What People Are Commenting
Proposals, Traditionalist Branches & Titanic
Proposals for the Pope
Perhaps you've been asked this question before: If you had the opportunity to do so, what list of proposals would you present to the Holy Father as essential, necessary changes to be made in current Church practice to best promote orthodox faith and life in the Church?
We have written three messages that we sent to Pope John Paul II as well as to then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, today Benedict XVI:
These three things - to stop ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue, to abandon Progressivism and to return the Papacy to what it was before the Council - constitute a list of actions that could start a true restoration of the Church.
- Quo Vadis Petre? - This was an overview of the ecumenical festivities planned for the passage of the Millennium. We asked him to refrain from those acts which went against the previous Papal Magisterium.
- We Resist You to the Face - In this book we basically proposed that he abandon Progressivism, which is the current of theology that is the heir of Modernism, condemned by St. Pius X in the Encyclical Pascendi.
- An Urgent Plea: Do Not Change the Papacy - In this work we asked JPII to not execute the program of reform he said he would make in his Encyclical Ut unum sint, that is, to modify the Papacy to please the Schismatics and Protestants so that they would merge with the Conciliar Church.
We hope this answers your question.
TIA correspondence desk
To Which Branch Do You Belong?
A quick question to you: Are you favorable to the Society of St Pius X? If not which Traditional 'branch" do you support?
Thank you for letting me know.
We have points in common and points of disagreement with SSPX.
TIA does not support 'branches,' but ideas. These ideas are the ensemble of principles that constitute the Catholic Faith, as well as their application in the temporal sphere.
As far as a movement adheres to those principles, we support it; insofar as it compromises with Progressivism in the Church or the Revolution in the State, we combat it.
TIA correspondence desk
Favoring Married Priests
I read recently that the formerly Anglican pastor and pro-life activist Paul Schneck was ordained. He is also a father of eight. I believe the ordination of Schneck and other high-church protestant converts (like the incoming flood of Anglicans)- as well as thriving Eastern-Rite parishes - should at least open the discussion up for lifting the ban on celibacy.
If the Church should ever decide to change its Latin-Rite ban on marriage, let us pray it decided to do so because it was in the best interests of the Church founded by Christ the King, and not out of intimidation from the secular media's sexual agenda coming from The New York Times editorial board crowd. However, my own opinion is that it should be at least discussed on the basis that a celibate priesthood in the Latin-Rite is a discipline, not a doctrine of faith.
By most accounts, the current priesthood is anywhere from 15% to 40% homosexual. That still means that 60% to 85% of priests have voluntarily given up wives, sex, children and money for Christ. Their sacrifice is truly commendable and holy, yet I do not think lifting the ban on celibacy would diminish their sacrifice anymore than the present situation of ordaining protestant converts.
If celibacy is truly a prerequisite for ordination and religious life, than how can you explain the holiness and reverence among Eastern/Byzantine/Oriental Rites? (whose mass I believe treats Christ with much more humility and respect than the way the current Novus Ordo Mass is being preached in most Latin Rite Parishes) Are the Ukrainians, Greeks, Egyptians, Lebanese etc. any less Catholic than us in the Latin Rite because they do allow for a married priesthood? I don't think so.
I write this email not as a liberal Vatican II reformer, but as a traditionalist who truly appreciates your website. If entertaining the idea of a married priesthood is blasphemous, then please pray for my soul as that is not my intention. But I do not think a married priesthood is blasphemous because if it were, then how do the Eastern rites exist in the first place?
We disagree with your position favoring the abolition of celibacy for the clergy.
We also think that to take the married priests of Eastern rites as a precedent is a faulty argument. You may read our reasons based on St. Gregory VII, Pope Calistus II, along with the First Lateran Council here.
TIA correspondence desk
Confession & Faculties
You were kind enough to answer my question [on confessions] in the February 18th "What People Are Commenting" section of your website and I thank you.
Basically you said that the SSPX and independent priests were dispensed from getting the proper faculties from Bishops because the Faith is more important than obedience. You also said that there was no doubt about the validity of their Sacraments including confession.
How do you come to this conclusion? Is it from the new Code of Canon Law or the power of Holy Orders? Canon 1335 of the New Code seems airtight to me, but I am no expert on this subject.
Thank you for your great website and keep up the good work.
Let us exemplify our position by analyzing an event that actually happened in History.
When the Titanic sank, survivors report that there was a Catholic priest aboard who chose to stay on board the ship in order to provide confession and absolution for those who would die.
He did so, and died with the other shipwrecked persons. It was certainly a heroic deed of dedication to souls that should serve as a model for many other priests.
Now, the Titanic sank when it was 400 miles south of Newfoundland in Canada, whose capital is St. John. Today, we say that those were international waters, but someone could object that the boundaries of international waters (200 miles) were established by an artificial standard made by the UN in 1982. Those boundaries would be up for discussion in 1912, when the Titanic sank.
Without entering the technical problem of boundaries, let us suppose that the place where the ship sank was under the jurisdiction of the Archdiocese of St. John.
Would you pretend that that priest should have asked permission of the Archbishop of St. John to exercise his power of confession?
"No," you would answer, "because in cases of travel, the priest is allowed to exercise his power of Orders without jurisdiction. A temporary hiatus of jurisdiction is given from some days before the priest leaves a country until some days after he arrives in another." This would be a very good partial answer.
The complete answer should be: "In cases of emergencies - natural disasters, shipwrecks, plane crashes, car accidents, fires, etc. - or in articulo mortis (for a dying person), the priest must exercise his power of Orders with or without jurisdiction."
Applying the metaphorical situation to the present day reality, we believe that the Conciliar Revolution installed in the Church by John XXIII and Paul VI is much graver than the shipwreck of the Titanic. Therefore, we have no doubt that those priests who resist this Revolution and were duly ordained must exercise their power of Orders and distribute the Sacraments to those who need them. It is the same principle that governs in emergencies.
This shows that the power of Orders may be exercised without the permission of the Prelates when they are contaminated by the errors of Progressivism and use their power of jurisdiction to oppress the priests who resist those errors.
TIA correspondence desk
Posted June 24, 2010
The opinions expressed in this section - What People Are Commenting -
do not necessarily express those of TIA
Related Topics of Interest
Should Priests Marry to Avoid the Present Crisis in the Clergy?
Married Priests? They Are Here...
Eastern Married Priests
Mass Said by Laymen
Question on Confessions
Confession before and after Vatican II
Related Works of Interest
Comments | Questions | Objections | Home | Books | CDs | Search | Contact Us | Donate
© 2002- Tradition in Action, Inc. All Rights Reserved