Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free

info: Please Sign Up or Sign In to continue.

A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for discussion related to learning about the faith (Catechetics), defense of the Faith (Apologetics), the Liturgy and canon law, motivated by a desire to grow closer to Christ or to bring someone else closer.

Saint Augustine of Hippo is considered on of the greatest Christian thinkers of all time and the Doctor of the Church.
Learn More: Saint Augustine

Oct 23rd 2013 new

These arguments are so circular so they never end, unfortunately. There are numerous types of suppression. You can give me a title, an office, a computer, an Internet connection and NO electricity. Am I being suppressed from communicating via email? There are subtle and not so subtle ways to promote or suppress in the world rolling eyes

LOCKED
Oct 23rd 2013 new
(quote) Gabor-19025 said:

These arguments are so circular so they never end, unfortunately. There are numerous types of suppression. You can give me a title, an office, a computer, an Internet connection and NO electricity. Am I being suppressed from communicating via email? There are subtle and not so subtle ways to promote or suppress in the world

Yes sir you are correct. smile
LOCKED
Oct 24th 2013 new
(quote) Paul-866591 said: The ministers cannot licitly celebrate a Mass or hear confessions or any other sacraments except in the case of imminent death.

One correction to your statement, Paul: in general, SSPX priests do not validly hear confessions or witness marriages, except where there is danger of death. There may be exceptions where an ordinary grants them faculties for these sacraments or may provide a dispensation for them to witness a specific marriage, but these would be the rare exception rather than the rule.

LOCKED
Oct 24th 2013 new
(quote) Bernard-2709 said: I posted a Video which a Canon Lawyer explains the Scaraments and the laws surrounding their celebration.The video was removed,so I will send it to you personally.The said Canon Lawyer who is now deceased,worked for Cardinal Stickler years ago.Since I cannot repost the video,suffice it to say you are wrong.I will send you the evidence.The moderator will not allow public display of the video.I do not want to get get kicked off CM.
The position of the Church on this matter is very clear:

(a) Pope Benedict, in a letter to the bishops of the world (i.e., a formal document, not an informal interview or public speech) stated that " the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church." (www.vatican.va. )

(b) Several prominent canon lawyers and priests have posted public statements explaining the status of SSPX priests vis a vis administration of the sacraments.

Public debate of the validity of scraments, expecially the sacrament of penance, is a very serious matter due to the potential to lead individuals astray and place their salvation at risk. The opinion of one canon lawyer, especially one who is dead and not able to respond to challenges, cannot be taken to outweigh a very clear official declaration by the Holy Father, especially when the latter is supported by numerous canonists of greater credibility.


LOCKED
Oct 24th 2013 new
(quote) Bernard-2709 said: Yes I believe that you are correct Ed.
Question 14
What are we to think of the New Catechism?

This question illustrates the fundamental differences between the SSPX and the Conciliar traditionalists or conservatives. These latter are often seen defending both the traditional Latin Mass and the new Catechism but not openly attacking either the Novus Ordo Missae or Vatican II.

The SSPX on the other hand defends the traditional catechisms and therefore the traditional Latin Mass, and so attacks the Novus Ordo Missae, Vatican II and the new Catechism, all of which more or less undermine our unchangeable Catholic faith.

Conservatives defend the Catechism of the Catholic Church for its re-affirmation of teachings silenced or denied by out rightly modernist catechisms; the Society rejects it though because it is an attempt to formalize and propagate the teachings of Vatican II. Pope John Paul II agrees with this:

The Catechism was also indispensable (i.e., as well as the 1983 Code of Canon Law), in order that all the richness of the teaching of the Church following the Second Vatican Council could be preserved in a new synthesis and be given a new direction. (Pope John Paul II, Crossing the Threshold of Hope, London, Jonathen Cape, 1994, p. 164)

One need but consider the 806 citations from Vatican II, a number which amounts on average to one citation every three-and-a-half paragraphs throughout the 2,865 paragraphs of the Catechism.

In particular, the novelties of Vatican II appear in the following paragraphs:

an infatuation with the dignity of man (225; 369; 1700; 1929...),

such that we may hope for the salvation of all the baptized (1682ff),

even non-Catholics (818),

or those who commit suicide (2283),

and of all the unbaptised, whether adults (847),

or infants (1261);

which is the basis of all rights (1738; 1930; 1935) including that of religious liberty (2106ff),

and the motive of all morality (1706; 1881; 2354; 2402; 2407, etc.),

a commitment to ecumenism (820f; 1399; 1401) because all religions are instruments of salvation (819; 838-843; 2104),

collegiality (879-885),

over-emphasis on the priesthood of the faithful (873; 1547; 1140ff, etc.).

Now, just as he who denies but one article of Faith loses the Faith [principle 7], so a teacher who errs on one point alone proves himself fallible, and, renders all he teaches questionable.

Just as the Second Vatican Council is not an authority to quote even where it propounds Catholic teaching (it does not do so infallibly and clearly), so this Catechism is not an authority of Catholic belief because of the modern deviations which it encompasses.

Those who defend this Catechism are supporting the innovations of Vatican II.

http://archives.sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q14_new_catechism.htm
Bernard--....we may not hope for the salvation of non-Catholics??--Just impossible??


LOCKED
Oct 24th 2013 new
(quote) Jerry-74383 said: One correction to your statement, Paul: in general, SSPX priests do not validly hear confessions or witness marriages, except where there is danger of death. There may be exceptions where an ordinary grants them faculties for these sacraments or may provide a dispensation for them to witness a specific marriage, but these would be the rare exception rather than the rule.

Thanks for the clarification.
LOCKED
Oct 24th 2013 new
(quote) Tom-112790 said: Bernard--....we may not hope for the salvation of non-Catholics??--Just impossible??


Praying would be far better than hoping (just saying...)

The Church's long-standing teaching is that normally one must be a member of the Catholic Church to achieve eternal salvation. This doesn't mean that for someone who is not a member of the Church to be saved. While we can hope and pray for the exceptional case, whenever possible we should work for the normal case: that is, while a person is still alive, we should strive to convert them to the Catholic faith rather than relying on God to use extraordinary means for their salvation. Once the person has died, or is otherwise unable to convert, then we can pray for application of the extraordinary.

LOCKED
Oct 24th 2013 new
(quote) Jerry-74383 said:
(b) Several prominent canon lawyers and priests have posted public statements explaining the status of SSPX priests vis a vis administration of the sacraments.

Public debate of the validity of scraments, expecially the sacrament of penance, is a very serious matter due to the potential to lead individuals astray and place their salvation at risk. The opinion of one canon lawyer, especially one who is dead and not able to respond to challenges, cannot be taken to outweigh a very clear official declaration by the Holy Father, especially when the latter is supported by numerous canonists of greater credibility.


At the end of the day given that none of us has a direct line to God (someone here may have but I don't) so none of us know for sure what Our Lord thinks of the SSPX? Using commonly used titles, "traditionalists" believe in following Catholic tradition, customs, ancient rites and Sacraments, and the traditional Catechism of the Catholic Church. They argue that the SSPX are following the Holy Will of God. They also argue that the SSPX was cut off by Rome rather than leaving Rome. At the other extreme "modernists" (use any title you want as the title is not relevant) believe that anything that is being spruiked in 2013 is Catholic because its source is Rome (version 2013) or a local Bishop.

People of all Catholic extractions generally agree that there is a difference between the law of the land and the law of God. To expand on that theory, does the modern law of the Church necessarily have to reconcile with the law of God just because it comes from the mouth of a Bishop including the Bishop of Rome? Tradition has always mandated consistency in teaching. It is a highly contentious to claim that the Church of today is consistent with the Church that was prior to the last Vatican Council. Where inconsistencies apply it is logical to conclude that one of the inconsistencies is right and one is wrong.Right and wrong cannot blend- they are mutually exclusive so the agents of change have either corrected error or are in fact error- not everyone can be right in this argument. Perhaps the New World Order is the Will of God? That is not for me to definitively conclude. I do find it of interest that one of the greatest "friends" of the Catholic Church, Mr Barack Obama is singing the praises of the Roman hierarchy- great diplomacy or is there more to it?

We all form a conscience and Pope Francis has encouraged us to follow our consciences. Is it a sin to attend a SSPX Mass if you do so in good conscience (out of respect for Christ the King)? I personally would not have an issue attending an SSPX Mass (have actually attended 2-3) ? Should I confess this as a sin? The only problem I would have would be in finding a modern priest who makes himself available for Confession boggled . I would have to go to confession to an SSPX priest and that would be invalid boggled .



LOCKED
Oct 24th 2013 new
(quote) Gabor-19025 said: At the end of the day given that none of us has a direct line to God (someone here may have but I don't) so none of us know for sure what Our Lord thinks of the SSPX?
No we don't. Which is why the Lord provided us with the Magisterium and gave it the final authority on matters of faith and morals, which we are obligated to follow, even those teachings that are not proclaimed infallibly.

Pope Benedict made a very clear declaration regarding the status of the SSPX in 2009. In fact, he stated it twice within a span of three sentences for emphasis.Maybe the pope got it right, maybe he got it wrong. If he did get it wrong, and even if we get it right, we're still wrong because we are putting ourselves above the Magisterium: the modern equivalent of eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil snared by Satan, just as our first parents were.


LOCKED
Oct 24th 2013 new
This: www.youtube.com (in Communion with Rome)

or this www.youtube.com (an invalid Mass)

I know which Mass I would attend.
LOCKED
Posts 161 - 170 of 200