Me to Them
I once thought as you about "Catho-Doxy" - Orthodox not schismatic by calling papacy Primus Inter Pares (only), Catholicism not heretic by filioque.
I got back to Catholic after I had seen agressive statements against "Benedict XVI" (whom I later reconsidered as having been pseudo-Pope Ratzinger) where his fault, if any, was rather opposite direction of his "Orthodox" critics.
In the case of the 10 year old girl who had been forced to abort, he excommunicated the two abortionists, but not the mother who had collaborated in delivering her daughter and twin grandchildren into their hands.
In the Africa question, his problem is / was not denying condoms is an overall solution to AIDS, but rather being too sympathetic on its role as a partial solution.
Once again, the "Orthodox" went against traditional morality, attacked Ratzinger for supporting it too much while I thought he was supporting it too little.
However, even if there were sense in your general position (I think it is refuted by half Roumanian Church being Neohimerites and therefore Modernist Heretics, other half being Antipapal Schismatics with too deep a distrust of Austria - and similarily for other Orthodox Churches, with Romanides complicating the issue further by his attacks on scholasticism), even so it is not very good to honour "Pope Francis".
Triviū, Quadriviū, 7 cætera : Ascii Code Gematria
As to your apostolic succession or lack thereof, I leave that to Pope Michael. Meanwhile I have my own problems with SSPX, they seem to consider me Theosophic because I:
* like the two main Inklings (whose 2 friends were, but who themselves were not Theosophists);
* consider stars are moved by angels.
I have wondered if the anonymous commenter under my last post on this matter is the SSPX parish curate of St Nicolas du Chardonnet:
New blog on the kid: - But Parallax Guarentees the Distance of Kepler 452, Right? Right? Don't...
And, if I saw your page because of his praying for me to : 1) remain under patronage of St Nicholas of Myra; 2) but with a more Theosophically minded priest. As for myself, I do not consider it Theosophical to agree with St Thomas Aquinas or mainstream Scholastic Philosophy on Astronomy, angels, Prima Via.
Sunday 9-VIII-2015 05:14
Them to Me:
I'm not sure, I follow what you are talking about as far as the Theosphically minded priest bit. St.Nicholas Parish, while still in the founding phase, is NOT a Liberal Catholic Church. Nothing against Liberal Catholicism generally. But we are Old Catholics. Theosophy for the most part, has never been a big thing with Old Catholics. That would be the Liberal Catholic's thing. .... That's why I love America. émoticône wink
Sunday 9-VIII-2015 11:55
Me to Them
So, someone may think YOU are the cure against theosophy and have prayed for me to find you because they ocnsider ME a Theosophist.
And that someone may also be excommunicating me before God, I just spotted an ocnsider instead of consider.
Sunday 9-VIII-2015 later
Them to Me
I am friends with the one they call, Pope Michael, but I am not under his juriscdiction.
Also, I & St.Nicholas of Myra in Burlington are not under papal rule, or under the Eastern patriarchs either. We are Old Catholics, real simple.
And we are not sedevacantists either. Pope Michael, if I understand right, is a sedevacantist.
We are an Old Catholic Church which derives our apostolic succession from the Old Catholics of the See of Utrecht.
And we are not Liberal Catholics, although I'll be the first to admit, I was initially ordained in that tradition.
Anyway, we are simply Old Catholics. We base our doctrines on the first 7 ecumenical councils of the undivided church beyond that, we would generally but simply describe ourselves as,
"Conservative in Worship",
"Moderate in Doctrine",
"Liberal on most Social Issues".
And we practice open communion to all professing baptized Christians, regardless or church tradition, or church affiliation
So, if the above brief discriptions sound good to you, then by all means, welcome aboard, & we'd love to have, & serve you.
God Love You, Brother! émoticône like
Me to them:
Open communion? Sounds like communion with heretics. So, thanks but no thanks.
Them to me:
Oh, I see, you're just here to simply harass a church that is simply exorcising their first amendment rights because apparently YOU are the arbiter of religious freedom in America, right? Tell the truth. You came to this page specifically to make trouble. Looking at your previous messages, I can now see, you already had an opinion formed, & you were building to something snide. You were looking for something you could find fault with, weren't you? You came here just to harass, didn't you. I mean, let's look at the facts. 1st, you complain we're not, "theosopical" enough for you. Then when I inform you, we are not theosophical. you then call us heretics. Also, your speech is kinda vague, & elusive so's not to be too obvious in your position because, you obviously wanted to bait me. You had no interest in this parish all along. You simply sought out, & targeted a community so you could find some thing to make a beef out of, & then make yourself feel good that you could I guess, I don't know, maybe, tell me off, & give me a what for. If I am wrong then be honest, why are you here? Also, I might point out that, YOUR use of the word "heretic" is extremely vague, & personally relative on YOUR part. So, I suppose now, unless I have our bishop block you, you're just gonna keep messaging this page just to amuse yourself now, right? I tried to be nice, & welcoming to you, the way Jesus would have. And you just threw it back in my face. Kinda rude, don't ya think? Especially since, we never did anything wrong, TO YOU. Oh right. I suppose it's ok to be a rude @$$-hole to anyone who disagrees with you. I suppose, in your belief system, it's ok to troll, & harass someone who's theology is different than your's, right? This is America. Religious Freedom wasn't designed for just YOU, you know? Now, just tell me the truth as to why you came here, & then I never want to see you here, trolling, & harassing here, ever again! YOU GOT THAT?
Me to them
"1st, you complain we're not, "theosopical" enough for you." False. I never claimed to be theosophical at all, nor to want theosophists.
"Then when I inform you, we are not theosophical. you then call us heretics." Not for not being theosophists, at any rate. Pretty certainly if you look back for simply disagreeing about "open Communion table" as they used to say back when I was a Lutheran.
The truth is: I happened to find you, and I happened to guess someone who THOUGHT I was theosophical had prayed for that. And if you wnat no more from me, how about contacting SSPX and telling them you did not find me theosophical? But if you DID find me theosophical, how about telling me wherein?
Wait - you are NOT the guys who commented anonymously on the post and considered both me and St Thomas Aquinas as "closer to Eastern gnosticism than the Western Catholic tradition of the intelligibility of the world"?
And what I told the guy was this, not using the word heretic, and not considering St Thomas as a Saint could in theory be or once have been just schismatic:
You have unmasked yourself as being not a Catholic.
A Catholic would not have such a disrespect for a canonised saint and a Church doctor, nor especially in metaphysical questions for precisely the Church doctor who along with St Augustine is the most interrested in philosophy.
Actually, it was probably the phrase "open communion sounds like communion with heretics" - but it does. If they allow Anglicans or Calvinists to Communion, they allow heretics to Communion.
However, if they were not among the anonymous commenters on my post, how come they made ANY connexion with my thinking them "not theosophical enough"?
Why I went to them was not to get Communion, but to get a witness. Pope Michael can vouch for me before God, perhaps, but he is not respected by St Nicolas du Chardonnet, and this gives me an isolated position. So, I wanted an EX-theosophist or one ordained indirectly by such, who would know WHAT theosophy is, to witness about what Theosophy is NOT - obviously in favour of St Thomas Aquinas and of me.
Whoever the anonymous commenter was, who rejected both me and St Thomas Aquinas, I ought to thank him for rejecting St Thomas Aquinas as well, while rejecting me, since in doing so, he is making his rejection of me less credible before those who accept St Thomas Aquinas as a Saint.
If a thesis is so theosophical it makes St Thomas Aquinas a theosophist because in fact he shared it, it is probably not theosophical at all, but its attacker does not know where theosophical errors end and orthodoxy begins.