Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: Dhimmis on the Thames Link: http://www.takimag.com/blogs/article/dhimmis_on_the_thames#16916 Post contents: Unlike spartacus, I try not to engage in personal attacks. I do try to engage in truth. I'm fully aware of the TFP history. It had germinated, flourished, and died long before I even knew it existed. What a shame Vatican2 didn't have the same brief history. In any event, it was nice of spartacus to avoid dealing with the primary point made re Ratzinger and the muslims. We have noticed in other columns that spartacus never engages with facts, particularly uncomfortable ones. Instead, he hyperlinks us to his sources which resemble the dispassionate discourses of Alan Stang. It is spartacus and other practitioners of false obedience, standing behind Ratzinger, arms folded, meditating on "Allah," who will have much more to explain after their demise than those of us who try to remain obedient to God. True obedience is the servant of faith, not of obedience. spartacus and one or two of the occasional columnists here engage in what St. Thomas Aquainas described as "error by excess." God, through His Catholic Church, has absolute authority over my conscience but, in the last resort, God meant us to judge if His Hierarchy is departing from His teaching. Obedience to men has limits. Galatians 1: 8-9. There are simply too many violations of the traditions of the Faith to be ignored and too many people do not have a problem ignoring either truth or tradition and thus become disobedient to Tradition. Note how spartacus and his fellow apostates, excuse me, apologists for Vatican2 always refer to those who respect tradition as "TradRad." As if the Church in 1956 were oh sooo radical. It was Vatican2 which bragged about how the Church ought to "return to its ancient heritage" and then foisted the protestantized novus ordo on us. spartacus and one or two others have not only succumbed to a false obedience but they have also become adherents to magisterialism, a fixation on the teachings that pertain ONLY to the current magisterium. Since extrinsic tradition has been subverted and since the Vatican tends to promulgate documents exhibitng a lack of concern (if not outright contempt) regarding previous magisterial acts, it becomes quite easy to ignore the past and pay attention only to the current magisterium. Neoconservatives think in a similar manner: the only standard by which they judge orthodoxy is whether or not one follows the current authority. We traditionalists look at the present through the eyes of the past while the Vatican2 neocons look at the past through the eyes of the present. Sent at: 2008 07 08