Thursday, September 01, 2005

Eternal Econe

The CWNews Tribunal has spoken: schismatics of the Continuing Econian Church are more worthy of respect and credibility than cardinals of the Holy Roman Church in valid communion.

A sampling:
As I read this article, I felt as if Pompeda was holding a spark, and Satan was behind him, blowing away! ... I only hope and pray that no one listens to him. Dear Pope B, please don't hear Pompada!

pompeda WHO???

Can you imagine a high ranking Roman prelate DEMANDING that the church of England submit itself to the Pope? or DEMANDING the Orthodox patriarchs submit themselves to the authority of the Pope? or DEMANDING the Official Chinese catholic church submit itself to the authority of the Pope?

The double standard is obvious: if you are a Catholic traditionalist you get imperious ultimatums, if you are an outright heretic you get respect and patience.

And, as if those were shabby, my personal favorite:
[H]ow obedient is Pompedda? Is it insubordinate to falsely insinuate sedevacantism and posture against the trads while one's boss (& the Vicar of Christ) and Fellay are trying to open a discussion?
By the same coin, how obedient is Fellay? The question presupposes that it's perfectly subordinate to obstinately thumb one's nose at the emphatic pleas of the beloved John Paul, The Great (the Vicar of Christ), and receive episcopal ordination for the sole purpose of rejecting the development of Tradition out of disobedience, arrogance and selfishness.

That "logic" defies reason.

Now, when I see the Trads' extend their "Oh, they're so Catholic, how dare you ask questions!" approach to people who never left in the first place, like Hans Kung (still a priest, never excommunicated), Roger Mahony (ordained bishop by papal decree and licit head of the largest diocese in the United States by order of John Paul II) and Bill Levada (ordained bishop by papal decree, the prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith and not some apostate offshoot), their embrace of schism might get a fair hearing. But all we've got here is simply more of calling a church-wrecker "bishop" and a bishop "church-wrecker" from the masters of cafeteria Catholicism, which -- by their own standard for everyone but themselves -- is no Catholicism at all.

Yet again, snowflakes, it's par for the course. And, by the example shown here, I guess this means I could smear and bash a Cardinal Fellay (were such thing ever to happen) with impunity. Not that I would; who am I to boss the Pope around?

Oh, that's right -- I'm not a Trad.

-30-

7 Comments:

Blogger the Savage said...

Stop the self-righteous prattle, Rocco. You bash all sorts of Papally mandated bishops, from Pell to Rigali to Vasa to Burke to Bruskewitz. You accused "Bob Vasa" (no episcopal honorifics for him) of having a "Calvinist mind" (take that, heretic). For heaven's sake, every EWTN viewr was impugned as schismatic just a day or two ago.

Not to mention the favorite hate tactic of the left - decry homophbia, then slip out subtle hints that various conservative figures are homosexuals. It worked nicely for Daily Kos and Wonkette in attacking John Roberts (not that I'm a Bushian, I just find the tactic disgusting), and you are no better than St. Blog's version of Wonkette.

You can dish it out Rocco, but you just can't take it. I'm sorry, but you are rapidly becoming the biggest hypocrite in the Catholic blogosphere.

1/9/05 09:32  
Blogger Jason Cardona said...

You've completely ignored the point.

I have no affiliation with the SSPX, actual or spiritual. I have no sympathy for what Archbishop Lefebvre did.

But then again, I have no sympathy for what a lot of people throughout the centuries did. In "Ut Unum Sint", John Paul II called for a "purification of memories", to get on a new path of dialogue. Rather than bait and sneer at the SSPX (which is no better than "mad-trads" who bait Protestants or Jews), why not heed the vision of John Paul II and enter into a dialogue with them?

You (rightly) warn others of eating at the Cafeteria. But be wary yourself, Snowflake. :)

1/9/05 09:34  
Blogger Jeff said...

I think Rocco's point is that it doesn't matter what you believe as long as you stay in the Institution. I'm sure Pope Ratzinger agrees with that, aren't you?

The admittedly arrogant and schismatical Fellay believes in details like the Divinity of Christ; Hans Kung believes Jesus was a Nice Fella and God = the Positive and Optimistic Vibes of the Universe. But, hey, he STAYED. That's the point, right? Yes, he stayed because he wanted a FORUM and he wanted to revolutionize and transform the institution from within. Otherwise, he has no GIG, no purpose.

That's all. Stay in the Institution, no matter if your purpose is to gut it from within. That's the key to faithfulness, not Faith.

But if THAT's the measure, what about that poor apostate Rabbi you were praising a few minutes ago, Rocco? Shifting standards, whatever comes to hand, right? Hmmm?

1/9/05 09:57  
Blogger patrick said...

I can't speak for Rocco, but I can speak for myself. Having fled the ECUSA over 10 years ago for Rome, I know something about the limitations of staying within a church institution for its own sake. The issue is not about staying within an institution as such. It is about a shared Faith and communion between those who share that Faith. Whatever one thinks of Cardinal Mahony, and there is much that could be said, he is in full communion with and shares the Faith of Rome and those who deny it are wrong. For now, the SSPX is not in full communion with Rome and might not even - depending on how one looks at it - share the Faith of the Catholic Church. At the very least, its situation is highly irregular. That is not true of Mahony even though he sometimes celebrates mass with awful and irregular Kool-Aid glass chalices than the nice frilly golden ones at Econe. Same goes for Pompedda.

Oh, last I checked, Cardinal Pompedda's strictures against Fellay and the SSPX also apply to Protestants and Orthodox. They cannot be reconciled to Rome, unless they share the Faith of Rome, no matter how much sweetness and light there may be in our ecumenical discussions. I don't see any evidence of Pompedda or Benedict dissing the SSPX - quite the opposite.

1/9/05 10:13  
Blogger Jeff said...

Right on, Patrick. Well said.

1/9/05 13:10  
Blogger John Hearn said...

Admit it Rock, your life would just be empty without the "Trads" to rail against. Of course some of these folks *are* nuts, but you are rather inclusive in who you regard as being in that group. But then, the more the merrier!

1/9/05 18:04  
Blogger michigancatholic said...

And some progressives aren't nuts??? Heh.

Check this out.

http://www.stjosephsmen.com/letters/images/clowns_small.jpg

2/9/05 17:11  

Post a Comment

<< Home