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

Author Topic: Leo intends to free newChurch from all tradition  (Read 657 times)

1 Member and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: Leo intends to free newChurch from all tradition
« Reply #20 on: Today at 03:05:31 PM »
I hate to say it but I think a lot of it is motivated by money. Money not for the sake of personal greed but to fund each group's particular endeavors. There aren't that many traditional Catholics and most of them don't have a lot of money so one group dissuading their faithful from attending the services of another group means more money for their coffers.
When the 7 broke from ABL they knew very well in advance they needed resources to launch their new sect and they cunningly
seized what they could. I might agree with them more doctrinally than the SSPX but I can't overlook the ruthlessness in how they acted. I've seen the same thing happen in other secular organizations that fragmented when its leader died.
You just proved my point.  You are part of the problem.  I’m not a Sede but they are still Trads.  But You described the Sede side using negative words like “cunning” and “ruthlessness”.  Why?  

Do you honestly believe that “the nine” had immoral reasons behind their leaving +ABL?  I don’t.  
Do you believe that every single thing +ABL did was perfect and beyond criticism?  I don’t.  

There shouldnt be sides in Tradition.  There are preferences, for sure, but not sides.  The new-sspx js another topic, but if we’re talking +ABL/Resistance vs Sede - both are trying to save souls.  Criticizing either is just wrong.  

Re: Leo intends to free newChurch from all tradition
« Reply #21 on: Today at 03:23:14 PM »
You just proved my point.  You are part of the problem.  I’m not a Sede but they are still Trads.  But You described the Sede side using negative words like “cunning” and “ruthlessness”.  Why? 

Do you honestly believe that “the nine” had immoral reasons behind their leaving +ABL?  I don’t. 
Do you believe that every single thing +ABL did was perfect and beyond criticism?  I don’t. 

There shouldnt be sides in Tradition.  There are preferences, for sure, but not sides.  The new-sspx js another topic, but if we’re talking +ABL/Resistance vs Sede - both are trying to save souls.  Criticizing either is just wrong. 
Yes, cunning, ruthless and very jewy are words I would use when you sue the very bishop who ordained you.
But hey, nobody wants to work the french fry machine at MacDonald's to earn a living. 


Offline AnthonyPadua

  • Supporter
Re: Leo intends to free newChurch from all tradition
« Reply #22 on: Today at 03:37:46 PM »
Yes, cunning, ruthless and very jewy are words I would use when you sue the very bishop who ordained you.
But hey, nobody wants to work the french fry machine at MacDonald's to earn a living.
Scripture says to avoid lawsuits against your brother... So it's worse when it's your 'father'.

Re: Leo intends to free newChurch from all tradition
« Reply #23 on: Today at 04:20:46 PM »
Scripture says to avoid lawsuits against your brother... So it's worse when it's your 'father'.
I've only been a traditional Catholic for a handful of years so I'm still getting up to speed on how all the various resistance/sede groups originated and the different personalities involved. 
I've picked up bits and pieces here and elsewhere to form a general but incomplete picture. Nevertheless some of the things I've learned has affected the esteem I previously held certain clerics in. Not to the point that I don't listen to them anymore. I still benefit immensely from their online presence but I've learned that they too are flawed men, which demands daily appeals in prayer for discernment.

Re: Leo intends to free newChurch from all tradition
« Reply #24 on: Today at 04:43:07 PM »
All this from the perspective of a man who thinks that Tradition should put itself under the authority of those who want to destroy it. Idiotic from start to finish.

I think you're missing the point that both Matthew and Atila are in the same camp regarding pope Bob.

Atila is not a sede and neither is Matthew.

The latter essentially calls Bob " a mystery of iniquity" and Atila labels him and the whole series of jew popes as "progressivist".

They are both operating on the guise that the visibility of the he Seat is what matters. 

You quote +De Lauriers, yet one of his most cogent statements concerning the papal usurpation is that "visibility" is not a mark of the Church.