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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10

Author Topic: SSPX Tradcuмania  (Read 8725 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Matthew

  • Mod
Re: SSPX Tradcuмania
« Reply #40 on: July 19, 2019, 11:59:52 PM »
In fact, let's get to the heart of the matter.

The ONLY thing wrong with this whole gathering is that the SSPX, which formerly had the full package of truth, is now watering down their position and considering various compromisers and compromised groups to be equal to them. This is a step down for them, and a dereliction of their duty.

Because even if this group got together and prayed publicly together -- or even participated in liturgical worship together -- there wouldn't be a problem as (virtually) all of them are Catholics. But that misses the point that the SSPX used to know better -- they were the witnesses against Vatican II and the new religion. The various "approved by Rome" groups were all considered a bunch of sellouts. And working directly with the Conciliar Church? Unthinkable!

Not anymore. That's the problem.
Logged

Offline SeanJohnson

Re: SSPX Tradcuмania
« Reply #41 on: July 20, 2019, 12:15:59 AM »
Quote from: Matthew on July 19, 2019, 11:50:03 PM
Well that isn't what I was talking about at all.

I'm talking about Pro-life action (counseling, talking to women, "rescue" operations, trying to shut down abortuaries, political action), and various apostolates like helping abused women.
But was this thread about ecuмenism -- gatherings between Catholics and non-Catholics? I thought it was a bunch of TRADS getting together in a TRAD-cuмenical affair.

No offense, but Mortalium Animos was clearly talking about Catholic vs. Non-Catholic -- not Trad vs. Trad. There is no "mortalium animos" equivalent which condemns Trad-cuмenism or neutrality in Trad politics.

So I brought up the topic -- what about specific Catholic products like pre-V2 books, Gregorian chant, statues, mantillas, etc. -- do such companies need to "pick a group and stand on principle", sacrificing 5/6 of their potential market -- or otherwise be considered lukewarm? Or do these groups have "no dog in the fight" on things like the Pope question, the best Trad group to be a member of, etc.
My response was to Byz
Logged

Offline 2Vermont

Re: SSPX Tradcuмania
« Reply #42 on: July 20, 2019, 06:28:24 AM »
Quote from: Matthew on July 19, 2019, 11:50:03 PM
No offense, but Mortalium Animos was clearly talking about Catholic vs. Non-Catholic -- not Trad vs. Trad. There is no "mortalium animos" equivalent which condemns Trad-cuмenism or neutrality in Trad politics.

I brought up Mortalium Animos because of the comment/question you had earlier.  I wasn't clear as to your point, so maybe I misunderstood it:
Isn't there even an official Church teaching about this? For example, it is licit to work closely with heretics (protestants) in pro-Life endeavors. We just don't worship with them.
Logged

Offline SeanJohnson

Re: SSPX Tradcuмania
« Reply #43 on: July 20, 2019, 06:42:52 AM »
Archbishop Lefebvre was pretty clear that they are doing the work of the devil, betraying Tradition, hurting the prospects for the recovery of the Church, are compromising doctrine/accepting conciliar errors, and that should never give the impression that we even like talking with them.

That's what's wrong with tradcuмenism.
Logged

Offline TKGS

Re: SSPX Tradcuмania
« Reply #44 on: July 20, 2019, 07:34:48 AM »
Quote from: Matthew on July 19, 2019, 11:43:22 PM
Did you even read my post?
I didn't ask about the lukewarm. That is obvious. I wasn't talking about compromisers, fence-sitters, or the lukewarm.

I said NEUTRAL because that has a very specific meaning. In this context it means "has no dog in the fight", "does not apply", "not in scope", etc.
Personally, I can't think of anything more lukewarm than the people involved who say they're neutral.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10
« previous next »