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

Author Topic: Red Light - Yellow Light about Prudence not Doctrine  (Read 6643 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Matthew

  • Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 31176
  • Reputation: +27093/-494
  • Gender: Male
Red Light - Yellow Light about Prudence not Doctrine
« on: January 03, 2014, 03:53:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Since the original thread has morphed a bit, I decided to start a new thread about this topic.

    Really, it deserves its own topic. How many don't realize that "To stay home or not to stay home" is a question of prudence, not doctrine?

    You can take a different action than me, but you can't say it's about a violated doctrine that frankly doesn't exist!

    Here follows my latest response to The Recusant where we discuss this issue:



    The fact of the matter is, "doctrine", on which we base our "convictions" can't really enter into it.

    Neither you, nor myself, has received a private revelation from God on this matter. (Please, correct me if I'm wrong here!)

    Just like with the issue of Sedevacantism, this is a matter for prudence, nothing more or less.

    That's why I bring up the issues I've considered:

    * The objective level of danger at my local chapel
    * Our priest's views on this matter
    * The availability of other options
    * The results of my past efforts to get a Resistance chapel set up
    * The outlook for the local Resistance in the future
    * The number and age of people in my family
    * The necessity of Mass and the Sacraments in the life of a Catholic
    * Etc

    When making a prudential decision, one gathers as much data as possible and then he makes a "best decision" which can objectively turn out to be wrong.

    In this regard, you have as much chance of being right as I do. If you are right, it's by luck. It's not by following grace any more closely than I have. I believe we are both doing 100% of what God has asked of us.

    If you disagree, then you need to point out what DOCTRINE is being violated at ALL SSPX chapels. So far, no one has come forward. I'm not saying there are no problems -- but questions of Faith and doctrine are another matter. Those are likely to follow *in the future* based on the current compromise which has indeed taken place at the top of the SSPX.

    As soon as there is a concrete doctrinal compromise, then you can say I'm objectively deficient in conviction, need to change eventually, etc. But until then, I can just as easily say that eventually the red-lighters will "come around" and acquire the virtue of patience :)

    I also need to get to work. Sorry for taking your time today, but I think this discussion will serve to sketch out the battle-lines on this issue, and will hopefully help others.

    God bless,

    Matthew
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com


    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31176
    • Reputation: +27093/-494
    • Gender: Male
    Red Light - Yellow Light about Prudence not Doctrine
    « Reply #1 on: January 03, 2014, 04:06:20 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Seriously -- anyone who thinks they have doctrine on their side needs to stop and think. What's next, they have an objective, 100% sure path for the larger Church Crisis as well? If so, then such a highly favored one needs to teach the rest of us lowly pilgrims! We've been wandering in the dark for 50 years -- we could use such enlightenment and sure guidance!

    In other words, we don't have that kind of certainty about the Crisis in the Church in general. How could anyone claim to have absolute certainty about the "best path" for this crisis-in-a-larger-Crisis?

    Here's the danger of your position: By believing you hold exclusive possession of the objective truth in this matter, that means that your opponents (those who don't follow your path) are either ignorant, or of bad will.

    Well, I can't plead ignorance. I've followed the SSPX crisis since Day One. In fact, I knew something was wrong back in '09 when +Williamson was thrown under the bus. So what does that leave? Blindness, or willful malice.

    No wonder others in your camp are getting judgmental -- either saying I'm innocently "flawed" in some way or outright malicious in my refusal to follow their path.

    You'll forgive me for resorting to a meme -- I'm really into them for some reason. I don't mean to lower the tenor of our discussion :)  But I can't resist -- at least once :)

    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com


    Offline John Grace

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5521
    • Reputation: +121/-6
    • Gender: Male
    Red Light - Yellow Light about Prudence not Doctrine
    « Reply #2 on: January 03, 2014, 04:11:42 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Matthew,

    What is the purpose of this thread and what is your problem with The Recusant?

    Your resistance forum admonishing The Recusant is uncalled for. In this discussion my support is for The Recusant.

    Offline Ecclesia Militans

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 984
    • Reputation: +14/-35
    • Gender: Male
    Red Light - Yellow Light about Prudence not Doctrine
    « Reply #3 on: January 03, 2014, 05:09:39 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Matthew,

    Do you or do you not agree with the former SSPX position of not attending the Masses of the FSSP?

    http://archives.sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q13_fraternity_of_st_peter.htm

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31176
    • Reputation: +27093/-494
    • Gender: Male
    Red Light - Yellow Light about Prudence not Doctrine
    « Reply #4 on: January 03, 2014, 08:24:50 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • What are we to think
    of the Fraternity of St. Peter?

    Since the introduction of the new sacramental rites, Rome had allowed no religious society or congregation exclusive use of the older rites. Then on June 30, 1988, Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated four bishops to ensure the survival of the traditional priesthood and sacraments, and especially of the traditional Latin Mass.

    Suddenly, within two days, Pope John Paul II recognized (Ecclesia Dei Afflicta, July 2, 1988) the “rightful aspirations” (for these things) of those who wouldn’t support Archbishop Lefebvre’s stance, and offered to give to them what he had always refused the Archbishop. A dozen or so priests of the SSPX accepted this “good will” and broke away to found the Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP).

    The Fraternity of St. Peter is founded upon more than questionable principles, for the following reasons:

    It accepts that the Conciliar Church has the power:

    to take away the Mass of all time (for the Novus Ordo Missae is not another form of this, question 5),
    to grant it to those only who accept the same Conciliar Church’s novel orientations (in life, belief, structures),
    to declare non-Catholic those who deny this by word or deed (An interpretation of "Everyone should be aware that formal adherence to the schism [of Archbishop Lefebvre] is a grave offense against God and carries the penalty of excommunication." Ecclesia Dei Afflicata), and,
    to professes itself in a certain way in communion with anyone calling himself “Christian,” and yet to declare itself out of communion with Catholics whose sole crime is wanting to remain Catholic (Vatican II, e.g., Lumen Gentium, §15; Unitatis Redintegratio §3).
    In practice, the priests of the Fraternity, having recourse to a Novus Ordo bishop willing to permit the traditional rites and willing to ordain their candidates, they are forced to abandon the fight against the new religion which is being installed:

    they reject the Novus Ordo Missae only because it is not their “spirituality” and claim the traditional Latin Mass only in virtue of their “charism” acknowledged them by the pope,
    they seek to ingratiate themselves with the local bishops, praising them for the least sign of Catholic spirit and keeping quiet on their modernist deviations (unless perhaps it is a question of a diocese where they have no hopes of starting up), even though by doing so they end up encouraging them along their wrong path, and
    note, for example, the Fraternity’s whole-hearted acceptance of the (New) Catechism of the Catholic Church (question 14), acceptance of Novus Ordo professors in their seminaries, and blanket acceptance of Vatican II’s orthodoxy (question 6).
    They are therefore Conciliar Catholics and not traditional Catholics.

    This being so, attending their Mass is:

    accepting the compromise on which they are based,
    accepting the direction taken by the Conciliar Church and the consequent destruction of the Catholic Faith and practices, and
    accepting, in particular, the lawfulness and doctrinal soundness of the Novus Ordo Missae and Vatican II.
    That is why a Catholic ought not to attend their Masses.
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com


    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31176
    • Reputation: +27093/-494
    • Gender: Male
    Red Light - Yellow Light about Prudence not Doctrine
    « Reply #5 on: January 03, 2014, 08:25:36 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    they reject the Novus Ordo Missae only because it is not their “spirituality” and claim the traditional Latin Mass only in virtue of their “charism” acknowledged them by the pope,


    Does this really describe the SSPX? I don't believe it does.

    No deal was made. <---- Yes, there's a time and a place to say this.
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31176
    • Reputation: +27093/-494
    • Gender: Male
    Red Light - Yellow Light about Prudence not Doctrine
    « Reply #6 on: January 03, 2014, 08:28:02 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: John Grace
    Matthew,

    What is the purpose of this thread and what is your problem with The Recusant?

    Your resistance forum admonishing The Recusant is uncalled for. In this discussion my support is for The Recusant.


    Mind your own business, John.

    As the witty saying goes, "This is an A and B conversation. C you later."

    I'm not admonishing anyone. I disagree with him, but I don't have a "problem" with him.

    We're having a fruitful discussion. Last time I checked, this was a free country and this was a message board where people could discuss whatever issues they feel like.

    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31176
    • Reputation: +27093/-494
    • Gender: Male
    Red Light - Yellow Light about Prudence not Doctrine
    « Reply #7 on: January 03, 2014, 08:30:49 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ecclesia Militans
    Matthew,

    Do you or do you not agree with the former SSPX position of not attending the Masses of the FSSP?

    http://archives.sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q13_fraternity_of_st_peter.htm


    Actually, that was only valid "prudential advice" in 1988. Of course one should support the die-hard SSPX instead of the sellout, Novus Ordo approving FSSP!

    It's not like it's valid "in all times, in all places" like Catholic dogma or something. Again, it's a question of prudence. (As a matter of fact, SSPX priests have often told parishioners they can attend FSSP if there is no other option.)

    But today's SSPX is not the FSSP. Not yet. For one thing, the deal hasn't been consummated which DOES make a difference. Of course some priests are accordistas chomping at the bit for a deal, and they're already defending the pope (etc.) as if the deal had been done. But it still hasn't been done, and not all priests feel the same way about a premature deal. Some are just attached to the "unity" of the organization "SSPX".
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com


    Online Ekim

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 791
    • Reputation: +818/-103
    • Gender: Male
    Red Light - Yellow Light about Prudence not Doctrine
    « Reply #8 on: January 04, 2014, 06:07:40 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Even St. Pius X never advised that Catholics abandon the Mass of modernist priests and bishops.  If my memory serves me well he warned us about them so that we could be on guard, but he never said "run and don't look back ".  Please correct me if I'm wrong.

    Unlike the 1960's /70's where there was a true doubt about the validity of the N.O. Mass and True Presence, no such doubt exists b/t the Masses offered by the SSPX and that offered by Resistance priests.  Prior to VII Catholics had to be aware of good and bad priests as advised by Pacendi and so today Catholics have to do the same with priests of the SSPX.  Just as I said in a previous thread, in the past four months I spoke to two SSPX priests, the younger priest clearly said Resistance priests were liars (but could not give an example) and the older priest said "Tell Fr. Hewko many of us support him on the inside".  

    I agree with Matthew.  Children need consistent exposure to the true Mass and true sacraments PERIOD!  If this was 1970 where this was not the case then by all means stay home.  But there are still true Masses being offered by GOOD priests who are still in the SSPX. That's a fact.  To deny Our Lord the homage he deserves and our children the sacraments they NEED is just plain wrong.

    Let us support these Resistance priest with all our money and prayers until that time that Our Lord sees fit to blanket the earth with them but in the meantime continue to feed our Children with the true Bread of Life and nourish their souls with the Sanctifying grace that only these sacraments can provide.

    ST. PIUS X...PRAY FOR US.

    Offline Ecclesia Militans

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 984
    • Reputation: +14/-35
    • Gender: Male

    Offline True Faith

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 95
    • Reputation: +111/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Red Light - Yellow Light about Prudence not Doctrine
    « Reply #10 on: January 04, 2014, 11:37:42 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Matthew
    Quote from: Ecclesia Militans
    Matthew,

    Do you or do you not agree with the former SSPX position of not attending the Masses of the FSSP?

    http://archives.sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q13_fraternity_of_st_peter.htm


    Actually, that was only valid "prudential advice" in 1988. Of course one should support the die-hard SSPX instead of the sellout, Novus Ordo approving FSSP!

    It's not like it's valid "in all times, in all places" like Catholic dogma or something. Again, it's a question of prudence. (As a matter of fact, SSPX priests have often told parishioners they can attend FSSP if there is no other option.)

    But today's SSPX is not the FSSP. Not yet. For one thing, the deal hasn't been consummated which DOES make a difference. Of course some priests are accordistas chomping at the bit for a deal, and they're already defending the pope (etc.) as if the deal had been done. But it still hasn't been done, and not all priests feel the same way about a premature deal. Some are just attached to the "unity" of the organization "SSPX".


    I recently printed off a transcript of a conference given by Fr.Pfeiffer in Brazil on January 25, 2013. (it can be found on The Recusant website) He made a point of addressing the fact that this whole crisis is not about a piece of paper given to Rome (the deal). It's a crystal clear conference that I highly recommend to get a grasp of what's really going on.


    Offline True Faith

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 95
    • Reputation: +111/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Red Light - Yellow Light about Prudence not Doctrine
    « Reply #11 on: January 04, 2014, 11:55:27 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ekim
    Even St. Pius X never advised that Catholics abandon the Mass of modernist priests and bishops.  If my memory serves me well he warned us about them so that we could be on guard, but he never said "run and don't look back ".  Please correct me if I'm wrong.

    Unlike the 1960's /70's where there was a true doubt about the validity of the N.O. Mass and True Presence, no such doubt exists b/t the Masses offered by the SSPX and that offered by Resistance priests.  Prior to VII Catholics had to be aware of good and bad priests as advised by Pacendi and so today Catholics have to do the same with priests of the SSPX.  Just as I said in a previous thread, in the past four months I spoke to two SSPX priests, the younger priest clearly said Resistance priests were liars (but could not give an example) and the older priest said "Tell Fr. Hewko many of us support him on the inside".  

    I agree with Matthew.  Children need consistent exposure to the true Mass and true sacraments PERIOD!  If this was 1970 where this was not the case then by all means stay home.  But there are still true Masses being offered by GOOD priests who are still in the SSPX. That's a fact.  To deny Our Lord the homage he deserves and our children the sacraments they NEED is just plain wrong.

    Let us support these Resistance priest with all our money and prayers until that time that Our Lord sees fit to blanket the earth with them but in the meantime continue to feed our Children with the true Bread of Life and nourish their souls with the Sanctifying grace that only these sacraments can provide.

    ST. PIUS X...PRAY FOR US.


    Perhaps St. Pius X warned the people to be watchful of modernist priests but allowed them to go to their Masses because those priests still represented true, unchanged, Catholic doctrine.

    The SSPX has officially compromised that doctrine now. The priests in the SSPX represent the Society's teachings, being ministers of their order. It is not about whether or not the priest is a heretic or a modernist, it is the fact that he accepts this new change in doctrine, as indicated by his silence. And in turn, by going to Mass at the SSPX, we are also showing that we are in union with this compromise because the Mass is a public act of worship. Hence the word: "Communion."

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31176
    • Reputation: +27093/-494
    • Gender: Male
    Red Light - Yellow Light about Prudence not Doctrine
    « Reply #12 on: January 04, 2014, 12:09:03 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ecclesia Militans
    Please listen to Fr. Pfeiffer's arguments at these links:

    http://www.ecclesiamilitans.com/2014/01/03/priests-and-faithful-ought-not-to-support-the-neo-sspx-fr-joseph-pfeiffer/

    http://www.ecclesiamilitans.com/2013/09/04/more-on-the-first-essential-condition-of-the-sspx-2012-general-chapter/

    http://www.ecclesiamilitans.com/2013/08/21/ecuмenism-and-religious-liberty-contained-in-sspx-2012-general-chapter-first-condition/


    Just one problem. Even if the links contained "Do not attend any SSPX Masses under any circuмstances." it wouldn't mean anything for this discussion.

    Fr. Pfeiffer is just ONE priest. And as an ex-seminarian of the Winona, MN seminary, I can tell you that the professors there never once mentioned Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer during their classes. In other words, he wasn't "legendary" when it comes to theology or anything else. He passed his classes; he got ordained. He was sent to do parish work.

    Did the SSPX immediately allocate Fr. Pfeiffer to write books, theology manuals, or to serve as a professor? That's what they did with Bishop Williamson. He was given the job of seminary professor almost immediately after his ordination.

    Fr. Pfeiffer isn't the mouth of God. Being a fallible human being, he could be good-old-fashioned WRONG about things once in a while, and he is certainly capable of imprudence. He's a good priest, and I actually agree with 99% of what he advocates. But ON PRINCIPLE I wouldn't follow him to the exclusion of EVERY OTHER theologian and priest (past, present and future). He's not THAT special.

    And remember, there's two kinds of wrong. Innocent wrong, and malicious wrong. I'm to go ahead and assume that anything Fr. Pfeiffer is wrong about he's just mistaken. I think he's a good priest and his heart is in the right place.

    If I followed him blindly, automatically rejecting every dissenting view (even from other Traditional Catholic clergy) that would be CULT OF PERSONALITY which is a bad thing.

    I know that those with a Fr. Pfeiffer statue in their living room are going to downthumb me, but I don't care.

    I'm not accusing anyone in particular of this, but I will say this: such people DO exist, and they have posted on CathInfo many times. If the shoe fits, wear it.

    And I'm going to give Fr. Pfeiffer the benefit of the doubt that he tolerates as his personal cross, rather than relishes, such "Pfeiffer groupies".
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31176
    • Reputation: +27093/-494
    • Gender: Male
    Red Light - Yellow Light about Prudence not Doctrine
    « Reply #13 on: January 04, 2014, 12:14:15 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • And the single most important thing in a Catholic's life is DOCTRINE. That means theology.

    Following ONE priest and ignoring ALL the others is extremely dangerous.

    I also want to add -- Fr. Pfeiffer IS legendary. But the areas he excels in (apostolic spirit, zeal) are not the same as Theology.

    And to make things crystal clear, I'm not criticizing Fr. Pfeiffer's theology. I'm simply not putting it on a pedestal and ignoring everything and everyone that contradicts it. There's a big difference!
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com

    Offline stbrighidswell

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 219
    • Reputation: +132/-0
    • Gender: Female
    Red Light - Yellow Light about Prudence not Doctrine
    « Reply #14 on: January 04, 2014, 12:16:33 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • [.

    That's why I bring up the issues I've considered:

    * The objective level of danger at my local chapel
    * Our priest's views on this matter
    * The availability of other options
    * The results of my past efforts to get a Resistance chapel set up
    * The outlook for the local Resistance in the future
    * The number and age of people in my family
    * The necessity of Mass and the Sacraments in the life of a Catholic
    * Etc

    If this was in order of priority I would put the last first....

    Man cannot live on bread alone.

    I couldn't agree more with Mathew.