This priest no doubt extols the virtues of St Catherine of Siena for her brave letters admonishing negligent popes (in the strongest of language!) forgetting that when she wrote her brave letters, the great saint was a lowly laywoman named Catherine Benincasa. And therein, one can detect an unfortunate attitude of clericalism which is hostile to the very idea that any lay person would or should “correct” a pope. the posters in Rome) on this scandalous papacy, with terminology that left me open-mouthed: he bemoans what he perceives to be a “passive-aggressive and disrespectful method of “correcting” the Sovereign Pontiff. I find it odd that this Society priest would write such a harsh attack on the satirical commentary (i.e. While I agree with your final paragraph, I’m afraid I have to disagree with you on the rest. I also pointed out the hypocrisy of objecting to an “anonymous” SSPX article, when Father X’s piece was itself also anonymous.Īs for his affirmation of the usual Remnant position on warning against regularization under the current Pope, we’ve already beaten that dead horse to a pulp! I said it smacked too much of the “resistance” position for my taste… In the future, I resolve to have my disrespect well-identified! 🙂 Because of my own experience publishing an anonymous, satirical underground newsletter for 5 years, I agreed with the SSPX article about my cowardice and disrespect in doing so.
In response to the alleged recent silence of the SSPX regarding Francis’ many abuses, I pointed out that he has obviously not been paying attention to the numerous articles posted and circulated by the Society….including the very last sentence of the article to which he objects! The article was not a blanket condemnation of anonymous criticism of the Pope, only of “disrespectful” and “passive aggressive” anonymous criticism. Most, if not all of the articles on the “News and Events” page are “anonymous,” unless they are quoting a specific source.
I disagreed with him on several points regarding his interpretation of the SSPX column, as follows: I just posted a long comment rather critical of this “Father X” on the Remnant website, but it seems to have disappeared. Then, my friend SSPX-X, you will find out what it is like to fight in the trenches of tradition and keep your head down from enemy fire. If the price to pay for regularization is silence now, the cost to remain will be the same. The atypical silence of the Society over the constant outrages of Francis in the months leading up to a possible regularization with Rome does not bode well for the future, for the Society itself and for tradition as a whole. And while still supporting the SSPX, many of us are gravely concerned about the impending regularization of the Society with Rome, under a papal regime that is transparently tyrannical, heretical and unprecedented in Church history. Many anonymous bloggers and authors within the broad spectrum of tradition are strong supporters of the SSPX, including many or most of us here at The Remnant. It is my hope that the criticisms of SSPX-X are not widespread within the Society and do not represent an official position of the Society, even though the post appears on the Society webpage. On the other hand, what diocesan cleric dares speak publicly about the same without a realistic fear of suspension, or far worse? After all, what Society priest would be suspended or laicized by superiors for criticizing Vatican II or any heterodoxy. Even though-and precisely because-they are regarded as irregular by the Vatican authorities and mainstream Church, this has put them in a position to stand in private and public opposition to the aberrations of the Vatican II era Church with relative impunity. With regard to those who are protected or immune from the power of the tyrant, to a degree this applies to the Society of Saint Pius X. If you doubt this, ask the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate or Cardinal Raymond Burke or anyone else who has been the object of his papal tirades and insults-to include traditional Catholics. In the case of Francis of Rome, it is manifestly the case that this man wields his crosier like a club. In my experience there are two groups of people highly critical of anonymous criticism or correction: those who wield power tyrannically and those who are protected or immune from the power of the tyrant.
0 kommentar(er)
