Catholic Apologetics international

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

i talked to one of the Catholic Apologetics apologists via email. What he said made a lot of sense to me. He said the SSPX were In schism. But he also had a more traditional understanding of the faith.

[quote]
The SSPX: I sympathize with most of their complaints against the current hierarchy, but that does not justify the illicit episcopal consecrations, and their subsequent disobedience to the Pope. I believe they are in schism. They put together a decent case from Canon law that they are not in schism, however John Paul II judged the contrary in Ecclesia Dei, and according to the first Vatican Council we cannot pass judgment on his judgments. So, until another Pope tells me the contrary, I will assume John Paul II was right and the SSPX is in fact in schism.
The New Mass: In it's human element, it is objectively inferior to traditional liturgies (Tridentne, St. Basil, St. John Chrysostom, St. James, St. Mark), in the sense that it is less beautiful as art and does not express the theology of the Mass as well. However, it is valid and licit, and should be attended frequently when other options are not available. I reject the SSPX "we won't touch the Novus Ordo with a 10 foot pole" position.

Ecumenism: True Catholic ecumenism is the ecumenism of return. See Pius XI's encyclical Mortalium Animos. Modern ecumenism tends toward the false irenicism that Vatican II warned against.

Vatican II: It does not teach theological error per se, but it contains many ambiguities which lend themselves to exploitation by liberals.

Religious liberty: Non-Catholics have a civil right (that is, they may not be forcfully prevented by the government) to privately practice a false religion. Unless it poses a threat to public morality, public peace, or the rights of other citizens, non-Catholics also have a civil right to public practice of false religions. This in no way detracts from the duty of the State to profess the true religion, protect it, sanction it, and give it a priveleged place in the formation of laws and the education of youth.

You are correct that many Conservative Catholics tend to act as if any criticism of the reigning Pope constitutes disloyalty to the Catholic Church.[/quote]

anyone have any comments about this. These ideas work for me and i think that they are correct. they seem to be adaquetally traditional without bieng schismatic. any thoughts?

[p0lar_bear]

EENS,

Do you really think there is any way this won't end up in Catholic vs. Catholic debate?

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

i would say there is a small chance it won't

[rkwright]

anyone know what 'irenicism' means? I searched 5 online dictionaries and none of them have it...

and what does your apologist mean by 'false religions'. Anything non-Catholic?

Edited January 5, 2006 by rkwright

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

yes

what else would that mean?

[Cam42]

[quote name='rkwright' date='Jan 4 2006, 07:30 PM']anyone know what 'irenicism' means?  I searched 5 online dictionaries and none of them have it...

and what does your apologist mean by 'false religions'.  Anything non-Catholic?
[right][snapback]846026[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I think that it is a misapplication of the word [i]irenic[/i], which means promoting peace; conciliatory.

However, I have never seen it applied in terminology as [i]irenicism[/i].

[furay]

I like CAI and I want to pick up their Study Bible of St Matthew's Gospel someday.

[Cam42]

Honestly, I have some real issues with CAI. [url="http://www.catholicculture.org/sites/site_view.cfm?recnum=1900"]Catholicculture.org [/url] gives good reasoning as to why. I would have to say that I concur. So, Sam, I would be real careful in reading what Dr. Sungenis has to say.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

Criticisms of the Pope John Paull II's relations with other religions show an implicit rejection of Catholic teaching on salvation. (Fidelity)
Example(s)
· Constant criticism of the New Mass which promotes a disrespect for papal authorithy over the liturgy. (Fidelity)
Example(s)
· Some material is blatantly anti-semitic. (Fidelity)
Example(s)
· Questionable links (Fidelity)
Example(s)
· Places considerable stress on largely-discredited scientific theories, including advocacy of Geocentrism, as if acceptance of these theories is critical to right Faith. (Resources)
Example(s)

all sungenis said about assisi is that there shouldn't be a statue of buddha on the tabernacle and he may have called it false ecumenicism
he thinks the new mass is not superior to the old mass
anti-semetic would mean that he would hate jews which i don't hink is true, i think he hates judiaism
who cares what scientific theories he places credit in?

[goldenchild17]

I don't think they go overboard with anything. Sungenis is probably my favorite apologist. Although my beliefs may be getting a little more extreme as of late, I never saw this organization as going too far.

[Brother Adam]

Despite what Sungenis may write today, his Not By books are excellent pieces of apologetics. I use Not by Faith Alone extensively to write on the doctrine of justification in the text I'm preparing.

[qfnol31]

[quote]Vatican II: It does not teach theological error per se, but it contains many ambiguities which lend themselves to exploitation by liberals.[/quote]

I'm not positive that Vatican II was as ambiguous as so many people claim, but I do certainly agree that people have misconstrued the council and most today have no idea what the council actually said.

[quote]Religious liberty: Non-Catholics have a civil right (that is, they may not be forcfully prevented by the government) to privately practice a false religion. Unless it poses a threat to public morality, public peace, or the rights of other citizens, non-Catholics also have a civil right to public practice of false religions. This in no way detracts from the duty of the State to profess the true religion, protect it, sanction it, and give it a priveleged place in the formation of laws and the education of youth.[/quote]

This is where we come off as Americans.

Even in Italy the state religion is Catholicism and because of Mussolini all public schools are required to teach Catholicism in schools.

[quote]You are correct that many Conservative Catholics tend to act as if any criticism of the reigning Pope constitutes disloyalty to the Catholic Church.[/quote]

I do think that people need to be careful of criticism, but as far as this goes, he is accurate and I would say correct. Not all criticism of the current Holy Father is disloyalty, but any criticism must be very, very careful, I think.

Oddly enough, I think Pope Benedict gets more criticism from those people who used to argue this in favor of John Paul II (Resquiat in pace!). I think that sometimes it is a reactionary stance (based on what I've found in my day-to-day life).

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

In regards to the liturgy:
[quote][u][i]Pope Pius XII, Mediator Dei:[/i][/u]
59. [b]The Church is without question a living organism, and as an organism, in respect of the sacred liturgy also, she grows, matures, develops, adapts and accommodates herself to temporal needs and circumstances[/b], provided only that the integrity of her doctrine be safeguarded...

60. The use of the Latin language, customary in a considerable portion of the Church, is a manifest and beautiful sign of unity, as well as an effective antidote for any corruption of doctrinal truth. In spite of this, [b]the use of the mother tongue in connection with several of the rites may be of much advantage to the people[/b]. But the Apostolic See alone is empowered to grant this permission. It is forbidden, therefore, to take any action whatever of this nature without having requested and obtained such consent, since [b]the sacred liturgy, as We have said, is entirely subject to the discretion and approval of the Holy See[/b].

61. The same reasoning holds in the case of some persons who are bent on the restoration of all the ancient rites and ceremonies indiscriminately. The liturgy of the early ages is most certainly worthy of all veneration. But [b]ancient usage must not be esteemed more suitable and proper, either in its own right or in its significance for later times and new situations, on the simple ground that it carries the savor and aroma of antiquity. The more recent liturgical rites likewise deserve reverence and respect. They, too, owe their inspiration to the Holy Spirit[/b], who assists the Church in every age even to the consummation of the world. [52] [b]They are equally the resources used by the majestic Spouse of Jesus Christ to promote and procure the sanctity of man[/b].

52. Cf. Matt. 28:20.
[url="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii...tor-dei_en.html"]http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii...tor-dei_en.html[/url][/quote]

[qfnol31]

thedude,

I don't think anyone here would argue otherwise, but I do think that there are many reasons otherwise that one could very easily argue the Tridentine is better than the Novus Ordo, much because the Novus Ordo ignores a lot of what used to be said.

Granted, this isn't all inherent to the Novus Ordo itself, but rather many are abuses.

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

Just wanted to get it out there. I've seen discussion of the Novus Ordo degenerate into stuff like that. By the way, I recently went to a Mass where the prayer of St. Michael was said at the end (as it used to be). I wish more would do the same.