Monday, January 12, 2015

Blogging Pause ... sequel


Well I had some time during the Christmas break to post some articles, and I still have one in a draft state - but it will have to wait for a few months.

Translation: Things are too busy and my posts will be few and far between (unless I suddenly have a lot of time!)


Saturday, January 10, 2015

Is the SSPX right?


And if so ... about what?

I discussed this theme earlier here  but it seems that, given the renewed furor against the SSPX, that it would be a good idea to revisit a key point.

The SSPX has a specific perspective on this particular trial that has fallen upon the Church of Christ since the illustrious Second Vatican Council.

The perspective is that there IS a crisis and that while the seeds were sown earlier, they sprouted in the fertile tilled soil of the Second Vatican Council (see Four Points).

This is the point that 'Rome' is unable to accept: That the Council (read: Second Vatican Council) documents contain the error in principle that have resulted in this multi-faceted crisis.

... and yes that includes the reforms that resulted in Liturgy, Law and now Morals.

Keep the Faith!


Friday, January 9, 2015

What Unity Is Being Offered to the SSPX (DICI)


While this appears to have:
a. Been Archbishop Pozzo's own initiative
b. and fallen on deaf ears ...

It is still useful for the record.


Courtesy of DICI

What Unity Is Being Offered to the Society of St. Pius X?

Filed under From TraditionNews
12-pozzoOn October 20, 2014, in an interview granted to the French weekly Famille chrétienne, Archbishop Guido Pozzo (in the picture), secretary of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, explained – after the meeting between Cardinal Müller and Bishop Fellay (September 23) – the subjects of discord between Rome and the Society of St. Pius X: “The controversial aspects have to do partly with the assessment of the ecclesial situation since Vatican Council II and the causes that produced a certain theological and pastoral tumult in the post-council period, and, more generally, in the modern context. And partly, they have to do with specific questions related to ecumenism, dialogue with the religions of the world and the question of religious liberty.”

Thursday, January 8, 2015

POPE PIUS IX, Quartus Supra to the Armenians, January 6, 1873


An encyclical of Pope Pius IX (Quartus Supra) was recently invoked in a snide greeting here.

The author quoted the following passage:
“It is as CONTRARY TO THE DIVINE CONSTITUTION of the Church as it is to perpetual and constant tradition for anyone to attempt to prove the catholicity of his faith and TRULY CALL HIMSELF A CATHOLIC when he FAILS IN OBEDIENCE TO THE APOSTOLIC SEE.” (POPE PIUS IX, Quartus Supra to the Armenians, January 6, 1873)

I have not as yet read the whole document, but I will make a quick guess:  The author is probably applying his own meaning to the words.  As noted elsewhere, it is probably part of a "confirmation bias".

I wonder what "they" will do should the SSPX is regularized without a compromise?

In reviewing the meaning of the quotation we employ the following steps:

  1. Place the quotation in its original context
  2. Evaluate whether or not the obedience in question applies to the condition of the SSPX or even Fr. Gruner.
Well, I'd like to place it in context ... but the text doesn't appear within the source that I have of the encyclical.

What a shame.

I cast about the internet looking for the text and alas ... nothing.

How a number of people can be mistaken about this encyclical is confusing.

Perhaps they have mis-placed the citation.

Nope, I checked ewtn here and still no joy.

Oh well my bad for letting them waste my time.


Wednesday, January 7, 2015

Monday, January 5, 2015

When (false) Prophecy Fails


18:21. And if in silent thought thou answer: How shall I know the word that the Lord hath not spoken?
18:22. Thou shalt have this sign: Whatsoever that same prophet foretelleth in the name of the Lord, and it cometh not to pass: that thing the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath forged it by the pride of his mind: and therefore thou shalt not fear him. (Source)

It should be this simple.

If someone makes a prediction about a future event and the event doesn't take place - then they were at best wrong and at worst a fraud.

However, when a person or their followers can't accept that they were wrong - then life gets interesting - that's where we cross the threshold to 'cognitive dissonance theory' (link).

General human behaviour 
... when confronted  with a reality which contradicts their beliefs.

First let's clarify something: There is no justification for justifying ones own actions based on the supposed future action of someone else.  This holds true in both the logical and moral sphere.

In effect the person is acting out of fear of a supposed future event.

I'm not talking about a pre-emptive strike in the presence of an actual significant build-up of forces or a hostile nation seeking to develop WMD's, such as when the IDF bombed a nuclear plant in Syria.

I am referring to what happened when Bishop Williamson et al warned of a 'sell-out' agreement between Rome and the SSPX.

Sunday, January 4, 2015

Laying it on the Line


I had thought that Bishop Williamson was starting to see through the fog of conspiracies because of the light of true doctrine.

Then he wrote this:
But what has happened to Tradition without the Archbishop to guide it? Alas, the authorities at the top of his Society of St Pius X, which for some 40 years spearheaded the defence of the objective Faith, cannot have been praying seriously enough to protect their minds and hearts from being in turn infected by subjectivism. They too have lost the primacy of objective truth, and so they are being played by the Romans like a fish is played by a fisherman. Archbishop Lefebvre, pray for us!



This is just too good a diagram to not link.

Robert Siscoe and John of St. Thomas Respond to Fr. Cekada - Catholic Family News


I've cited Mr. Siscoe's work in a number of my discussions with Sede-Vacantists and the following article is no exception.

Source: Gloria.TV

Additional Reference: Bellarmine and Suarez on the Question of a Heretical Pope.

Robert Siscoe and John of St. Thomas Respond to Fr. Cekada

(From September 2014 issue of Catholic Family News)

By Robert J. Siscoe

Fr. Cekada posted a response on his website to my April, 2014 article, titled Bellarmine and Suarez on the Question of a Heretical Pope. (1) Skipping over the citations included in the article, which confirmed that the intervention of the proper ecclesiastical authorities is necessary for a sitting Pope to be declared deprived of his office due to heresy, Fr. Cekada zeroed in on one point in particular: he objected to my assertion that, according to Bellarmine, a Pope becomes a “manifest heretic” by remaining obstinate after being publicly warned.

Friday, January 2, 2015

Might is not right!

A refresher on some Catholic Principles.

Why "Preventive War" is Immoral
By Fr. Juan Carlos Iscara
Originally printed in the May 2003 issue of The Angelus

Perhaps when this article is published, the war against Iraq may be over. Or God forbid it may have just sparked off a wider conflict. Whatever the case, these few lines will not attempt to deal with the geopolitical or military aspects of the Iraqi war, which are beyond the author’s expertise, but will only examine its moral justification.

As it has been said in a former article,1 to state the conditions in which a just war is morally licit is an ethical judgment, whereas to decide that, here and now, a war should be fought is a judgment of political prudence. In other words, to know the conditions in which a just war may be fought is one thing; to establish whether those conditions are or are not realized in a particular case is a different and far more difficult matter. We must be guided to concrete decisions by a body of principles of justice, previous to any conflict, grounded in the Eternal Reason of God; but our prudential judgment depends on the knowledge of all the relevant facts in the concrete case. Moreover, we must be acutely aware of the danger of error through the manipulation of propaganda and the easy slogans of sentimental patriotism.

Thursday, January 1, 2015

At the Service of the Holy Catholic Church Declaration of 1974 - The root of the conflict between Rome and the SSPX DICI


I've personally encountered a spectrum of beliefs concerning the conflict between Rome and its offspring - the SSPX.

Most of the responses are based on ignorance or a refusal to accept that the SSPX could be right in its response to the waves that are attempting to submerge the Barque of Peter.


Courtesy of DICI

At the Service of the Holy Catholic Church

Filed under From RomeFrom TraditionNewsThe Church in the world
On November 21, 1974, 40 years ago,  Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre made this declaration, that has since become the Society of St. Pius X’s profession of Faith: “We adhere with our whole heart and with our whole soul to the Catholic Rome, guardian of the Catholic Faith and of the traditions necessary to the maintenance of this Faith, to the eternal Rome, mistress of wisdom and truth. Because of this adherence we refuse and have always refused to follow the Rome of neo-modernist and neo-Protestant tendencies, such as were clearly manifested during the Second Vatican Council, and after the Council in all the resulting reforms.”