|
Post by Pacelli on Mar 14, 2021 7:36:05 GMT -5
This discussion thread is a place for those who have questions or comments on Voxx's talk in the Resources section linked HEREI have a few comments to add: This is a great talk, Voxx. Thank you for posting it. The obvious reality of our present situation is that we should be trying to go to mass in our times as frequently as possible. We should not be making excuses on why we can't go or creating a new doctrine that supposedly forbids us from attending. The reception of Holy Communion is morally necessary for salvation and every effort should be made to attend mass unless that becomes impossible. If the non-una cum position being espoused were true, then the entire Catholic Church in all masses throughout the world, from Paul VI's election until the first Sedevacantist priest figured out he wasn't Pope and stopped saying his name una cum sometime in the 1970's, were all objectively schismatic and objectively sins against the First Commandment. The position is directly at odds with the indefectibility of the Church, and against the doctrine that the eternal sacrifice, pleasing to God, will remain with us until the end of time. On a practical level, I have always wondered if the bishops and priests espousing this position who were once saying the name of the V2 "Pope" in the Canon, and then discovered this new "truth," ever tried to reach out to all the folks who paid them mass stipends, year after year for these "objectively schismatic" masses, and tried to pay them back.
|
|
|
Post by RitaMarita on Mar 31, 2021 16:46:24 GMT -5
Wish I was able to watch/listen to this... Too hard with the little boys around all the time though...
Yeah though...
What gives Sanborn more credence over the Home Aloners who are trying to be strict about everything?
If he can use epikeia for himself with jurisdiction why can't people use that for those who are confused about how to respond to the papal issue?
Sigh... I miss Father Collins... He was the best priest whom I have ever known. He held the sedevacantist position but understood about the charity/humility aspects of the church better than most traditional Catholic priests...
Requiescat in pace...
|
|
|
Post by Clotilde on Apr 7, 2021 1:26:56 GMT -5
Wish I was able to watch/listen to this... Too hard with the little boys around all the time though... Yeah though... What gives Sanborn more credence over the Home Aloners who are trying to be strict about everything? If he can use epikeia for himself with jurisdiction why can't people use that for those who are confused about how to respond to the papal issue? Sigh... I miss Father Collins... He was the best priest whom I have ever known. He held the sedevacantist position but understood about the charity/humility aspects of the church better than most traditional Catholic priests... Requiescat in pace... Sanborn has as much authority as Home Aloners, you, me, or the people next door. I could say he has some degree of training but even those with less training may still use their knowledge better or be able to better use it according to the Will of God. The use of epikeia for one but not for another is an absolute double standard, especially when we are on the same page about morality and essentials of the Faith. Father Collins was the best. I hope the priests who knew him will remember his example and emulate it.
|
|
|
Post by RitaMarita on Apr 12, 2021 13:36:03 GMT -5
Wish I was able to watch/listen to this... Too hard with the little boys around all the time though... Yeah though... What gives Sanborn more credence over the Home Aloners who are trying to be strict about everything? If he can use epikeia for himself with jurisdiction why can't people use that for those who are confused about how to respond to the papal issue? Sigh... I miss Father Collins... He was the best priest whom I have ever known. He held the sedevacantist position but understood about the charity/humility aspects of the church better than most traditional Catholic priests... Requiescat in pace... Sanborn has as much authority as Home Aloners, you, me, or the people next door. I could say he has some degree of training but even those with less training may still use their knowledge better or be able to better use it according to the Will of God. The use of epikeia for one but not for another is an absolute double standard, especially when we are on the same page about morality and essentials of the Faith. Father Collins was the best. I hope the priests who knew him will remember his example and emulate it. Well said on all points! Especially praying for the last... 😇
|
|
|
Post by Resolution on Apr 14, 2022 22:28:00 GMT -5
I listened to Voxx's video. I would appreciate it if @voxxkowalski could also discuss the article linked below the Bp Sanborn's video as this contains more substantial discussion of Bp Sanborn's position than does his video itself.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Apr 15, 2022 5:30:42 GMT -5
I listened to Voxx's video. I would appreciate it if @voxxkowalski could also discuss the article linked below the Bp Sanborn's video as this contains more substantial discussion of Bp Sanborn's position than does his video itself. Pacelli is the one if you wish to discuss intricacies....I made this video mainly to point out the lack of precision and the lack of Charity and Logic in Sanborns position in the video...the video itself is very influental to many..and many who watch it never bother to realy parse it...and objectively critique the NUC position.
|
|
|
Post by Anonymoous on Jul 20, 2022 15:40:42 GMT -5
Has anyone attempted to refute Fr. Cekada's argument for the NUC position?
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jul 27, 2022 8:51:54 GMT -5
Has anyone attempted to refute Fr. Cekada's argument for the NUC position? Generally, most have who have dealt with it have not referenced it by name, so as to not give the late Fr. Cekada's article any credibility.
|
|
Deleted
Past Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2022 21:08:41 GMT -5
Has anyone attempted to refute Fr. Cekada's argument for the NUC position? Generally, most have who have dealt with it have not referenced it by name, so as to not give the late Fr. Cekada's article any credibility. I would like to read their refutations nonetheless. I have not read anything written by anyone other than John Lane or John Daly.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Sept 21, 2022 9:21:24 GMT -5
Generally, most have who have dealt with it have not referenced it by name, so as to not give the late Fr. Cekada's article any credibility. I would like to read their refutations nonetheless. I have not read anything written by anyone other than John Lane or John Daly. John Lane and John Daly never wrote a direct refutation against the "Grain of Incense," junk theology. In my opinion, they probably figured no one could ever believe such nonsense in the first place. Doesn't the title give it all away? You need read no further and just sit and think about whether the title is grounded in Catholic theology or if it is the profession of a serious error against the Faith to equate apostasy to a false god with Catholics worshipping God in the approved Catholic rite, said by a validly ordained Catholic priest, who, for whatever reason, has not yet concluded that the undeclared heretic who is also the undeclared antipope is the pope, and thereby names him in the prayers of the mass. The title gives it all away, and shows that the author was not writing seriously about theology, but was more interested in promoting his "new found truth" through vitriolic polemics under the guise of Catholic theology. The author never bothered to explain why he once held the opposite position, and exactly when and why he no longer held it since the days of his seminary training until the mysterious date of his conversion to this "new truth." One last point, considering that the article is junk, IMO, the only reason the article gets treated seriously by anyone at least somewhat educated in theology, is due to the supposed credibility of the author. The author has written some excellent material in his past, I freely admit, and some of it is located in our resource library. Unfortunately, and I am still not sure of what happened to him, but he shifted at some point, and the quality of his writing took a downward spiral. That is the most charitable way I can put it.
|
|
Deleted
Past Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2022 0:16:35 GMT -5
I would like to read their refutations nonetheless. I have not read anything written by anyone other than John Lane or John Daly. John Lane and John Daly never wrote a direct refutation against the "Grain of Incense," junk theology. In my opinion, they probably figured no one could ever believe such nonsense in the first place. Doesn't the title give it all away? You need read no further and just sit and think about whether the title is grounded in Catholic theology or if it is the profession of a serious error against the Faith to equate apostasy to a false god with Catholics worshipping God in the approved Catholic rite, said by a validly ordained Catholic priest, who, for whatever reason, has not yet concluded that the undeclared heretic who is also the undeclared antipope is the pope, and thereby names him in the prayers of the mass. The title gives it all away, and shows that the author was not writing seriously about theology, but was more interested in promoting his "new found truth" through vitriolic polemics under the guise of Catholic theology. The author never bothered to explain why he once held the opposite position, and exactly when and why he no longer held it since the days of his seminary training until the mysterious date of his conversion to this "new truth." One last point, considering that the article is junk, IMO, the only reason the article gets treated seriously by anyone at least somewhat educated in theology, is due to the supposed credibility of the author. The author has written some excellent material in his past, I freely admit, and some of it is located in our resource library. Unfortunately, and I am still not sure of what happened to him, but he shifted at some point, and the quality of his writing took a downward spiral. That is the most charitable way I can put it. Unfortunately clergy trained by Father Cekada and Bishop Sanborn have accepted the position and are very effective at preaching it. Did you have links to other rebuttals? I have no idea who may have written them.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Sept 25, 2022 16:55:06 GMT -5
There is an entire subforum dedicated to their error: tradcath.proboards.com/board/42/non-una-refutation-resourcesYou have a point about how this error is being "preached" by adherents of this error. I will pray and reflect on whether more effort should be made against this. On one hand I don't want Catholics to think this is serious enough to be rebutted, but on the other hand I don't want the poorly instructed in their Faith to believe this error. I will think about it.
|
|
Deleted
Past Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2022 18:07:09 GMT -5
There is an entire subforum dedicated to their error: tradcath.proboards.com/board/42/non-una-refutation-resourcesYou have a point about how this error is being "preached" by adherents of this error. I will pray and reflect on whether more effort should be made against this. On one hand I don't want Catholics to think this is serious enough to be rebutted, but on the other hand I don't want the poorly instructed in their Faith to believe this error. I will think about it, I can honestly say that it has become a worldwide problem. With Bergoglio a lot more people are waking up to the reality of the situation RE: the papacy and are looking for the Catholic Church, but the internet apostolates and twitter accounts of sectarians who hold this position are often the initial contact that they have with the sede vacante position. Many young people are falling into this error, including those who were supposedly raised in tradition. As a position it is sold in a manner that appeals to the emotions and intellectual pride of self and this is a very effective way of propagandising those who don't know any better. I have witnessed young men attending SSPX chapels leaving them over this issue, with sacramental access being reduced to less than once a month at a visiting Mass requiring priests from another country. I myself had the opportunity for weekly and even four times a week Mass but thought it off limits for some time and was attending the only non-Una Cum mass in my country offered once a month for two years. I know of a family in South Africa who have deprived themselves completely of the sacraments for years because of this nonsense. This error is truly a great obstacle to the salvation of souls. When I was going to be confirmed by Bp Sanborn, I was told in advance by the people organising his visit that "we're not into empire building." I did not know what they meant by that phrase or why anyone would be thinking that way. I am beginning to question whether that is exactly what they're about.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Sept 25, 2022 21:37:30 GMT -5
There is an entire subforum dedicated to their error: tradcath.proboards.com/board/42/non-una-refutation-resourcesYou have a point about how this error is being "preached" by adherents of this error. I will pray and reflect on whether more effort should be made against this. On one hand I don't want Catholics to think this is serious enough to be rebutted, but on the other hand I don't want the poorly instructed in their Faith to believe this error. I will think about it, I can honestly say that it has become a worldwide problem. With Bergoglio a lot more people are waking up to the reality of the situation RE: the papacy and are looking for the Catholic Church, but the internet apostolates and twitter accounts of sectarians who hold this position are often the initial contact that they have with the sede vacante position. Many young people are falling into this error, including those who were supposedly raised in tradition. As a position it is sold in a manner that appeals to the emotions and intellectual pride of self and this is a very effective way of propagandising those who don't know any better. I have witnessed young men attending SSPX chapels leaving them over this issue, with sacramental access being reduced to less than once a month at a visiting Mass requiring priests from another country. I myself had the opportunity for weekly and even four times a week Mass but thought it off limits for some time and was attending the only non-Una Cum mass in my country offered once a month for two years. I know of a family in South Africa who have deprived themselves completely of the sacraments for years because of this nonsense. This error is truly a great obstacle to the salvation of souls. When I was going to be confirmed by Bp Sanborn, I was told in advance by the people organising his visit that "we're not into empire building." I did not know what they meant by that phrase or why anyone would be thinking that way. I am beginning to question whether that is exactly what they're about. All very good points. Thank you. I will pray and think on this.
|
|