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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8

Author Topic: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"  (Read 4561 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SeanJohnson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15064
  • Reputation: +9980/-3161
  • Gender: Male
Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
« Reply #75 on: October 06, 2019, 01:27:22 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on October 06, 2019, 01:01:36 PM
    Does he denounce it as a theory, or just as a "fact"?  I think the theory is valid but I can't impose it on anyone else.  This is where many sedes err, by drawing lines in the sand.


    Fr Chazal gave that 2 hour conference (I think in Australia) where he was answering Fr Cekada's "dogmatism" on the issue.  Fr Chazal admitted that sedevacantism might be correct, but he said we can't say for sure.  His whole thesis was, "Why do we HAVE to say that the chair is vacant?  Why can't we just say the pope is unorthodox and should be ignored?  The issue of the vacant chair is up to the Church to decide."
    .
    He is not opposed to sedevacantist ideals, but he is opposed to dogmatism on the matter and I wholeheartedly agree.

    1) Regarding sedevacantism, BIshop Williamson says it is an emotional overreaction.  Howlingsworth proves it rather nicely, coming to his conclusion without any theology, but instead a gut reaction that Francis can't posssible be pope and be doing the things he is doing.

    2) Regarding Fr. Chazal, he explicitly denies sedeprivationism, yet Ladislaus wants to impose it upon him anyway because of something he said in a conference.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline ByzCat3000

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1889
    • Reputation: +500/-141
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
    « Reply #76 on: October 06, 2019, 01:36:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Fr. Chazal might be a good example of my point though.  He says to ignore *all* the Pope's actions (rather than particularly the evil ones) which seems practically equivalent to Sedeprivationism in my mind.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41899
    • Reputation: +23942/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
    « Reply #77 on: October 06, 2019, 01:45:09 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: ByzCat3000 on October 06, 2019, 01:36:14 PM
    Fr. Chazal might be a good example of my point though.  He says to ignore *all* the Pope's actions (rather than particularly the evil ones) which seems practically equivalent to Sedeprivationism in my mind.

    Yes, in the practical order, it amounts to the same thing.  He tried to distance himself from sedeprivationism by saying that his position is that they have valid but illicit jurisdiction.  Now, I'm not sure what that means in the case of jurisdiction.  I understand what it mean for the Sacraments, but not so much for jurisdiction.

    But for all intents and purposes it's the same thing.  Father Chazal's position differs from classic R&R, which holds that we evaluate each command or teaching on a case-by-case basis, that commands that are not contrary to faith or morals are binding on consciences.  Father Chazal has stated that none of their commands or teachings, even if they are neutral or even good, are binding under pain of sin.  According to him, they can and must be completely ignored; they are under "quarantine".
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41899
    • Reputation: +23942/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
    « Reply #78 on: October 06, 2019, 01:48:09 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on October 06, 2019, 01:27:22 PM
    Regarding sedevacantism, BIshop Williamson says it is an emotional overreaction.

    Well, sure, that's his opinion, but sedevacantism itself is founded on some very serious theological reasons and principles ... as Archbishop Lefebvre himself conceded.  Now, certainly, the dogmatic brand of sedevacantism is in fact an overreaction to the problems with R&R ... IMO.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41899
    • Reputation: +23942/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
    « Reply #79 on: October 06, 2019, 01:49:41 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: ByzCat3000 on October 06, 2019, 11:57:19 AM
    In what meaningful way is the SSPX Resistance in communion with Francis anyways though?  That's the question I keep asking, and I've yet to see anyone answer it.  The normal SSPX, whether right or wrong, is at least *trying* to be regularized, so you can debate to what extent its OK to disobey the guy you think is pope (even that comes down to some level of private interpretation but I digress.)  I'm still not sure what practical difference there is between being Resistance, and being sede.  I'm not saying there isn't one, I just don't get it.  The accusation of "schism" here seems purely technical.

    EDIT: This comment was originally made in response to Sean's.

    Yes, the recognition of the V2 Popes seems like little more than a technicality, just lip service.  You put a picture of Francis up in your chapels' vestibules, mention his name in the Canon, but that's the end of it.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41899
    • Reputation: +23942/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
    « Reply #80 on: October 06, 2019, 01:52:29 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on October 06, 2019, 12:04:04 PM
    Yes.

    Well, since you say that the legitimacy of the V2 papal claimants is dogmatic fact, you hold +Lefebvre and +Williamson to be heretics ... since they have both publicly stated that it is possible that these men are not popes.  It is heretical not only to reject a dogma, but even to doubt it.  So, for instance, you don't completely reject the Immaculate Conception, but you say that it's possible that it's not true ... you are a heretic.

    Let the record show the SeanJohnson considers Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop Williamson to be heretics.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41899
    • Reputation: +23942/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
    « Reply #81 on: October 06, 2019, 01:54:07 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: ByzCat3000 on October 06, 2019, 12:07:08 PM
    But I think its possible that it *is* a dogmatic fact that he's the Pope though.  I guess that's what I'm saying.

    If we wanted to hyper nuance this into percentages, it seems like you believe that he's almost certainly not the Pope, but you're not willing to say its definitive.  Whereas at least as of now I'd say he's most probably the Pope, but maybe I'm wrong.

    You're saying that it is possible that it's true, that they are legitimate.  But unless you hold that it's certain with the certainty of faith, with the same certainty that you believe in the Real Presence, then you do not uphold it as dogmatic fact.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41899
    • Reputation: +23942/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
    « Reply #82 on: October 06, 2019, 01:55:24 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on October 06, 2019, 12:09:57 PM
    Your continuous bs attributions to others allegedly holding your position are laughable.
    Bishop Williamson denounces sedevacantism as recently as the Intro he wrote for my book.
    Fr. Chazal, another alleged sympathizer, denounces it and sedeprivationism, yet you say otherwise by putting your own meaning into his words.
    No Lad, you are on your own, whatever you say to the contrary.

    I never said that these men have embraced sedevacantism.  What I'm saying is that they are not sedeplenists.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41899
    • Reputation: +23942/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
    « Reply #83 on: October 06, 2019, 01:57:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on October 06, 2019, 12:45:39 PM
    Absolutely in communion with him: By recognizing his authority to govern the universal church.
    If a child refuses the evil commands of his father, it does not mean they are rejecting his fatherhood.

    If the evil father tells you to take out the garbage, are you bound to do it under pain of sin?  Yes, according to R&R.  No, according to Father Chazal's opinion.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41899
    • Reputation: +23942/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
    « Reply #84 on: October 06, 2019, 02:05:59 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on October 06, 2019, 12:56:06 PM
    Agree Ladislaus.  Even if they doubt the pope is orthodox, and think he might be a heretic, this would lead to doubt.  And such doubts are legitimate, per most theologians who have studied the matter.  ...Even many novus ordo-ites are becoming 'sede doubtists'.  
    .
    Personally, I think 'sede doubtism' is a mindset, while 'sede-privationism' is an actual theological view, to which 'sede doubtism' logically leads.

    Absolutely.  I have made this distinction myself.  Sededoubtism is a response in conscience to the crisis.  Sedeprivationism comes into play in terms of defining the status of such a pope IF IN FACT he is a heretic.

    IF HE IS A HERETIC, then ...
    1) does he lose all authority and the office of the papacy (sedevacantism)
    2) does he lose authority but retain the office (sedimpoundism and sedeprivationism)
    3) does he lose neither (R&R) ... but evil teachings of commands can be rejected on a case by case basis

    So the second set of questions only comes into play once the doubt is resolved in favor of his being a heretic ... but a sede-doubtist prescinds from the requirement of picking any of these.  I mean, heck, serious theologians have disagreed over what happens to such a pope.  So why am I, a layman, required to come up with an answer?

    All I need to resolved in my conscience is whether I am required to follow them, to accept Vatican II and the New Mass, or not.

    I could be a sede-doubtist and sedeprivationist, or a sede-doubtist and sedevacantist, or a sede-doubtist and R&R.  So sede-doubtism does not preclude any one of the possible "resolutions" to the crisis.  It's a response ... or, as you put it, a mindset ... rather than a resolution.  I am not required to resolve the problem, but I am required to respond to it in conscience.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41899
    • Reputation: +23942/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
    « Reply #85 on: October 06, 2019, 02:08:24 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on October 06, 2019, 01:01:36 PM
    Does he denounce it as a theory, or just as a "fact"?  I think the theory is valid but I can't impose it on anyone else.  This is where many sedes err, by drawing lines in the sand.


    Fr Chazal gave that 2 hour conference (I think in Australia) where he was answering Fr Cekada's "dogmatism" on the issue.  Fr Chazal admitted that sedevacantism might be correct, but he said we can't say for sure.  His whole thesis was, "Why do we HAVE to say that the chair is vacant?  Why can't we just say the pope is unorthodox and should be ignored?  The issue of the vacant chair is up to the Church to decide."
    .
    He is not opposed to sedevacantist ideals, but he is opposed to dogmatism on the matter and I wholeheartedly agree.

    Thank you ... from someone who actually listened to the entire thing.
    Logged

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6173
    • Reputation: +3147/-2941
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
    « Reply #86 on: October 06, 2019, 02:26:33 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on October 06, 2019, 01:27:22 PM
    1) Regarding sedevacantism, BIshop Williamson says it is an emotional overreaction.  Howlingsworth proves it rather nicely, coming to his conclusion without any theology, but instead a gut reaction that Francis can't posssible be pope and be doing the things he is doing.

    2) Regarding Fr. Chazal, he explicitly denies sedeprivationism, yet Ladislaus wants to impose it upon him anyway because of something he said in a conference.

    It's no use trying to debate or talk sense into the sedeprivationists or sedevacantists. They are allowed to promote their views here all they want, without censure. Why spend time debating with something that is completely condoned on the forum? It's a waste of our time. They are only here to gain converts to their cause, and they are allowed to do so. No point in trying to stop something that is allowed.

    It's like when I used to post on the Catholic answers forum. I eventually gave up, since the forum was geared toward the Novus Ordo Catholics. Well, it's the same here. The only difference is that this forum is geared toward the sedevacantists and sedeprivationists. Why rebel against that which is intrinsic to a forum?
    Logged
    "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 Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41899
    • Reputation: +23942/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
    « Reply #87 on: October 06, 2019, 02:30:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Meg on October 06, 2019, 02:26:33 PM
    It's no use trying to debate or talk sense into the sedeprivationists or sedevacantists.

    Just stop, Meg.  In your entire posting history here on CI you have never once made a rational argument of any kind using theology or logic.  You simply emerge from time to time to post some emotional rant.  If there's anyone who's outside of being "reasoned with", then it's most certainly you.
    Logged

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6173
    • Reputation: +3147/-2941
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
    « Reply #88 on: October 06, 2019, 02:35:38 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on October 06, 2019, 02:30:54 PM
    Just stop, Meg.  In your entire posting history here on CI you have never once made a rational argument of any kind using theology or logic.  You simply emerge from time to time to post some emotional rant.  If there's anyone who's outside of being "reasoned with", then it's most certainly you.

    You should be happy. You can promote you sedeprivationist views here without censure. You spend many hours here every day, even though you have a family with children.

    It shouldn't bother you that someone disagrees with your agenda. After all, what difference will my posts make? None at all. I'm one of a very small minority who supports the Resistance. Our views don't matter at all. But yours do.

    Carry on.
    Logged
    "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 Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41899
    • Reputation: +23942/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does +Williamson think that the Old Mass is "nourishing?"
    « Reply #89 on: October 06, 2019, 02:38:24 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Meg on October 06, 2019, 02:26:33 PM
    They are only here to gain converts to their cause, and they are allowed to do so.

    Nonsense.  I am not here to convert anyone.  What I enjoy most about CI is having a sounding board for my own thinking and reasoning.  I am seeking the truth and attempting to form my own conscience.  Openly listening to critical points of view is essential to avoiding error.  I do, however, dismiss emotional rants like your own and those of Sean.

    I recently had a PM exchange with someone who asked me whether it was licit to receive Sacraments from a Thuc-line priest.  This was not a validity question, but because the person believed that Francis is pope and the Thuc-line priests were nearly all sedevacantists.  I told him that only he could decide that depending on the dictates of his conscience.  He concluded that he could not, and I told him that his position was not unreasonable.

    If I were a priest, I would not deny the Sacraments to R&R nor sedevacantist nor sedeprivationist, not by reason of their position.  I'm not in any position to impose my conscience on others.  I might have strong opinions on some matters, but that does not mean I have any authority to impose them on anyone else.
    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8
    « previous next »