SSPX Bp. Fellay: “We have become as a ping-pong ball, that everyone hits.”

I listened to SSPX Bp. Fellay’s sermon for the ordinations to the priesthood today in Econe

Our friends at Rorate have some English.  Audio in French is here.  BTW… I haven’t heard many “normal” bishops speak at an ordination with this sort of fervor about priesthood.  But here is what he said about the current situation…

[...]

Certainly, you ask of me, ‘What is happening with Rome?” If up to now we have said almost nothing, it is because we do not have much to tell you. Up to now, things are at a stage, we can say, of a full stop. In the sense that there have been tos and fros, there have been exchanges, effectively, dealings, proposals, but we are at the point of departure. The point of departure in which we had said not being able to accept, not being able to sign. We are there, that is all. We see, on one hand, this situation getting complicated, it has been two, three years I have said before, in Rome, before the contradiction. Since 2009, I have said it, and I repeat it, and well that takes place every day. It is the state of the Church, what do you want? There are those who try, who wish to move further, we can say, on Progressivism and on the consequences of Progressivism. There are others who wish corrections to take place. And we, in the middle, we have become as a ping-pong ball, that everyone hits. We know that in the end, in the end, the Church will find herself again, and to us belongs this yearning of not being satisfied with a certain, let us say, comfort. With a situation that is simply not normal. We cannot become in the end used, because we are in a situation in which we do whatever we want, to consider the state in which we find ourselves as normal. This isn’t true. Simply not true. It is normal that we seek, with respect for all conditions that are necessary, evidently, to recover this title, that is ours, to which we have a right, of Catholics. This doesn’t mean that we must place ourselves simply in the hands of the Modernists, this has nothing to do with it.

But it is a difficult situation, difficult, everything seems electric, we see clearly that the devil runs unchained on all sides. And therefore, this is the time for prayer. It is a difficult moment. For us, about us, all sorts of things are said. Dear God, the only thing we wish for is to make God’s will, that is all. The will of God is expressed in facts. … It is also clear that we cannot bring good to all the Church than by remaining faithful to this heritage of the Archbishop. From which come these famous, I don’t know, “conditions”, “assurances”, that we have presented several times, that must ensure that the Society will remain what it is. If, at a certain time, a collaboration is conceivable, when, how, well the circumstances will show it.

[...]

So, who knows what is up with them.  When I hear these sermons, I always keep in mind that he has a particular audience and that he must be very careful not to alienate them.

Meanwhile, mark on your calendars to pray for the SSPXers who will soon meet in Chapter:

The SSPX annual General Chapter takes place from 9-14 July.

The SSPX has invited everyone to pray a novena to the Holy Ghost from 30 June – 8 July. The novena will consist of praying the Veni Creator Spiritus with the addition of 2 invocations:

Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us. (3 times)
St. Pius X, pray for us.

The text of the Veni Creator Spiritus with translation. HERE

I will be praying this novena and I encourage you to do so in solidarity with the SSPX and especially for the cause of full canonical recognition for the Society.

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in SESSIUNCULA and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

41 Responses to SSPX Bp. Fellay: “We have become as a ping-pong ball, that everyone hits.”

  1. Chrysologus says:

    If a reconciliation happens in the foreseeable future, it will be a genuine miracle. For a while reconciliation appeared to be possible, to the point that some thought it assured, but that moment has passed. The Holy Father cannot turn his back on the Second Vatican Council, and the SSPX will not accept it. What more can be said?

  2. APX says:

    While we’re praying for the SSPX and their General Chapter coming up, I think it’s only prudent that we add the FSSP to it, as their General Chapter is coming up next week. I haven’t seen much about it mentioned online, but given that our priest has been elected to represent English speaking district (or something along those lines) and has asked for our prayers, I know it’s coming up.

  3. robtbrown says:

    Chrysologus says:

    If a reconciliation happens in the foreseeable future, it will be a genuine miracle. For a while reconciliation appeared to be possible, to the point that some thought it assured, but that moment has passed. The Holy Father cannot turn his back on the Second Vatican Council, and the SSPX will not accept it. What more can be said?

    Disagree. Rome has granted that those texts to which the SSPX has objections are open to various interpretations. From what Euro friends have told me, there are certain people within the SCDF who are hostile to reconciliation with Rome. The appointment of DiNoia is intended to remedy that situation.

  4. Dismas says:

    Anyone up for a few sets of ping-pong?

  5. Pingback: SSPX Ping Pong? « Catholic Bandita

  6. Pingback: Chiara Petrillo Plenary Indulgence Medjugorje SSPX Sts. Peter & Paul | Big Pulpit

  7. kiwiinamerica says:

    Here’s the problem…..“We know that in the end, in the end, the Church will find herself again……..”

    “Find herself”?? Is the Catholic Church lost? I think this speaks volumes about the SSPX attitude. If I could paraphrase: “Rome is lost and SSPX is the current guardian of orthodox Catholicism”. Ahhhhh……..big red flag, right there, your Excellency. The Church will always sail through stormy waters. If it’s not fall out from Vatican II it will be something else.

    Time to fish or cut bait, your Excellency.

    As Shakespeare said; “there is a tide in the affairs of men, which taken at the flood, leads on to fortune. Omitted, all the voyage of their life is bound in shallows and in miseries”

  8. GregH says:

    Do you speak and understand French?

  9. Geoffrey says:

    “We said we could not accept, we could not sign; that is all.”

    “We know that in the end, in the end, the Church will find herself again…”

    “It is also clear that we cannot bring good to all the Church than by remaining faithful to this heritage of the Archbishop.”

    These are just a few reasons why I cannot in good conscience pray “in solidarity with the SSPX”. However, I will continue pray for their conversion and subsequent full canonical recognition.

    From today’s meditation from Fr. Gabriel of St Mary Magdalen’s “Divine Intimacy”:

    “He is not a true Catholic who does not feel the joy of being a child of the Church, whose heart does not vibrate for the Church and for the Vicar of Christ upon earth, who is not ready to renounce his own personal views in order to ‘sentire cum Ecclesia’, to think with the Church, always and in all things” (n. 375).

  10. ad Deum says:

    Sad. Just read article that supposidly Archbishop Fellay asked Pope Benedict about making changes in The Church Himself-his reply was basically the staff/others make these decisions, leaving us with current Church problems.

  11. Dismas says:

    In addition to the novena, perhaps we all should brush up on our ping pong skills as well. Here’s a training video:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvJ4wh1kwR8

  12. Jack Orlando says:

    Someone has quoted a text said to be from a letter of Cardinal Ratzinger to Lefebvre from thirty years ago. I cannot vouch for the authenticity of this text, yet I support its argument.

    you cannot assert the incompatibility of the conciliar texts – which are magisterial texts – with the Magisterium and Tradition. You can say that, personally, you do not see this compatibility, and to ask explanations of the Apostolic See. But if, on the contrary, you assert the impossibility of such an explanation, you are deeply departing from the fundamental structure of the Catholic faith.

    Frankly, I think this position is quite correct. It reasonably allows for questions regarding the meaning of Magisterial texts and questions about a Magisterial text’s compatibility with other magisterial texts. Yet it forbids one asserting that such compatibility be impossible, and asserting that the questioner be his own magisterium. In short, without this argument being accepted, one rejects the Magisterium wholesale. And one cannot be Catholic with such a rejection.

    This text also rejects a dichotomy between “pastoral” texts which one would be supposedly free to reject; and “dogmatic” texts which one would be not free to reject. Both kinds of texts are Magisterial; to reject any Magisterial text, be it“pastoral” or “dogmatic”, is to undermine “the fundamental structure of the Catholic faith”.

    For example. I find tiresome when some Traditionalists say that the documents of Vatican II are only “pastoral”. The Council teaches the dogma of the Paschal Mystery. True, it does not teach this infallibly; it doesn’t need to, for the Paschal Mystery is taught in Scripture and by the Fathers. I cannot see at all why some Traditionalists reject this beautiful and true teaching or find it incompatible with Scription and Tradition.

    Mind you, I do not wish to start a rabbit hole on the Paschal Mystery. The question at hand is the authority of the Magisterium. One is with Peter, or one is not. And Peter lives.

  13. Ignatius says:

    Kiwiinamerica, Geoffrey and Jack Orlando exposed my thoughts better than I could. I fully agree with them. And I think that if the SSPXers do not avail of this last chance at reconciliation, they will go all the way of “Palmarian Church” and similar sedevacantist kooks…

  14. Clinton R. says:

    On one hand, the SSPX, with their valid concerns regarding the modernism and outright heresy runs rampant in Rome. Other the other hand, the Catholic Church is the Church founded by the Lord upon St. Peter. The successor of St. Peter is Pope Benedict XVI. I fully understand the SSPX’s position and fears they will be under the thumb of the modernists if they sign a deal that they deign unfavorable. However, you cannot be part of the True Church apart from the Pope. That is what we say to Protestants. I truly admire the SSPX’s love and devotion to the Church and her traditions. This situation is so hard and it is sad that we have this division largely due to the ambiguity and liberal application of Vatican II. This matter cannot be solved by man. We must pray for God to gift us with His immeasurable wisdom. May Our Blessed Mother pray for the Holy Church. May Ss Peter and Paul pray for us. +JMJ+

  15. Clinton R: I believe you’ve said it all, well and succinctly.

  16. HighMass says:

    Please Society of St. Pius X be obedient to the Holy Father, Please we beg GOD

  17. Jim of Bowie says:

    To me, this is more like Yo-Yo than Ping Pong. Nevertheless I will join with Fr. Z in the Novena.

  18. HighMass says:

    Yes Clinton You have said it well. THey must be a part of the Church, and Yes the liberal interpretation of V II has caused alot of pain, don’t think it is what BLessed John XXIII intended.

    Pray Pray Pray

  19. Suburbanbanshee says:

    It’s summer. The SSPX has its chapter coming up, and the Vatican people have their vacations coming up because it’s just too hot. Priests that are moving to new assignments usually get moved in June or July, too. There’s a lot going on.

    That’s why there’s always a lot of Vatican announcements in the spring and fall. People clear off their desks before summer, and hurry to get paperwork done as soon as they get back.

  20. moon1234 says:

    If the SSPX does not reconcile with Rome I doubt you will see them treated as cooks as some suggest. Look at the Orthodox. Their orders are valid and Catholics can fulfill their Sunday Obligations in an Orthodox parish. Does Rome consider all Orthodox marraiges invalid?

    I think what Rome is worried about is ANOTHER growing group of Catholics with valid orders that point out the change in doctrine of VII, just as the Orthodox do in other aspects of the faith. It will be almost three decades since the SSPX issue of 1984.

    What has happened in that time? The society has continued to grow EVERY year with more ordinations. I am sure Rome was hoping it would die out over time as the people who were attached to the Mass before VII died out, but the opposite has happened.

    The SSPX is larger, as a society, than most of the other recognized Catholic rites (Syrian, Chaldean, etc.). In time they will rival the major eastern rites. The SSPX claim Roman Rite heritage. Dismissing them is to dismiss the Latin Rite before VII.

    I think BXVI recognizes this, he wants this issue solved and ended. If we look to history of how the eastern rites developed it is not unlike the present situation with the SSPX.

  21. St. Epaphras says:

    Thank you, Father, for the audio link.

    The first part of the sermon, I mean the part on the priesthood, is so profound and touching . He speaks from the heart about holiness, sacrifice, etc. in a priest and goes into detail on what it means to share in the priesthood of Christ. I urge all who can to listen to at least that part. Well worth the time.

  22. robtbrown says:

    kiwiinamerica says:

    “Find herself”?? Is the Catholic Church lost? I think this speaks volumes about the SSPX attitude. If I could paraphrase: “Rome is lost and SSPX is the current guardian of orthodox Catholicism”. Ahhhhh……..big red flag, right there, your Excellency. The Church will always sail through stormy waters. If it’s not fall out from Vatican II it will be something else.

    The something else of the past 45 years has been worse than anything in the previous 300.

  23. MarkA says:

    Quite a few commenters express sentiments such as High Mass, who said:
    “Please Society of St. Pius X be obedient to the Holy Father, Please we beg GOD”

    With all due respect to many people, perhaps your calls for obedience are misdirected. There are many informed sources who are speculating that some in the Curia are not being faithful/obedient to Pope Benedict XVI. See “Schmidberger: some “people in the Vatican” have attempted to derail reconciliation” at Rorate. None of this would be surprising given the recent Leaks scandal.

    Look what collegiality hath wrought!

  24. Centristian says:

    moon1234:

    “If the SSPX does not reconcile with Rome I doubt you will see them treated as cooks as some suggest. Look at the Orthodox. Their orders are valid and Catholics can fulfill their Sunday Obligations in an Orthodox parish. Does Rome consider all Orthodox marraiges invalid?”

    Apples to oranges, Moon. More like apples to…I don’t know…peanuts.

    The Orthodox and the Catholics (for the most part) represent the Eastern and Western halves of the once united Church of the Roman Empire…that is to say, the universal Church. That unity split in half, just as the Empire itself did. The Orthodox were not some minor separatist group that split off from Rome!

    The SSPX, on the other hand, are just that: some little separatist group that split away from Rome. They were a priestly society of common life subsisting with in the Swiss diocese of Fribourg that was dissolved when its charter was allowed by the same diocese to expire without renewal. The Vatican refused to intervene to rescue Lefebvre’s society and Lefebvre rebelled by ignoring the autorities that allowed his charter to expire. That’s all the current Lefebvrists are, then: illegitimate pretenders to a long extinct priestly society once based in Switzerland.

    Please let’s not compare the disobedience of a short-lived Swiss priestly fraternity with the great East-West Schism of the Christian Church, and lets not compare the Lefebvrist organization with the Orthodox Church, for goodness’ sake. Orthodox sacraments are valid because they are; they’ve never ceased to be. The Orthodox Church does not rely upon faculties from Rome for validity.

    At this point I wonder if it all won’t amount to simply a matter of what I’ve always imagined it would be: individual Lefebvrists leaving the organizaton as they come to their senses at the prompting of the Holy Spirit, and reconciling with Rome and with their local bishop. So much of the SSPX is just too deeply mired in a cultish conspiratorial mindset and culture, thanks to too much credence given by too many Lefebvre-oriented traditionalists over the years to the paranoid “doctrines” of people like Richard Williamson, Solange Hertz, David Allen White, Ramon Angles, and the rest of the unsavory cast of characters from the far-right wing of Catholic traditionalism (and political archconservatism, particularly in France) that dominated Lefebvrism for so long. If there is some moderating influence now, it’s likely that it is too little, and too late, to save the SSPX as a whole.

    I would hope to see Fellay leave. Perhaps he might find a home with the FSSP.

  25. robtbrown says:

    Centristian says,

    Orthodox sacraments are valid because they are; they’ve never ceased to be. The Orthodox Church does not rely upon faculties from Rome for validity.

    You’ve just denied the universal jurisdiction of the pope, which is de fide.

  26. HighMass says:

    Great points MarkA….you are correct!

  27. Cheesesteak Expert says:

    moon1234: Whatever do you mean by “how eastern rites developed it is not unlike the present situation with the SSPX.”?

  28. Cheesesteak Expert says:

    robtbrown: Does one deny the universal jurisdiction of the Pope by rejecting the Novus Ordo?

  29. Centristian says:

    “You’ve just denied the universal jurisdiction of the pope, which is de fide.”

    Oh, don’tcha just luuuuv that Roscoe P. Coltrane “I gotcha, I gotcha” attitude of traddies who are never happier than when they think they’ve just caught someone sinning? Slays me.

    Ask the Pope if he thinks Orthodox priests need him to give them faculties in order to perform a vaild wedding or offer a valid absolution. Go ahead. Let’s see what he says.

  30. mightyduk says:

    Oh, don’tcha just luuuuv that Roscoe P. Coltrane “I gotcha, I gotcha” attitude of moderates

    Centristian, aren’t you just the pot calling the kettle black? Accusing “traddies” (ie. those of us who cling to the entire 2000 year history of the Catholic Faith rather than to the sliver that occured since the 60′s) of finding fault, where you just delivered a diatribe against the SSPX which is CLEARLY inconsistent with the will of the Holy Father in his attempts at reconciliation, and how important he considers it.

  31. MarkA says:

    mightyduk – Great point delivered in a charitable manner.

    Centristian – Your uncharitable comments detract from your arguments.

    HighMass – Thank you. I’m very concerned for Pope Benedict XVI and the service of those who surround him. I pray for him every day.

  32. Jack Orlando says:

    Mightyduk has written:
    “those of us who cling to the entire 2000 year history of the Catholic Faith rather than to the sliver that occured since the 60?s”

    I am sorry to say that I see no evidence for many Traditionalists clinging to the 2000 year history. Many Traditionalists seem to be aware of Scholasticism, and nothing else. And Scholasticism is a sliver itself, an important one to be sure, yet not the whole 2000 years. And to condemn any theology not Scholastic as “Modernist” is moronic.

    I so no evidence in many Traditionalists of the Patristic revivial that began first with the Oxford Movement, then spreading quickly to Second Empire France, and then blossoming ever since. I see no evidence of any knowledge among Traditionalists of scholarly study of Scripture, beginning with Reimarcus, continuing in Germany during the 19th Century, and blossoming among Catholic scholars since World War II — blossoming so much that now Catholic Bible studies are as good as any, and the Pontifical Biblical Institute now may be the best place on Earth to study Scripture. Where among many Traditionalists do we hear about the central theme of Our Lord’s ministry — the Kingdom of God? Or of the central theme of the apostolic preaching in Acts, the Resurrection? or of views of the Redemption other than penal substitutional atonement? or that “propitiation” isn’t a very good translation of hilasterion? or of views other than a juridical view of of the Redemption? or of the New Perspectives on Paul, which ought to have captured Catholic interest because this perspective shatters the Lutheran view of Justification? Or that the knowledge of the Old Testament, which Paul simple calls “Scripture”, is essential to understand the New? Or of the Paschal Mystery, so central to the whole New Testament? Or the recovery of the theology of the Parousia? All these items are the fruit of serious Bible study; all of them seem to be unknown to many Traditionalists.

    And I see no evidence among many Traditionalists of the riches in the Theology of the Eastern Church; e.g. that the Redemption is more than the Cross.

    To leave out out Scripture and the Fathers leaves out the first three thousand years of our faith (which begins with Abraham). It leaves out the first 11 centuries of Christian history. And it ignores Kosher developments since Scholasticism.

    Note that I have said “many” Traditionalists, not all.

  33. robtbrown says:

    Centristian says:

    “You’ve just denied the universal jurisdiction of the pope, which is de fide.”

    Oh, don’tcha just luuuuv that Roscoe P. Coltrane “I gotcha, I gotcha” attitude of traddies who are never happier than when they think they’ve just caught someone sinning? Slays me.

    I never said a word about sin.

    Once again: I am not a Traditionalist in any sense of the word. I am by inclination, education, and practice a Thomist who thinks that Latin liturgy ad orientem is the best way to celebrate mass. Although I think there needed to be adjustments to the 1962 Missal, I think overall it is better than the the Novus Ordo. And I think that the present way of celebrating the Novus Ordo (vernacular, versus populum) is based on a theological fallacy, i.e., that the Eucharist is a meal (cf. Ratzinger, The Spirit of the Liturgy, where he attacks the notion that the Eucharist is a Christianized version of the Passover).

    I have also noted the deficiencies of a low, public mass using the 1962 Missal.

    And I have in general often criticized here the theological method favored by the SSPX, which tends toward univocation (typical of Counter Reformation theology). I also have made particular reference to what seems to be their false understanding of minimal Sacramental intention (cf an article on the SSPX site).

    In fact, at the FSSP seminary I was asked to teach the course on Tradition and declined because, as I told them, it is not my approach to theology because I am a Thomist.

    You’ve had a bad experience with the SSPX. Understandable. I am aware of many of their flaws for various reasons, one of which is that I had a couple of first year classmates (one became a good friend) who left the SSPX and lived in a house in Rome provided by Cardinal Ratzinger for ex Econe seminarians—they were ordained for English dioceses. One is now a very well known English priest, whose name and (I think) photograph has appeared on this site.

    I assure you, however, that whatever bad experiences you had with the SSPX are nothing compared to what some of us have been subjected to in houses of post Vat II formation. Blatant immorality. Blatant denial of doctrine. I could relate incidents that either I was present personally or told by very good friends who were present themselves.

    Ask the Pope if he thinks Orthodox priests need him to give them faculties in order to perform a vaild wedding or offer a valid absolution. Go ahead. Let’s see what he says.

    BXVI is a very bright man who would not have recourse to such a facile opinion.

    NB: There are some theological questions that can only be understood by first knowing that the contrary extremes are both false. And I’m not really interested in now going into the two theories of episcopal jurisdiction.

  34. robtbrown says:

    Cheesesteak Expert says:

    robtbrown: Does one deny the universal jurisdiction of the Pope by rejecting the Novus Ordo?

    I use jurisdiction to refer to the faculties for forgiveness of sin and Matrimony.

    If you mean “papal primacy”, it depends on what is meant by “reject”.

    1. If it means the Novus Ordo is not valid, then I would say that it is a denial.

    2. If it means the pope did not have such authority to promulgate the Novus Ordo, then I would also say it is a denial. (The question of whether a pope has the authority to juridically suppress what is known as the TLM was avoided by Paul VI–he didn’t abrogate it.)

    3. If it means there are deficiencies in the Novus Ordo that do not contradict dogma, then I would say it is not a denial.

    Historically, the SSPX has been, IMHO, overly concerned with the authority of the pope in promulgating the Novus Ordo, a concern based on an inflated notion of Infallibility.

  35. robtbrown says:

    Jack Orlando,

    I agree with much of what you say. NB:

    1. The Scholasticism of the SSPX is mostly of the neo-type (Counter Reformation). Further, as you know, Duns Scotus was also a scholastic, and his theology is often opposed to the thought of St Thomas.

    2. Criticism has been made (valid, I think) that much of the present recourse to the Fathers has been picking and choosing what fits into Existentialist philosophy. In fact, Cardinal Ratzinger noted the tendency among those who endorse ressourcement to ignore medieval theology altogether.

    In my first exposure to St Thomas’ Summa Theologiae, I was surprised how it was rich with texts from the Fathers (nb: also the Catena Aurea. A friend pointed out the Providential life of St Thomas, who was born over 600 years after the death of the last Western Father and over 400 after the last Eastern Father. The Fathers had already been read, re-read, and re-re-read by the time of his birth (St Thomas was the first Latin theologian to use Eastern Fathers). And I have pointed out to students that there are more years between St Thomas and St Augustine than between St Thomas and us.

    IMHO, all the toys were out of the closet during the life of St Thomas

    3. I’m afraid you are more sanguine about modern Scripture scholarship than I am. I can’t remember ever having been enlightened by any of it I have read–other than to refute the opinions of other Scripture Scholars. And the method–esp early on–was Hegelian and full of a priori ideas (most of them Protestant). Lately, certain Catholics, like Fitzmyer and Meier, have provided an antidote for some them.

    Also: A few months ago I decided to do some reading on the anomaly of the mention of the priesthood of Melchisedek in Psalm 110 and went to various works by Scripture Scholars. Finding nothing of note (other than some who thought the mention of Melchisedek is a mistake), I emailed a very bright, very close friend, who has the SSL and SSD from the Biblicum and was offered a teaching position there. His reply: If you have a question of content in a biblical passage, the modern commentaries will NEVER help you to find an answer.

  36. Athanasius says:

    “Find herself”?? Is the Catholic Church lost? I think this speaks volumes about the SSPX attitude. If I could paraphrase: “Rome is lost and SSPX is the current guardian of orthodox Catholicism”. Ahhhhh……..big red flag, right there, your Excellency. The Church will always sail through stormy waters. If it’s not fall out from Vatican II it will be something else.

    This is actually not what Fellay is saying. Fellay is speaking in a broad sense of the heresy rampant in the Church even at the level of the hierarchy. Even if we leave out issues of Religious Liberty, or Ecumenism (which is a practice not a doctrine), you can’t deny that at a wide level the Church militant are uncatechized, that there are numerous Bishops who hold heretical opinions, and Bishops conferences openly tell us that the Jews do not need Jesus (which is clearly against the depositum fidei).

    There will always be heresies in the Church, but never in history at such a side level amongst both faithful and hierarchy. What Fellay is saying, is that these errors will eventually be worked out because the Church is indefectable. He is not saying the Church is lost. We could correctly say the Church found herself after the Arian crisis in the same sense in which Fellay is speaking.

  37. robtbrown says:

    Cheesesteak expert,

    Your moniker has convinced me that I will have a cheesesteak sandwich this evening (mushrooms, onions, and green peppers). And that reminds me that the first time I ate one was when I was in the Army. Joe’s Bar, outside of Ft Dix, had 2 for 1 on Saturdays. That I would eat 4 and lose weight obviously means it was over 40 years ago.

  38. Athanasius says:

    And Scholasticism is a sliver itself, an important one to be sure, yet not the whole 2000 years. And to condemn any theology not Scholastic as “Modernist” is moronic.

    Yes, and no. First off I don’t think most Trads are familiar with scholasticism at all, and the term is broad and encompasses thinkers of a widely different bent. Thomism would be a fairer word, although many lay trads haven’t the faintest idea of what Thomism really is (I have 15 years experience with numerous Trads all around the world). The fact is, however, that scholasticism, particularly the Thomist tradition, represents the evolution of philosophy and theology into a synthesis of the pagan Platonic and Aristotelian traditions with the Catholic faith. 15th century scholasticism on the other hand, reduces science to aristotle (a backward scientific approach which stifled science in the Arab tradition). Preference for the rigor of scholasticism, particularly of Thomism reflects respect for a system based on logic, classificiation, order and clarity. It is a philosophical construct which gears one toward truth. The Popes from Leo XIII onward explicitly pointed to this tradition as the clearest and most eloquent and accurate system for explicating theology. It is no accident that when this was thrown out after the Council that suddenly we see heresy and idiotic foolish principles appearing all over the world. A philosophy or theology that is not Thomistic may be condemned based on whether it accords with Catholic principles, those of St. Thomas and that tradition of scholasticism which the Church has made her own. So yes, to say its not scholasticism (Thomist) therefore its heretical is nonsense, but if the judgment is made to say phenomenology is based on Kantian modernist principles which lead one to the rejection of truth apriori by making the individual the standard of truth, then that is reasonable.

  39. jhayes says:

    Now that Archbishop diNoia has been appointed, Rocco brings up the appointment of a replacement for Cardinal Levada.

    Still expected among the hanging threads is the appointment of a new prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, with Bishop Gerhard Ludwig Müller of Regensburg remaining the most widely-tipped contender for the post.

    He points out that even though the Pope is leaving Tuesday for three months at Castel Gondolfo, appointments that he has already made will be announced over the next couple of weeks.

    Article on +Müller: http://whispersintheloggia.blogspot.com/2012/06/next-inquisitor.html

  40. acardnal says:

    New interview with AB di Noia given to the “National Catholic Register” available at Rorate-Caeli here:
    http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2012/07/for-record-interview-with-ecclesia-dei.html

  41. Cheesesteak Expert says:

    I would have guessed somewhere in Jersey, given that your repast included those delicious vegetables added to your foundational cheesesteak elements, a hallmark of Jersey variants. And in summer, doubtless you would also enjoy a raw tomato for dessert, sliced in half and sprinkled with salt – heaven!
    note: recommended bees for Jersey variants include PBR in 40 oz bottle.