Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Hope has two beautiful daughters. Their names are anger and courage; anger at the way things are, and courage to see that they do not remain the way they are.
About Me
Worth a Visit:
Blog Archive
-
▼
2006
(287)
-
▼
July
(32)
- The rush to welcome disaffected Anglicans home...
- One commandment at a time, please?
- Nice response to the post on Blessed Sacrament in ...
- The Middle East
- Pro-Life Pharmacies
- More FSSP news
- Massachusetts, Missouri, whatever . . .
- Update to St. Joseph / St. Benedict
- Massachusetts Interdict
- A new webring . . . or not.
- Marcus Scotus strikes again
- Update to Guardian Angels and Good Counsel
- Empty Churches
- Holy Family Slovenian Parish -- Update
- Things I DON'T see at the altar....
- Womynpriests?
- The Curt Jester. . .
- The latest rumor . . .
- The wind has shifted on the Texas High Plains.
- From the FSSP General Chapter
- My kinda guys....
- Another great tour...
- No kidding!
- Bishop Finn on the Radio
- New KC Catholic Blogs
- Goofball Benedictines Get Honest: They're Prots
- Fr. John Berg elected leader of the FSSP
- St. Rose Philippine Duschene Community Update
- St. John the Baptist, KCKS
- English Catholicism: What can we do to save it?
- T-Shirt dispute
- On loyalty to one's parish
-
▼
July
(32)
KCMO Closed Church Tour
- St Augustine's
- St John's Seminary
- St Mary's/Immaculate Heart
- Ss Peter & Paul, St. Mark's, and St. Joseph
- Holy Spirit
- St. Michael
- St. Stanislaus
- St. Stephen's
- Assumption/St. Anthony
- St. John the Baptist
- Guardian Angels & Good Counsel (not closed)
- Our Lady of Guadalupe
- Hogan High School
- Benedictine Sisters' Convent
- Loretto Academy
- Annunciation
- Holy Trinity
- Our Lady of the Curmudgeons
- St. Francis Seraph
- Old St. Patrick's
- St. Vincent de Paul
- Blessed Sacrament
- Holy Name
KCKS Church Tour (Not all closed yet, but they're trying!)
11 comments:
Is this good news or bad news? And on what merits?
This is good news. I don't know much about Fr. Gabet, but Bisig the person around whom the FSSP formed after the 1988 consecrations, and he is (as I understand it) committed to preserving the special purpose and charism of the FSSP against those who would try to dilute it.
Where is Fr. Jackson going?
I don't know. I'm just some layman in Kansas City.
Who's trying to dilute the FSSP? Someone from within? Or is it just the Vatican?
Dr. Bombay said, "Or is it just the Vatican?"
Did not the "Vatican" create the FSSP, specifically JPII, for the special purpose of keeping priests trained in this rite?
Yes.
And the Vatican also voided the FSSP elections in 2000 because they didn't like the outcome. (Only Americans are allowed to do that.)
And further, the Vatican said that priests of the FSSP couldn't be forbidden from saying the novus ordo. Too bad that doesn't go both ways.
I'm not sure what your point is Doctor.
Should the FSSP priest be prohibited from celebrating the Novus Ordo?
And the Vatican also voided the FSSP elections in 2000 because they didn't like the outcome. (Only Americans are allowed to do that.)
Voided the election? What does that mean?
I think what people are saying is that the FSSP should be able to, if it saw fit, require its members to keep with their purpose and charism, which is exclusive use of the old rites. If you want to say the N.O., then the FSSP probably isn't the place for you: transfer to a diocesan seminary. It's not my place to demand such a rule, nor the place of any one else who isn't a member of their institute to demand such a rule, but they ought to be able to have that rule if they see fit.
And yes, in 2000, the Ecclesia Dei commission intervened, modified the FSSP statutes, and appointed the superiors that the Fraternity's general chapter had a right to elect (and to some accounts had already elected) themselves. Again, Google "Protocol 1411" for the details.
When the SSPX'ers cry out "Rome can't be trusted!" that incident is one of the main things they bring up. And sadly, they've got a good point there.
There were those (in the curia and in various chanceries) in 1988, and there are still those in 2006, whose goal is to gradually "mainstream" traditional orders and traditional laity--move them by degrees to the N.O. Permitting (and tacitly encouraging, or even coercing, bi-ritualism in this sense is dilution). That idea is obviously repugnant to clergy and laity who are living the old ecclesiastical life and raising their children in it. Those people aren't just slow to adapt; they're committed to preserving the old rites and living the counter-cultural Catholicism that goes with it. And judging from Mass attendance and vocations and family sizes, it's working. Let them keep going.
On the other hand, I'm not sure what Dr. Bombay means by too bad it doesn't go both ways? Unfortunately, it does go both ways. Many diocesan clergy who want to use the old Rites are forbidden to do so in public Masses, and because of the limit on the number of Masses they can say, practically cannot do so in their private Masses.
Big Daddy can start his own blog if he wants to pick at us or try to cause a neo-Cath scene, or he can go hang out on Pete Vere's or one of Stephen Hands eight billion websites. This post is done.
Post a Comment