CatherineM Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 [quote name='Resurrexi' post='1904653' date='Jun 28 2009, 08:21 PM']However the "people behind the scenes" feel, the Pope himself wants these talks to happen. Motu proprio [i]does[/i] mean "by his own initiative".[/quote] You really don't need to define theological terms for me. When you get a little older, you will hopefully come to understand, that the world is rarely as black and white as you are trying to make it. It is mostly shades of gray. I know what the Pope wants. He has made it very clear to anyone who is paying attention. Whether you believe it is right or wrong, there are some bishops who don't have the same vision for the future of the Church. That happens with humans. We all tend to have our own opinions about things. The higher the rank, the more that you think your opinion should matter too. Sometimes the College of Cardinals elect what they consider to be a caretaker Pope. One who is older, probably won't be in office long, and can hold the seat until someone else is older and ready. John XXIII was considered one, and he started Vatican II. Sometimes caretaker Popes work out like some Supreme Court Justices do, you expect one thing, and get a curveball instead. What happens behind the scenes does matter, because the Pope can't run everything by himself without lots of cooperation. By the way, I have done enough mediations in my life to have learned one important lesson. For "talks" to happen, both sides have to want to talk to each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 (edited) [quote name='CatherineM' post='1904670' date='Jun 28 2009, 08:34 PM']By the way, I have done enough mediations in my life to have learned one important lesson. For "talks" to happen, both sides have to want to talk to each other.[/quote] Bishop Fellay seems sincerely to desire the dialogue with Rome. Edited June 29, 2009 by Resurrexi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 [quote name='CatherineM' post='1904670' date='Jun 28 2009, 08:34 PM']I know what the Pope wants. He has made it very clear to anyone who is paying attention. Whether you believe it is right or wrong, there are some bishops who don't have the same vision for the future of the Church.[/quote] I am an ultramontanist, remember? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatherineM Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 [quote name='Resurrexi' post='1904676' date='Jun 28 2009, 08:40 PM']I am an ultramontanist, remember? [/quote] So were the Jesuits once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 [quote name='CatherineM' post='1904680' date='Jun 28 2009, 08:43 PM']So were the Jesuits once.[/quote] What do you mean by that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatherineM Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 [quote name='Resurrexi' post='1904683' date='Jun 28 2009, 08:45 PM']What do you mean by that?[/quote] If I have to explain it, it's probably over your head. I do that sometimes, sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 I agree with CatherineM in this. Regardless of what was expected, if the SSPX were as serious as we wish they were, they'd hold off, knowing it would only be temporary, until such a time as the Vatican said they could validly ordain. What it seems like to me is that they want to be back in communion with Rome, but only if it means they don't have to change at all. That's not how they have to look at this. Rome is not going to change for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 [quote name='CatherineM' post='1904685' date='Jun 28 2009, 08:47 PM']If I have to explain it, it's probably over your head. I do that sometimes, sorry.[/quote] To me it seemed to imply that I might be ultramonatane now, but in a few years I will not be. Is that what you intended? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 (edited) [quote name='Nihil Obstat' post='1904687' date='Jun 28 2009, 08:48 PM']Regardless of what was expected, if the SSPX were as serious as we wish they were, they'd hold off, knowing it would only be temporary, until such a time as the Vatican said they could validly ordain.[/quote] The SSPX bishops do [i]validly [/i]ordain if they say they say the correct words and perform the imposition of the hands with the correct intention. The ordinations are merely [i]illict[/i]. Edited June 29, 2009 by Resurrexi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 Got them mixed up again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatherineM Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 [quote name='Resurrexi' post='1904688' date='Jun 28 2009, 08:49 PM']To me it seemed to imply that I might be ultramonatane now, but in a few years I will not be. Is that what you intended?[/quote] What I meant is that things change. There was a time when the Jesuits were ultra, and now they are deemed to be the driving force behind a number of pro-choice politicians. I'm not saying that you will change, but sometimes the church and/or the world can change around you. [quote name='Resurrexi' post='1904690' date='Jun 28 2009, 08:51 PM']The SSPX bishops do [i]validly [/i]ordain if they say they say the correct words and perform the imposition of the hands with the correct intention. The ordinations are merely [i]illict[/i].[/quote] The ordinations were a test of obedience, and they failed the test. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 [quote name='CatherineM' post='1904708' date='Jun 28 2009, 09:03 PM']The ordinations were a test of obedience, and they failed the test.[/quote] The Pope knew that the bishops would perform the ordinations. It is true that the SSPX bishops' performance of the ordinations was not only a serious violation of canon law, but also a sin of grave matter. However, these talks could take a long time--a decade even. The Pope does not realistically expect the bishops and priests of the SSPX to stop celebrating the sacraments. It reminds me of prostitution in Medieval Italy. Everyone understood that fornication was a sin of grave matter. Everyone also knew and that those who were fully culpable for the sin were going to hell unless they were absolved or made an act of perfect contrition with the intention of confessing. Nevertheless, prostitution was legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 How come you'll make excuses for breaking Canon Law if it's a traditionalist doing it? There would be no excuse if this was a wacky liberal group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' post='1904722' date='Jun 28 2009, 09:15 PM']How come you'll make excuses for breaking Canon Law if it's a traditionalist doing it? There would be no excuse if this was a wacky liberal group.[/quote] You think that comparing the illicit nature of the ordinations to legal prostitution is making excuses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 [quote name='Resurrexi' post='1904725' date='Jun 28 2009, 09:16 PM'] You think that comparing the illicit nature of the ordinations to legal prostitution is making excuses?[/quote] Knowing you, yes. I think youre minimizing the SSPX's actions. Like I said, if this was a wacky liberal group, you would not in any way be trying to minimize this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now