Cam42 Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 So that we are clear, there are 4 issues that drove me over the edge. 1. The Mass 2. Eccelsiology (including ecumenism and "inter-faith" dialogue) 3. Religious Tolerance (*sic* Freedom) 4. The Magisterium of Vatican Council II These issues are the reasons why I've come to the decision that I have. I don't doubt the validity of any of them, but rather I doubt the licitness of them in light of 2000 years of tradition. I am still 100% faithful to the Holy Father. I am still 100% faithful to the authentic Magisterium of the Church. I have no plans on leaving the Church, nor do I have any plans on joining a group which seeks to undermine the Holy See. What I am doing is coming to an understanding that Modernism has crept into the leadership of the Church and I am tired of constantly being subjected to the wanton and obvious disobedience which permiates the mainstream Church. If the leaders of the Church authentically apply the principles of Vatican Council II, then I am all for it. The issue is that they are not doing that. This is most evident in the Mass. Finally, my obedience is to the Church and her authentic Magisterium, not to the individual whims of men, even if they be bishops. Case in point....Cardinal Mahony was not acting in line with the authentic Magisterium when he put forth his guidelines several years back. His ecclesiology is not in line with Rome and it is not in line with the authentic understanding of Vatican II, yet because he's a bishop, I'm supposed to simply smell of elderberries it up? Nope. I won't do that any longer. He's not above reproach. Another example is that of the Consilium. We have been subjected to the OF for over 40 years, now. It is not what the Council Fathers nor the Synod of Bishops wanted, but it is what we have. Is it an authentic expression of Vatican Council II? I'm not sure. Does that mean that it's invalid? Heavens no. But it does call into question the reason we have the Mass in the form we have it now. As for the SSPX proper...the only issue that remains for them to be regular is jurisdiction. It really isn't any more complicated than that. The excommunications of the bishops who serve them have been lifted. So, if all that remains is the juridical issue, and that is the reasoning for the illicitness of the Mass, then so be it. It is not my place to judge one way or another. I assist at their Masses, because I can be assured that there is no deviation in the Mass, nothing more; nothing less. The fact that they share the same concerns that I do is a coincidence. I am [b]not[/b] setting them up as an alternate Magisterium. I am [b]not[/b] setting them up as an alternate Church. I still see the authentic Magisterium as being Holy Mother Church and I will abide by the authentic teachings. That is the bottom line. You will never, nor have you ever seen me willingly or knowingly quote or state anything which is contrary to the authentic Magisterium of the Catholic Church. That much I can guarantee you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 I wonder if criticism of SSPX bishops will become forbidden on Phatmass when (not if, when) the SSPX obtains proper jurisdiction... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIKolbe Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 If you are truly wondering, I would suggest an email to dUSt to ask. If you are merely sophomorically and linguistically prancing around to score points with your friends; well done, it's the lame board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dominicansoul Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1303751869' post='2232481'] I wonder if criticism of SSPX bishops will become forbidden on Phatmass when (not if, when) the SSPX obtains proper jurisdiction... [/quote] well, criticism of the Pope and Bishops and Priest of the Catholic church seems to be desired by a few of you, and some of it is even allowed here, so, I don't see why the SSPX is sooooo special that they should be left out of all the fun!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ardillacid Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 [quote name='MIkolbe' timestamp='1303752209' post='2232487'] If you are truly wondering, I would suggest an email to dUSt to ask. If you are merely sophomorically and linguistically prancing around to score points with your friends; well done, it's the lame board. [/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 [quote name='MIkolbe' timestamp='1303752209' post='2232487'] If you are truly wondering, I would suggest an email to dUSt to ask. If you are merely sophomorically and linguistically prancing around to score points with your friends; well done, it's the lame board. [/quote] None of the above. That's kind of rude to assume. As I was alluding to last night, I think it will be fascinating to read the specific documents which regularize the SSPX. Especially fascinating will be to read the tone of the documents, which will give some insight into how the Holy Father views the rehabilitated SSPX theologically speaking. I.e. what will the implications be for interpretations of VII if the doctrinal opinions of the SSPX are accepted as legitimate opinions for a faithful Catholic? I think these are good and interesting questions to ask, and I look forward with great anticipation when I can watch it unfold myself. [quote name='dominicansoul' timestamp='1303752292' post='2232489'] well, criticism of the Pope and Bishops and Priest of the Catholic church seems to be desired by a few of you, and some of it is even allowed here, so, I don't see why the SSPX is sooooo special that they should be left out of all the fun!!! [/quote] I was being quite polite, thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIKolbe Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1303753467' post='2232510'] None of the above. That's kind of rude to assume. As I was alluding to last night, I think it will be fascinating to read the specific documents which regularize the SSPX. Especially fascinating will be to read the tone of the documents, which will give some insight into how the Holy Father views the rehabilitated SSPX theologically speaking. I.e. what will the implications be for interpretations of VII if the doctrinal opinions of the SSPX are accepted as legitimate opinions for a faithful Catholic? I think these are good and interesting questions to ask, and I look forward with great anticipation when I can watch it unfold myself. [/quote] so it's the latter then.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ardillacid Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 Lame board... Have there ever been threads closed on the lame board before, Jason? Could be history in the making here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIKolbe Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 i do not remember.. but then, as people tell me, i am old and decrepid; so perhaps my memory is failing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 [quote name='MIkolbe' timestamp='1303753648' post='2232514'] so it's the latter then.. [/quote] I don't even know why you're saying that. I've been extremely clear that I find the SSPX situation very interesting on an academic/theological/canonical level. What about my post implies that I'm trying to score cheap points? When you interpreted my original post as such due to my imprecise tone I clarified in a lot of detail. So.... what's going on? I'm trying to have a civil conversation here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 I hope Alyosuis (sp?) sees this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIKolbe Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1303753882' post='2232518'] I don't even know why you're saying that. I've been extremely clear that I find the SSPX situation very interesting on an academic/theological/canonical level. What about my post implies that I'm trying to score cheap points? When you interpreted my original post as such due to my imprecise tone I clarified in a lot of detail. So.... what's going on? I'm trying to have a civil conversation here. [/quote] you lost me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 [quote name='MIkolbe' timestamp='1303753829' post='2232517'] i do not remember.. but then, as people tell me, i am old and decrepid; so perhaps my memory is failing. [/quote] finally! you admit it!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 [quote name='ardillacid' timestamp='1303753703' post='2232515'] Lame board... Have there ever been threads closed on the lame board before, Jason? Could be history in the making here! [/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIKolbe Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 slow down there, Betty White... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts