Latest topics
» Rethink "Feeneyism"?
Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:02 pm by tornpage

» Brother Andre Marie MICM, the Prior at the St. Benedict Center does not correct Frs.Brian Harrison and Cekada,Bishops Sanborn,Pirvanus,Kelly and Fellay
Wed Jun 28, 2017 4:24 pm by MRyan

» Revisiting Diocese/Parish Screening Policy
Wed Jun 28, 2017 4:03 pm by MRyan

» When sedes and trads can accept that Pius XII made a mistake then popes since John XXIII are no more in heresy
Wed Jun 28, 2017 3:08 pm by MRyan

» Doctrinal talks were conducted with Fr.Gleize on 'the other side'
Mon Jun 26, 2017 9:08 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Pope Benedict permitted Fr. Jean Marie Gleize to lead in doctrinal talks since he was a liberal ?
Mon Jun 26, 2017 8:59 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Padre Pio told Fr.Gabriel Amorth," It is Satan who has been introduced into the bosom of the Church and within a very short time will come to rule a false Church" -Bishop Richard Williamson
Sun Jun 25, 2017 9:14 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Mons. Brunero Gherardini misled the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and many traditionalists
Sun Jun 25, 2017 7:18 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Official statement from SSPX awaited : Fr.Gleize and other theologians have got it wrong
Sat Jun 24, 2017 10:10 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Brother Andre Marie MICM too is teaching error : Bishop Sanborn cannot report at the Chancery office
Sat Jun 24, 2017 8:50 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Magsiterial Heresy ?
Sat Sep 26, 2015 8:36 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Magisterium should apologise to the SSPX for the excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre
Sat Sep 26, 2015 8:34 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Brother Francis MICM made a mistake on Vatican Council II
Sat Sep 26, 2015 5:14 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Legion of Christ universities in Rome adapt to leftist laws
Fri May 22, 2015 7:53 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» CM, SSPX, MICM deny the Faith to please superiors
Thu May 21, 2015 4:44 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» SSPX and Church Militant are using the same liberal theology and are unaware of it
Wed May 20, 2015 9:54 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Michael Voris uses liberal theology and yet critcizes Michael Coren
Tue May 19, 2015 10:10 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Fr.John Zuhlsdorf condones Mass for suicide
Tue May 19, 2015 9:18 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Vatican Council II is traditional or liberal depending on how you interpret the Letter of the Holy Office
Mon May 18, 2015 5:57 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Church Militant unable to answer questions on extra ecclesiam nulla salus
Sun May 17, 2015 5:55 am by Lionel L. Andrades


Sede Vacantism: A Conspiracy to Waste Your Time

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Sede Vacantism: A Conspiracy to Waste Your Time

Post  MRyan on Mon Feb 11, 2013 1:46 pm

Sede Vacantism: A Conspiracy to Waste Your Time

By Dr. Jeff Mirus | February 07, 2013 11:04 AM

http://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/otc.cfm?id=1054

A friend passed along a message from someone arguing that recent popes have not really been popes at all—in other words, that the See of Peter is vacant—which conveniently explains all the problems we have. The theory is called sede vacantism (from sede vacante, or empty chair). I wrote out a quick answer, and then decided I might as well publish it in case it would be of use to others. Perhaps it is not as polished as my usual commentaries, but here goes:

Dear Mrs. X –

People who hold the views in the email are already deep into conspiracy theory. They are not rational, and there is nothing to be gained from arguing with them. Catholics need to know when they are being baited, and should refuse to be drawn in unless they want to waste huge amounts of their time. These messages are much like the constant messages you get warning about computer viruses. The message IS the virus. It is designed, in effect, to clog your brain, to waste your time. I don’t mean the individual sender intends this; but the Devil certainly does.

For some peculiar reason, people who subscribe to such theories seem to be able to pile up instance after instance of this or that which “proves” their theory. Taken as a whole, the sheer volume of instances begins to sound plausible. The trouble is that, as far as they are concerned, virtually everything proves their theory (kind of like the jokes about global warming). This is classic conspiracy theory monomania. You might remember the John Birch Society and other conspiracy theory groups who in the fifties, sixties and seventies were convinced that the Communists were directly responsible for everything wrong with American society. They divided people into three groups: Communists, dupes, and true believers.

The best way to summarize this intellectual myopia is that when the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem begins to look suspiciously like a nail.

Still, even though it would constitute a very unusual sort of calling to take the time to refute these things point by point—because it is a task that would never end—there are certain classic mistakes that the sede vacantists make in all their reasoning. For example:

1. They will cite private views expressed by a pope or views expressed before he was pope as evidence against the possibility of his being the pope. But such views are irrelevant.

2. They will almost always take statements, both theological and dogmatic, out of context, understanding them in ways that were not intended by the author or are not intended by the Church.

3. They will cite as heresies ideas that they believe contradict certain teachings of the Church, but without fully understanding what the relevant statements of the Magisterium actually require us to affirm or deny. (They are certain that they know what the Church means by X when they haven’t studied all the Magisterial statements which bear on X in order to gain a proper understanding.)

4. They will cite older statements of the Magisterium against later statements of the Magisterium, claiming there is a conflict. But both statements are equally guaranteed by the Holy Spirit. Therefore, any conflict is caused by our misunderstanding. The correct understanding of any Catholic teaching is always an understanding which allows for the truth of all Scriptural and Magisterial statements which bear upon it. To allege a contradiction is to argue circularly; it is to assume what you are trying to prove—namely that the later Magisterium has erred. If we assume, as we must, that the later Magisterium has not erred, then the proper task emerges: to find an understanding which satisfies all Magisterial statements.

5. They will cite saints against the Magisterium. St. Thomas Aquinas said X, they may argue, and so the Second Vatican Council was wrong when it said Y. But saints have no guarantees of theological accuracy. What saints do is accept Magisterial correction if they make a mistake. Thus St. Thomas Aquinas, at a point in history when the question was still unsettled by the Magisterium, thought it to be false that Mary was immaculately conceived. He was wrong. It happens to the best of us, but it does not happen to the Magisterium.

6. They fail to properly identify cause and effect. Because the rapid secularization of modern culture (which has been in process for half a millennium but with a vengeance in the last part of the 20th century) infected the Church and caused all kinds of problems, and because ecclesiastical discipline has been lax, they assume the Magisterium has taught error, or the alleged pope must be a heretic or the See of Peter is vacant, or some such thing.

7. In all, then, they are historically and culturally blind. They do not understand complex cultural problems and, in particular, they have no sense of the grave and even endemic problems the Church has suffered in many, probably most, preceding periods. In the end, they fail to distinguish between the sins of the members of the Church and the divine guarantees the Church still possesses as the bride of Christ, without spot or wrinkle (Eph 5:27), with whom Christ promised to be present until the end of time (Mt 28:20).

In closing, it may be helpful to remember the humorous bit of evidence the sede vacantists were fond of trotting out some twenty or thirty years go. Believing the papacy to have been validly staffed until the implementation of the Second Vatican Council, they argued that a properly-elected Pope Paul VI had been kidnapped. They provided “before” and “after” pictures of what was obviously the same person except for changes in age. They noted that the Pope’s nose was slightly thinner and more angular in the “after picture”, and presented this as proof that Paul VI had been replaced with a substitute, and that the plastic surgery had been imperfect.

This was said about a man who was constantly followed by the press, and was known personally to huge numbers of people, much like an American president. We might expect to see this in a movie, perhaps, but even there we would enjoy it only if it were well done enough for us to succeed in suspending our disbelief!

As I said, you do not want to be drawn in unless you have a lifetime to spend, and you enjoy arguing without results. There really is a sort of madness to these assertions. It is a dangerous road.

Jeff Mirus
Trinity Communications
avatar
MRyan

Posts : 2276
Reputation : 2448
Join date : 2010-12-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Sede Vacantism: A Conspiracy to Waste Your Time

Post  columba on Mon Feb 11, 2013 3:50 pm

Mike, I wouldn't (like the auther says) waste my time refuting his nonsensical ramblings, offered to his uncritical, conciliar, brainwashed readership with not a shred of evidence in support of any one of his false statements and presumably (in his mind) infallible opinions.

Each and every point he makes has been amply refuted a thousand times over by minds much more theoligically advanced than his. In fact even a dodo like myself could take every sentence of his article and expose it for the superficial nonsnse it is.

Why doesn't he take his opinion and test it against some credible opposition where a chance of rebuttal would expose each and every one of his fallacies. I have heard anti-sede arguments that would give one pause for due consideration but this is pure egocentric babbling.

His conspiracy theory theory is the biggest conspiracy theory of all. If you can't defeat an argument just call it a conspiracy theory. Yep, that should make it go away... Never does and never will.
avatar
columba

Posts : 979
Reputation : 1068
Join date : 2010-12-18
Location : Ireland

Back to top Go down

Re: Sede Vacantism: A Conspiracy to Waste Your Time

Post  MRyan on Sat Feb 16, 2013 5:33 pm

columba wrote:Mike, I wouldn't (like the auther says) waste my time refuting his nonsensical ramblings, offered to his uncritical, conciliar, brainwashed readership with not a shred of evidence in support of any one of his false statements and presumably (in his mind) infallible opinions.

Each and every point he makes has been amply refuted a thousand times over by minds much more theoligically advanced than his. In fact even a dodo like myself could take every sentence of his article and expose it for the superficial nonsnse it is.
You can do no such thing, and we both know it. You talk the talk, but you cannot walk the walk. In politics they call this filibustering.

Empty bombastic bloviating - that’s all your “threats” amount to.

Every one of the seven points is accurate, and the “theologically advanced minds” you refer to are not as “advanced” as you think. When a “theologically advanced mind” tells us, for example, that rite of Order is “conclusively invalid”, even a “dodo” like myself can see the inherent flaws, inconsistency and the hypocrisy in the written argument.

columba wrote:Why doesn't he take his opinion and test it against some credible opposition where a chance of rebuttal would expose each and every one of his fallacies. I have heard anti-sede arguments that would give one pause for due consideration but this is pure egocentric babbling.
Because there is no credible opposition out there.

columba wrote:His conspiracy theory theory is the biggest conspiracy theory of all. If you can't defeat an argument just call it a conspiracy theory. Yep, that should make it go away... Never does and never will.
There is no “argument”, it is a conspiracy theory positing that the one true visible Church of Christ has been reduced to a handful of sede-spleenists, none of whom can agree even on some of the basic fundamentals of their own made-up heresy about an apostate anti-pope usurping the chair of Peter (which is not actually the chair of Peter since it is a "false Church") for some 55 years (and counting) while the universal Church falls for the largest and longest running hoax in history.

A hoax so pervasive that it has fooled some 6 billion Catholics into believing that the visible Vicar on earth, as well as the Cardinals, Bishops, Priests and Religious, and the divine universal institution called the Roman Catholic Church is what it portends to be, rather than being the HERETICAL FACADE you would and your sede friends would have us believe, with your "advanced theological minds" that are so advanced they cannot see the forest from the trees.

Really, columba, your hubris reeks.

avatar
MRyan

Posts : 2276
Reputation : 2448
Join date : 2010-12-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Sede Vacantism: A Conspiracy to Waste Your Time

Post  MRyan on Sun Feb 17, 2013 10:38 am

MRyan wrote:
A hoax so pervasive that it has fooled some 6 billion Catholics into believing that the visible Vicar on earth, as well as the Cardinals, Bishops, Priests and Religious, and the divine universal institution called the Roman Catholic Church is what it portends to be, rather than being the HERETICAL FACADE you would and your sede friends would have us believe, with your "advanced theological minds" that are so advanced they cannot see the forest from the trees.
OK, a slight exaggeration there (for rhetorical effect); should read "A hoax so pervasive that it has fooled some 1.2 billion Catholics into believing ..."
avatar
MRyan

Posts : 2276
Reputation : 2448
Join date : 2010-12-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Sede Vacantism: A Conspiracy to Waste Your Time

Post  columba on Sun Feb 17, 2013 11:04 am

Sentence 1.
A friend passed along a message from someone arguing that recent popes have not really been popes at all—in other words, that the See of Peter is vacant—which conveniently explains all the problems we have.
No one (not even sedevacantists) would claim that the vacancy of the chair of Peter would explain ALL the problems we have... First fallacy refuted.



Sentence 2.
The theory is called sede vacantism (from sede vacante, or empty chair).
Taken in conjunction with his first sentence (which is the only reference we have thus far), this statement is also false. The sedevacantist theory does NOT explain all the problems within the Church... Second fallacy refuted.



Sentence 3.
I wrote out a quick answer, and then decided I might as well publish it in case it would be of use to others.
He hasn't answered anything at all. He merely makes unsubstantiated claims. These are not answers and are of no use to anyone.... Third fallacy refuted.



Sentence 4.
Perhaps it is not as polished as my usual commentaries, but here goes:
It is not polished at all.... fourth fallacy refuted.



Sentence 5.
Dear Mrs. X –
People who hold the views in the email are already deep into conspiracy theory.
A downright lie. He cannot know this.... Fifth fallacy refuted.



Sentence 6.
They are not rational, and there is nothing to be gained from arguing with them.
Two lies in the one sentence. the first lie is calumnious. The second is an opinion of his stated as fact.... Sixth fallacy refuted.



Sentence 7.
Catholics need to know when they are being baited, and should refuse to be drawn in unless they want to waste huge amounts of their time.
I presume from this comment that sedevacantists are not Catholic and those who debate them are. His opinion again, and another act of calumny. The only one wasting peoples time is the author of this nonsense.... seventh fallacy refuted.



Sentence 8.
These messages are much like the constant messages you get warning about computer viruses.
That would depend on the source of the warning. If it's from your computer's anti-virus software only a fool would ignore it. It seems he wishes everyone to become fools like himself.... eighth fallacy refuted.



Sentence 9.
The message IS the virus.
Tell that to Norton or AVG.... Ninth fallacy refuted.



Sentence 10.
It is designed, in effect, to clog your brain, to waste your time.
Mr Know-all strikes again with opinion stated as fact. Self refuting statement. No need for further comment.... Tenth fallacy refuted.



Sentence 11,
I don’t mean the individual sender intends this; but the Devil certainly does.
You obviously don't know what you mean sir, but you presume to speak for the Devil. unsubstantiated opinion dressed as fact again.... eleventh fallacy refuted.

Mike, do you wish me to continue? I already said that I was reluctant to waste time with this guy but if you insist I'll continue.
avatar
columba

Posts : 979
Reputation : 1068
Join date : 2010-12-18
Location : Ireland

Back to top Go down

Re: Sede Vacantism: A Conspiracy to Waste Your Time

Post  MRyan on Sun Feb 17, 2013 4:49 pm

columba wrote:Sentence 1.
A friend passed along a message from someone arguing that recent popes have not really been popes at all—in other words, that the See of Peter is vacant—which conveniently explains all the problems we have.
No one (not even sedevacantists) would claim that the vacancy of the chair of Peter would explain ALL the problems we have... First fallacy refuted.
No, actually, you’ve refuted nothing, for if the See of Peter has been vacant for 55 + years, it most certainly explains all of the problems rad-trads are constantly bemoaning, for there would be no true pope and no true Church that could correct these problems and enact reforms, especially when these same false popes and the false Church are the main enablers of the problems, or so it is alleged.

Do you not hold that the pope is a modernist and that the Church has been infected at her highest levels by the heresy of modernism?

The author is not suggesting that sedeism claims that all of the problems of the Church were caused by a vacant See, but only that a true pope and a true Church neither would have nor could have set out to destroy the Church by initiating heretical teachings, invalid/sacrilegious rites and heretical ecumenical pogroms, as the sedevacantists allege.

None of these alleged heresies, sacrileges, invalid rites, invalid Orders, false ecumenism, etc., says the sedevacantist, would be possible under a true pope and a true Church, so it would certainly explain all of the problems within the so-called “false” Church.

Your problem, columba, you do not even realize the gravity of the sede thesis. If it is true, then the visible universal Church and the visible pope on earth is a complete façade – all of it, and IF the See has been vacant all of these decades, then there is NO Church and there is NO pope who can enact a single reform, except to give the illusion of reform. For what good is reform if that which it is alleged to reform is absolutely heretical, false and a façade?

That is why the author says the sede vacante thesis “conveniently explains all the problems we have”, for it certainly does.

Does the "true Church" have problems, columba? If so, where is this visible institution called the one true Church of Christ? Don't you see the total irrationality of your argument? What "Church" are you referring to? How can there be "problems" in a "Church" that is only a heretical facade of the true Church which has actually been "eclipsed"? And why should the problems of my Church (and alleged heretical monstrosity) concern the sede?

Does the sede spend his time trying to explain how an apostate facade can fix its problems, or by trying to expose the apostate heretical facade for what it really is?

After all, if Ab Lefebvre rejected the very protocol he signed that would have reunited the SSPX with the Church (under mutually agreed conditions) on the grounds that “it appears clear that the goal of these dialogues is to reabsorb us within the [Post-] Conciliar Church, the only Church to which you make allusion during these meetings”, how much more dangerous is it for the sedevacantist to even think about recognizing and “negotiating” with the “heretical” [Post-] Conciliar Church as if it were, or could ever become, the one true Church of Christ?

For the sede, this is insanity.

No, the sede simply rejects any notion of collaboration with an evil apostate entity; a modernist entity Ab Lebevre clearly did not want to be drawn into; while the SSPX, even in toning down the rhetoric, continues to give its nod towards the Pope’s cardboard effigy, while refusing to fall under his Primacy of Jurisdiction or to be moderated by his authority.

But that is not what you are defending, you are defending the sede position which rejects outright any appearance of "unity", as fractured as it is, with a false Church.

"Problems"; what problems"? Oh, you mean the problems that exist amongst the various sede sects? Yes, just terrible! But somehow I am not too concerned with the bickering and back-biting of the various inconsequential sects (though souls are never inconsequential) which do not recognize my Church as the one true Church of Christ.

When you constantly fall of your fence and don your sede hat, the problems of my Church are not your problems, and I resent the intrusion of any sede into the affairs of my Church. Go build or resurrect your your own church and leave mine alone, thank you very much.

columba wrote:Sentence 2.
The theory is called sede vacantism (from sede vacante, or empty chair).
Taken in conjunction with his first sentence (which is the only reference we have thus far), this statement is also false. The sedevacantist theory does NOT explain all the problems within the Church... Second fallacy refuted.
And what “Church” is that? It is simply fallacious to hold that a false apostate church can fix any, let alone “all”, of it own problems that it is directly responsible for in the first place. And if it “fixes” a problem, will the sede come running back? Ha!

Sedevacantists are not “fence-sitters”, columba, so stop pretending that you can argue for a position that does not recognize a universal false church and its visible false pope in any way shape or form (notwithstanding the nonsensical “half-a-pope” material thesis). There is NO problem that a false Church can fix when it IS the problem; meaning, the sede position explains all of the problems of the FALSE heretical universal church of the anti-Christ.

columba wrote:Sentence 3.
I wrote out a quick answer, and then decided I might as well publish it in case it would be of use to others.
He hasn't answered anything at all. He merely makes unsubstantiated claims. These are not answers and are of no use to anyone.... Third fallacy refuted.
His seven points are factual, and true. Sedeism is defined by every one of those errors.

columba wrote:Sentence 4.
Perhaps it is not as polished as my usual commentaries, but here goes:
It is not polished at all.... fourth fallacy refuted.
By “polished” he simply means that he does not have the time (or energy) to go into detail, but he hits the major themes.

Your “fallacy refuted” gibberish is just that. You take one sentence or phrase at a time and think that you can spin it out of context. You only expose the shallowness of your approach and your incapacity for reasoned and factual analysis. You are a huckster for the sede thesis, and that’s all you are.

columba wrote:Sentence 5.
Dear Mrs. X –
People who hold the views in the email are already deep into conspiracy theory.
A downright lie. He cannot know this.... Fifth fallacy refuted.
The entire mainstream sede fairy-tale is a lie, and it is a lie deep into conspiracy theory. Why do you constantly cite discredited and even heretical “prophesies” concerning the See of Rome losing the faith and becoming the seat of the anti-Christ?

As I said:

There is no “argument”, it is a conspiracy theory positing that the one true visible Church of Christ has been reduced to a handful of sede-spleenists, none of whom can agree even on some of the basic fundamentals of their own made-up heresy about an apostate anti-pope usurping the chair of Peter (which is not actually the chair of Peter since it is a "false Church") for some 55 years (and counting) while the universal Church falls for the largest and longest running hoax in history.

A hoax so pervasive that it has fooled some 1.2 billion Catholics into believing that the visible Vicar on earth, as well as the Cardinals, Bishops, Priests and Religious, and the divine universal institution called the Roman Catholic Church is what it portends to be, rather than being the HERETICAL FACADE you would and your sede friends would have us believe, with your "advanced theological minds" that are so advanced they cannot see the forest from the trees.
Now THAT is a conspiracy theory! And who is behind the conspiracy? Let's see, the Devil, Communists, Modernists, Marxists, Masons, and even our Lord, who allows His Church to be “eclipsed” for decades on end by a false Church, by false and heretical/apostate anti-popes, by heresies galore, by invalid or doubtful sacraments to include invalid Orders.

Yes indeed, if that is NOT a conspiracy theory, I do not know what is.

columba wrote: Sentence 6.
They are not rational, and there is nothing to be gained from arguing with them.
Two lies in the one sentence. the first lie is calumnious. The second is an opinion of his stated as fact.... Sixth fallacy refuted.
Like Jehanne, you have no idea what “calumny” actually means. The sede thesis as it is alleged to have been played out in the real world of the promise of a perpetual visible Church and a visible Pope who shall not lose the faith - is the very definition of “irrational”. Me, I would call it “heresy”, but that’s just me.

columba wrote: Sentence 7.
Catholics need to know when they are being baited, and should refuse to be drawn in unless they want to waste huge amounts of their time.
I presume from this comment that sedevacantists are not Catholic and those who debate them are. His opinion again, and another act of calumny. The only one wasting peoples time is the author of this nonsense.... seventh fallacy refuted.
No, he did not say that “sedevacantists are not Catholic”, he said “Catholics should refuse to be drawn in unless they want to waste huge amounts of their time”. Your allegation is a logical fallacy based on a false presumption, and you are guilty of the very crime you accuse him. Shame on you.

columba wrote:
Sentence 8.
These messages are much like the constant messages you get warning about computer viruses.
That would depend on the source of the warning. If it's from your computer's anti-virus software only a fool would ignore it. It seems he wishes everyone to become fools like himself.... eighth fallacy refuted.
You falsely accuse him of “calumny”, then call him a “fool”, and then say you “refuted” his alleged “fallacy”. You’ve refuted nothing.

columba wrote: Sentence 9.
The message IS the virus.
Tell that to Norton or AVG.... Ninth fallacy refuted.
Neither Norton nor AVG are responsible for spreading viruses, they remove viruses.

Fallacy refuted.

columba wrote: Sentence 10.
It is designed, in effect, to clog your brain, to waste your time.
Mr Know-all strikes again with opinion stated as fact. Self refuting statement. No need for further comment.... Tenth fallacy refuted.
Self-refuting refutation, no need for further comment. What he says is true, whether the particular sede intends to clog your brain or waste your time or not. Catholics should simply ignore it, it’s a waste of time.

I once said on this forum that if I were a pastor of souls, I would forbid my parishioners on the pain of sin from attending the traveling sede dog-and-pony show of any sedevacantist who set up his tent in my area. Anathema sit! I haven’t changed my stance one iota.

columba wrote: Sentence 11,
I don’t mean the individual sender intends this; but the Devil certainly does.
You obviously don't know what you mean sir, but you presume to speak for the Devil. unsubstantiated opinion dressed as fact again.... eleventh fallacy refuted.
He knows exactly what he means, and if you believe that the devil is NOT behind he promotion of sedeism, you are the the devil's “fool”, and one of his foot soldiers.

columba wrote:Mike, do you wish me to continue? I already said that I was reluctant to waste time with this guy but if you insist I'll continue.

Have at it, I don’t like wasting my time debating the promoters of sede swill, but if you insist ….
avatar
MRyan

Posts : 2276
Reputation : 2448
Join date : 2010-12-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Sede Vacantism: A Conspiracy to Waste Your Time

Post  George Brenner on Tue Nov 26, 2013 1:19 pm

Columba,



Did you have a chance to listen to the sermon that I posted ... http://www.audiosancto.org/auweb/20131027-The-Vicar-of-Christ-the-King-True-Devotion-to-the-Pope.mp3



Mike introduced me to this site; lots of great sermon/homilies



We started to have additional Masses on Tuesday mornings at the Chapel of Divine Mercy, the newest dedicated altar in our diocese. The altar is fixed and faces the Crucifix with the Priest saying the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass facing Jesus in the Tabernacle. Mass is said in the latin rite or in the Novus Ordo with the priests facing Jesus. Some of the priests are excited about learning and saying Mass in the latin rite. Communion is received on the tongue by most kneeling. Exposition of the Blessed sacrament followed Mass today.

By contrast I attended a Novus Ordo Mass two weeks ago and the talking and noise from the vestibule was very disruptive before Mass . To make matters worse they were having adoration of the Blessed Sacrament before and after Mass and hardly anyone knelt on both knees and many were talking in Church.

Columba, I think that if you give the sermon noted above a chance you will see that we live in a time of punishment willed and allowed by God. We got what we wanted. (I am not referring to the few of reverence and good will whoever and wherever they are) We received Popes that are a reflection of our sins, modernism and lack of obedience. We must pray for the Pope and that God will lift the punishment. We truly squandered the faith of our ancestors and deserve this chastisement. The good father in the sermon explains it beautifully. We must be loyal to the Pope for not to be is treason. That does not in any way mean that we should be guilty of papolatry. We must question with respect and dignity due to the Vicar of Christ areas where he may go astray. Never attack the Person of the Pope.



Pope issues mission statement for papacy





Associated Press

By NICOLE WINFIELD 3 hours ago




part of article....".Pope Francis
explained his most controversial remarks criticizing the church's "obsession" with transmitting a disjointed set of moral doctrines, saying that in the church's "hierarchy of truths," mercy is paramount, proportion is necessary, and that what counts is inviting the faithful in.

He went even further Tuesday, saying some of the church's historical customs can even be cast aside if they no longer serve to communicate the faith. Citing St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, Francis stressed the need for moderation in norms "so as to not burden the lives of the faithful........"



My questions for the Pope with respect:



???? What do you mean by a disjointed set of moral Doctrines? How can moral doctrines be disjointed by definition?

???? What historical customs can be cast aside? Who will have the wisdom to take this advise or implement correctly the desired outcome without further damage to the Church and further the free for all in the smorgasboard opinions which has been the legacy of VCII ?



****+++++**** Holy Father did you mean to say that we can and must be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. Did you mean Holy Father that without reducing, changing or minimizing the truths of centuries that we must also be merciful, compassionate and come to the aid of the poor and lonely both physically and spiritually? Is that what you meant to say Holy Father?



I remain your loyal servant, Holy Father but please pray for wisdom that your words and actions will be ones of clarity and not ones that will scatter or confuse the flock for whom you are our Shepherd



JMJ,



George
avatar
George Brenner

Posts : 604
Reputation : 674
Join date : 2011-09-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Sede Vacantism: A Conspiracy to Waste Your Time

Post  MRyan on Fri Nov 29, 2013 2:25 pm

George Brenner wrote:
We started to have additional Masses on Tuesday mornings at the Chapel of Divine Mercy, the newest dedicated altar in our diocese. The altar is fixed and faces the Crucifix with the Priest saying the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass facing Jesus in the Tabernacle. Mass is said in the latin rite or in the Novus Ordo  with the priests facing Jesus. Some of the priests are excited about learning and saying Mass in the latin rite. Communion is received on the tongue by most kneeling.  Exposition of the Blessed sacrament followed Mass today.

 By contrast I attended a Novus Ordo Mass two weeks ago and the talking and noise from the vestibule was very disruptive before Mass . To make matters worse they were having adoration of the Blessed Sacrament before and after Mass and hardly anyone knelt on both knees and many were talking in Church.
George,

Well, some good news, anyway ... and its a good start. Your comment that "The altar is fixed and faces the Crucifix with the Priest saying the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass facing Jesus in the Tabernacle … Mass is said … with the priests facing Jesus", brings to mind the totally misplaced objection and canard that says "the priest has his back to the people".

Chapter III of Cardinal Ratzinger's Spirit of the Liturgy:

"In reality what happened was an unprecedented clericalization came on the scene. Now the priest - the "presider", as they now prefer to call him - becomes the real point of reference for the whole liturgy. Everything depends on him. We have to see him, to respond to him, to be involved in what he is doing. His creativity sustains the whole thing. Not surprisingly, people try to reduce this new created role by assigning all kinds of liturgical functions to different individuals and entrusting the "creative" planning of the liturgy to groups of people who like to, and are supposed to, "make a contribution of their own." Less and less is God in the picture.

The turning of the priest towards the people has turned the community into a self-enclosed circle. In its outward form, it not longer opens out on what lies ahead and above, but is locked into itself. The common turning towards the East was not a "celebration toward the wall"; it did not mean that the priest "had his back to the people"; the priest himself was not regarded as so important."
III THE IDIOM OF WORSHIP - Nichols, Aidan (2011-04-15). Looking at The Liturgy. Ignatius Press. Kindle Edition:

One particularly controverted point in this connection concerns the issue of the eastward orientation of church, altar, and celebration, or, more widely, of the versus populum over against the versus apsidem position. It seems undeniable that the weight of patristic scholarship is now placed on the side of the view that eastward orientation and so, generally speaking, versus apsidem celebration was the norm in the early Church. In his paper “Eis anatolas blepsete: Orientation as a Liturgical Principle”, published in Studia Patristica for 1982, Canon M. J. Moreton of Exeter University has gathered together the most important extant data, whether textual or architectural, on this subject.(4)  At Dura-Europos, the ancient Mesopotamian riverine city, with its significant Christian and Jewish communities, one of the best preserved synagogues of late antiquity and the only house church of the pre-Nicene period to have survived lie in close proximity. But while the first is orientated toward Jerusalem, the second is orientated in the strict sense of that word—aligned with the east. As Moreton comments:

In this respect we encounter at Dura for the first time a conflict of principle which goes to the heart of what is at issue between Judaism and Christianity, viz., whether the advent of the Messiah is still future or already realized; whether it is looked for in the devout observance of the Torah, itself associated with the land, the city and the Temple in Jerusalem, or realized in the performance of the Liturgy.(5)
In time, indeed, the messianic salutation Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini! would displace a Jewish benedictus verse referring to that temple as the regular accompaniment to the liturgical Sanctus, telling as the latter originally did in its biblical context of the prophet Isaiah’s temple vision. In the consecratory prayers of a variety of Eastern anaphora (the Liturgy of the Twelve Apostles, the Liturgy of Saint James, the Liturgy of Saint Basil, the Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom), this marks the point where reference to God’s work in creation is replaced by an account of his work in Jesus Christ. So contextualized, the orientation of the church building in which the Liturgy is performed “expresses the hope and confidence of the Church in him whose coming was from the East in the historic past, and will be again at the glorious Parousia”(6) the Eucharist as efficacious memorial of the one and anticipation of the other joining the two in the present.

… Recently the Congregation for Divine Worship has admitted that eastward orientation, not versus populum celebration, is the tradition in possession in the Church viewed diachronically, across time.(9)  In that sense the onus probandi falls on those who would justify an alternative siting. Of course justification exists: whether material, as in the impediment of the confessio tomb and its little window for relic-gazing and lowering down objects as at Saint Peter’s, or spiritual, as in the case made in the Catholic Student Movement in the Germany of the 1930s or the worker-priest movement in the France of the 1950s. It must be borne in mind, however, that the roots of the pressure for versus populum celebration in the modern liturgical movement lie in the soil of the eighteenth-century Enlightenment, where they are hard to disentangle from a conscious effort to divert attention away from the Eucharist as sacrifice—a term as opaque to rationalistically inclined Catholics then as to many of our contemporaries now—and toward the much more comprehensible notions of the Eucharist as assembly and as meal. In a personal reminiscence, I recall the vicar of Tewkesbury (Gloucestershire) telling me in 1969, when my own home was some few miles up the Severn, that for High Anglicans like himself the abandonment of versus apsidem celebration was unthinkable, since it was part-and-parcel of their struggle to revive a sense of the Eucharist as sacrifice in the Church of England. But for Roman Catholics, he thought, versus populum celebration would do no harm. Our sense of the Sacrifice of the Mass was too deep to be shaken. This was too kindly a view of the capacity of the contemporary sensusfidei, at any rate in England.

Henri de Lubac wrote in The Splendor of the Church: Today the question should be determined, in my judgment, in relation to the threat of what we can call “cultic immanentism”: the danger, namely, of a congregation’s covert self-reference in a horizontal, humanistic world. In contemporary “Catholic communalism”, it has been said: “Liturgical Gemütlichkeit, communal warmth, friendliness, welcoming hospitality, can easily be mistaken for the source and summit of the faith.”(10)  Not unconnected with this is the possibility that the personality of the priest (inevitably, as president, the principal facilitator of such a therapeutic support-group) will become the main ingredient of the whole ritual.Unfortunately, the “liveliest church in town” has little to do with the life the Gospel speaks of.
avatar
MRyan

Posts : 2276
Reputation : 2448
Join date : 2010-12-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Sede Vacantism: A Conspiracy to Waste Your Time

Post  George Brenner on Fri Nov 29, 2013 8:37 pm

Well said, Mike

Your last post will prove very valuable for me to give to some priests that I know. I think that we have overlooked the struggles that many priests of good will have gone through in trying to be good Catholics in todays Church.

JMJ,

George
avatar
George Brenner

Posts : 604
Reputation : 674
Join date : 2011-09-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Sede Vacantism: A Conspiracy to Waste Your Time

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum