Fish Eaters Traditional Catholic Forum
May 19, 2013, 09:40:PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: The man still needs help!
 
   Fish Eaters    Forum Index   Forum Rules   Help Calendar Members Chat Room   Who's Chatting   Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9
 
Author Topic: Real trads  (Read 3750 times)
JayneK
Gold Fish
*
Gender: Female
Personality type: INTJ
Posts: 14,365



« Reply #50 on: January 26, 2012, 03:13:PM »

There is quite a difference between treating any disagreement with the SSPX as heresy and being ok with you calling the SSPX schismatic and disobedient.

I make a point to never call the SSPX schismatic.  But I can see how I sounded like I was.  I meant that they were perceived as schismatic by Rome at that time.  I apologize for being unclear.
Logged

ADORABLE Saviour, consider my many wants, and grant me those graces which Thou knowest I stand in need of to do Thy will in all things.
JayneK
Gold Fish
*
Gender: Female
Personality type: INTJ
Posts: 14,365



« Reply #51 on: January 26, 2012, 03:15:PM »

How many times do we have to have the same argument? We are all very familiar with what you think Jayne, the same for the  other usual suspects. This is worse then the modesty threads.

The vast majority of arguments on the forum are ones that we have had many times before.  In all these cases, people who are not interested do not have to read them.
Logged

ADORABLE Saviour, consider my many wants, and grant me those graces which Thou knowest I stand in need of to do Thy will in all things.
Warrenton
Member

Gender: Male
Personality type: manic
Posts: 1,151



« Reply #52 on: January 26, 2012, 03:18:PM »

In other words, there are no "real trads".  We all give up one element of tradtional Catholicism or another.  That is the nature of the crisis. 

I see what you are getting at with this statement, but it is not quite accurate.  

We are real traditionalists, because we cleave to real traditions.  The facts that some may not be in union with the Magesterium, or that others remain in union with the Magisterium (at least formally) does not make any of us "less real."  Why?  Because in all of our cases  -yours and Nics both - the rupture is not of our making.  Therefore, comparisons with Luther are not apt  - Luther created the crisis point, and the reacted to it.  You and Nic, and I suppose the rest of us here, lack the first element of the Lutheran schism:  we did not create this crisis.

Further, it is not our fault that there are no precedents within the past centuries for us to turn to.  Some turn to the SSPX, at the expense of union, and others form a distinct traditionalist group within churches under the Magisterium, at the expense of the sacraments:  it is a question of emphasis more than substance.  Clearly, both are necessary:  if there were no traditionalists in the Church proper, the Magesterium would not attempt reconciliation - we would have a new Bugnini.  On the other hand, if there were no SSPX, there would be no polestar for traditional Catholics, the sacramental knowledge would be virtually lost.

Frustration is natural to people - each of us want our way, immediately.  The sense of injustice makes the frustration felt more sharply.  However, the forces arrayed against traditionalists well know this, and from the start they gambled that with time, the disparate traditionalists would cancel each other out, die off, give in.   As Michael Vorhis recently said, "I remember, I was there."  When I was young, I was frequently told I was hoping for the return of things forever gone, that "no one" wanted the return of the traditional sacraments.  Restoration is hard when there are two legitmate claimants to a throne.  But the contenders are foolish to fight amongst themselves, when there is a third, more powerful adversary who seeks the destruction of both of them.    

Logged

I have loved the habitation of thy house, and the place where thy honour dwelleth
Walty
Gold Fish
*
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,486



« Reply #53 on: January 26, 2012, 05:06:PM »

Maybe you're just paranoid, but I see nothing wrong with this post except that you disagree with her position on the SSPX.  So proud of you, but sorry I don't think that qualifies as objectionable content. 

Yes.  You are missing very much.  This thread is not just about this thread.
Logged

Quote from: Rev. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange O.P.
The Church is intolerant in principle because she believes;
she is tolerant in practice because she loves.
The enemies of the Church are tolerant in principle because they do not believe;
 they are intolerant in practice because they do not love.

Timorem Domini docebo vos.
JayneK
Gold Fish
*
Gender: Female
Personality type: INTJ
Posts: 14,365



« Reply #54 on: January 26, 2012, 05:37:PM »

Maybe you're just paranoid, but I see nothing wrong with this post except that you disagree with her position on the SSPX.  So proud of you, but sorry I don't think that qualifies as objectionable content. 

Yes.  You are missing very much.  This thread is not just about this thread.

Virtually every time I post, it isn't about what I post.  Even though my actual positions aren't any different that those of many others here, they do not get the same reactions.  I know that I can be irritating at times, but I do not understand the level of animosity directed at me. 
Logged

ADORABLE Saviour, consider my many wants, and grant me those graces which Thou knowest I stand in need of to do Thy will in all things.


Walty
Gold Fish
*
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,486



« Reply #55 on: January 26, 2012, 05:42:PM »

Maybe you're just paranoid, but I see nothing wrong with this post except that you disagree with her position on the SSPX.  So proud of you, but sorry I don't think that qualifies as objectionable content. 

Yes.  You are missing very much.  This thread is not just about this thread.

Virtually every time I post, it isn't about what I post.  Even though my actual positions aren't any different that those of many others here, they do not get the same reactions.  I know that I can be irritating at times, but I do not understand the level of animosity directed at me. 

Really?  I find that hard to believe.  You've been baiting the people you disagree with for awhile now.  If you think the forum is turning away from the SSPX, something which you are happy about, then why do you even feel the need to make this thread?

http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/index.php/topic,3448259.msg33684265.html#msg33684265
Logged

Quote from: Rev. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange O.P.
The Church is intolerant in principle because she believes;
she is tolerant in practice because she loves.
The enemies of the Church are tolerant in principle because they do not believe;
 they are intolerant in practice because they do not love.

Timorem Domini docebo vos.
verenaerin
Member

Posts: 2,501



« Reply #56 on: January 26, 2012, 05:58:PM »

How many times do we have to have the same argument? We are all very familiar with what you think Jayne, the same for the  other usual suspects. This is worse then the modesty threads.

The vast majority of arguments on the forum are ones that we have had many times before.  In all these cases, people who are not interested do not have to read them.

If you are the one feeling attacked, then why don't you keep away from those threads?
Logged

I cough for my own amusement...

I fight for the rights of the sleeveless!
radartek
Member

Gender: Male
Posts: 25



« Reply #57 on: January 26, 2012, 06:13:PM »

I find discussions such as these highly unproductive.  As someone stated earlier each side knows the others positions on the matter.  Right now, there is still the possibility that the Society may be be fully "reconciled" with Rome.  We are still waiting for the Vatican to respond to the SSPX response on the preamble.  Perhaps it is still possible for resolution to take place.  Who can say?  But what worries me is people with the same "mindset" as Jaynek may harden themselves to to reconciliaton personally with the Society should they be "regularized". 

Conversly, I worry about Society supporters who would harden themselves similarly.  I find this very troubling, and just wish that everyone would concentrate on the fact that both sides main area of concern is the Salvation Of Souls.  I don't think anyone would disagree with that.  That being said, how both sides work together to make this happen?  You might say, the Novus Ordo and the deviations from the pre-1962 cathechism are to blame. That being said,  what areas pre and post 1962 are still in alignment.  I think much time is spent on areas where deviation takes place, and not enough where they are the same.

I attend both SSPX and FSSP masses.  And I feel quite ok personally with it.  I have never had the priests at the SSPX masses/chapels advise me to NOT attend a FSSP/Diocesan TLM.  Yet, I see statements made like this is the norm for the Society.  I do not accept that this is the SSPX norm,as I have not seen it.  Sometimes I think the main conflict is not the really the mass at all.  It is really whether or not, TOTAL obedience is required of EVERYTHING said by the Pope.  I think that is the main area of conflict in these kinds of discussions.  People have their positions to support.  I suspect everyone really knows what the answer to this really is.  But both sides will not yield or admit any kind of error in their determination of yes or no, is every word uttered by the Pope infallible.  HIstory has shown us much, but yet history is ignored.
Logged
JayneK
Gold Fish
*
Gender: Female
Personality type: INTJ
Posts: 14,365



« Reply #58 on: January 26, 2012, 06:16:PM »

Virtually every time I post, it isn't about what I post.  Even though my actual positions aren't any different that those of many others here, they do not get the same reactions.  I know that I can be irritating at times, but I do not understand the level of animosity directed at me. 

Really?  I find that hard to believe.  You've been baiting the people you disagree with for awhile now.  If you think the forum is turning away from the SSPX, something which you are happy about, then why do you even feel the need to make this thread?

http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/index.php/topic,3448259.msg33684265.html#msg33684265

How do you tell the difference between disagreeing and baiting?  Don't you think one's perception is at least partially due to if one agrees with the poster?  I avoid name-calling and emotionally loaded language.  I try to be polite to people.  Can you tell me exactly what it is I do to bait people?

You linked to the "Criticisms of JayneK" thread.  I do not understand what point you are making.  
Logged

ADORABLE Saviour, consider my many wants, and grant me those graces which Thou knowest I stand in need of to do Thy will in all things.
JayneK
Gold Fish
*
Gender: Female
Personality type: INTJ
Posts: 14,365



« Reply #59 on: January 26, 2012, 06:19:PM »

How many times do we have to have the same argument? We are all very familiar with what you think Jayne, the same for the  other usual suspects. This is worse then the modesty threads.

The vast majority of arguments on the forum are ones that we have had many times before.  In all these cases, people who are not interested do not have to read them.

If you are the one feeling attacked, then why don't you keep away from those threads?

I post in threads where the subject interests me.  I do not run away from them because I might be attacked.  I refuse to be intimidated.
Logged

ADORABLE Saviour, consider my many wants, and grant me those graces which Thou knowest I stand in need of to do Thy will in all things.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9
 
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.8 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC