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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6

Author Topic: FSSP Granted an Indult to offer the 1958 Holy Week Rubrics  (Read 3710 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline PG

Re: FSSP Granted an Indult to offer the 1958 Holy Week Rubrics
« Reply #10 on: March 06, 2018, 04:03:47 PM »
Quote from: Meg on March 06, 2018, 01:10:16 PM
Nonsense.
What do you find so nonsensical about what I have said?  
Do you not believe bishop williamson used the old holy week without any intention of using the other pre 62 liturgy?  
Do you not believe the explanation I have provided for the term sedeplenist?
Do you not believe that I specifically want the resistance to rise to the top in all of traditions squabbles?  
If not these, then what?
Logged

Offline Meg

Re: FSSP Granted an Indult to offer the 1958 Holy Week Rubrics
« Reply #11 on: March 06, 2018, 04:09:26 PM »
Quote from: PG on March 06, 2018, 04:03:47 PM
What do you find so nonsensical about what I have said?  
Do you not believe bishop williamson used the old holy week without any intention of using the other pre 62 liturgy?  
Do you not believe the explanation I have provided for the term sedeplenist?
Do you not believe that I specifically want the resistance to rise to the top in all of traditions squabbles?  
If not these, then what?
Bishop Williamson is not a sedeplenist. You seem to want to believe that he is. And I'm not interested in your explanation as to why you believe it. Sedewhatevers cannot be reasoned with. I've been there, done that.

You want your particular sedewhatever POV to prevail in order to unite the Resistance. You aren't the only one. But that has little chance of happening. 
Logged

Offline PG

Re: FSSP Granted an Indult to offer the 1958 Holy Week Rubrics
« Reply #12 on: March 06, 2018, 04:36:14 PM »
Quote from: Meg on March 06, 2018, 04:09:26 PM
Bishop Williamson is not a sedeplenist. You seem to want to believe that he is. And I'm not interested in your explanation as to why you believe it. Sedewhatevers cannot be reasoned with. I've been there, done that.

You want your particular sedewhatever POV to prevail in order to unite the Resistance. You aren't the only one. But that has little chance of happening.
Sedeplenist means that the seat of peter is full.  Sede means seat, and plenist reflects there being plenty there, in the seat.  It means it is full.  How many times have we all heard bishop williamson say he believes that francis is pope?  And, all the past conciliar popes as well.  That means Bishop williamson is a sedeplenist.  The sspx is sedeplenist.  The ecclesia dei is sedeplenist.  They all always have been regardless of their other disagreements.  If such a cleric puts the pope in the canon of their mass, they are a sedeplenist.  If a cleric does not place the pope in the canon of the mass, that means they are a sedevacantist.  Don't let your hatred of me for exposing louis de montfort as the fraud that he is blind you to reality.  Facts are facts.
Logged

Offline Meg

Re: FSSP Granted an Indult to offer the 1958 Holy Week Rubrics
« Reply #13 on: March 06, 2018, 04:45:46 PM »
Quote from: PG on March 06, 2018, 04:36:14 PM
Sedeplenist means that the seat of peter is full.  Sede means seat, and plenist reflects there being plenty there, in the seat.  It means it is full.  How many times have we all heard bishop williamson say he believes that francis is pope?  And, all the past conciliar popes as well.  That means Bishop williamson is a sedeplenist.  The sspx is sedeplenist.  The ecclesia dei is sedeplenist.  They all always have been regardless of their other disagreements.  If such a cleric puts the pope in the canon of their mass, they are a sedeplenist.  If a cleric does not place the pope in the canon of the mass, that means they are a sedevacantist.  Don't let your hatred of me for exposing louis de montfort as the fraud that he is blind you to reality.  Facts are facts.

Just because some sedewhatevers use a made-up term called sedeplenism, this doesn't mean that the term has any real meaning, except in the minds of those who profess this POV. The term is meaningless to me. And....I've never heard any Resistance priest or bishop use it at all. Why should they?

Why would you think that I hate you? That's quite extreme....just because I think that sedewhateverism is wrong. And....where did you get the idea that I hate you because you exposed De Monfort? I barely even looked at your thread or whatever that was on the subject, since I don't really care about it. I'm not a fan of De Montfort anyway, because he over-analyzes everything - especially Marian devotion.
Logged

Offline PG

Re: FSSP Granted an Indult to offer the 1958 Holy Week Rubrics
« Reply #14 on: March 06, 2018, 05:01:17 PM »
Well, I did not make up the term.  However, it is a professional, accurate, and useful term.  It makes discussion of the matter more efficient, so long as the terms are accurate.  And, in this case it is.  Look it up on google.  You will see that I am not the only one who uses it.  I see no negative to its use.  I will continue to use it.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
« previous next »