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

Author Topic: CONFLICT  (Read 1279 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Mr G

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2128
  • Reputation: +1326/-87
  • Gender: Male
CONFLICT
« on: April 25, 2018, 03:32:39 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • http://tradcatresist.blogspot.ie/

    By: Tradcatresist

    Due to the actions of Pope Francis (and arguably Bishop Fellay's trajectory i.e the refusal of the SSPX to loudly condemn those actions) sedevacantism has made great gains throughout tradition over the last couple of years.

    Personally, I have never known as many people question a Pope's legitimacy, and never expected that even conservative Catholic's would be asking the same thing.

    Perhaps due to a combination of a conspiratorial nature, and ahem "quirkiness" that one finds in the resistance, the question of sedevacantism has now begun to divide cleric and layman alike. This is only to be expected, if one has left behind a "comfortable" existence with the SSPX for 'refusing to compromise with error' then one can hardly blame people for 'blowing a gasket' when they find themselves fighting needless arguments within a remnant of a remnant.

    The question of how to deal with this problem is difficult indeed. Some obviously believe that to argue publicly helps sedevacantists achieve their aim. There is a logic to this, many traditionalists are historically open to easy black and white solutions Also, many laymen are ignorant of the issues involved and susceptible to those with convincing reasoning.  I myself was shocked when I left the SSPX by the quite incredible lack of understanding of basic SSPX arguments by the average member of the laity. To give one example, supplied jurisdiction. (Indeed, many people attending should not be, as they are only doing so for geographical reasons, rather than a necessity for supplied jurisdiction. They would be just as content at a local diocesan Latin Mass.)

    On the other hand, how are people ever going to be convinced of error if they are not debated. I hope that this is the aim of Fr Chazal's new work and concede that forums are not always the best avenue. Particularly, when they seem to attract people with a seemingly limitless time to cut and paste but not enough time to reflect that what one says to another member of Christ's mystical body is there for all the world to see now and forever. However, without such forums would we have been made aware of GREC, Krah, the letter of the three Bishop's etc etc? The moderator of the most popular resistance forum rarely says something I disagree with, indeed I sometimes am shocked at the response he gets when he simply states truths that were common place in every SSPX parish fifteen years ago. However, some regular contributors need to ask themselves what is in their heart when they argue their point, love for souls or destroying an opponent?

    Possibly, a part of the problem is a lack of direction from above. Small positive initiatives can often distract laity from their 'bug-bears' and I do believe that not enough is being done to encourage laity in this way. In Ireland one such small initiative is streaming a fortnightly Mass by Fr Edward MacDonald. This will enable those unable to attend Mass that day to unite with those in attendance. (see here) Only a small initiative but a positive one to help souls in need.Could we not put sermons onto audio CD's for others? Could we ourselves not print off interesting articles for non-internet savvy elderly parishioners? Could we offer to help a large family struggling with the demands of small children? Even a lift somewhere, a meal or a kind word can be all that is needed. Or perhaps a fund raising drive for a missionary effort can often unite those in conflict. I am sure that a certain Brazilian monastery, or a bamboo seminary would not say no.

    One of the most charitable clerics in these situations is perhaps the most hated and vilified by those who do not know him (and sometimes by those who do, to their shame) Bishop Richard Williamson. Whilst publicly disagreeing with their non-una cuм position he still recognises souls in need and will help them in his capacity as Bishop if necessary.

    Fr Roy, one of those misguided in conflict over this unnecessary issue, recently said -
    "Of course, making the decision to leave the Society of St. Pius X is something serious. Despite the very serious reasons that convinced the various priests to take this step and probably because of the inertia of so many other confreres, we always wonder a little if we made the right decision. As time passes and in front of a situation that has been worsening within the fraternity in recent years, it is clear that this was the right thing to do. In fact, if you speak with most priests who have left, they will tell you that they consider their departure as a great grace.

    Providence does not fail to give us clear signs either. A few weeks ago, for example, the ceremonialist who was assisting me in Montreal at the Mass on April 17, 2016 (the date of my first compromising sermon), was getting married in Winnipeg, Manitoba, in front of the modernist priest of the Novus Ordo parish, before the amazed eyes of the priest of the Society of St. Pius X, serving as a flower pot and preparing to celebrate the Mass under the eyes of the amazed modernist priest. The marriage of two young traditionalists, but the marriage especially of two churches. Alice in Wonderland! Priest of the Brotherhood tell me who you frequent, I will tell you who you are . Nothing really surprising about this is the arrangements made by Pope Francis and accepted with boundless gratitude by Bishop Fellay. The principle being accepted, the practice will gradually follow, when the spirits will get used to it. Nothing new under the sun. The mechanisms of the revolution are known. Only those who will oppose the whip will survive as always. The others will become accustomed to this umpteenth compromise, the compromise in these domains being a lack of love for God and his Church, and the lack of love being always punished by the blindness of the mind and the lukewarmness of the heart.

    Like all those who have lived in closed worlds, the fact of being outside also allows us to consider things with a little more hindsight and to make a more just judgment. Many, seeing us leave the Society of St. Pius X, behave with us as if we had left the Church. In fact, we have left a religious congregation and continue to serve the Church where Providence guides us. The Fraternity is a means permitted by God and not an end, and if this means is corrupted and becomes an obstacle to the good of Tradition and souls, we must know how to detach ourselves from it. It is Ignatian indifference: I will only use creatures to the extent that they guide me towards the end that God has given me, and I will detach myself from them to the extent that they become an obstacle to this end. How many priests should practice what they preach in the Spiritual Exercises!

    The fact of leaving the Society also brings us into contact with a small world that abounds outside of it and allows us to open our eyes to a different reality: no, the Brotherhood is not the Church and is not Tradition, contrary to what many members seem to preach. She is one of them, but the flock of the Lord is at this moment truly scattered all over the earth, and everywhere are souls of good will who remain faithful to God as best they can. There is no shortage of rising voices or gestures that arise within what is called "Resistance" and that tend to recreate a small world just as cloisonné and impervious. This could only be done to the detriment of the souls of the faithful and we pray Providence to give everyone "a heart as wide as the sand that is by the sea." 1 Kings, 5.9"

    A good point well made. Let us all make an effort to act with charity towards one another and recognise what this crisis has done to us all. I end with the words of a former sedevacantist, reaching out to former friends, talking sense as always, who all should listen to due to his experience and love of souls. Don Curzio Nitoglia


    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6173
    • Reputation: +3147/-2941
    • Gender: Female
    Re: CONFLICT
    « Reply #1 on: April 26, 2018, 06:21:04 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Don Curzio Nitoglia recent published a most enlightening articles on the problems with the Material Pope Thesis.  It is good to see more and more priests tackling these issues publicly.

    It is indeed good to see more priests tackling the issue. Do you know if there is a link available in English to the articles you mention above?

    Oh wait....are his articles on the Non Possumus blog? I think I located at least one, or maybe two of the articles there.
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29


    Offline AJNC

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1002
    • Reputation: +567/-43
    • Gender: Male
    Re: CONFLICT
    « Reply #2 on: April 27, 2018, 03:08:53 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This is how the article appears on that blog. It does not say that it is by Fr Nitoglia but rather by Tradcatresist. Towards the end of the article a link to Fr Notoglia is provided.


    Wednesday, 25 April 2018
     CONFLICT


     By Tradcatresist
     
     Due to the actions of Pope Francis (and arguably Bishop Fellay's trajectory i.e the refusal of the SSPX to loudly condemn those actions) sedevacantism has made great gains throughout tradition over the last couple of years.
     
     Personally, I have never known as many people question a Pope's legitimacy, and never expected that even conservative Catholic's would be asking the same thing.
     
     Perhaps due to a combination of a conspiratorial nature, and ahem "quirkiness" that one finds in the resistance, the question of sedevacantism has now begun to divide cleric and layman alike. This is only to be expected, if one has left behind a "comfortable" existence with the SSPX for 'refusing to compromise with error' then one can hardly blame people for 'blowing a gasket' when they find themselves fighting needless arguments within a remnant of a remnant.
     
     The question of how to deal with this problem is difficult indeed. Some obviously believe that to argue publicly helps sedevacantists achieve their aim. There is a logic to this, many traditionalists are historically open to easy black and white solutions Also, many laymen are ignorant of the issues involved and susceptible to those with convincing reasoning.  I myself was shocked when I left the SSPX by the quite incredible lack of understanding of basic SSPX arguments by the average member of the laity. To give one example, supplied jurisdiction. (Indeed, many people attending should not be, as they are only doing so for geographical reasons, rather than a necessity for supplied jurisdiction. They would be just as content at a local diocesan Latin Mass.)
     
     On the other hand, how are people ever going to be convinced of error if they are not debated. I hope that this is the aim of Fr Chazal's new work and concede that forums are not always the best avenue. Particularly, when they seem to attract people with a seemingly limitless time to cut and paste but not enough time to reflect that what one says to another member of Christ's mystical body is there for all the world to see now and forever. However, without such forums would we have been made aware of GREC, Krah, the letter of the three Bishop's etc etc? The moderator of the most popular resistance forum rarely says something I disagree with, indeed I sometimes am shocked at the response he gets when he simply states truths that were common place in every SSPX parish fifteen years ago. However, some regular contributors need to ask themselves what is in their heart when they argue their point, love for souls or destroying an opponent?
     
     Possibly, a part of the problem is a lack of direction from above. Small positive initiatives can often distract laity from their 'bug-bears' and I do believe that not enough is being done to encourage laity in this way. In Ireland one such small initiative is streaming a fortnightly Mass by Fr Edward MacDonald. This will enable those unable to attend Mass that day to unite with those in attendance. (see here) Only a small initiative but a positive one to help souls in need.Could we not put sermons onto audio CD's for others? Could we ourselves not print off interesting articles for non-internet savvy elderly parishioners? Could we offer to help a large family struggling with the demands of small children? Even a lift somewhere, a meal or a kind word can be all that is needed. Or perhaps a fund raising drive for a missionary effort can often unite those in conflict. I am sure that a certain Brazilian monastery, or a bamboo seminary would not say no.
     
     One of the most charitable clerics in these situations is perhaps the most hated and vilified by those who do not know him (and sometimes by those who do, to their shame) Bishop Richard Williamson. Whilst publicly disagreeing with their non-una cuм position he still recognises souls in need and will help them in his capacity as Bishop if necessary.
     
     Fr Roy, one of those misguided in conflict over this unnecessary issue, recently said -
     "Of course, making the decision to leave the Society of St. Pius X is something serious. Despite the very serious reasons that convinced the various priests to take this step and probably because of the inertia of so many other confreres, we always wonder a little if we made the right decision. As time passes and in front of a situation that has been worsening within the fraternity in recent years, it is clear that this was the right thing to do. In fact, if you speak with most priests who have left, they will tell you that they consider their departure as a great grace.
     
     Providence does not fail to give us clear signs either. A few weeks ago, for example, the ceremonialist who was assisting me in Montreal at the Mass on April 17, 2016 (the date of my first compromising sermon), was getting married in Winnipeg, Manitoba, in front of the modernist priest of the Novus Ordo parish, before the amazed eyes of the priest of the Society of St. Pius X, serving as a flower pot and preparing to celebrate the Mass under the eyes of the amazed modernist priest. The marriage of two young traditionalists, but the marriage especially of two churches. Alice in Wonderland! Priest of the Brotherhood tell me who you frequent, I will tell you who you are . Nothing really surprising about this is the arrangements made by Pope Francis and accepted with boundless gratitude by Bishop Fellay. The principle being accepted, the practice will gradually follow, when the spirits will get used to it. Nothing new under the sun. The mechanisms of the revolution are known. Only those who will oppose the whip will survive as always. The others will become accustomed to this umpteenth compromise, the compromise in these domains being a lack of love for God and his Church, and the lack of love being always punished by the blindness of the mind and the lukewarmness of the heart.
     
     
    Like all those who have lived in closed worlds, the fact of being outside also allows us to consider things with a little more hindsight and to make a more just judgment. Many, seeing us leave the Society of St. Pius X, behave with us as if we had left the Church. In fact, we have left a religious congregation and continue to serve the Church where Providence guides us. The Fraternity is a means permitted by God and not an end, and if this means is corrupted and becomes an obstacle to the good of Tradition and souls, we must know how to detach ourselves from it. It is Ignatian indifference: I will only use creatures to the extent that they guide me towards the end that God has given me, and I will detach myself from them to the extent that they become an obstacle to this end. How many priests should practice what they preach in the Spiritual Exercises!
     
     The fact of leaving the Society also brings us into contact with a small world that abounds outside of it and allows us to open our eyes to a different reality: no, the Brotherhood is not the Church and is not Tradition, contrary to what many members seem to preach. She is one of them, but the flock of the Lord is at this moment truly scattered all over the earth, and everywhere are souls of good will who remain faithful to God as best they can. There is no shortage of rising voices or gestures that arise within what is called "Resistance" and that tend to recreate a small world just as cloisonné and impervious. This could only be done to the detriment of the souls of the faithful and we pray Providence to give everyone "a heart as wide as the sand that is by the sea." 1 Kings, 5.9" (End quote)
     
     A good point well made. Let us all make an effort to act with charity towards one another and recognise what this crisis has done to us all. I end this article with the words of a former sedevacantist, Don Curzio Nitoglia,  talking sense as always, who all should listen to due to his experience and love of souls. here
    Posted by Traditional Catholic at 05:13  No comments:
     Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6173
    • Reputation: +3147/-2941
    • Gender: Female
    Re: CONFLICT
    « Reply #3 on: April 27, 2018, 09:55:05 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This is how the article appears on that blog. It does not say that it is by Fr Nitoglia but rather by Tradcatresist. Towards the end of the article a link to Fr Notoglia is provided.

    I think you're right. It doesn't appear to have been written by Fr. Nitoglia, as I had thought. But given the content, it does seem to have been written by a priest of the Resistance.

    It's a very balanced essay on the current and growing problem of sedevacantism.














    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6173
    • Reputation: +3147/-2941
    • Gender: Female
    Re: CONFLICT
    « Reply #4 on: April 27, 2018, 10:25:21 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • I think you're right. It doesn't appear to have been written by Fr. Nitoglia, as I had thought. But given the content, it does seem to have been written by a priest of the Resistance.

    It's a very balanced essay on the current and growing problem of sedevacantism.


    I should add that it's good that there are Resistance priests who are addressing the growing problem of Sedeism. If it goes unaddressed, then we will all wake up one day to find that the Resistance has gone sede. Sedeism is insidious. 
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29


    Offline Jaynek

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3874
    • Reputation: +1993/-1112
    • Gender: Female
    Re: CONFLICT
    « Reply #5 on: April 27, 2018, 10:32:32 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • I don't see why sedevacantism is such a problem.  The problem is the crisis in the Church.  It follows from the nature of the crisis that there will be confusion and disagreement about just exactly what needs to be done about it.  Why put so much energy into condemning other Catholics for reaching a different conclusion than oneself?

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6173
    • Reputation: +3147/-2941
    • Gender: Female
    Re: CONFLICT
    « Reply #6 on: April 27, 2018, 10:33:35 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I don't see why sedevacantism is such a problem.  The problem is the crisis in the Church.  It follows from the nature of the crisis that there will be confusion and disagreement about just exactly what needs to be done about it.  Why put so much energy into condemning other Catholics for reaching a different conclusion than oneself?

    Did you read the O.P.?
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29

    Offline hollingsworth

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2786
    • Reputation: +2888/-512
    • Gender: Male
    Re: CONFLICT
    « Reply #7 on: April 27, 2018, 10:48:04 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • jaynek: 
    Quote
    I don't see why sedevacantism is such a problem.  The problem is the crisis in the Church.  It follows from the nature of the crisis that there will be confusion and disagreement about just exactly what needs to be done about it.  Why put so much energy into condemning other Catholics for reaching a different conclusion than oneself?

    I fully agree.  The "problem" is not sedevacantism.  The "problem" is an apostate, faithless church which gave rise to, and inspired the sede position to begin with.