Author Topic: +Lefebvre: SSPX must use 1962 reform (Read 7756 times)

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #15 on:** May 14, 2022, 11:45:42 PM »

Quote from: NIFH on May 14, 2022, 11:24:14 PM

Just as I defer my opinions about my clogged drain to my plumber, and my opinions about my tax return to my accountant, I defer my opinions about modern theological problems to the champion of Tradition, who supported his judgments with the doctrine of the Church. Lord, spare me from becoming an armchair theologian!

So profound!

ABL wasn't an actual theologian, btw. Everyone in Traddieland, by necessity, is an armchair theologian. Accept it, just as you should accept that your (cult-member) "rule of faith" died over THIRTY years ago. I know it is impossible to see clearly after guzzling so many gallons of kewl-aid, but maybe someone will read this who actually possesses good will. One never knows...

Incredulous · « **Reply #16 on:** May 15, 2022, 12:16:14 AM »

By 1959, Padre Pio knew that Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ had reached the slippers of the Pope. But what did +ABL know?

By 2022, we finally realize the SSPX's real function is that of the controlled opposition for the infiltrated jewChurch.

The SSPX has always maintained an ecuмenical posture, where non baptized jews, muslims and buddhists can get to Heaven. (+ABL's 4 Baptisms in his 1984 Open Letter to Confused Catholics).

The SSPX's true purpose is to keep Catholic tradition, kosher.

That the "conflicted" Jєωιѕн Pope Pius XII opened the way to liturgical reforms is no excuse.
+ABL embraced the Bugnini/Montini 1962 Missal with it's butchering of Holy Week.
He thought rejection of it was an "extremist" posture. He was wrong.

And the SSPX openly denied the coup de tat of the 1958 conclave with Cardinal Siri (Pope Gregory XVII's) papacy.

Instead, they insisted that all the mainstream media's successors to Pius XII were legitimate.
And that union with these heretics needed to be maintained.... even Francis?

Kosher tradition... this is the legacy of the SSPX for 53 years and counting.

trento · « **Reply #17 on:** May 15, 2022, 02:45:26 AM »

Quote from: gladius_veritatis on May 14, 2022, 08:23:13 PM

Who decides what is an illegitimate ban? You?

+ABL, God rest his soul, is dead. He has been for over THIRTY years. It'd be incredibly refreshing if people acted like it and thought for themselves, incorporating "new" information and insights that he did not enjoy.

I will bet that should the current SSPX leadership agrees to implement the pre55 Holy Week, there will be some bright minds out there who will criticize the SSPX as "cozying up to Conciliar Rome", "becoming like the Ecclesia Dei institutes", in essence, you can't please all the armchair theologians on the Internet.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #18 on:** May 15, 2022, 07:15:07 AM »

Quote from: NIFH on May 14, 2022, 11:24:14 PM

Just as I defer my opinions about my clogged drain to my plumber, and my opinions about my tax return to my accountant, I defer my opinions about modern theological problems to the champion of Tradition, who supported his judgements with the doctrine of the Church. Lord, spare me from becoming an armchair theologian!

Well, you have to realize that EVERYONE is an armchair theologian these days, as was Archbishop Lefebvre himself. He was a great missioinary, but he was not a theologian. Now, Father, later-Bishop, Guerard des Lauriers WAS a legitimate (and top-tier) pre-V2 theologian. But even he didn't have any authority. It's OK to think for yourself a little bit and come to your own conclusions. Until the Church is restored, we're kindof all on our own theologically (apart from obviously settled matters). In other words, it's not some kind of impiety to disagree with Archbishop Lefebvre. It is even permitted to (respectfully) disagree with Doctors of the Church like St. Thomas on some contested matters. Only the Church teaches with authority. Unfortunately, I think that's part of the fallout from R&R. When you set up the principle that Catholics are allowed to second-guess the Magisterium (now THAT is true armchair theology), then people look for other substitute doctrinal authorities, and that's where Archbishop Lefebvre took on a form larger than life. He became almost a substitute rule of faith in the vaccuм. But that's really wrong and we have to be careful of ascribing to him more authority and more infallibility than we allow for the Church's Magisterium.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #19 on:** May 15, 2022, 07:33:53 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on May 15, 2022, 07:15:07 AM

Unfortunately, I think that's part of the fallout from R&R. When you set up the principle that Catholics are allowed to second-guess the Magisterium (now THAT is true armchair theology)...

Unfortunately, that’s part of the fallout from sedevacantism, when you set up the principle that Catholics are allowed to depose the entire hierarchy, based upon their subjective/private interpretations of heresy, despite having no authority to do so (now THAT is true armchair theology).

Ps to other sedes: I’m really only just trying to get Lad to stop stirring the pot all the time by pointing out his position has its own dilemmas too. There was no need to take this thread in the direction he did; his own post introduces that comment as an aside. Knock it off.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: +Lefebvre: SSPX must use 1962 reform (Read 7756 times)

gladius_veritatis

Re: +Lefebvre: SSPX must use 1962 reform

Incredulous

Re: +Lefebvre: SSPX must use 1962 reform

trento

Re: +Lefebvre: SSPX must use 1962 reform

Ladislaus

Re: +Lefebvre: SSPX must use 1962 reform

SeanJohnson

Re: +Lefebvre: SSPX must use 1962 reform