EcceNovaFacioOmni Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 Elaboration: They believe the Novus Ordo is a Protestant service in disguise, made to appease non-Catholics. They believe that Vatican II was heretical and an attempt to undermine Catholic theology so as to be more ecumenical. They believe John Paul II is not the true sucessor to St. Peter and that they don't need to obey his commands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popestpiusx Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 Dear thedude, What you have given is called an accusation, not an elaboration. Christian charity and justice demand that if we are going to make an accusation, that at the very least we should be able to substantiate our claim. Therefore I ask again, but let me be more specific. Can you provide examples or evidence that the SSPX is in fact guilty of what you say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popestpiusx Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 Just for the record (again) I am not affiliatedwith the SSPx, nor do I agree with many of their arguments. However, if one is going to accuse them of something then for pete's sake have a reason for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 Thedude has listed the characteristics of the SSPX. Go read sspx sites. THis is not a topic for this debate on this board, since its the apologetics section, and phatmass is faithful to the Magisterium of the Church. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popestpiusx Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 (edited) thedue has not listed the characteristics of the sspx. He has listed characteristics and predicated them upon the SSPX. He has done so in a public forum and therefore it is perfectly within reason to ask for a justification of these accusations. But since it is I who seem to be on trial here, I will provide one example how how one of these "Characteristics" is not predicable upon the SSPX. Consider the following: "The Society of Saint Pius X professes filial devotion and loyalty to Pope John Paul II, the Successor of Saint Peter and the Vicar of Christ. The priests of the Society pray for His Holiness and the local Ordinary at every Mass they celebrate." This is cut and pasted directly off the official SSPX web site. I do not care one bit what some less informed "affiliates" of the SSPX believe. If one does not hold JPII to be the Pope, one is not ordained in the SSPX. Therefore thedude's statement "They believe John Paul II is not the true sucessor to St. Peter and that they don't need to obey his commands " is manifestly incorrect. And because he has stated it in a public forum, justice demands a retraction. That is why I am pushing him to provide evidence to support his accusations. Is that clear, dearest mother? To do less would be violate Christian justice and charity? If the SSPX is in fact outside the fold, then how is this not a topic for apologetics? If you hope to convert them then you had better know what they actually believe. Edited March 16, 2004 by popestpiusx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phatcatholic Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 i must ask that if thedude and popestpiusx wish to discuss their differences on this issue any further, that a new thread be made in the debate table. this board is for catholics and non-catholics who wish to study and learn more about the catholic faith, and how to defend it to others. apologetics board = where u get the info debate board = where u discuss differeing interpretations of that info thanks and pax christi, phatcatholic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popestpiusx Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 Duly noted! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 this may arise a problem. thedude and popestpiusX please remember that dUST a while ago forbid open debating between anti-VII traditionalism and VII adherent Catholics. possibly you could see about starting a blank thread and letting it sit there until it was off the front page then having a mod rename it and move it to the back alley so you can discuss. popestpiusX and i guess thedude would then ask dUST for the pass to the back alley and begin their discussion there. dUST fears such Catholic vs. Catholic argument is detrimental to those new to the faith because Traditionalists represent a group that claims to be Catholic believing things different than what the Catholic Church teaches. therefore, arrangements should be made to take this discussion to the back alley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popestpiusx Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 (edited) Are you kidding me? Moving to the debate table is one thing. Shoving us off to a locked room is rediculous. I've not said anything anti-VaticanII nor have I even supported the SSPX (or any other likeminded group). I am simply trying to keep people from falling into the trap of tossing around baseless accusations. If someone can accuse a group of something then they should be able to defend it and if they have incorrectly represented the truth then they should publicly correct the error. Why is that a subject deserving of being shoved off in a locked room where only the "very special" can go? Edited March 16, 2004 by popestpiusx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 (edited) no. you know the wolves in sheeps clothing, this is a measure taken against them. we do not want ppl enticing young Catholics newly forming their conscience and preparing for a life in the faith into a radical position that rejects the majority of their fellow Catholics. protestantism vs catholocism is less threatening to them, as they know they are two different faiths. but the schismatic traditionalist movement is very cunning in trying to convince ppl that they are the real Catholics and all the rest of us are not. it produces very bad fruit most of the time, we're in the business of trying to produce good fruit for the Lord. Edited March 16, 2004 by Aloysius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popestpiusx Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 (edited) This is amazing. Kids are flocking by the hundreds of thousands into various protestant sects and you are worried about traditionalists? Who are the real enemies of the Church? By the way, re-read my edited post above. Edited March 16, 2004 by popestpiusx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 [quote name='popestpiusx' date='Mar 16 2004, 12:04 AM'] Are you kidding me? Moving to the debate table is one thing. Shoving us off to a locked room is rediculous. I've not said anything anti-VaticanII nor have I even supported the SSPX (or any other likeminded group). I am simply trying to keep people from falling into the trap of tossing around baseless accusations. If someone can accuse a group of something then they should be able to defend it and if they have incorrectly represented the truth then they should publicly correct the error. Why is that a subject deserving of being shoved off in a locked room where only the "very special" can go? [/quote] okay, my comment was about being careful. if it continues the way it is, a discussion of what the SSPX is really about, okay. but if it goes into an anti-VII argument and all that, it's gotta be back alley for the sake of putting down mutinees in the Church. have you ever seen a Catholic board that allows traditionalist arguments? you get a bunch of WACKOS and it quickly degrades. case in point: My Life After the Passion Board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilac_angel Posted March 16, 2004 Author Share Posted March 16, 2004 (edited) [quote]Who are the real enemies of the Church?[/quote] Some of the traditional Catholics (who, by the way, adhere to SSPX) on another Christian forum are calling the rest of the Catholics 'Luciferian'... do we really want other Catholics calling us Satan? How does that look to people new to the faith? People in that society that I have talked to (maybe not all, but still) believe that all who attend non-traditional Masses are evil or backward. This is simply not true - either liturgy is perfectly valid. To deny that is to fall into heresy or schism. I also see people like this as equal or greater enemies of the Church because they are using the Church's own doctrine against itself. They see themselves as better than those that don't attend Tridentine Masses and certainly make that known. In rarer cases, their attacks of Catholics may be more subtle, but that doesn't mean that it's less harmful. Edited March 16, 2004 by lilac_angel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 [quote name='popestpiusx' date='Mar 16 2004, 12:21 AM'] This is amazing. Kids are flocking by the hundreds of thousands into various protestant sects and you are worried about traditionalists? Who are the real enemies of the Church? By the way, re-read my edited post above. [/quote] i am worried about both. both are enemies of the Church. we're bein surrounded, on one side modernism and on another schismatic traditionalism. we must hold steadfast to tradition without criticizing Councils of the Church. go to the passion board and see the wackos there and you may understand more what i'm scared of. traditionalism breeds bad fruits, kinda like those on the Passion Board shouting against the "Luciferean Bishops" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phatcatholic Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 i have moved this discussion to the debate table b/c of the debating that has continued w/in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts