Author Topic: Eleison Comments (Read 10402 times)

JPaul · « **Reply #15 on:** August 30, 2015, 08:55:31 PM »

The SSPX and its spinoff the resistance so called serve in the practical realm of things as gatekeepers providing the raw meat that keeps the natives from overrunning the conciliar fences and breaking out onto the sedevacantist savannahs or otherwise ditching the deracinated Traditional plantation entirely.

curioustrad · « **Reply #16 on:** August 30, 2015, 09:17:28 PM »

Quote from: hollingsworth

curioustrad:
Quote
Which begs the question why does + Williamson play the devil's advocate with Francesco ?

You must think that I will know exactly what you're asking. Maybe I should. But, frankly, I'm not certain what you mean by "devil's advocate" here. Are you asking, by chance, does H.E. give the benefit of the doubt to Pope Francis, or something along that line? :confused1:

Yes exactly.

curioustrad · « **Reply #17 on:** August 30, 2015, 09:20:06 PM »

Quote from: J.Paul

The SSPX and its spinoff the resistance so called serve in the practical realm of things as gatekeepers providing the raw meat that keeps the natives from overrunning the conciliar fences and breaking out onto the sedevacantist savannahs or otherwise ditching the deracinated Traditional plantation entirely.

Really ? I thought sede-land was a jungle where ferocious animals tear you limb from limb - perhaps you're thinking of Cecil the lion from Rhodesia ? I had Jurassic Park in mind myself !

Matthew · « **Reply #18 on:** August 30, 2015, 09:49:19 PM »

Quote from: J.Paul

The SSPX and its spinoff the resistance so called serve in the practical realm of things as gatekeepers providing the raw meat that keeps the natives from overrunning the conciliar fences and breaking out onto the sedevacantist savannahs or otherwise ditching the deracinated Traditional plantation entirely.

1. I don't equate "sedevacantism" with "unrestricted freedom/nirvana/utopia". In Sede-land, there is no authority and the natives there will tear you limb from limb. They each cleave to their own opinions as to the Faith itself, hinging their entire viewpoint of the Faith on one obscure passage from a given encyclical that caught their eye at some point. If you agree with their pet interpretation of their pet encyclical, "you're all right". If not, you're a vitandus (to-be-avoided) heretic, even if the Mass you attend on Sunday looks suspiciously like a good Tridentine Mass...

2. "otherwise ditching the deracinated Traditional plantation entirely"
I don't know what you're suggesting here... giving up on Tradition for the failed experiment it was, or what? Hey, I get frustrated with Trads as much as anyone -- probably more than anyone. But that's the Catholic Faith you're talking about there. Traditional Catholicism is nothing novel or new -- just the Catholic Faith as it was always taught. I don't care if everyone grows cold/lukewarm, becomes a hypocrite, worldly, apathetic, etc. I don't have a whole lot of choice.

"Faith of our Fathers...Holy Faith...We will be true to thee till death..."

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #19 on:** August 31, 2015, 05:45:28 AM »

.

I'm still waiting for Wessex's reply to this post:

Quote from: 2Vermont

Quote from: Neil Obstat
Quote from: Wessex

There were others who stood up to "the unfaithful Church authorities".
They must always be acknowledged and remembered.

Great! But if the world relies on that post, they'll be forgotten.

How about this: Provide a list of their names and countries of origin/operation.

I'm asking for the names of those who stood up at least as prominently as ABL did (since your claim is that he didn't really stand up so much in the first place).

E.g., Does Fr. Leonard Feeney make your list? He "stood up" in 1948, long before the Council reared its ugly head. Or is he somehow disqualified for some unmentionable 'reason'?

.

Cardinal Ottaviani?

While Ottaviani attempted to intervene, maybe a bit weakly, he had long been rubbing elbows and perhaps involved in some of the preparatory shenanigans (at least philosophically or by not resisting early enough) with such characters as Annibale Bugnini and Augustin Cardinal Bea SJ. Since he did not do anything to preserve and continue the Traditional Latin Mass after the N.O. took root, I wouldn't like to say he "stood up to the unfaithful Church authorities," IMHO.

I would put Fr. Gommar DePauw, "Professor of Theology and Doctor of Canon Law and Founder of the Catholic Traditionalist Movement (CTM)" (according to Traditio.com), of New York, in this category, though. He was staunchly opposed to the Vat.II novelties and never had ANYTHING to do with the new liturgy. HOWEVER, since he was unfortunately not a bishop, there was only so much he could accomplish on his own.

While Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen (1895-1979) eventually saw the light and realized he missed his chance to make a real difference, he had long complied and cooperated with the Novus Ordo apparatus, including using the new liturgy, etc., so he did NOT "stand up."

.