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

Author Topic: Flashback - Betrayal by the Nine  (Read 7043 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline 2Vermont

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10109
  • Reputation: +5284/-917
  • Gender: Female
Re: Flashback - Betrayal by the Nine
« Reply #45 on: April 12, 2024, 07:06:33 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • ::Sigh::

    Once again, from the Letter of the Nine (1983):

    2. Doubtful Priests

    Over the past few years, the Society has accepted the service of priests ordained by vernacular versions of the New Rite of Ordination of 1968. On November 30, 1947, Pope Pius XII issued his Apostolic Constitution Sacramentum Ordinis, dealing with the matter of the Sacrament of Orders. It was his intention "to put an end to all controversy," as he said. He did this by, among other things, decreeing and determining which words in the form for the ordination of a priest "are essential and therefore requisite for validity."

    The English words of the form in the New Rite of ordination so differ from the ones Pius XII said were essential for validity that they introduce a positive doubt as to its validity. In fact the doubt is not negative, but positive enough even in your own mind, Your Grace, so as to justify the conditional ordination of priests ordained in the New Rite.

    And so you have in fact conditionally ordained at least two priests in America: Father Sullivan and Father [. . .]. Indeed, you even asked Rev. Philip Stark to accept conditional ordination and he, as you yourself told us, adamantly refused And yet, after his refusal, you nevertheless allowed and continue to allow him to work with the Society; and he is not the only doubtfully ordained priest that you permit to do so — he is one of many.

    Thus under the aegis of the Society, doubtful Masses are being offered, doubtful absolutions are being given and dying people are being anointed with an "Extreme Unction" that may be invalid and of no more value than the anointing with oil done by a Protestant minister.

    How, one must ask before God, can the Society reject the doubtful sacraments of the new Church only to replace them — 3— with doubtful priests? How grave a sin this is! How false a pretense! Furthermore, the Society in the Southwest District has begun to import to the United States priests whose theological training and manner of ordination are under a similar cloud. As Your Grace knows, this has been a source of scandal.

    The employment of such priests strikes at the heart of one of the reasons for the Society's existence: to provide unquestionably valid sacraments for the faithful — for if a positive doubt exists as to the validity of a priest's ordination, not only are the sacraments he administers doubtful, but the faithful are put into a position by the Society of choosing between the doubtful sacraments of the new Church and the doubtful priests of the Society. From the standpoint of Catholic morality this is inadmissible.

    Revenge not yourselves, my dearly beloved; but give place unto wrath, for it is written: Revenge is mine, I will repay, saith the Lord. (Romans 12:19)


    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13860
    • Reputation: +5579/-867
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Flashback - Betrayal by the Nine
    « Reply #46 on: April 12, 2024, 07:07:07 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

  • The same could be said about the Archbishop. Why didn’t he just “acknowledge and obey the direction” of his “pope” Paul VI or “pope” JPII? Thank God he didn’t follow your advice!
    He obeyed God rather than man. The pope is not God.
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse


    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 42120
    • Reputation: +24092/-4346
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Flashback - Betrayal by the Nine
    « Reply #47 on: April 12, 2024, 07:10:14 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Also from the above link (interview with Father Cekada):
    Quote
    What I think was also strange is that over the years this always came to be understood in SSPX circles as “well all this was just because they didn’t want to recognize the Pope.” And that wasn’t it at all – it wasn’t about not recognizing Wojtyla, but about not recognizing Archbishop Lefebvre as Pope. He was a devout man, but he didn’t have any authority to decide these questions of annulments, etc.

    This SV slant on the break was always just SSPX propaganda against the Nine, since I think a lot of the faithful would have been concerned about NO "Orders" and "annulments".  As I said, several of the Nine were not SV at the time, and a couple were almost anti-SV.

    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 42120
    • Reputation: +24092/-4346
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Flashback - Betrayal by the Nine
    « Reply #48 on: April 12, 2024, 07:11:05 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • He obeyed God rather than man. The pope is not God.

    Pope is in fact "Christ on earth", thus he's called the Vicar of Christ.  +Lefebvre wasn't even that.  But your "logic" is that it's OK to refuse submission to the Vicar of Christ over matters of conscience but evil to refuse submission to +Lefebvre over matters of conscience.  Go figure.

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13860
    • Reputation: +5579/-867
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Flashback - Betrayal by the Nine
    « Reply #49 on: April 12, 2024, 07:12:33 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Pope is in fact "Christ on earth", thus he's called the Vicar of Christ.  +Lefebvre wasn't even that.
    :facepalm:
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse


    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 42120
    • Reputation: +24092/-4346
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Flashback - Betrayal by the Nine
    « Reply #50 on: April 12, 2024, 07:15:40 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 2. Doubtful Priests

    ...
    In fact the doubt is not negative, but positive enough even in your own mind, Your Grace, so as to justify the conditional ordination of priests ordained in the New Rite.


    This is a key point.  If a conditional ordination is permitted, then it's required before the faithful can receive the Sacraments from such a priest (laboring under positive doubt).  So was there or wasn't there a positive doubt?  If not, then conditional ordinations are not permitted.  If yes, then why were these priests being sent out to the faithful to give them positively-doubtful Sacraments?

    This blatant contradiction was often smoothed over by (and +Lefebvre himself used the expression) it being "better" or "preferrable" on account of the "peace among the faithful".  Sound like they realized that many of their faithful held the orders to be positively doubtful and they didn't want to risk losing too many people.

    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 42120
    • Reputation: +24092/-4346
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Flashback - Betrayal by the Nine
    « Reply #51 on: April 12, 2024, 07:18:22 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • :facepalm:

    Which part of this doesn't compute, the term "Vicar of Christ" or the fact that +Lefebvre is inferior to the pope in terms of authority?  Both of these are Catholic dogma, the latter explicitly taught by Vatican I as dogma ... so which CATHOLIC DOGMA are you facepalming?  This (your facepalming of Catholic dogma) demonstrates more clearly than ever that you're little more than a thinly-veiled Old Catholic heretic.

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13860
    • Reputation: +5579/-867
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Flashback - Betrayal by the Nine
    « Reply #52 on: April 12, 2024, 08:11:38 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  •  This (your facepalming of Catholic dogma) demonstrates more clearly than ever that you're little more than a thinly-veiled Old Catholic heretic.
    Try to always remember that, like all other non-sede trads, I am only a heretic to sedes.
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse


    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 42120
    • Reputation: +24092/-4346
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Flashback - Betrayal by the Nine
    « Reply #53 on: April 12, 2024, 08:15:58 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Try to always remember that, like all other non-sede trads, I am only a heretic to sedes.

    Uhm, no.  You're a heretic to Catholics.  Please explain which of the Catholic dogmas you were facepalming above, i.e. whether it's that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ on earth or that +Lefebvre has less authority than a Pope.

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10345
    • Reputation: +6253/-1743
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Flashback - Betrayal by the Nine
    « Reply #54 on: April 12, 2024, 09:13:33 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    Once again, from the Letter of the Nine (1983):

    2. Doubtful Priests
    I agree, this is a major concern.  We are all blessed to have had +ABL and the sspx, but...let's not pretend that their view on doubtful priests (i.e. new rite sacraments) and the new mass is logical or consistent.  It's not.  At all.

    Fr Wathen (and other priests) were criticizing the sspx back in the early 80s for their wishy-washy attitude towards new-rome/new-sacraments.  Of all the good things that ABL/sspx did over the years, this philosophical error was their downfall, and it's why they are what they are today.

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 10109
    • Reputation: +5284/-917
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Flashback - Betrayal by the Nine
    « Reply #55 on: April 12, 2024, 11:13:25 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • He obeyed God rather than man. The pope is not God.
    As did The Nine.  Or are concerns with doubtful priests and sacraments only now an "obeying God, not man" issue post-Nine and post-Lefebrve?
    Revenge not yourselves, my dearly beloved; but give place unto wrath, for it is written: Revenge is mine, I will repay, saith the Lord. (Romans 12:19)


    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4218
    • Reputation: +2453/-557
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Flashback - Betrayal by the Nine
    « Reply #56 on: April 12, 2024, 11:26:42 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • As did The Nine.  Or are concerns with doubtful priests and sacraments only now an "obeying God, not man" issue post-Nine and post-Lefebrve?
    Vermont, it’s not that Stubborn “doesn’t get it”, he doesn’t WANT to get it.
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 42120
    • Reputation: +24092/-4346
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Flashback - Betrayal by the Nine
    « Reply #57 on: April 12, 2024, 11:37:10 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I agree, this is a major concern.  We are all blessed to have had +ABL and the sspx, but...let's not pretend that their view on doubtful priests (i.e. new rite sacraments) and the new mass is logical or consistent.  It's not.  At all.

    Fr Wathen (and other priests) were criticizing the sspx back in the early 80s for their wishy-washy attitude towards new-rome/new-sacraments.  Of all the good things that ABL/sspx did over the years, this philosophical error was their downfall, and it's why they are what they are today.

    Right.  Archbishop Lefebvre was a great man, but he wasn't infallible and did also err (although without a doubt materially only) on EENS dogma, articulating a position that's basically identical to Rahner's Anonymous Christian doctrine, where people are saved BY the Church (and by Christ) even if not IN the Church.  EENS definitions do not read "no salvation except by means of the Church" but, rather, "no salvation except IN the Church".  He made some decisions that didn't show him to be a great judge of character (undoubtedly due to his propensity to think the best of everyone, e.g. consecrating +Felly, appointing Schmidberger et al. to positions of authority, etc.) And his error on EENS was undoubtedly just due to the fact that this was being taught already for decades prior to Vatican II in seminaries even by priests who were otherwise orthodox or conservative, since the assault on that dogma has been going on for centuries.  +Lefebvre did not train to be a theologian, but a missionary and a diplomat.  When Father Feeney sent out a letter to all the world's bishops regarding the necessity to defend EENS with renewed vigor, he only received two positive responses (and the letter had nothing to do with BoD, which he didn't even discuss until later).

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6177
    • Reputation: +3149/-2941
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Flashback - Betrayal by the Nine
    « Reply #58 on: April 12, 2024, 12:15:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • He obeyed God rather than man. The pope is not God.

    What you said above sums the problem up very well. Some SV's (such as Ladislaus) believe that the pope is God. And, if a pope deviates from how God is supposed to behave (according to them), then he cannot be both Pope and God, since the two are synonymous. They are one in the same. The pope is like the fourth person of the Trinity for them. Such a strange way to view the situation. It seems to derive from a Vatican ll mindset. 
    "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 Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13860
    • Reputation: +5579/-867
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Flashback - Betrayal by the Nine
    « Reply #59 on: April 12, 2024, 12:19:46 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Uhm, no.  You're a heretic to Catholics.  Please explain which of the Catholic dogmas you were facepalming above, i.e. whether it's that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ on earth or that +Lefebvre has less authority than a Pope.
    Uhm, if anyone is a heretic, it's you - except to other sedes. Face palm was for you insisting: "Pope is in fact "Christ on earth." Which actually is heresy. Your fellow sedes apparently agree with you on this heresy since they show their consent by their silence.

    But now you've changed your tune again, now you say above: "the Pope is the Vicar of Christ on earth." Is the pope Christ or Christ's Vicar? Where is this dogma you falsely claim I facepalmed?And why do you repeatedly and falsely accuse me of facepalming a dogma of the Church? Can you believe that it was actually you and your ridiculousness that I facepalmed?


    You said:
    Quote
    But your "logic" is that it's OK to refuse submission to the Vicar of Christ over matters of conscience but evil to refuse submission to +Lefebvre over matters of conscience.  Go figure.
    Let me set you straight, presuming that were possible.

    No, it is not ok to refuse submission to the Vicar of Christ over matters of conscience no matter how trivial. You, as usual, confuse True Obedience (read my sig) with Blind Obedience (read your posts).

    It is not only ok, it is our duty to refuse submission to the Vicar of Christ whenever "the popes use their authority contrary to the end for which this authority was given them. They have a right to be disobeyed by us." - Archbishop Lefebvre

    Using their authority contrary to the end for which this authority was given the conciliar popes are guilty of, and which is something you insist is impossible for popes to be capable of.

    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse