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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9

Author Topic: +Vigano Replies to a Priest  (Read 4738 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Papa Pius V

Re: +Vigano Replies to a Priest
« Reply #30 on: February 04, 2021, 05:05:54 PM »
Quote from: SeanJohnson on February 04, 2021, 05:00:11 PM
Your advice would have been better spent on Fr. Peter Scott in 2000, who apparently didn't see it your way when he ran the permissibility of using the MMR ναccιnє against double effect, and found it wanting.
I don't dispute there are issues or differing points of view. I personally see the vaccine as a form of human sacrifice, but I can also see the point of view of those who allow it based on Traditional Catholic moral theology.
That's the problem with Resistance type people. They unjustly make the SSPX out to be no different than say EWTN or your local Novus Ordo diocese when in reality and in charity such a conclusion is absolutely ridiculous.
Logged

Offline songbird

Re: +Vigano Replies to a Priest
« Reply #31 on: February 04, 2021, 06:41:12 PM »
Thank you, 2Vermont. Actions speak louder than words. A picture is worth a 1000 words.

And we know the itchy ear syndrome. Believe nothing of what you hear and half of what you see?  Even If he said the Old Catholic Mass, let us hear him call the new order heresy!  Not a suggestion to leave new order, but tell all.  The radical jews have been after the Church since day one, to the TOP.  Does he say that,, no way! like Fr. Coughlin did on radio!  Now there was a courageous Priest!
Logged

Offline KevinBrumley

Re: +Vigano Replies to a Priest
« Reply #32 on: February 04, 2021, 08:52:05 PM »
Quote from: SeanJohnson on February 04, 2021, 03:25:09 PM
It is truly amazing that certain people here will overlook the SSPX’s reorientation vis-vis conciliar Rome and yet not bat an eye at straining the words of Vigano in order to squeeze out heterodoxy.
LOL...the reverse doesn't work my friend.  I'm not twisting anything Vigano said or painting his words in the worse possible light.  It's right there for all to see which you plainly admit is problematic.  I'm not condemning him for it per se, we all make mistakes and if he is in good faith I know he will come around.  The point is how you treat his error while shouting from the rooftops regarding any real or perceived problem with something an SSPX priest says.  Look at the post on Fellay's "fatal flaw."  One sentence probably taken out of context and yet we see people making rash judgments.  Aha!  This just confirms it yet again!  But no "fatal flaw" for Vigano.  Nor do I overlook the problems with the direction of the SSPX.  My point was obviously to show a bit of hypocrisy here, you have two different weights and measures.  If you claim that you give deference to Vigano because he's new then surely you could come up with some excusing factor regarding the SSPX but clearly you don't.  Indeed, you do not refrain from telling people to flee from the SSPX because of the problems.  Yet you sit at the feet of Vigano and give him a pass on an actual theological error regarding not only Americanism, but ecclesiology and religious indifferentism.  You point out the problem with the SSPX's position on the vaccine.  You prove my point again.  Surely having read moral theology you are aware that there have been divergent conclusions on many moral questions.  Have you ever read Ligouri's manuals?  This is not controversial.  But for you, it's proof of practical apostasy.  It defines an entire society of priests (even though many reject it).  It is an outrageous unforgivable sin that will lead souls to hell.  Do you see the problem here?  It's not just an erroneous judgment made in good faith, it's much, much more that because for you, anything that can support your primary thesis is seized upon, exaggerated and put on the front page.  It doesn't matter much if facts are distorted or sins against justice and charity are committed so long as the point is made -- the SSPX is a terrible organization fit for the dung pile.       
Logged

Offline SeanJohnson

Re: +Vigano Replies to a Priest
« Reply #33 on: February 04, 2021, 09:18:09 PM »
Quote from: KevinBrumley on February 04, 2021, 08:52:05 PM
LOL...the reverse doesn't work my friend.  I'm not twisting anything Vigano said or painting his words in the worse possible light.  It's right there for all to see which you plainly admit is problematic.  I'm not condemning him for it per se, we all make mistakes and if he is in good faith I know he will come around.  The point is how you treat his error while shouting from the rooftops regarding any real or perceived problem with something an SSPX priest says.  Look at the post on Fellay's "fatal flaw."  One sentence probably taken out of context and yet we see people making rash judgments.  Aha!  This just confirms it yet again!  But no "fatal flaw" for Vigano.  Nor do I overlook the problems with the direction of the SSPX.  My point was obviously to show a bit of hypocrisy here, you have two different weights and measures.  If you claim that you give deference to Vigano because he's new then surely you could come up with some excusing factor regarding the SSPX but clearly you don't.  Indeed, you do not refrain from telling people to flee from the SSPX because of the problems.  Yet you sit at the feet of Vigano and give him a pass on an actual theological error regarding not only Americanism, but ecclesiology and religious indifferentism.  You point out the problem with the SSPX's position on the ναccιnє.  You prove my point again.  Surely having read moral theology you are aware that there have been divergent conclusions on many moral questions.  Have you ever read Ligouri's manuals?  This is not controversial.  But for you, it's proof of practical apostasy.  It defines an entire society of priests (even though many reject it).  It is an outrageous unforgivable sin that will lead souls to hell.  Do you see the problem here?  It's not just an erroneous judgment made in good faith, it's much, much more that because for you, anything that can support your primary thesis is seized upon, exaggerated and put on the front page.  It doesn't matter much if facts are distorted or sins against justice and charity are committed so long as the point is made -- the SSPX is a terrible organization fit for the dung pile.      

Nigga please:

https://ca-rc.com/books/as-we-are
Logged

Offline KevinBrumley

Re: +Vigano Replies to a Priest
« Reply #34 on: February 04, 2021, 11:21:28 PM »
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9
« previous next »