Skip to main content

The Elimination of Pockets of Resistance - II - UPDATED

Image
By
+
JMJ

Updated - scroll to bottom

As I mentioned here, 'cue Fr. Greiger', he has now responded with another counter-post.

Everything is as it is normally, however then there was this:

Yet, riding the wave of the cutting edge “reporting” of Rorate Caeli, even a “real” journalist fails to do even the least amount of due diligence before tweeting the following:

This is from someone who writes for The Weekly Standard, The Wall Street Journaland The Spectator.  But he is just “repeating” what he read on Rorate Caeli.  Now, of course, New Catholic will deny he called the FI under commission a heretical order, but that is clearly what he meant.  Why else would a friar otherwise have no way out but to abandon the priesthood?  In fact, Rorate Caeli retweeted Schulman’s smear.
But be sure, no one will take responsibility for spreading the lie that the friars who support the Apostolic Commission are heretics, nor will anyone take responsibility for having sowed the seed of dissension and despair by suggesting that friars confronted with the duty to obey the Church in difficult circumstances will have no choice but to leave the priesthood.


Here we see a perfect example of the application of a confirmation bias driven by a cultural perspective.

Here is how Fr. Greiger parsed the statement thus:

  • Papal blacklist 
  • 4 (for) bishops 
  • who shelter refugees 
  • from heretical order 
  • condemned for being nonheretics?
In Fr. Greger's mind, he associates the order under the 'commission' with the statement 'heretical.

However, I don't parse it the same way ... perhaps because I do not assume a malfeasance on the part of Mr. Schulman.

  • Papal blacklist 
  • 4 (for) bishops 
  • who shelter refugees 
  • from heretical order condemned for being non heretics?

The FFI came under the 'commission' because of the 'crypto-lefebvrism' that Fr. Greiger opposes with such vehemence. 

In short, they touched upon the cultural assumption that Fr. Greiger holds strongly: The Second Vatican Council was a great event in the life of the Church and nothing is or can be wrong with the documents.  To hold this opinion is 'heretical'.

The commision holds the FFI as 'heretical' because they dared to question the Second Vatican Council.

However, given that the FFI members being chastised for their presumption havn't denied a dogma of the Church - they are non-heretics.

That's the way I see it ...

I guess Fr. Greiger just seeks offense in anything that doesn't correspond to his own narrative of the events.

P^3


PS.  My wife has noted that many time, when we have been accused of something, the accuser is often guilty of the same fault.
This is a plague upon the Church and the Internet is its delivery system.  The Catholic blogosphere needs a purge.  We need to stop the rumor-mongering and vicious gossip.
I wonder if Fr. Greiger's denunciation of his confreres, superiors et al as being crypto-lefebvrists constitutes rumor-mongering and vicious gossip?

My wife is very wise.

Update

Fr. Greiger tweeted Mr. Schulman.  Here's his response.


It would appear that my interpretation was closer to the mark.

P^3
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

By
+ 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
Post a Comment
Read more

What the heck is a congregation of "Pontifical Right"

By
+ JMJ In a discussion with a friend the question occurred to me that I didn't actually know was is involved in being a religious order of 'pontifical right'. I had a vague notion that this meant they reported to Rome as opposed to the local diocese. I'm also aware that, according to the accounts I have heard, the Archbishop received 'praise' and the written direction to incardinate priests directly into the SSPX.  This is interesting because it implies that the SSPX priests were no longer required to incardinate in the local diocese but in the SSPX. This is something that belongs to an order of 'pontifical right'. Anyway here's some definitions: Di diritto pontificio is the Italian term for “of pontifical right” . It is given to the ecclesiastical institutions (the religious and secular institutes, societies of apostolic life) either created by the Holy See or approved by it with the formal decree, known by its Latin name, Decretu
Post a Comment
Read more

Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

By
+ JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R
Post a Comment
Read more

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

By
+ 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
Post a Comment
Read more