|
Post by Pacelli on Oct 26, 2017 15:43:24 GMT -5
I have posted some resources to educate Catholics about the Palmarian sect, HERE
I would ask that all who wish to participate in this thread read at least the first post there, and those with more time, to read the entire book linked in the second post. My thoughts: I believe that the Palma de Troya group should serve as a warning to all Catholics that unauthorized groups are a danger, that they can easily justify the acceptance of illegal episcopal consecrations, impose unlawful disciplinary norms, falsely assert authority over Catholics, and even tinker with doctrine. We should all be very careful of any group pretending they have the apostolic succession, or even worse, pretending that they can elect a Pope, and lastly putting the idea into action and actually usurping the papal office. While most sedevacantists haven't graduated to electing a false pope, many believe or at least consider as a possibility the first two ideas. Many of the people that fell in with Palma de Troya were good Catholics, devoted to Our Lady and against modernism. Sadly, many were Catholic priests. Once Catholic theology of apostolic succession is deviated from, and the necessity of a mission is denied, or falsely claimed, a Pandora's box is opened, and the danger grows as the deviation from the sound Catholic doctrine on apostolic succession grows.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Oct 28, 2017 8:20:15 GMT -5
It would seem that many of the actions taken by this group (which was utterly unknown to me untill I read the article just now) are actions many in trad circles imagine would be the way out of the crisis. That is why I would say that the constant theorys and wishful thinking all come from the cognizant dissonance of the RR position. I wouldnt class the palmarians as sedes since they solved the problem by assertions of drugged Paul6 and upon his death electing their own...a Pope. I thank God that he gave me the clarity to understand HIS will...or I should say understand that all this IS His will. I find peace in knowing that I cannot change the crisis nor fix it beyond my personal path. We must all be as Mary during the 3 days Her Son was hidden in the Tomb.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Oct 28, 2017 13:32:03 GMT -5
It would seem that many of the actions taken by this group (which was utterly unknown to me untill I read the article just now) are actions many in trad circles imagine would be the way out of the crisis. That is why I would say that the constant theorys and wishful thinking all come from the cognizant dissonance of the RR position. I wouldnt class the palmarians as sedes since they solved the problem by assertions of drugged Paul6 and upon his death electing their own...a Pope. I thank God that he gave me the clarity to understand HIS will...or I should say understand that all this IS His will. I find peace in knowing that I cannot change the crisis nor fix it beyond my personal path. We must all be as Mary during the 3 days Her Son was hidden in the Tomb. I have known about them for a long time, but this new book really gives an inside look into them in tremendous detail. I know people will dismiss them as unstable kooks, but I don't see it that way. Their initial thinking of consecrating bishops at will is no different than the Traditionalist arguments. What basis is there to argue that Clemente in 1976 (prior to his papal claims) could not have consecrated bishop after bishop? Traditionalist theology states that necessity trumps the law, and that it is up to the consecrating bishop to decide who gets consecrated as a bishop. Traditionalist thinking also dismisses the necessity of approved training for clerics, and it falls to the Traditional bishop to decide what training he regards as acceptable. Regarding his papal claims, I can't see why too many who identify as traditionalists would have a problem. Many believe that the traditional bishops can elect, and Clemente had more bishops than all traditional groups combined consecrated in a manner in line with the Traditionalist theology of "necessity knows no law," who accepted his papal claims. He also stated that God made him Pope, which is another idea accepted by many as a way that a new Pope will come. There were also alleged miracles to support his claims. In short, the recipe that made Palma de Troya can easily be duplicated or at least be made close to it, in Traditional circles. Once the Apostolicity of mission is ignored, and people believe that apostolic succession is continued by any bishop on his own initiave consecrating other bishops based on a "necessity," then we have a deviation from the constant 2000 year teaching of the Church. One last point, if apostolic succession is transmitted in this new way, then why dismiss Clemente's papal claims? Does not the election of the Pope devolve to the hierarchy, and if the hierarchy is defined as vagrant bishops, does it not devolve to them?
|
|