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

The Curious Case of Steve Skojec and the Dangers of Deep Diving into the Crisis Sub-Titled: The Failings of Others

 + JMJ It's been a while now since Steve Skojec sold 1P5 and abandoned the Catholic Faith. I've been a 'Trad' since 1982 and in those 40+ years I seen this death-spiral before with a similar end point. It seems that anyone who jumps into the fray unprepared for the enormous task of righting wrongs will, eventually, become discouraged by not the task but the people who surround them.   I remember when Skojec complained of the treatment his family received from a traditional priest.  This seems to have been the start of the end for him. So what can we learn from the likes of Steve Skojec, Michael Voris (maybe?), Louie Verrecchio, Gerry Matatix and other celebrity Catholics? Probably quite a lot about what not to do. First, don't burn out on the crisis?  When you burn out, on work or anything else, little things assume a more greater importance than they are due.   This is one of my 'canary in the coal mine' signals that I've been stretching myself too thin

What the heck is a congregation of "Pontifical Right"

+ 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

De Veritate - St. Thomas Aquinas - What is necessary to believe explicitly?

I was recently introduced to a work of St. Thomas De Veritate ( Source ) in the course of an argument concerning the minimum content of explicit faith.  When I submitted the following quote as proof: Theological faith, that is, a supernatural faith in Revelation, is necessary, and this is an effect of grace (D 1789); nemini unquam sine ilIa contigit iustificatio (D 1793). As far as the content of this faith is concerned, according to Hebr. 11, 6, at least the existence of God and retribution in the other world must be firmly held, necessitate medii (by the necessity of means) with explicit faith. In regard to the Trinity and the Incarnation, implicit faith suffices. The supernatural faith necessary for justification is attained when God grants to the unbeliever by internal inspiration or external teaching a knowledge of the truths of Revelation, and actual grace to make the supernatural act of faith. Cf. De verite 14, I I.Ott - Fundamentals of Dogma p241 In response my opponent wrot

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

Gary Campbell - Former SSPX Priest

 + JMJ I've come across Gary Campbell's articles on Where Peter Is and noticed that he seems to have very strong biases, assumptions and reactions to anything that runs against these. Driven by curiosity I have found a copy of his letter to Bishop Fellay explaining his reasons for leaving the SSPX only five years after his ordination in Winona. I was surprised to learn that I was present for his ordination. Given this, I was interested in reviewing his letter to Bishop Fellay. There will be two versions in this post. The unblocked and blocked letter. The unblocked is, obviously the full letter. The block, meaning unnecessary text will be blocked out, is a technique I use to remove ancillary text while focusing on key phrases. After completing my read, I believe that the root of much of what caused the issues with Fr. Campbell could be the seeds of the 'resistance' that, when the same perceptions were challenged by continued negotiations with Rome resulted in the necessa