Skip to main content

Laying it on the Line

Image
By
+
JMJ


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!



So here it is, laying it on the line:

  1. The 'resistance' leaders et al have demonstrated a faulty (ie erroneous) understanding of the Four Marks which darkens (to say the least) their concepts of ecclesiology.
  2. This darkness has reached the extent that there is NO difference between 'resistance' and sede-vacantist ecclesiologies 
    1. Noticed this when I happened upon yet another sede site.
  3. True disobedience is a sin
  4. Fear mongering is simply FUD spelt backwards (see ad-nauseum fallacy)
  5. Doctrine illumines principles, principles guide action.  Faulty doctrine leads to faulty principles which leads to bad actions.  
This is the story of the resistance.  

Their entire effort rests upon a faulty foundation (doctrine) which is why they have no problem re-imagining the Catholic Principles that the Archbishop used to guide his relations with Rome. Which is why they can't seem to stop with the calumny, detraction, and false accusations.

I don't need an undergrad degree in theology or to listen to the on-going youtube 'sermons' to find out if the resistance is right.

It is simple:
  • The two groups (SSPX and former-SSPX) each hold two incompatible doctrinal positions on ecclesiology.
  • Ecclesiology is a fairly well defined area of Theology, otherwise the SSPX wouldn't have a Theological leg to stand on.  Church Teaching (ie Four Marks) is clear. *
  • Ergo there are only three possibilities
    • SSPX= right, 'resistance'=wrong
    • SSPX =wrong, 'resistance'=right
    • SSPX =wrong, 'resistance'=wrong
  • The position of the SSPX is completely consistent with Church Teaching (see four marks etc)
  • The position of the former-SSPX self styled 'resistance' is completely inconsistent with Church Teaching.
Ergo: SSPX = RIGHT, 'resistance' (aka sspx-mc, sspx-so etc etc etc)=WRONG


P^3


Note
* The only problem is that most people need to set aside their kindergarten Catechism and man-up to reading the Catechism of the Council of Trent without any sede-vacantist interpretations.



Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Rome,the SSPX and this time of Crisis - Updated

By
+ JMJ Obviously there's lots of events right now. First we have the April 1st - I almost thought it was April Fools - meeting between Pope Francis and Bishop Fellay.  Nothing really news worthy as this is a natural progression as Rome appears to be considering fulfilling Archbishop Lefebvre's wish to 'accept us as we are'. Second we have the April 8th publication of what will be a verbose exhortation of the Synod of the Family. I'm willing to bet that the Pope will give with one hand (unilateral regularization of SSPX) and take with the other (ambiguous document that opens the flood gates of sin further). Much to pray for. P^3
30 comments
Read more

The Vatican and SSPX – An Organizational Culture Perspective

By
Introduction The recent and continuing interactions between the Vatican and the SSPX have been a great opportunity for prayer and reflection.  The basis for the disagreement is theological and not liturgical. As noted by Dr. Lamont (2012), the SSPX theological position on the four key controversial aspects of the Second Vatican Council are base on prior theological work that resulted from relevant magisterial pronouncements.  So it is difficult to understand the apparent rejection of the theological position of the SSPX.
17 comments
Read more

A Reply to Martin Blackshaw’s FLAWED Remnant article titled: FLAWED: SSPX Advice on Abortion-tainted Vaccines

By
 + JMJ    An article has appeared in the Remnant (link to article) and I am afraid that there are a number of flaws in it that need to be addressed. The author, Martin Blackshaw, believes that both the Church and the SSPX are misapplying the principle of Moral Theology called 'Cooperation In Evil'.  Unfortunately, Mr. Blackshaw rests most of his arguments on citing authors that support his position, without considering the possibility that they are wrong. This highlights a key factor in this crisis: ignorance of the faith and its application . I don't am not singling out Mr. Blackshaw for this criticism, I have observed that it applies to laity and religious, superior and subject a like.  No one seems immune in this enduring crisis, myself included.  I further believe that this ignorance is why so many Catholics, both traditional and non, rely on their gut feeling or "Catholic conscience" for charting their way through this crisis of the faith.  While...
25 comments
Read more

Battle Joy

By
+ JMJ I was listening to a Cd of John Vennari on Battle Joy ( Recapture the Flag: Dedication and Battle Joy - by John Vennari ) and it really captures a key point that Catholics (Traditional and otherwise labelled) need to adopt. We should see this conflict as a chance to prove our mettle for our King and to earn our unending reward.  As veterans we'll be able to talk about the old battles in which we fought and the honour we gained in fighting for our King! Attached is a preview of course that, although secular, contains some of the elements of Battle Joy. P^3 https://www.coursera.org/learn/war/lecture/VDwfk/the-joy-of-battle
Post a Comment
Read more

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

By
Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...
8 comments
Read more