Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: Last Tradhican on January 12, 2022, 03:42:44 AM
-
St. John Chrysostom, sometime Patriarch of Constantinople:
“I do not speak rashly, but as I feel and think, I do not think that many priests are saved but that those that perish are far more numerous. The reason is that the office requires a great soul. For there are many things to make a priest swerve from rectitude, and he requires great vigilance on every side. Do you not perceive how many qualities a bishop must have that he may be apt to teach; patient towards the wicked, firm and faithful in teaching the Word? How many difficulties therein.
Moreover the loss of others is imputed to him. I need say no more. If but one dies without baptism, does it not entirely endanger his salvation? For the loss of one soul is so great an evil as no man can understand. If the salvation of one soul is of such importance that, for its sake, the Son of God became man and suffered so much, think of the penalty the loss of one soul will entail”. (Third Homily, Acts of the Apostles)
If St. John Chrysostom (one of the Four Great Fathers of the East along with St. Basil the Great, St. Gregory of Nαzιanzus, St. Athanasius) says in the late 4th century that the priests that go to Hell are more numerous than those that are saved, that means that at least 51% of priests in his time were lost in his opinion. That was in the 4th century, imagine today, where we are living in what Pius X called 120 years ago, the cesspool of all heresies, modernism and progressivism! I doubt if more than 1% of priests are saved today. In France today, less than 4% of Catholics go mass and the rest of Europe is about the same. In the largest populated Catholic country in the world, Brazil, about 7% of Catholics go to mass. And we are talking about the Novus Ordo mass, with all of its high jinks!
We are taught to be obedient to our shepherds, the pope, our local bishop, the pastor of the church we attend. But yet, few here on CI are obedient to our traditional shepherds. We are not obedient because we do not recognize their voice as the voice of the Good Shepherd, the voice of Our Lord Jesus Christ who said: " He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up another way, the same is a thief and a robber... they follow not, but fly from him, because they know not the voice of strangers." If we do not recognize the voice of the visible hierarchy what voice do we follow? This is the most important decision to make today, for if we blindly follow one of the priests that is going to Hell, we will go there with him. What priest do we follow, THAT is the question!
Do we follow the SSPX, do we follow the Indult mass communities, do we follow the sedevacantes groups, do we follow an independent priest?
I personally think we are on our own to follow truth and the only safe road is to follow what has always been, tradition and accept no changes till we have Catholic shepherds in the hierarchy established by Christ. I think the most important guide for following as sheep today, the essential condition; the requirement that is absolutely necessary, is to go to priests that were ordained in the traditional Rite of Ordination and ordained by bishops who were consecrated in the traditional formula. That leaves no doubt that one is receiving the sacraments, which may be in most cases the only aid to salvation we will receive in our times. What about a good priest to lead us? Who can we follow that will not be among the priests that will be lost? I think there, we are to judge the priests we follow by their deeds, by how they live the faith.
"For there is no eloquence that does not fall before deeds. Men need example and not words, for they are deeply conscious that without example, religion is in vain, as a tree without fruit is vain and fit only to be cast into the fire" (Giorse Borsi)
-
That leaves no doubt that one is receiving the sacraments, which may be in most cases the only aid to salvation we will receive in our times. What about a good priest to lead us? Who can we follow that will not be among the priests that will be lost? I think there, we are to judge the priests we follow by their deeds, by how they live the faith.
"For there is no eloquence that does not fall before deeds. Men need example and not words, for they are deeply conscious that without example, religion is in vain, as a tree without fruit is vain and fit only to be cast into the fire" (Giorse Borsi)
Those good priest today will be a rare gift, so the majority of us, should not expect more than the (undoubtable valid) sacraments, we are on our own to learn the time-honored traditions and how to really live the Faith.
-
We are taught to be obedient to our shepherds, the pope, our local bishop, the pastor of the church we attend. But yet, few here on CI are obedient to them, our traditional shepherds.
-
Who exactly are those traditional shepherds to be obedient to? Pagliarini? Dolan? ...
None of them can call obedience, and all Trads choose whomever they want to be obedient to, or not.
My personal choice changed over the years. I finally arrived at "SSPX Resistance", before I gave up on obedience, altogether.
-
Obedience to lawful authority is a commandment of God. So we must take it seriously and understand that just because an authority (bishop or priest) makes errors in some areas, if he is truly an authority for us, we must consider each command and measure it against what our informed Catholic conscience tells us is true.
St. Thomas Aquinas provides the formulation for determining whether a command is lawful or not:
“Law is an ordination of reason, by the proper authority, for the common good, and promulgated.”
If the bishop or priest bases his command on incomplete facts or invalid logic, then his command is not an "ordination of reason." If the person is not actually the bishop or priest with authority over you, then his command does not need to be followed by you. If his command is for his private gain or has an evil end, then he must be ignored. If he does not tell you that he is commanding you to do what he says, then it is not required.
Being obedient to a bishop's lawful command or taking a bishop's advice are two very different things. The former is a required under the fourth commandment. The latter is a matter of prudence.
-
Obedience to lawful authority is a commandment of God. So we must take it seriously and understand that just because an authority (bishop or priest) makes errors in some areas, if he is truly an authority for us, we must consider each command and measure it against what our informed Catholic conscience tells us is true.
St. Thomas Aquinas provides the formulation for determining whether a command is lawful or not:
“Law is an ordination of reason, by the proper authority, for the common good, and promulgated.”
If the bishop or priest bases his command on incomplete facts or invalid logic, then his command is not an "ordination of reason." If the person is not actually the bishop or priest with authority over you, then his command does not need to be followed by you. If his command is for his private gain or has an evil end, then he must be ignored. If he does not tell you that he is commanding you to do what he says, then it is not required.
Being obedient to a bishop's lawful command or taking a bishop's advice are two very different things. The former is a required under the fourth commandment. The latter is a matter of prudence.
Which are the bishops you're talking about?
-
Who exactly are those traditional shepherds to be obedient to?
The pope, our local bishop, the pastor of the church local diocese church we attend. It is what has always been "tradition".
-
The pope, our local bishop, the pastor of the church local diocese church we attend. It is what has always been "tradition".
You are calling to be obedient to the antichristian "bishops" of the robber church of the "new pentecost"?
Are you joking?
-
Which are the bishops you're talking about?
If I had a question about "a lawful command" from a religious superior that I could not answer with a traditional Catholic Catechism and logic, I would ask Bishop Williamson. This hasn't come up for me yet, however.
-
If I had a question about "a lawful command" from a religious superior that I could not answer with a traditional Catholic Catechism and logic, I would ask Bishop Williamson. This hasn't come up for me yet, however.
There are no religious superiors, properly speaking, within Traddieland. No one within Traddieland has any meaningful canonical status and all vows are private.
-
If I had a question about "a lawful command" from a religious superior that I could not answer with a traditional Catholic Catechism and logic, I would ask Bishop Williamson. This hasn't come up for me yet, however.
How can you call that obedience, if you yourself choose the "authority"?
-
How can you call that obedience, if you yourself choose the "authority"?
Don't ask difficult questions! :laugh1:
-
Obedience to lawful authority is a commandment of God. So we must take it seriously and understand that just because an authority (bishop or priest) makes errors in some areas, if he is truly an authority for us, we must consider each command and measure it against what our informed Catholic conscience tells us is true.
So, you must sift each and every command, even when it comes from certainly lawful authority? That is NOT obedience; that is making oneself the final arbiter of the merit of each and every command.
-
How can you call that obedience, if you yourself choose the "authority"?
So if a Catholic "chooses" to join a religious order and "chooses" to follow the superior of that religious order in disciplinary matters, you would not call that "obedience?"
-
So, you must sift each and every command, even when it comes from certainly lawful authority? That is NOT obedience; that is making oneself the final arbiter of the merit of each and every command.
Yes, you must use your God-given reason and listen to your conscience. This is what St. Thomas Aquinas, and all Catholic theologians, taught.
Regarding a questionable "command" from a human being, you should compare that command to the authentic Magisterium. If the command contradicts the Magisterium, you must reject the command. Otherwise, anyone one in any religious order would be subject to the dictatorial whim of a superior. The words I quoted above from St. Thomas Aquinas show the proper method for "sifting" these commands.
-
You are calling to be obedient to the antichristian "bishops" of the robber church of the "new pentecost"?
Are you joking?
Marion,
If you ask that question, you have not read the OP.
-
Yes, you must use your God-given reason and listen to your conscience. This is what St. Thomas Aquinas, and all Catholic theologians, taught.
Regarding a questionable "command" from a human being, you should compare that command to the authentic Magisterium. If the command contradicts the Magisterium, you must reject the command. Otherwise, anyone one in any religious order would be subject to the dictatorial whim of a superior. The words I quoted above from St. Thomas Aquinas show the proper method for "sifting" these commands.
We really should stick to discussing the laity, for no one here on CI is a cleric under a superior. No?
If only 1% of priest will be saved today, we must choose who we follow very carefully, or we could "obediently" follow the 99% into perdition.
OP - We are taught to be obedient to our shepherds, the pope, our local diocese bishop, the pastor of the church we attend in our diocese. But yet, few here on CI are obedient to our customary shepherds. We are not obedient because we do not recognize their voice as the voice of the Good Shepherd, the voice of Our Lord Jesus Christ who said: " He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up another way, the same is a thief and a robber... they follow not, but fly from him, because they know not the voice of strangers." If we do not recognize the voice of the visible hierarchy what voice do we follow? This is the most important decision to make today, for if we blindly follow one of the priests that is going to Hell, we will go there with him. What priest do we follow, THAT is the question!
-
So if a Catholic "chooses" to join a religious order and "chooses" to follow the superior of that religious order in disciplinary matters, you would not call that "obedience?"
Before a Catholic starts to choose anything, he belongs to a diocese and is subject to the head of that diocese. He may ask to be allowed to join a religious order.
-
“Obedience” is a Vatican II term to hide and justify mortal sin. It is false “obedience” to man instead of God. “Obedience” has and is being used to persecute and silent good and holy Priests.
-
“Those good priest today will be a rare gift, so the majority of us, should not expect more than the (undoubtable valid) sacraments, we are on our own to learn the time-honored traditions and how to really live the Faith.“
Yes. My beloved late mother in law years ago advised “ Go to Mass and come home.
-
The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse
-
The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse
I wonder, was anyone else ever taught this, or some variation of this principle as a child?
-
Hesse's principle is falsely applied to the crisis and does not extend to the Magisterium and the Universal Discipline of the Church, nor to the Church's public worship.
-
Hesse's principle is falsely applied to the crisis and does not extend to the Magisterium and the Universal Discipline of the Church, nor to the Church's public worship.
"Hesse's principle?" Not even able to show a respect to a priest by calling him Father? - where did you learn that I wonder.
I did not think the Church's principle was such an inconvenience for for you, as such I take it you were never taught this principle as a child. Ok.
-
Gerry Matatics has an interesting perspective on this. The Church is the mystical body of Christ on earth and it's Magisterium is endowed with the property of its head, and continues (continued) His presence among us. Christ was a king, priest, and prophet, thus a) ruler, b) healer/sanctifier, and c) truth teller.
The Magisterium of the Catholic Church took over all these functions, and has (had) them. So, a) it has (had) real authority, and can (could) bind and loose those under its jurisdiction; it can (could) command, and authoritatively say, "do this; do that" ; b) it has (had) the sacraments to justify and translate men from the state of a fallen progeny of Adam to child of God in a state of grace via the sacraments (whose power is via Christ), and the power to redeem and heal; and, c) it was a truth teller, and relayed all necessary truths of the Kingdom of God.
For something to be the, or part of the, true Catholic Church, it must have all of these powers and attributes.
Matatics notes that no Trad priest or bishop basically has the attributes of a). He cannot tell me I must go to his Mass; He cannot bind me by any command. Unlike a bishop or ordinary in a parish of the true Church where I am, either through himself or through a subordinate priest of his (where the Church was and had the attributes of a)), he cannot exercise any binding authority over me.
Any submission of me to him would be purely voluntary, just as to a Prot minister if I were a Prot.
Thus, the marks of the Church lacking - apostolicity (if you incorporate rule or authority into that mark) - in the chapel of whomever down the street (SSPX, SSPV, CMRI, independent priest or bishop), they cannot be a part of the true Catholic Church.
He is a home aloner, and you can quibble with his response to the state of things. But I think he is clearly right to the extent that we are "free," and how we exercise our Catholic faith in these circuмstances of being "without a representative of the King" to command us will be judged accordingly, and not by standards governing when the King's representative could bindingly say, "do this; do that."
I'm not sure how LT in the original post would shake down on this, because it is a bit confusing. He seems to agree with the above when he says we are "free," but I'm not sure.
-
Matatics notes that no Trad priest or bishop basically has the attributes of a). He cannot tell me I must go to his Mass; ...
No, but the priest can tell me that I must go to A Mass. That's because it's the Church's command. Canon Law and the Ten Commandments don't go on hiatus during a vacancy.
And, no, Apostolicity is not lacking if there were no bishops left with active jurisdiction; that's been discussed numerous times. There's an aspect of Apostolicity simply in episcopal orders even if they aren't actualized or made concrete at a specific time, just as apostolicity doesn't cease nor the "perpetual succession" of the papacy die out during a papal interregnum simply because there happens to be no pope at the moment. We human being are essentially made of body and soul, but we do not cease to be human when we die (before the Resurrection of the Body). We remain essentially human even if we happen to lack a body for a time. We remain essentially body and soul despite accidentally for a time not having an actual body.
-
The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse
Amen! Holy Scripture backs this up!
-
Amen! Holy Scripture backs this up!
But the Catholic faith is in fact obedience and submission to the teaching authority of the Church; that is the essence of supernatural faith. "He who hears you hears Me." This maxim is grossly misapplied to the Magisterium out of desperation by R&R. Prots say the same thing, that the teachings of the Church are "traditions of men".
-
But the Catholic faith is in fact obedience and submission to the teaching authority of the Church; that is the essence of supernatural faith. "He who hears you hears Me." This maxim is grossly misapplied to the Magisterium out of desperation by R&R. Prots say the same thing, that the teachings of the Church are "traditions of men".
You make no sense. It is not the least bit complicated as you are wont to make it - only to end up confusing the precise and simple meaning.
This principle applies always to everyone in every situation and circuмstance of our lives, if you think otherwise, if, out of desperation by your sedeism you think it is "grossly misapplied" in regards to the conciliar popes, then you don't know what you're talking about.
St. Thomas More understood this principle and died proclaiming it when just before getting his head chopped off, he professed: "I am the king's good servant, but God's first." THIS is exemplifying the highest principle in the Church.
Although St. Thomas More was speaking of the king and not the pope, his example applies to every situation, every circuмstance, every person, and every question of importance throughout our whole life while we live in this world.
We can replace "king" with "parent" or "teacher" or "president" or "bishop" or "pope" or even "angel from heaven" - or you name it, because the principle of what St. Thomas More professed as his last words on earth, is the highest of all Catholic principles.
-
No, but the priest can tell me that I must go to A Mass. That's because it's the Church's command. Canon Law and the Ten Commandments don't go on hiatus during a vacancy.
And, no, Apostolicity is not lacking if there were no bishops left with active jurisdiction; that's been discussed numerous times. There's an aspect of Apostolicity simply in episcopal orders even if they aren't actualized or made concrete at a specific time, just as apostolicity doesn't cease nor the "perpetual succession" of the papacy die out during a papal interregnum simply because there happens to be no pope at the moment. We human being are essentially made of body and soul, but we do not cease to be human when we die (before the Resurrection of the Body). We remain essentially human even if we happen to lack a body for a time. We remain essentially body and soul despite accidentally for a time not having an actual body.
I'm obligated to go to a Catholic Mass. There being no identifying juridical structure which tells me where the Catholic Church is, there's no obligation.
Where are you obligated to go? Some of the priests and bishops will say you can't go to a Thuc bishop or a priest consecrated by a Thuc bishop, some will say you can't go to a una cuм Mass, etc. Which one is right? Which one binds? None of them.
Where is the binding authority? Where is the indisputably Catholic Mass? Depends on who you talk to. Where there is a Catholic Church and a living Magisterium, that will not, cannot, be the case.
If you choose to go to an SSPV or other TLM at some chapel not affiliated with the Conciliar Church, it's a choice, and voluntary.
We are not talking about natural law here, like the 10 Commandments, which needs no lawgiver but a conscience.
This is not a mere "vacancy." I know apostolicity has been addressed here numerous times, and I've been involved in the discussion. And a substantial number here, perhaps a majority, believe it requires what you call active jurisdiction. Even many Sedes believe it is required, like John Lane. I question that myself, and ask for proof, and haven't really seen it.
But the principle - again, accepted by most - hits a wall in our current circuмstances, as Matatics noticed. Matatics is basically arguing from an agreed principle with a certain audience, and his argument has validity assuming the premise, as, again, many do.
We haven't had a true pontiff in perhaps over 60 years. If true, we may have no bishops with apostolic mission - if you accept that argument. We have never had a vacancy before, in about 2,000 years, where that was true. Never. With all other vacancies, we had bishops with apostolic mission, and even during the Arian crisis.
Another "sign" of the times we are in, and how they are one of a kind, such as has never been seen before, so to speak. Matthew 24:21.
Thus, for someone who does accept that argument - the need for active jurisdiction - Matatic's point is powerful and I think valid.
-
“Those good priest today will be a rare gift, so the majority of us, should not expect more than the (undoubtable valid) sacraments, we are on our own to learn the time-honored traditions and how to really live the Faith.“
Yes. My beloved late mother in law years ago advised “ Go to Mass and come home.
AMEN!
There are very few priests who are educated enough to teach or advise well.
-
Today is the feast day of St. John Chrysostom.
-
[color=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.498039)]“The road to Hell is paved with the bones of priests and monks, and the skulls of bishops are the lamp posts that light the path. (https://quotefancy.com/quote/1578636/Saint-John-Chrysostom-The-road-to-Hell-is-paved-with-the-bones-of-priests-and-monks-and)”[/color]
— Saint John Chrysostom (https://quotefancy.com/saint-john-chrysostom-quotes)