For Cam especially...

[Cam42]

[quote name='brendan1104' date='Mar 27 2006, 08:46 PM']how long do i have to complete it? i haven't read ott in about a year and a half. give me until next week at least i'll need to review.
e-mail me with it. i need to speak to you.
[right][snapback]924251[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

About a day. Considering that I pull most of this stuff off in about 5 minute spurts, I would say that if you are going to make a call out of that magnitude, I would hope that you can speak to it immediately.

If you don't believe that I pull this stuff off in that timeframe, look at the frequency of my postings in the heat of most debates. Now, let's not forget that I work about 55 hours a week (managing a retail store). So there may be 8 hour stretches or an occasional overnight where I don't answer, but for the most part, I am getting this stuff out in a more than timely manner.

So, I would give you about a day.

Not bragging, but simply backing my ability to take less than a week to read this stuff.

[brendan1104]

I have an idea- and no, I'm not chickening out. Let's end/not debate any more on the liturgy/SSPX.

[Cam42]

[quote name='brendan1104' date='Mar 27 2006, 11:04 PM']I have an idea- and no, I'm not chickening out. Let's end/not debate any more on the liturgy/SSPX.
[right][snapback]924481[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I have a better idea.....how about you leave the schismatic attitude and come back to Rome. If you never left, then start respecting that which you owe your allegiance.

You owe the Pope your obedience.....this includes the Liturgy and the SSPX issue.

[brendan1104]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Mar 27 2006, 11:09 PM']I have a better idea.....how about you leave the schismatic attitude and come back to Rome.  If you never left, then start respecting that which you owe your allegiance.

You owe the Pope your obedience.....this includes the Liturgy and the SSPX issue.
[right][snapback]924488[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I wish I could... but with everything I've read from the SSPX/other trad sites and books it's hard... I wouldn't know where to begin reading un-biased books on liturgy, vatican 2, doctrine, etc.

[Dave]

Then read "More Catholic Than the Pope: An Inside Look at Extreme Traditionalism" by Patrick Madrid and Pete Vere and take a look at this site: [url="http://jloughnan.tripod.com/chetshet.htm"]http://jloughnan.tripod.com/chetshet.htm[/url]

[Amator Veritatis]

As a result of various recent circumstances, not the least of which were the poor state of my computer and a recent trip to Naples, Florida, I have been prevented from participating in the discussions on these forums in past days. I would like to note that jurisdiction is necessary, properly speaking, only for the Sacraments of Penance and Matrimony. The other Sacraments do not require jurisdiction, at least for validity. As Cam noted, the Sacrament of Extreme Unction as administered by the SSPX priest was undoubtedly valid, but he made the point that such an act may have been illicit. The fact of the matter is that, in danger of death, the Church permits even laicised priests to administer the Sacraments, including the Sacrament of Penance. These norms are given in the Code of Canon Law. In this manner, even the Sacrament of Confession is valid in danger of death, though it usually requires faculties given by the local ordinary. If the Church supplies the faculties necessary for the validity of Confessions, how much more does she make licit that which might have questionably been licit without the urgent needs of the dying. Besides, the mere desire for a loved one to receive the Sacrament of Extreme Unction with the Apostolic Blessing is reason enough to have an SSPX priest come to administer the Last Rites. She is fortunate to have had such a loving relative to care for her at the time of death.

[i]Requiem aeternam dona ei Domine et lux perpetua luceat ei[/i]. Please be assured of my prayers for your dear relative. Rather than a cause for hostility towards each other, we ought let these events remind us of that terrible day when Our Lord will call us to reckon the deeds of our lives, whether they were spent in the happy service of virtue or the reprobate service of vice. In this manner, may we remember the certainty of death and the necessity of living a holy life. We would do well to remember the words of Job: "My days have been swifter than a post" Cf. Job ix.25. In [i]Preparation for Death[/i], Saint Alphonsus notes that, in order to remember the imminence of death, the Venerable P. Juvenal Ancina, Bishop of Saluzzo, kept before him the skull of a dead man, on which was written, "What you are, I was ; and what I am, you shall be." Let us all remember that death is certain and that our lives must be a preparation for our deaths.

[brendan1104]

[quote name='Dave' date='Mar 28 2006, 11:50 AM']Then read "More Catholic Than the Pope: An Inside Look at Extreme Traditionalism" by Patrick Madrid and Pete Vere and take a look at this site: [url="http://jloughnan.tripod.com/chetshet.htm"]http://jloughnan.tripod.com/chetshet.htm[/url]
[right][snapback]925002[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Read the book... terrible research and presentation.

[Dave]

Perhaps the reason you feel that way is because the stuff in the book goes against what you want to believe? You were probably looking for support for your disobedience and sinful attitudes and got mad when the book didn't give you any.

Further weakening your claim is the fact you didn't cite any examples of alleged bad research and presentation.

[Cam42]

[quote name='Amator Veritatis' date='Mar 28 2006, 02:07 PM']As a result of various recent circumstances, not the least of which were the poor state of my computer and a recent trip to Naples, Florida, I have been prevented from participating in the discussions on these forums in past days. I would like to note that jurisdiction is necessary, properly speaking, only for the Sacraments of Penance and Matrimony. The other Sacraments do not require jurisdiction, at least for validity. As Cam noted, the Sacrament of Extreme Unction as administered by the SSPX priest was undoubtedly valid, but he made the point that such an act may have been illicit. The fact of the matter is that, in danger of death, the Church permits even laicised priests to administer the Sacraments, including the Sacrament of Penance. These norms are given in the Code of Canon Law. In this manner, even the Sacrament of Confession is valid in danger of death, though it usually requires faculties given by the local ordinary. If the Church supplies the faculties necessary for the validity of Confessions, how much more does she make licit that which might have questionably been licit without the urgent needs of the dying. Besides, the mere desire for a loved one to receive the Sacrament of Extreme Unction with the Apostolic Blessing is reason enough to have an SSPX priest come to administer the Last Rites. She is fortunate to have had such a loving relative to care for her at the time of death.

[i]Requiem aeternam dona ei Domine et lux perpetua luceat ei[/i]. Please be assured of my prayers for your dear relative. Rather than a cause for hostility towards each other, we ought let these events remind us of that terrible day when Our Lord will call us to reckon the deeds of our lives, whether they were spent in the happy service of virtue or the reprobate service of vice. In this manner, may we remember the certainty of death and the necessity of living a holy life. We would do well to remember the words of Job: "My days have been swifter than a post" Cf. Job ix.25. In [i]Preparation for Death[/i], Saint Alphonsus notes that, in order to remember the imminence of death, the Venerable P. Juvenal Ancina, Bishop of Saluzzo, kept before him the skull of a dead man, on which was written, "What you are, I was ; and what I am, you shall be." Let us all remember that death is certain and that our lives must be a preparation for our deaths.
[right][snapback]925214[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

No one disputes your assertations to the validity of the the Sacrament, however, one does need jurisdiction in order to perform the Sacraments, except in the case dire emergency. However, it should be noted that the good lady had already received the Sacrament from a priest in good standing.

It was brendan's scruples that forced him to call the SSPX priest in. So, the need, as it were, did not exist and the criteria that you laid forth is non-existent.

You ask, "How much more does she make licit that which might have questionably been licit without the urgent needs of the dying?"

That answer is not very hard to come by. It is licit when it is done by a priest who has jurisdiction and is not suspended in his faculties. All SSPX priests are suspended ipso facto therefore, they cannot either by jurisdiction or by suspension conduct/perform those Sacraments and even sacramentals in a licit manner.

Had there been no priest available, rather than scruples as the reasoning for the need for re-positioning of the Sacrament, I would be much more forgiving in the position, as the validity is not in question, only the licitness.

[Jaime]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Mar 29 2006, 01:37 PM']No one disputes your assertations to the validity of the the Sacrament, however, one does need jurisdiction in order to perform the Sacraments, except in the case dire emergency.  However, it should be noted that the good lady had already received the Sacrament from a priest in good standing.

It was brendan's scruples that forced him to call the SSPX priest in.  So, the need, as it were, did not exist and the criteria that you laid forth is non-existent.

You ask, "How much more does she make licit that which might have questionably been licit without the urgent needs of the dying?"

That answer is not very hard to come by.  It is licit when it is done by a priest who has jurisdiction and is not suspended in his faculties.  All SSPX priests are suspended ipso facto therefore, they cannot either by jurisdiction or by suspension conduct/perform those Sacraments and even sacramentals in a licit manner.

Had there been no priest available, rather than scruples as the reasoning for the need for re-positioning of the Sacrament, I would be much more forgiving in the position, as the validity is not in question, only the licitness.
[right][snapback]927174[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

And isn't there a canon law about how you have to obey your bishop and not call an SSPX priest? I think its next to the canon law about not publicly criticizing your bishop...

But I'm not sure where it is

[Cam42]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Mar 29 2006, 03:20 PM']And isn't there a canon law about how you have to obey your bishop and not call an SSPX priest?  I think its next to the canon law about not publicly criticizing your bishop...

But I'm not sure where it is
[right][snapback]927239[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

[Jaime]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Mar 29 2006, 09:09 PM']
[right][snapback]927812[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

[img]http://www.cnn.com/EVENTS/1997/star.wars.anniversary/where.are.they/hans.solo.lg.jpg[/img]

Laugh it up furball!

[Cam42]

[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v672/camilam42/Csubi3.jpg[/img]

Ruh gwyaaaag.

Ok, that is actually a sentence in Shyriiwook. I don't know what is geekier....making a statement in Shyriiwook, or knowing the name of Chewbacca's language.

[Jaime]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Mar 29 2006, 09:36 PM'][img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v672/camilam42/Csubi3.jpg[/img]

Ruh gwyaaaag.

Ok, that is actually a sentence in Shyriiwook.  I don't know what is geekier....making a statement in Shyriiwook, or knowing the name of Chewbacca's language.
[right][snapback]927851[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

You have to choose?

That's like saying "Which is better an ice cream sundae with chocolate sprinkles or an ice cream sundae with multi colored sprinkles?"

Edited March 30, 2006 by jaime

[Amator Veritatis]

Cam, this is, if anything, a valid interpretation of the maxim [i]Lex suprema salus animarum[/i]. Besides the fact that the Church supplies any necessary jurisdiction in danger of death, the benefits regarding the salvation of the woman's soul as a result of the Apostolic Blessing far outweigh the questionable matters of jurisdiction. By your statement that a suspended priest cannot licitly administer the Sacraments or sacramentals, do you mean to include that a suspended priest cannot licitly bless an object? Could you provide a reference for this claim, if you are, indeed, making it? Secondly, could you provide a reference that it is possible to administer a sacramental illicitly? Thank you.

[dspen2005]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Mar 27 2006, 10:09 PM']I have a better idea.....how about you leave the schismatic attitude and come back to Rome.  If you never left, then start respecting that which you owe your allegiance.

You owe the Pope your obedience.....this includes the Liturgy and the SSPX issue.
[right][snapback]924488[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

thank you Cam, once again, telling it like it is.... Preach on brutha-man!!!!

[Ora et Labora]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Mar 26 2006, 08:49 PM']all this argument makes me tired of Catholicism.
[right][snapback]923137[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

you were always tired of it sam...im sorry. you dont want to see the big picture.

and this is really not necessary. i back dave and cam 100% what they say and the info they show are solid.

we all know the situation with the SSPX...well, most of us. if anyone wants the solid truth for it, get the book More Catholic Then the Pope by Patrick Madrid and Pete Vere.

[Ora et Labora]

[quote name='brendan1104' date='Mar 28 2006, 07:17 AM']I wish I could... but with everything I've read from the SSPX/other trad sites and books it's hard... I wouldn't know where to begin reading un-biased books on liturgy, vatican 2, doctrine, etc.
[right][snapback]924837[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I have an idea...stop reading all of of the trash that the SSPX give you and start reading solid books. Like the Boltimore Catechism.

[Ora et Labora]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Mar 26 2006, 09:09 PM']yes. but (and i do not mean this in an offensive or mean way) i don't give it out to people i do not know.
[right][snapback]923175[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

do you know me well enough? lol

[zunshynn]

Kristina, you didn't hear?! Brendan is back!