|
Post by Pacelli on May 1, 2016 17:04:25 GMT -5
(The following was posted by the poster, Matthew, of the CI forum, May 1st, 2016)
The following is the Declaration of Fidelity to the Positions of the Society of St. Pius X formulated by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. Since 1981, this Declaration has been required to be signed by candidates before receiving the subdiaconate. After the Archbishop’s death in 1991, the formula was modified to include a provision to deal with the 1983 Code of Canon Law:
I, the undersigned, ___________(name)________ recognize _______________ as Pope of the Holy Catholic Church. That is why I am ready to pray in public for him as Sovereign Pontiff. I refuse to follow him when he departs from the Catholic tradition, especially in the questions of religious liberty and ecumenism, as also in the reforms which are harmful to the Church.
I grant that Masses celebrated according to the new rite are not all invalid. However, considering the bad translations of the Novus Ordo Missae, its ambiguity favoring its being interpreted in a Protestant sense, and the plurality of ways in which it can be celebrated, I recognize that the danger of invalidity is very great.
I affirm that the new rite of Mass does not, it is true, formulate any heresy in an explicit manner, but that it departs “in a striking manner overall as well as in detail, from the Catholic theology of the Holy Mass”, and for this reason the new rite is in itself bad.
That is why I shall never celebrate the Holy Mass according to this new rite, even if I am threatened with ecclesiastical sanctions; and I shall never advise anyone in a positive manner to take an active part in such a Mass.
Finally, I admit as being legitimate the liturgical reform of John XXIII. Hence I take all the liturgical books from it to be Catholic: the Missal, the Breviary, etc.; and I bind myself to make exclusive use of them according to their calendar and rubrics, in particular for the celebration of Mass and for the recitation in common of the Breviary.
In doing this I desire to show the obedience binding me to my superiors, as also the obedience binding me to the Roman Pontiff in all his legitimate acts.
Signed ________________________
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on May 1, 2016 17:09:41 GMT -5
Just for the record, I would take death prior to signing the above statement.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on May 1, 2016 17:28:05 GMT -5
Signing that could cause you to die twice.
|
|
|
Post by Clotilde on May 1, 2016 17:40:04 GMT -5
(The following was posted by the poster, Matthew, of the CI forum, May 1st, 2016) The following is the Declaration of Fidelity to the Positions of the Society of St. Pius X formulated by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. Since 1981, this Declaration has been required to be signed by candidates before receiving the subdiaconate. After the Archbishop’s death in 1991, the formula was modified to include a provision to deal with the 1983 Code of Canon Law: This is my first time reading this, so I'll be posting my initial response in red. First of all, why before the sub diaconate? Did they allow members to join, take tuition money, knowing many would drop out before the major orders so was the plan to get some quick money and deal with it later? Why not before you enter the seminary? Would they argue that before ordination one could reconsider and comply to the official position?I, the undersigned, ___________(name)________ recognize _______________ as Pope of the Holy Catholic Church. That is why I am ready to pray in public for him as Sovereign Pontiff. I refuse to follow him when he departs from the Catholic tradition, especially in the questions of religious liberty and ecumenism, as also in the reforms which are harmful to the Church. A pope cannot depart from tradition as pope. So who is the arbiter of when the pope has fallen from tradition? The individual, the collective? Who decides what is what? I grant that Masses celebrated according to the new rite are not all invalid. However, considering the bad translations of the Novus Ordo Missae, its ambiguity favoring its being interpreted in a Protestant sense, and the plurality of ways in which it can be celebrated, I recognize that the danger of invalidity is very great. A mass given by the Church is harmful to the faithful? It has to be sifted through by seminarians and their teachers? Again, a mass given by the Church is potentially invalid? What planet do these people come from and can we send them back?I affirm that the new rite of Mass does not, it is true, formulate any heresy in an explicit manner, but that it departs “in a striking manner overall as well as in detail, from the Catholic theology of the Holy Mass”, and for this reason the new rite is in itself bad. Using Ottaviani's words are not a justification from this new theology, it's a vague standard which is applied here and overdone. I'm tired of the Ottaviani Card. Poor Cardinal, he wouldn't like this either. That is why I shall never celebrate the Holy Mass according to this new rite, even if I am threatened with ecclesiastical sanctions; and I shall never advise anyone in a positive manner to take an active part in such a Mass. Translation: I won't say the mass given to me by (what I consider) the Church for the Roman rite, even if I am excommunicated, I will oppose the mass of my pope until my dying breath.
...said no Catholic priest ever.Finally, I admit as being legitimate the liturgical reform of John XXIII. Hence I take all the liturgical books from it to be Catholic: the Missal, the Breviary, etc.; and I bind myself to make exclusive use of them according to their calendar and rubrics, in particular for the celebration of Mass and for the recitation in common of the Breviary. Translation: See, look how we are not sedevacantists! We are so loyal!
Guess what, many sedevacantists have no problem with John XXIII, and consider him pope, or probably so! That trick won't work. Also, who are you to bind yourself to anything in these matters. You are a subject of the Church and She alone binds you. That's great that you like the old mass and all, but tell me when we've had two missals, two calendars, two of everything in the same rite? Is that traditional? That sounds like it might, I don't know, depart from tradition.In doing this I desire to show the obedience binding me to my superiors, as also the obedience binding me to the Roman Pontiff in all his legitimate acts. Translation:I am binding myself to the authority of whomever I desire, regardless of whether they have lawful authority given to them by the Church to govern or teach me. I obey the Roman Pontiff when I like what he does and I examine all of his acts for orthodoxy. I do not believe a Catholic could sign this in good conscience. I, too, would rather die than sign. I will show it to my boys someday as an exercise in identifying non-Catholic thinking. At least some use will come out of this horrid thing.
|
|
|
Post by Clotilde on May 1, 2016 17:41:55 GMT -5
Sorry for how that looks at the end, my text box got all wonky and I'm not great with the BB code.
ETA: Fixed it!
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on May 1, 2016 18:13:14 GMT -5
This is like a smoking gun against the RRgonutz
|
|
|
Post by heinrich on May 2, 2016 19:29:44 GMT -5
It all sounded reasonable to me.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on May 2, 2016 19:50:37 GMT -5
It all sounded reasonable to me. "I refuse to follow him(the Pope) when he departs from the Catholic tradition, especially in the questions of religious liberty and ecumenism, as also in the reforms which are harmful to the Church." That sounds reasonable?
|
|
|
Post by RitaMarita on May 4, 2016 6:11:33 GMT -5
So it begins...
We really need to pray that God intervenes and helps our pitiful little world...
|
|
|
Post by heinrich on May 4, 2016 22:16:47 GMT -5
It all sounded reasonable to me. "I refuse to follow him(the Pope) when he departs from the Catholic tradition, especially in the questions of religious liberty and ecumenism, as also in the reforms which are harmful to the Church." That sounds reasonable? Would you please explain to me what is unreasonable?
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on May 5, 2016 5:09:36 GMT -5
I refuse to follow the Pope.....
When do Popes deviate from Tradition?
And why is such a statement and oath required of Catholics?
|
|
|
Post by heinrich on May 5, 2016 11:57:15 GMT -5
As far as Sacred Tradition is concerned, that is clear. I see what you are saying. Popes that people here consider Popes changed traditional practices. This is an interesting time and unique point in the history of the Church.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on May 5, 2016 13:35:51 GMT -5
The word is deviate...and if your point is granted (and Im not granting it) that Popes changed traditions...then all Catholics can by no means disobey.
|
|
MiriamM
TC spellcheck
TC quality control
Posts: 55
|
Post by MiriamM on May 5, 2016 14:09:20 GMT -5
THIS: And why is such a statement and oath required of Catholics?
|
|
|
Post by semperfidelis on May 10, 2016 12:16:28 GMT -5
(The following was posted by the poster, Matthew, of the CI forum, May 1st, 2016) The following is the Declaration of Fidelity to the Positions of the Society of St. Pius X formulated by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. Since 1981, this Declaration has been required to be signed by candidates before receiving the subdiaconate. After the Archbishop’s death in 1991, the formula was modified to include a provision to deal with the 1983 Code of Canon Law: I, the undersigned, ___________(name)________ recognize _______________ as Pope of the Holy Catholic Church. That is why I am ready to pray in public for him as Sovereign Pontiff. I refuse to follow him when he departs from the Catholic tradition, especially in the questions of religious liberty and ecumenism, as also in the reforms which are harmful to the Church. And who determines what is the tradition of the Church if not the hierarchy and the Pope? This constant clamoring to hold to the traditions of the Church sounds the same to me as a Protestant clamoring he is holding to Scripture. Now why not state it as necessary to hold to Catholic Doctrine and Dogmas i.e. the Catholic religion as every theology manual explains as necessary to be Catholic?
Whoops, STOP, can't say that! For when wording the statement of what a Catholic is bond to hold in its proper terminology, one can clearly see that he ["the Pope"] departs not from just "Catholic tradition" but the Catholic Religion. Could it be that it would become hard to not then see he ["the Pope"] is not a Catholic when wording the phrase correctly!I grant that Masses celebrated according to the new rite are not all invalid. However, considering the bad translations of the Novus Ordo Missae, its ambiguity favoring its being interpreted in a Protestant sense, and the plurality of ways in which it can be celebrated, I recognize that the danger of invalidity is very great. Since when does the Society of Pius X have the authority to rule upon which masses said using the new rite are invalid or not? I must have missed were they were granted such authority in the Church to make the decision.
Since when does the Catholic Church give a rite of mass which often is invalid? Hardly sounds like the way by which "fools will not err therein!"I affirm that the new rite of Mass does not, it is true, formulate any heresy in an explicit manner, but that it departs “in a striking manner overall as well as in detail, from the Catholic theology of the Holy Mass”, and for this reason the new rite is in itself bad. Except that the new rite very clearly did, does formulate heresy in an explicit manner in changing the words of the Consecration to mean another sense other than that given by Christ for the true Consecration formula is founded in Scripture.That is why I shall never celebrate the Holy Mass according to this new rite, even if I am threatened with ecclesiastical sanctions; and I shall never advise anyone in a positive manner to take an active part in such a Mass. Finally, I admit as being legitimate the liturgical reform of John XXIII. Hence I take all the liturgical books from it to be Catholic: the Missal, the Breviary, etc.; and I bind myself to make exclusive use of them according to their calendar and rubrics, in particular for the celebration of Mass and for the recitation in common of the Breviary. In doing this I desire to show the obedience binding me to my superiors, as also the obedience binding me to the Roman Pontiff in all his legitimate acts. Since when have the SSPX leaders been granted any ecclesiastical authority to bind anyone? Umm... they were not. Since when have the SSPX accepted any acts of the Roman Pontiff as legitimate, as they completely ignore everything coming from Rome, or accepted the authority of their Diocesan bishop? Quite simply, they don't!
Actions speak louder than words!Signed ________________________
|
|