Skip to main content

The "Resistance" and its problems ...

+
JMJ


Maybe the 'resistance' isn't founded on heresy.  Unfortunately, no 'resistor' that I have encountered online has provided explicit affirmation of the principles that I've discussed.

One "resistor" who did admit that the  principles are Catholic so he had to accept them later balked at Obedience with an excuse that he didn't 'trust' the Pope et al.  Now he is a home-aloner ala resistance.

It is strange how a conspiracy clouded mind can narrow the perspective to the point where people echo the modernists saying "St.Thomas never could have imagined this time, so we need to disregard X".  I surrounded that with quotes because that was actually posted in answer to my discussion on obedience as per St. Thomas.

There are a number of elements that I find telling in my contacts with 'resistors':
  1. They are selective in their application of principles .  It seems that the ends does justify the means for these people.
  2. They appear to have  strong bias towards trusting their own judgement, instead of following principles such St. Thomas Aquinas on Obedience.  
With Bishop Williamson's consecration of Fr. Faure, I encountered another 'resistor' who, when asked a direct question, launched off on all sorts of twigs that weren't relevant to the question at hand.


The thing I have noted is that when confronted by a hard 'fact', such as the lifting of the excommunication, they resort to twig arguments that are usually 'after the fact' - such as why didn't we hear of this in 2009?

Essentially, those with whom I have held these discussions refuse to face some of the hard questions. Such as why are the beliefs of the clergy of the resistance not consistent with the teaching of the Church on the Four Marks etc?

When confronted, instead of answering the inconsistency directly they introduce new items such as raising the principle of 'no canonical regularization prior to a doctrinal resolution' to an almost de-fide status.  As a consequence they shunt aside St. Thomas etc.

Oddy, they (Tony La Rosa) wrote the following:

It was not until February 2, 2012 that this principle was publicly made known to have changed.  During a sermon a St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary in Winona, Bishop Bernard Fellay said the following:

“We told them (i.e., Rome) very clearly, if you accept us as is, without change, without obliging us to accept these things (i.e., Vatican II, etc.), then we are ready.”3

So the SSPX leadership was willing to become canonically regularized as long as Rome did not expect the SSPX to change from its current position.  However, this caused an uproar within the SSPX, including the other three SSPX Bishops...(Source)
I guess they didn't realize that Bishop Fellay was quoting Archbishop Lefebvre when he said: "Accept us as we are".

Oh well ... reality is a nasty thing to deal with.


When confronted with reality they have a few choices.  The 'resistors' that I've encountered all change their perception of the action.

The similarity to a delusional psychosis is stunning.


P^3



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3

Is it sinful to attend the Novus Ordo (New Mass) - Is it Sinful to Not Attend the Novus Ordo on Sunday?

+ JMJ A non-SSPX Catholic is upset over the SSPX statements on not attending the Novus Ordo Missae. Ladies and gentlemen, what the SSPX, or at least its website editor, is advocating is a mortal sin against the Third Commandment.  Unless the priest deviates from the language of the Sacramentary, the consecration, and thus the rest of Mass is to be considered valid.  No one may elect not to attend Mass simply because abuses are occurring therein.  Might I suggest that such absenteeism is its own abuse?  The Third Commandment binds under mortal sin.  Father So-And-So from the SSPX has no authority whatsoever to excuse attendance at Mass, be that Mass ever so unpalatable. Source:Restore DC Catholicism Well, this is interesting. First why does the SSPX issue this statement? Because it is sinful to put your faith in danger by attending a protestant service.  It is likewise dangerous to put your faith in danger by attending a protestantized mass (ie the Novus Ordo Missae

Remember this day March 25, 1991 - The Death of Archbishop Lefebvre

+ JMJ This is the day, 25 years ago, that Archbishop Lefebvre passed on to his eternal reward. I know that he has as many (perhaps even more) critics than admirers.  For example I still remember Fr. Paul Nicholson's screed in which he shouted from the top of his webpage: "To die excommunicated - how horrible". I'll leave aside Fr. Nicholson's ignorance on the matter as in the grand scheme of things, his impact on the life of the Mystical Body of Christ, which IS the Roman Catholic Church is no greater than that of Michael Voris etc. Archbishop Lefebvre and the work he founded (ie Fraternal Society of St. Pius X ) have had a significant impact. Let us list of few from greatest to smallest: Consistent and constant Catholic perspective on the crisis of the Church from the halls of the Second Vatican Council to the Synod on the Family (and beyond!) Summorum Pontificum and Universae Ecclesiae : By which the restoration of the sacramental life of the