|
| ||||
|
EC595: What remains to be seen is how these words will translate into acts on the part of the new Superior General.
Therefore, honourable Superior General, here is an act to follow your words: why not make public a clear and fair summary of the record of the last Doctrinal Discussions of 2009–2011? You would be backing your fine doctrinal paragraphs of November 23 with a real doctrinal act!Does the bishop ttuly believe that the new SG will act on his challenge? I DO NOT! And I have confidence that not a single forum member of CI believes it either. The studied silence of all interested forum members speaks volumes. Many of you are quite loquacious on other topics. But on this one, apparently, the cat has got your tongues.
How many of you honestly think that Pagliarani is going to act? Do any of you really think that SSPX will publish a summary of the 2009-11 doctrinal discussions?The odds are very low that anything positive happens, naturally speaking, but you never know how God might intervene if people pray for a miracle.
Does the bishop truly believe that the new SG will act on his challenge?Probably not but it never hurts to ask. If the new SG does nothing, then we know there is something to hide of the past discussions; therefore, the new SG has lost some integrity and we know who we are dealing with. At the present, we don't know how independent he is or how loyal to +Fellay's agenda he is. I see this challenge as a litmus test to see the new SG's mindset.
I will state further, without hesitation: Bishop Williamson knows too, in his heart of hearts that Society leaders will never do this. So why does he offer the challenge?I agree with you and probably most would agree too. However, the good Bishop also knows the dire straits that many Catholics would have, if the neo-sspx goes under Rome. How many men, women and children depend on the society for mass/sacraments? How many graces will be lost if they no longer can attend the society or (even worse) if they go along with new-rome into the depths of the indult madness? The consequences are immense!
PV: How many graces will be lost if they (sspx Catholics) no longer can attend the society or (even worse) if they go along with new-rome into the depths of the indult madness? The consequences are immense!
I want to challenge you CI members, i.e those who are still with the Society, and those who are not, including Matthew. How many of you honestly think that Pagliarani is going to act? Do any of you really think that SSPX will publish a summary of the 2009-11 doctrinal discussions?If he didn't ask, many would complain that he didn't ask. He's the only one with the authority among those opposed to the accord who will be listened to by the Menzingen. Don't think for one minute that the other SSPX priests don't hear what he says.
Here is the bishop’s challenge in EC595:
Does the bishop truly believe that the new SG will act on his challenge? I DO NOT!
I want to challenge you CI members, i.e those who are still with the Society, and those who are not, including Matthew. How many of you honestly think that Pagliarani is going to act? Do any of you really think that SSPX will publish a summary of the 2009-11 doctrinal discussions?No, I don't believe Pagliarani is going to act honestly to turn the SSPX around 180 degrees (which is what it would require: a complete U turn from the present course). I think +W knows and believes this as well.
Does the bishop truly believe that the new SG will act on his challenge? I DO NOT! And I have confidence that not a single forum member of CI believes it either. The studied silence of all interested forum members speaks volumes. Many of you are quite loquacious on other topics. But on this one, apparently, the cat has got your tongues.
I will state further, without hesitation: Bishop Williamson knows too, in his heart of hearts that Society leaders will never do this. So why does he offer the challenge?
I want to challenge you CI members, i.e those who are still with the Society, and those who are not, including Matthew. How many of you honestly think that Pagliarani is going to act? Do any of you really think that SSPX will publish a summary of the 2009-11 doctrinal discussions?Until the issue of whether these non-Catholic men actually do have the authority is addressed the insanity will continue.
Here is the bishop’s challenge in EC595:
Does the bishop ttuly believe that the new SG will act on his challenge? I DO NOT! And I have confidence that not a single forum member of CI believes it either. The studied silence of all interested forum members speaks volumes. Many of you are quite loquacious on other topics. But on this one, apparently, the cat has got your tongues.
I will state further, without hesitation: Bishop Williamson knows too, in his heart of hearts that Society leaders will never do this. So why does he offer the challenge?
After the last round of discussions, as the bishop reminds us in EC595, one of the four SSPX representatives in these discussions admitted openly “They (the Romans) are mentally sick, but it is they who have the authority.”
Yet SSPX leaders conclude: “Everything therefore impels the Society to re-open theological Discussions.”
Oh really?! Isn’t the very definition of insanity the repetition of an act, which has failed initially, to produce a different result the second time around? How does one appeal a second time to a Roman hierarchy that by the Society's own admission is mentally sick.
I want hear from some of you generally mouthy forum members. What do you think?
Or, one can ask alternately: how many graces have already been lost by Catholics still in attendance at SSPX chapels?
These Catholics can do what many traditional Catholics have already done. They can search for independent alternatives, or stay home alone and say their Rosaries.
SSPX Catholics, who should know better, support an organization which continues to function only because of them. Otherwise, it would justifiably sink into oblivion. I have no sympathy for your argument.If/when the sspx becomes an indult/rome mass, then your arguments apply. Until then, the obligation of attending mass trumps all other concerns.
..How many of you honestly think that Pagliarani is going to act? Do any of you really think that SSPX will publish a summary of the 2009-11 doctrinal discussions?
Here is the bishop’s challenge in EC595:.
Does the bishop [truly] believe that the new SG will act on his challenge? I DO NOT! And I have confidence that not a single forum member of CI believes it either. The studied silence of all interested forum members speaks volumes. Many of you are quite loquacious on other topics. But on this one, apparently, the cat has got your tongues.
I will state further, without hesitation: Bishop Williamson knows too, in his heart of hearts that Society leaders will never do this. So why does he offer the challenge?.
Not when one has been unjustly banned from the SSPX chapel. My crime was to co-host two resistance masses and invite a dozen people to attend. Seven took up the offer. This was in 2013 and 2014. The resistance never took hold and the SSPX is the only traditional outlet in the area. There is a resistance chapel 300 miles one way, but I am no longer able to travel long distances due to changes in my life circuмstances. So I stay home.
A Catholic has an obligation to attend mass, under pain of mortal sin. Right now, the sspx offers valid mass/sacraments and people have an OBLIGATION to attend, if they have no other alternatives. One CANNOT stay at home if there is an sspx mass available.
Not when one has been unjustly banned from the SSPX chapel. My crime was to co-host two resistance masses and invite a dozen people to attend. Seven took up the offer. This was in 2013 and 2014. The resistance never took hold and the SSPX is the only traditional outlet in the area. There is a resistance chapel 300 miles one way, but I am no longer able to travel long distances due to changes in my life circuмstances. So I stay home.They probably don't even remember who you are and even if they do, they have an obligation to take care of your soul. Just go there and do not give them any money. If you think that some busybodies talk about you, remember what was done to our Lord, their sheepish talk is nothing, let them heap coals upon themselves with their petty hates. Do your job and let God sort out the rest. They are valid priests, and that is the only reason you go there. I see many people like you at my SSPX chapel, they come to mass and then go home. Maybe once in a while they talk after mass to their few old friends who proved themselves to be real friends, and then they leave.
Not when one has been unjustly banned from the SSPX chapel. My crime was to co-host two resistance masses and invite a dozen people to attend. Seven took up the offer. This was in 2013 and 2014. The resistance never took hold and the SSPX is the only traditional outlet in the area. There is a resistance chapel 300 miles one way, but I am no longer able to travel long distances due to changes in my life circuмstances. So I stay home.Lord have mercy
Not when one has been unjustly banned from the SSPX chapel.Obviously, if you're banned you can't go. Exception to the rule. This thread isn't about your situation.
Obviously, if you're banned you can't go. Exception to the rule. This thread isn't about your situation.
Plenty of catholics have benefited from the sspx even if many of their priests are liberal. Those laity who aren't strong in their faith, only have themselves to blame. The mass outweighs other concerns...at the moment.
A Catholic has an obligation to attend mass, under pain of mortal sin. Right now, the sspx offers valid mass/sacraments and people have an OBLIGATION to attend, if they have no other alternatives. One CANNOT stay at home if there is an sspx mass available.
If/when the sspx becomes an indult/rome mass, then your arguments apply. Until then, the obligation of attending mass trumps all other concerns.
Matthew: That is a matter of opinion.Glad the forum's owner responded. PV was out of line, but better that M say it than I.
You (PV) are not the Pope. Please stop pretending to rule on practical, prudential matters. You have no authority to issue Papal proclamations, or issue encyclicals to settle and clarify disputed matters.
The SSPX playing footsie with Modernist Rome and telling their people V2 isn't so bad, let's get closer to the Conciliar Church, etc. is a supreme danger. Certainly enough reason to stay home.I was making a general statement about the sspx. Certainly some sspx chapels are more liberal than others. That decision is left up to the individual. My only point is that I don't think the evidence exists to "red light" ALL sspx chapels just yet. In my experience, the local sspx chapels close to me aren't doctrinally corrupted. Maybe some are elsewhere? Could be.
The fact of the matter is that the decision to 'stay home' cannot be made lightly due to politics or personal preferences.I'm afraid that prior to Matthew's well reasoned comments above, PV, you might have declared the 'stay home' position a mortal sin. I think, also, that you were forced to abridge your earlier remarks about sspx chapels.
I'm afraid that prior to Matthew's well reasoned comments above, PV, you might have declared the 'stay home' position a mortal sin.Missing Mass on Sundays, without a grave reason, is a grave sin. That's what I indirectly said to begin with (and what i continue to hold). Since I can't comment on EVERY sspx chapel, I originally said that the sspx (overall) is not yet an indult, therefore (overall) one cannot skip their masses (generally speaking).
Or, one can ask alternately: how many graces have already been lost by Catholics still in attendance at SSPX chapels? These Catholics can do what many traditional Catholics have already done. They can search for independent alternatives, or stay home alone and say their Rosaries. SSPX Catholics, who should know better, support an organization which continues to function only because of them. Otherwise, it would justifiably sink into oblivion. I have no sympathy for your argument.Not sure what you are saying but what makes you believe people lose graces by assisting at SSPX Masses and receiving the sacraments from their priests? That's stupid talk. Are you Novus Ordo? If so, I understand why you said what you said.
..I cannot travel either as the fumes from auto exhaust make me physically ill.
Taking a plane is also not an option as I have severe vertigo.
I don’t plan to engage in tit or tat with other forum members on this subject.You're the one who wanted to debate the topic, then you say you won't debate, then you complain when the topic fizzles out. ??...??...??