Recent posts

#31

The Sedevacantist Thesis / Re: Sedevacantists and Akita

Last post by awkward customer - Today at 12:51:50 PM

This is actually not even the crux of the matter, which is pointed out in the response to Fr. Cekada by Fr. Jenkins. .......

I've just started another thread in the General Catholic discussion subforum so that the dispute over the Schiavo case can be continued there.

#32

General Catholic Discussion / Are feeding tubes Ordinary or ...

Last post by awkward customer - Today at 12:49:54 PM

A discussion about the Terri Schiavo case has emerged in the 'Sedevacantism and Akita' thread in the Sede subforum.  Since I have been a major participant in this discussion, I'm starting a new thread because the issue of the Ordinary/Extraordinary nature of feeding tubes is an important one and so as not to keep derailing the thread.  I also feel obliged to defend the late Fr Anthony Cekada against accusations of promoting murder etc etc.

So here goes.  I maintain that feeding tubes are Extraordinary treatment and that Terri Shiavo was kept alive for 15 years in conditions that could easily be described as cruel and usual punishment.

But there are others who disagree.

So what does the Church say?  Are feeding tubes Ordinary or Extraordinary treatment?

#33

The Sedevacantist Thesis / Re: Sedevacantists and Akita

Last post by LausTibiChriste - Today at 12:36:36 PM

Can someone explain to me why the Anglican rites were declared null and void but the same reasoning for their abrogation doesn't apply to the new rites?

#34

General News and Discussion / ZOG confirmed

Last post by james03 - Today at 12:34:32 PM

No surprise to anyone:

He revealed that some refer to former Facebook board member and Biden Chief of Staff Jeff Zients as "the second most powerful person in Washington" and that "by getting Jeff's sign off, you're getting the President to sign off."

"Whatever this guy says, it's what the President says," Robinson told an undercover journalist.

Jeff Zients, a foreigner, runs the Americans' government.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/04/must-see-okeefe-media-group-uncovers-who-is/

#35

General News and Discussion / Re: Russia Invades Ukraine

Last post by james03 - Today at 12:28:53 PM

Maximum Leader Putin^(TM) out with his dogs:

#36

The Coffee Pot / Re: Catholic Memes

Last post by james03 - Today at 12:20:39 PM

Black people don't call them snakes.  They call them "serpents", which I always found amusing.

#37

General News and Discussion / Re: Economic Myths on High Pri...

Last post by james03 - Today at 12:14:04 PM

How do you replace such growth?

Why do you need "growth"?  Assume a country with a stable population with gold money and a Chilean style pension system that year-in and year-out has the same GDP.  That wouldn't be a problem.

In actuality, in a country with a stable population, you would see slow growth due to technology improvements and productivity gains.  Which would be good.  Capital accumulation would also lead to growth, again a good thing. 

But in a fascist/socialist economy the main need for "growth" is due to paying ever increasing usury charges (non-productive loans, like government debt) and to stay ahead of inflation from socialist money printing for as long as you can.

[We have discussed it in the past; and the issue of the validity of the N.O. Was once "the" issue among trads;]

#38

The Sedevacantist Thesis / Re: Sedevacantists and Akita

Last post by Baylee - Today at 12:12:55 PM

And no one here said differently.  But some folks refuse to even discuss or consider that the opinion that the NO rites are doubtful could be......CORRECT! It's the equivalent of sticking one's fingers in their ears and saying "lalalalalalala!"

You've been here longer than me:  has anyone really tried to discuss the conclusions of many sede AND non-sede clergy regarding the New Rites?  Or has it always been pushed aside because it might get people upset?

We have discussed it in the past; and the issue of the validity of the N.O. Was once "the" issue among trads; but now the field of battle has shifted more towards the validity of the Conciliar Popes; especially since the issue of "authority"is more far reaching and affects the validity issue i.e. What is the degree that Catholics are bound to submit to the Council; the N.O.M.; the New Code of Canon Law; and the magisterial decrees of the Conciliar Church. Why is this? Because if the Conciliar Popes are true Popes, then Vatican II is a true Council; the Conciliar decrees must be accepted by the faithful; the reformed sacramental rites are legitimate, valid and work for the edification and salvation of souls; same for the New Code of Canon Law; the Ecumenical directory; Balamaand and Abu Dhabi declarations etc. etc. If these are not true Popes then the contrary is true.
That is were the R&R position is radically contradictory; to whit: The R&R's want to have their cake (Pope and hierarchy) and 'eat them too' i.e. Decide when and to what measure they will submit to said hierarchy (mostly not at all).

Maybe the validity of the NO Mass was discussed because I've been trying to search for threads about the validity of the NO Rites of Ordination and Consecration and coming up pretty empty. Whenever I find one it never goes beyond one page. It seems as if that topic hits too close to home and people just don't want to "go there". 

#39

The Coffee Pot / Re: interesting purchase you m...

Last post by LausTibiChriste - Today at 12:04:56 PM

Going to the icon store tomorrow

Wish my bank account luck

#40

The Sedevacantist Thesis / Re: Sedevacantists and Akita

Last post by Michael Wilson - Today at 11:43:54 AM

And no one here said differently.  But some folks refuse to even discuss or consider that the opinion that the NO rites are doubtful could be......CORRECT! It's the equivalent of sticking one's fingers in their ears and saying "lalalalalalala!"

You've been here longer than me:  has anyone really tried to discuss the conclusions of many sede AND non-sede clergy regarding the New Rites?  Or has it always been pushed aside because it might get people upset?

We have discussed it in the past; and the issue of the validity of the N.O. Was once "the" issue among trads; but now the field of battle has shifted more towards the validity of the Conciliar Popes; especially since the issue of "authority"is more far reaching and affects the validity issue i.e. What is the degree that Catholics are bound to submit to the Council; the N.O.M.; the New Code of Canon Law; and the magisterial decrees of the Conciliar Church. Why is this? Because if the Conciliar Popes are true Popes, then Vatican II is a true Council; the Conciliar decrees must be accepted by the faithful; the reformed sacramental rites are legitimate, valid and work for the edification and salvation of souls; same for the New Code of Canon Law; the Ecumenical directory; Balamaand and Abu Dhabi declarations etc. etc. If these are not true Popes then the contrary is true.
That is were the R&R position is radically contradictory; to whit: The R&R's want to have their cake (Pope and hierarchy) and 'eat them too' i.e. Decide when and to what measure they will submit to said hierarchy (mostly not at all).