejection of Vatican II as being contrary to Catholic teaching.

    But, you see, this question raises a great point.  If one accepted the principles of straight sedevacantism, then all I would have to do is to say the man is a heretic, and reject this as the teaching of a non-pope.  It's this consideration that first made me question sedevacantism.  What dogma is safe, then, if you cannot have any a priori certainty about papal legitimacy?  Normally, the way it works is ... I have an opinion; the Church condemns the opinion; I drop the opinion and comply with Church teaching.  I do not respond by impugning the legitimacy of the pope.
    my problem is still that it seems, logically, that you could do the same thing with Sede-doubtism (and I say that despite having non zero amounts of doubt as well, so I guess I'm a hypocrite, sue me, I'm still figuring things out).  Why couldn't you just say "Ok, he's teaching this, so I'm not really sure if he's even eally the Pope or not"?  
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18300
    • Reputation: +10161/-4815
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
    « Reply #108 on: October 06, 2019, 03:43:16 PM »
  • Thanks!4
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on October 06, 2019, 03:26:45 PM
    Just wanted to congratulate Ladislaus for rambling off 9 successive posts in 23 minutes (until Meg broke his streak) from 1:45PM - 2:08 PM.

    This is all in one thread, mind you!

    Volume to cover substance, and shout down the opposition.

    He recovered from Meg's "interruption," and fired off another 9 posts within an hour...on the same thread!!!!

    Note that he was active in other threads during this time!

    :( :o ??? :laugh2:

    NB: Oops, I guess I was too slow: In the 1 minute it took me to write this post, Ladialaus has fired off another barage!

    :facepalm:

    Hey, at least my posts have substance to them ... unlike this one.

    You're just acting like a baby again, now that you've been argued into another corner where you accused +Lefebvre and +Williamson of heresy.
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4684
    • Reputation: +4113/-1432
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
    « Reply #109 on: October 09, 2019, 02:33:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: pakb on October 09, 2019, 02:29:01 PM
    Bp. Williamson’s advice was refuted here and here.
    Nope 
    Logged
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4684
    • Reputation: +4113/-1432
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
    « Reply #110 on: October 09, 2019, 02:38:30 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Interesting you show up after I raised the African conciliar priest scandal (as you did just before your last appearance).

    I can see I shall have to punish you by bumping that thread then...
    Logged
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4684
    • Reputation: +4113/-1432
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
    « Reply #111 on: October 09, 2019, 02:49:13 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: pakb on October 09, 2019, 02:44:27 PM
    Yep.
    Use of a non-approved rite immediately brings into question the intent of the minister: that’s one of the reasons why attendance is forbidden. Therefore you’re forced to accept it as an Approved Rite which puts it on par with the Tridentine Rite i.e. you have to go further than anything the SSPX has ever claimed! :D
    Non-approved?  Your boss says it’s perfectly legitimate ;)
    Logged
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4684
    • Reputation: +4113/-1432
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
    « Reply #112 on: October 09, 2019, 03:37:15 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: pakb on October 09, 2019, 03:04:09 PM
    No, he distinguishes between the two requirements: only the promulgation was legitimate. Your boss, on the other hand, has to accept the legitimacy of both the promulgation and the validity of the rite.  :D

    You began by asserting the NOM was a "non-approved rite."  Now you are saying Bishop Fellay acknowledged the legitimacy of the promulgation of a non-approved rite.

    You are doing more damage to your boss than you are to Williamson.
    Logged
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-
    Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8]
    « previous next »
     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16