havok579257 Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1307842251' post='2252572'] According to them, they are dedicated to doing just that. While we disagree with them on some of their methods, at the end of the day neither you nor I can know whether or not they have acted in good conscience. I believe that they did, and I think it is more Christian to assume that they did. It is entirely acceptable to call them traditionalist. Kewl. Thanks. [/quote] i don't know a whole lot about the sspx but how can anyone act in good conscious when they are not following rome? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted June 12, 2011 Author Share Posted June 12, 2011 (edited) [quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1307843027' post='2252578'] i don't know a whole lot about the sspx but how can anyone act in good conscious when they are not following rome? [/quote] The same way the episcopate, clergy, and lay faithful acted in good conscience under the heretic pope Honorius. Not to imply, of course, that our popes are heretical. They are not. ETA2: I mean only to show that it is possible in theory. Edited June 12, 2011 by Nihil Obstat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 I'm sure Luther thought he was acting in good conscience as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted June 12, 2011 Author Share Posted June 12, 2011 [quote name='homeschoolmom' timestamp='1307843740' post='2252584'] I'm sure Luther thought he was acting in good conscience as well. [/quote] Maybe at first. I don't believe he was after a little while. I think he was very much under the influence of his own arrogance, and I do not see the same in many of the SSPX clergy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amppax Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1307836357' post='2252519'] From the horse's mouth: "[b]We adhere with our whole heart and with our whole soul to Catholic Rome[/b], the guardian of the Catholic faith and of those traditions necessary for the maintenance of that faith, to eternal Rome, mistress of wisdom and truth." [/quote] the lines right after this kinda reveal something different (From Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre [i]Declaration [/i][which Nihil is quoting]): [size="2"][font="Arial"][size="2"][b]We refuse, on the other hand, and have always refused to follow the Rome of neo-Modernist and neo-Protestant tendencies which were clearly evident in the Second Vatican Council and, after the Council, in all the reforms which issued from it.[/b][/size][/font][/size] [font="Arial"] [/font] Edited June 12, 2011 by Amppax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1307843460' post='2252582'] The same way the episcopate, clergy, and lay faithful acted in good conscience under the heretic pope Honorius. Not to imply, of course, that our popes are heretical. They are not. ETA2: I mean only to show that it is possible in theory. [/quote] Totally and completely false. Showing allegiance to the Magisterium over a heretic pope is acceptable. This is not what the SSPX has done. They are not in communion with Rome. What they did was wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1307842251' post='2252572'] According to them, they are dedicated to doing just that. While we disagree with them on some of their methods, at the end of the day neither you nor I can know whether or not they have acted in good conscience. I believe that they did, and I think it is more Christian to assume that they did. It is entirely acceptable to call them traditionalist. [/quote] It doesn't matter one single wit if they acted in good conscience or not. I don't care. The Church has ruled on this matter. Until they accept that (and I hope they do) they aren't obedient and therefore not Traditionalists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vee Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 Ooops. In the pic where I said it was the FSSP celebrating Mass at the Elysburg Carmel I was wrong, that was actually the Valparaiso Nebraska Carmel. This is Elysburg PA which also has an FSSP chaplain and is a foundation from NE. [img]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_OHdzk3JlsgY/SmPIhfbb4lI/AAAAAAAAEZE/nGphToJ9P78/s400/new+Carmelite+foundation+in+Elysburg,+Pennsylvania,+USA.JPG[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted June 12, 2011 Author Share Posted June 12, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Amppax' timestamp='1307843960' post='2252587'] the lines right after this kinda reveal something different (From Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre [i]Declaration [/i][which Nihil is quoting]): [size="2"][font="Arial"][size="2"][b]We refuse, on the other hand, and have always refused to follow the Rome of neo-Modernist and neo-Protestant tendencies which were clearly evident in the Second Vatican Council and, after the Council, in all the reforms which issued from it.[/b][/size][/font][/size] [font="Arial"] [/font] [/quote] Their criticisms of VII are harsher than mine. I think they are rather too extreme on a few points. That is what the doctrinal talks are for. [quote name='jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) (the artist formerly known as hot stuff)' timestamp='1307844145' post='2252588'] Totally and completely false. Showing allegiance to the Magisterium over a heretic pope is acceptable. This is not what the SSPX has done. They are not in communion with Rome. What they did was wrong. [/quote] [quote name='jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) (the artist formerly known as hot stuff)' timestamp='1307844276' post='2252590'] It doesn't matter one single wit if they acted in good conscience or not. I don't care. The Church has ruled on this matter. Until they accept that (and I hope they do) they aren't obedient and therefore not Traditionalists. [/quote] Again Jim, they are not exommunicated, they are not in schism. All of the priests and three of the four bishops are suspended (one is not, and is canonically in good standing with Rome). I don't know the strictest theological definition of "being in communion", but seeing as how they are not schismatic or heretical or excommunicated, it would be false to say that they are not Catholic. Since we must believe that they are Catholic, I think it is silly and immature to refuse to call them traditionalist, which is not any sort of formal theological term. You're just being difficult. Edited for typo. Edited June 12, 2011 by Nihil Obstat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1307844775' post='2252592'] Their criticisms of VII are harsher than mine. I think they are rather too extreme on a few points. That is what the doctrinal talks are for. Again Jim, they are not exommunicated, they are not in schism. All of the priests and three of the four bishops are suspended (one is not, and is canonically in good standing with Rome). I don't know the strictest theological definition of "being in communion", but seeing as how they are not schismatic or heretical or excommunicated, it would be false to say that they are not Catholic. Since we must believe that they are Catholic, I think it is silly and immature to refuse to call them traditionalist, which is not any sort of formal theological term. You're just being difficult. Edited for typo. [/quote] Are they in full communion with Rome? Keep calling me silly and immature. after you answer that properly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted June 12, 2011 Author Share Posted June 12, 2011 [quote name='jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff)' timestamp='1307845193' post='2252594'] Are they in full communion with Rome? Keep calling me silly and immature. after you answer that properly [/quote] I just told you that I don't know the strict theological definition of "being in communion with Rome". I do know that they [b]are not[/b] excommunicated, they [b]are not[/b] heretics, and they [b]are not[/b] in schism. One of their bishops isn't even suspended, though he is the single exception. They [b]are[/b] most certainly Catholic. That is an indisputable fact. They [b]are[/b] within the Church. They have not set up parallel diocese, they do not claim to have the authority of the Pope or the Magisterium. What do you want me to say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePenciledOne Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1307843816' post='2252585'] Maybe at first. I don't believe he was after a little while. I think he was very much under the influence of his own arrogance, and I do not see the same in many of the SSPX clergy. [/quote] Well, he still died a Catholic though if I'm not mistaken. And don't be so quick to just write any of them off. Only God knows the hearts of men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1307845412' post='2252596'] I just told you that I don't know the strict theological definition of "being in communion with Rome". I do know that they [b]are not[/b] excommunicated, they [b]are not[/b] heretics, and they [b]are not[/b] in schism. One of their bishops isn't even suspended, though he is the single exception. They [b]are[/b] most certainly Catholic. That is an indisputable fact. They [b]are[/b] within the Church. They have not set up parallel diocese, they do not claim to have the authority of the Pope or the Magisterium. What do you want me to say? [/quote] Well let me help you out. They are not in full communion. Otherwise there would be no need to "normalize" relations. Its kind of a big DUH. If they were in good standing, there would be no need for these discussions, now would there? Use some logic Nihil. [quote]“The remission of the excommunication has freed the four bishops from a serious canonical penalty, but it has not altered the juridical position of the Society of St. Pius X which, at the present time, enjoys no canonical recognition within the Catholic Church. Even the four bishops, though released from excommunication, have no canonical function in the Church and cannot legally exercise a ministry within her”.[/quote] Does that sound like they are in good standing? Of course not. Arguing otherwise is foolish and obtuse. WHEN they are fully obedient to Rome you can call them whatever you want. Until then you cannot consider their disobedience to be Traditionalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norseman82 Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 On a side note, it looks like their seminary's hockey team may have a goon (see the reaction at 1:09): [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5DB0FZgBrU[/media] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted June 12, 2011 Author Share Posted June 12, 2011 [quote name='ThePenciledOne' timestamp='1307845988' post='2252599'] Well, he still died a Catholic though if I'm not mistaken. And don't be so quick to just write any of them off. Only God knows the hearts of men. [/quote] Martin Luther? He died excommunicated and in heresy and schism. He may have repented. I hope he did. However, it looks rather unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts