MIKolbe Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 the SSPX is BASEketball [img]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lB_DsiW-2gI/TVvqMtwfxWI/AAAAAAAAACE/r23M2lZtNZ8/s1600/baseketball.jpg[/img]
MIKolbe Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 don't.... it's pretty much a knock off, thinking they can do their own thing, failing miserably... oh, you meant the movie....
BG45 Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 Yeah was going for the movie... I tried to read the SSPX site once; their fidelity didn't exactly leap out in my face from their FAQ. They actually have the closest Traditional Latin Mass to me I think, in Pittsburgh as I found out just yesterday.
Lil Red Posted July 12, 2011 Author Posted July 12, 2011 [quote name='dUSt' timestamp='1310430233' post='2266043'] No. In your hypothetical, you'd have to go form your own league because you disagreed with the umpire, and then hire your own umpires in your own league that have to follow your interpretation of the rules. Sure, you'd still be playing baseball, just not in the Major Leagues anymore, with no chance of ever winning a pennant. [/quote] i hate sports analogies. idgi.
Papist Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 [quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1310437012' post='2266131'] i hate sports analogies. idgi. [/quote] Just think of it as when baking a cake, you use splenda and margarine in place of white sugar and butter. Does that help?
Lil Red Posted July 12, 2011 Author Posted July 12, 2011 [quote name='Papist' timestamp='1310494643' post='2266404'] Just think of it as when baking a cake, you use splenda and margarine in place of white sugar and butter. Does that help? [/quote] oh, so it tastes cr[i][/i]appier?
Papist Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 [quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1310494992' post='2266407'] oh, so it tastes crappier? [/quote] Very good. You're a quick study.
Lil Red Posted July 12, 2011 Author Posted July 12, 2011 [quote name='Papist' timestamp='1310495441' post='2266413'] Very good. You're a quick study. [/quote] ya just gotta speak the lingo.
fides' Jack Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 [quote name='dUSt' timestamp='1310430233' post='2266043'] No. In your hypothetical, you'd have to go form your own league because you disagreed with the umpire, and then hire your own umpires in your own league that have to follow your interpretation of the rules. Sure, you'd still be playing baseball, just not in the Major Leagues anymore, with no chance of ever winning a pennant. [/quote] And then when somebody starts up a forum about MLB, you can go and start arguments about how your league is better, because your umpires are more faithful to the "true" sport of baseball, and even the spectators in your stands are more respectful toward the sport. You might even consider starting your own forum to support your own league... ... ... I'm not breaking any rules by being sarcastic, am I?
Lil Red Posted July 12, 2011 Author Posted July 12, 2011 [quote name='fides' Jack' timestamp='1310499510' post='2266465'] And then when somebody starts up a forum about MLB, you can go and start arguments about how your league is better, because your umpires are more faithful to the "true" sport of baseball, and even the spectators in your stands are more respectful toward the sport. You might even consider starting your own forum to support your own league... ... ... I'm not breaking any rules by being sarcastic, am I? [/quote] [i]sarcasm meter 5/5[/i]
Aloysius Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 I do not support the SSPX, and clearly state again and again that they are wrong in what they do in defying Church authority, but I think people's attitudes about them and especially their analogies are over the top. By a lot. They are not protestants. They are not Nancy Pelosi. They felt the Church was lost in dark woods, so they retraced the Church's steps and camped out back where the Church was before she entered those woods. They felt the game of baseball was in danger when a few umpires began acting like all balls thrown were strikes unless they were thrown in the traditional manner, in which case the pitcher was thrown out of the game (ie, the de facto ban on/abrogation of the Traditional Latin Mass which Summorum Pontificum reveals was never licit), so they went and made sure the game of baseball was being played correctly somewhere, to the shagrin of the MLB. I don't like the baseball analogy as much as the woods analogy, but there it is; they're not making up their own game, they're trying to pass it on as it was passed down to them. Martin Luther's doctrines were different, they were a marked rupture from the teaching of the Church. he felt he was ressurecting something from St. Augustine and the Church Fathers. that's completely different than what the SSPX is doing. Martin Luther was removed by at least a millenium by what he was trying to ressurect, and therefore was definitely ending up making his own things up. There is a direct connection between the SSPX and the period in time of Church history in which every last one of their positions would have been considered acceptable. they do not make things up or extrapolate on them, or at least they try not to, they pass down what was passed down to them. Lefebvre was taught x, y, and z; he taught x, y, and z to Fellay et al., who have been teaching x, y, and z to their seminarians. not protestantism. fides' jack, you're fine in your sarcasm, except that no one in this thread supports the SSPX. they simply take a more nuanced approach than the shouts of the peanut gallery about how simple it all is, about how stupid and wrong the SSPX are, about how glad they are that they are so right and the SSPX is so wrong. even if that's not the intention, that's the sense I get from many posts about the situation, the prayer of the pharisee rather than that of the publican. there are reasons the SSPX ended up in this situation; reasons that have deep rooted causes on both sides. much of the hierarchy suppressed traditional forms of worship, many within the Church demanded that we all hold that things that previous generations held as sacred as now being harmful. perhaps there was a better way to handle the situation (probably, actually, but on Monday morning there's always a better way one could have quarter backed), but one should keep a better perspective on it. someone above said the closest traditional latin mass to them was SSPX in pittsburgh, but there is a diocesan Traditional Latin Mass which has been daily (deo gratias, and Zubik gratias while we're at it) since Lent 2011. 11am High Mass on Sundays, St. Boniface Church/Holy Wisdom Parish. The Pittsburgh Latin Mass Community.
faithcecelia Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 [quote name='BG45' timestamp='1310431469' post='2266075'] Yeah was going for the movie... I tried to read the SSPX site once; their fidelity didn't exactly leap out in my face from their FAQ. They actually have the closest Traditional Latin Mass to me I think, in Pittsburgh as I found out just yesterday. [/quote] I tried to read there site twice - once about 5yrs ago and once recently having joined Phatmass. I have been left feeling nauseaus each time and in need to getting to church and the Blessed sacrament. I don't mean about to puke, but definate nausea and nervousness came over me. Same has happened looking at sites for convents I have later found are not in the Church. I don't consider myself perceptive on most things, but I do think this says something to me. I love the Church and I have faith that its hierarchy have made, do make and will continue to make important decisions based on serious prayer and discernment, not on whims or based on what is 'trendy.
Nihil Obstat Posted July 13, 2011 Posted July 13, 2011 [quote name='dUSt' timestamp='1310430233' post='2266043'] No. In your hypothetical, you'd have to go form your own league because you disagreed with the umpire, and then hire your own umpires in your own league that have to follow your interpretation of the rules. Sure, you'd still be playing baseball, just not in the Major Leagues anymore, with no chance of ever winning a pennant. [/quote] I think you're getting confused with the Orthodox. . . The SSPX are not in schism. [quote name='Aloysius' timestamp='1310511515' post='2266585'] I do not support the SSPX, and clearly state again and again that they are wrong in what they do in defying Church authority, but I think people's attitudes about them and especially their analogies are over the top. By a lot. They are not protestants. They are not Nancy Pelosi. They felt the Church was lost in dark woods, so they retraced the Church's steps and camped out back where the Church was before she entered those woods. They felt the game of baseball was in danger when a few umpires began acting like all balls thrown were strikes unless they were thrown in the traditional manner, in which case the pitcher was thrown out of the game (ie, the de facto ban on/abrogation of the Traditional Latin Mass which Summorum Pontificum reveals was never licit), so they went and made sure the game of baseball was being played correctly somewhere, to the shagrin of the MLB. I don't like the baseball analogy as much as the woods analogy, but there it is; they're not making up their own game, they're trying to pass it on as it was passed down to them. Martin Luther's doctrines were different, they were a marked rupture from the teaching of the Church. he felt he was ressurecting something from St. Augustine and the Church Fathers. that's completely different than what the SSPX is doing. Martin Luther was removed by at least a millenium by what he was trying to ressurect, and therefore was definitely ending up making his own things up. There is a direct connection between the SSPX and the period in time of Church history in which every last one of their positions would have been considered acceptable. they do not make things up or extrapolate on them, or at least they try not to, they pass down what was passed down to them. Lefebvre was taught x, y, and z; he taught x, y, and z to Fellay et al., who have been teaching x, y, and z to their seminarians. not protestantism. fides' jack, you're fine in your sarcasm, except that no one in this thread supports the SSPX. they simply take a more nuanced approach than the shouts of the peanut gallery about how simple it all is, about how stupid and wrong the SSPX are, about how glad they are that they are so right and the SSPX is so wrong. even if that's not the intention, that's the sense I get from many posts about the situation, the prayer of the pharisee rather than that of the publican. there are reasons the SSPX ended up in this situation; reasons that have deep rooted causes on both sides. much of the hierarchy suppressed traditional forms of worship, many within the Church demanded that we all hold that things that previous generations held as sacred as now being harmful. perhaps there was a better way to handle the situation (probably, actually, but on Monday morning there's always a better way one could have quarter backed), but one should keep a better perspective on it. someone above said the closest traditional latin mass to them was SSPX in pittsburgh, but there is a diocesan Traditional Latin Mass which has been daily (deo gratias, and Zubik gratias while we're at it) since Lent 2011. 11am High Mass on Sundays, St. Boniface Church/Holy Wisdom Parish. The Pittsburgh Latin Mass Community. [/quote] Agreed 100 times.
SoylentGreene Posted July 14, 2011 Posted July 14, 2011 I don't in any way dispute the fact that the SSPX people are schismatic. However, my question is, Is what they're doing any worse than the crazies on the other side of the spectrum? For example the wacknuts who "ordain" women, or the infamous sister who was chaperoning women into the abortion clinic??
Vincent Vega Posted July 14, 2011 Posted July 14, 2011 [quote name='SoylentGreene' timestamp='1310678176' post='2267484'] I don't in any way dispute the fact that the SSPX people are schismatic. However, my question is, Is what they're doing any worse than the crazies on the other side of the spectrum? For example the wacknuts who "ordain" women, or the infamous sister who was chaperoning women into the abortion clinic?? [/quote] No, and in fact, I would say that their situation carries less gravity than these.
SoylentGreene Posted July 14, 2011 Posted July 14, 2011 So why are the Sspx people so demonized and the other ones I mentioned aren't? Why do the 'liberal' weirdos get to do what they want but the conservative ones don't?
Nihil Obstat Posted July 15, 2011 Posted July 15, 2011 [quote name='SoylentGreene' timestamp='1310678176' post='2267484'] I don't in any way dispute the fact that the SSPX people are schismatic. However, my question is, Is what they're doing any worse than the crazies on the other side of the spectrum? For example the wacknuts who "ordain" women, or the infamous sister who was chaperoning women into the abortion clinic?? [/quote] I'm not sure if this is just phrased ambiguously, but I want to make sure I clarify: the SSPX are not in schism.
Vincent Vega Posted July 15, 2011 Posted July 15, 2011 [quote name='SoylentGreene' timestamp='1310682686' post='2267509']Why do the 'liberal' weirdos get to do what they want but the conservative ones don't? [/quote] You must be new here.
Amppax Posted July 15, 2011 Posted July 15, 2011 [quote name='SoylentGreene' timestamp='1310682686' post='2267509'] So why are the Sspx people so demonized and the other ones I mentioned aren't? Why do the 'liberal' weirdos get to do what they want but the conservative ones don't? [/quote] It's easier to laugh the liberal ones off
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now