Bishop Schneider backs the SSPX

[Walking_Home]

If I speak for my family alone, I speak for many, the sheep were scattered because they were not comfortable with the abuses, obviously you have grown accustomed to them. I am fortunate not to have been one of the innocents participating as a clown acolyte in 1984, at St. Agnes’ in Milwaukee.

---

The Ordinary Form itself – Is Not an abuse, nor of lesser quality to the EF. Yes – some places went “overboard” with “liberties” – but we can’t apply it across the board to all the OFs. You don’t know my OF parish – and the priests that serve there – so don’t apply what may have happened at some other parish to what I am accustomed to.

 

[Denise1957]

---

The Ordinary Form itself – Is Not an abuse, nor of lesser quality to the EF. Yes – some places went “overboard” with “liberties” – but we can’t apply it across the board to all the OFs. You don’t know my OF parish – and the priests that serve there – so don’t apply what may have happened at some other parish to what I am accustomed to.

I don’t want to speak for Casilda, who is a very capable and knowledgeable poster, but I think that she’s talking about what happened in a parish in 1984 (clown Masses). It might seem like a long time ago, and maybe there hasn’t been a clown Mass there for quite some time, but I think what she’s getting at is how it was a scandal at the time, and that it caused Catholics to question their Faith. How could it not do so? To see a clown Mass would cause me to question the Catholic faith, too. I’ve not ever seen one, but I don’t think that the loss of Catholic identity (with the consequences of Catholics leaving the church), because of these things, should be treated lightly or dismissed so easily.

That there is a trend away from abuses is a hopeful sign. It shows that novelty (sometimes in the form of an abuse) is not a good way to sustain one’s faith in the long run. There seems to be a trend toward tradition, which is also hopeful. That doesn’t mean that those who have been scandalized in the past by abuse/novelty are going to trust that the Church is firmly back on the right track, and I don’t really blame them.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

---

The Ordinary Form itself – Is Not an abuse, nor of lesser quality to the EF. Yes – some places went “overboard” with “liberties” – but we can’t apply it across the board to all the OFs. You don’t know my OF parish – and the priests that serve there – so don’t apply what may have happened at some other parish to what I am accustomed to.

You know, I have seen absolutely horrible OFs I have seen entire cities where abuses occur, I have seen Bishops try to stamp out anything they deem “traditional” in the name of “progression” I have seen eradication of the EF that still occurs no matter what the MP said. I have also been a member of an amazing parish that celebrated the OF in a reverent and Holy manner. Led by a priest who was one of the most faithful priests I have ever seen. With attendees that understood the liturgy and loved it and respected it. When I was at that wonderful parish I never once was defensive about people who spoke of widespread abuses or wonky things because I had seen it, I had lived it. It did not offend me or the wonderful parish I was at. Now, I am back in a liturgical desert with little to no hope of changing any time soon. And I feel absolutely deflated, I feel starved, because I know what I could be eating… But the SSPX Chapel an hour from our city is thriving. It is the only form of Tradition within a day’s drive. Do I attend? No, but I long for reconciliation of the society. I long for Tradition. Does that make me an idoliter? Does the fact that the Church is entertaining even the IDEA of profaning the Eucharist and doing away with marriage make me doubt my faith. Yes. I am shaken, but I trust God, I trust His Church but that does not mean that I am blind to the tragedies, abuses, and direction we seem to be heading…
As much as you pointed out those who idolize tradition. The idolization of many things, things far worse is in the Church. Tradition and seeking to honor God and not the whims and sexual fancies of man is the bad guy here? Nope, I can’t buy that…

 

[Walking_Home]

I don’t want to speak for Casilda, who is a very capable and knowledgeable poster, but I think that she’s talking about what happened in a parish in 1984 (clown Masses). It might seem like a long time ago, and maybe there hasn’t been a clown Mass there for quite some time, but I think what she’s getting at is how it was a scandal at the time, and that it caused Catholics to question their Faith. How could it not do so? To see a clown Mass would cause me to question the Catholic faith, too. I’ve not ever seen one, but I don’t think that the loss of Catholic identity (with the consequences of Catholics leaving the church), because of these things, should be treated lightly or dismissed so easily.

That there is a trend away from abuses is a hopeful sign. It shows that novelty (sometimes in the form of an abuse) is not a good way to sustain one’s faith in the long run. There seems to be a trend toward tradition, which is also hopeful. That doesn’t mean that those who have been scandalized in the past by abuse/novelty are going to trust that the Church is firmly back on the right track, and I don’t really blame them.

---

The ever present “clown” Mass. Throwing that and churning it in – seems to have become part of the “brand” of toxic traditionalism.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

---

The ever present “clown” Mass. Throwing that and churning it in – seems to have become part of the “brand” of toxic traditionalism.

Ah the white whale of Masses. I don’t doubt it has happened, but I will tell you, Sunday, this past week, at my parish would have not qualified as a clown Mass. But rather a rock concert. Complete with one hand in the air head banging…
Toxic Traditionalism? Wow, and you are the one saying there is a “brand” here? Sounds like you are equally as metaphorical in your zeal for your point as a Clown Mass would be…

 

[Walking_Home]

Walking_Home:

The Ordinary Form itself – Is Not an abuse, nor of lesser quality to the EF. Yes – some places went “overboard” with “liberties” – but we can’t apply it across the board to all the OFs. You don’t know my OF parish – and the priests that serve there – so don’t apply what may have happened at some other parish to what I am accustomed to.

You know, I have seen absolutely horrible OFs I have seen entire cities where abuses occur, I have seen Bishops try to stamp out anything they deem “traditional” in the name of “progression” I have seen eradication of the EF that still occurs no matter what the MP said. I have also been a member of an amazing parish that celebrated the OF in a reverent and Holy manner. Led by a priest who was one of the most faithful priests I have ever seen. With attendees that understood the liturgy and loved it and respected it. When I was at that wonderful parish I never once was defensive about people who spoke of widespread abuses or wonky things because I had seen it, I had lived it. It did not offend me or the wonderful parish I was at. Now, I am back in a liturgical desert with little to no hope of changing any time soon. And I feel absolutely deflated, I feel starved, because I know what I could be eating… But the SSPX Chapel an hour from our city is thriving. It is the only form of Tradition within a day’s drive. Do I attend? No, but I long for reconciliation of the society. I long for Tradition. Does that make me an idoliter? Does the fact that the Church is entertaining even the IDEA of profaning the Eucharist and doing away with marriage make me doubt my faith. Yes. I am shaken, but I trust God, I trust His Church but that does not mean that I am blind to the tragedies, abuses, and direction we seem to be heading…
As much as you pointed out those who idolize tradition. The idolization of many things, things far worse is in the Church. Tradition and seeking to honor God and not the whims and sexual fancies of man is the bad guy here? Nope, I can’t buy that…

---

Remember the time – you were quite “sympathetic” to a group that --covered itself with a veneer of Christian values. Held them in high esteem. What happened with that.

Maybe taking a “stroll” through the various “Traditionalist” sites – will give you insight – as to what really is going on under the surface:

Here – I’ll provide you with a bit from a “SSPX friendly” “Trad” site.

I’m a recovering protestant. I’m working with a priest to get me baptized and into the church. I chose the traditional route because I am sure our Lord didn’t establish a protestant church with a Catholic label. I’m going with FSSP. They’re the only one close that offers the Latin rite.

 

[Denise1957]

---

The ever present “clown” Mass. Throwing that and churning it in – seems to have become part of the “brand” of toxic traditionalism.

It has not been “thrown in,” but rather it has been carefully explained to you. That you don’t care for careful explanations is your choice. I’ll put you on ignore since you don’t really seem to want to read careful reasoning on the subject. Less contention that way, IMO.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

---

Remember the time – you were quite “sympathetic” to a group that --covered itself with a veneer of Christian values. Held them in high esteem. What happened with that.

Maybe taking a “stroll” through the various “Traditionalist” sites – will give you insight – as to what really is going on under the surface:

Here – I’ll provide you with a bit from a “SSPX friendly” “Trad” site.

So, because I liked a family friendly show about the Duggars, you wish to now bring that up with the SSPX? Sorry that I cannot continue this conversation with you.

 

[Walking_Home]

It has not been “thrown in,” but rather it has been carefully explained to you. That you don’t care for careful explanations is your choice. I’ll put you on ignore since you don’t really seem to want to read careful reasoning on the subject. Less contention that way, IMO.

---

No skin of my back - by your “ignore”. Oh – and my reasoning – well that comes from long time reading/observing the various “Traditionalist” sites/blogs – yea even the “resistance” ones.

 

[commenter]

This has been a fruitful thread, but we need to focus on the topic, not on each others’ agendas. If anyone has not read the original interview, I encourage you to read it. In spite of the title, the interview does not necessarily “back” the SSPX in all its aspects. But it does shed some light on history, and people’s feelings. I encourage more posts but try to reference directly or indirectly something in the interview - to agree, disagree, or something in between.

 

[Tomdstone]

This has been a fruitful thread, but we need to focus on the topic, not on each others’ agendas. If anyone has not read the original interview, I encourage you to read it. In spite of the title, the interview does not necessarily “back” the SSPX in all its aspects. But it does shed some light on history, and people’s feelings. I encourage more posts but try to reference directly or indirectly something in the interview - to agree, disagree, or something in between.

I think it would be good to have SSPX as officially part of the Church. But would they be welcomed?

 

[pnewton]

I think it is relevant. Had Bishop Schneider lived in 1054, would he back the Eastern Orthodox?

This is kind of like ask what would Jesus do. The answer only gives information about the one answering, and their opinion, not what Bishop Schneider, Jesus or anyone else would have done if…

I heard growing up, that the devil runs religion.

And I heard that Jesus said that the Holy Spirit would guide us in all truth and the Gates of Hell will not prevail against His Church.

I read threads like this to try and get an understanding, of what happened, the few faithful like the SSPX weathering out the storm,

This kind of begs the question of what is this storm, and whether jumping ship is “weathering” anything. As far as taking away devotions. The Catholic Church has never taken away any devotions. People are always welcome to participate in whatever approved spiritual devotion they deem best.

 

[pnewton]

---

When it leads one to follow illicit/suspended priests and Bishops – yea “Tradition” has taken on “idolization”.

I think calling this idolatry is too far, as it relies on a very general sense of the word, and such an inward motive is something God alone could know with any individual. It is like saying pride is what keeps the SSPX away. While it may be the motive in some people, it is still something known to God alone.

I am quite satisfied with viewing the whole situation as an objective act of rejecting authority, which is quite serious enough, and leave God to sort out the motives.

 

[pnewton]

---

The ever present “clown” Mass. Throwing that and churning it in – seems to have become part of the “brand” of toxic traditionalism.

I think we need another Godwin’s Law corollary.

Okay, take an incident of sin, be it a priest having a clown Mass, or a priest caught in a sexual sin. Neither one is an act of the Church changing doctrine toward either the importance of the Eucharist, or the sinfulness of sexual immorality. While we can be understanding to the one that allows the act of a priest to lead him to abandon the Catholic Church, can we at least agree that some sort of break over an act of sin is wrong? It some people in the pew should not leave the Church over a scandal of sex, why are we trying to justify this same action over a scandal in liturgy?

 

[Tomdstone]

I think we need another Godwin’s Law corollary.

Okay, take an incident of sin, be it a priest having a clown Mass, or a priest caught in a sexual sin. Neither one is an act of the Church changing doctrine toward either the importance of the Eucharist, or the sinfulness of sexual immorality. While we can be understanding to the one that allows the act of a priest to lead him to abandon the Catholic Church, can we at least agree that some sort of break over an act of sin is wrong? It some people in the pew should not leave the Church over a scandal of sex, why are we trying to justify this same action over a scandal in liturgy?

Are you claiming that it is a sin to celebrate a clown Mass?

 

[pnewton]

This has been a fruitful thread, but we need to focus on the topic, not on each others’ agendas. If anyone has not read the original interview, I encourage you to read it. In spite of the title, the interview does not necessarily “back” the SSPX in all its aspects. But it does shed some light on history, and people’s feelings. I encourage more posts but try to reference directly or indirectly something in the interview - to agree, disagree, or something in between.

No, he doesn’t. He just talks about the practicality of canonical recognition. However, he is but one bishop, and his opinion is just his opinion, albeit a very sharp and educated one. I hate to put too much into a news story on an interview. They Church does not work through the media. Therefore, I will only say that his presentation of the two sides (the Holy See and the SSPX) as just two sides…

we can state, that there is on both sides (Holy See and the SSPX) an over-evaluation and over-estimation of a pastoral reality in the Church, which is Vatican II.

…misses the very important and all critical fact that the two are not equal, in number, authority, protection from error, and (only in my opinion) openness to the other. If we were to speak of a parent and a child getting grounded, would we say that both should have an equal say in what happens? Authority is of critical importance to the life of the Church. Without it, there is no definition of what is or is not traditional, doctrine or discipline. Whenever I talk to non-Catholics, authority is the first issue I address, as it is primary, a foundation, to all else.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

But would they be welcomed?

Now that is the real question. And some of it is that the Church of today seems to shun what the SSPX stand for, seems to relegate it to something quaint but not important. ANd those who deem it important are somehow zealots or ideologues. The SSPX were one pen stroke away just a few years ago and somehow I think more people than the SSPX would have rejected Rome if they had been brought into the fold. The sheer passion both sides have is astounding to me. Even on these boards on this site there are those who would be horrified at the thought of the SSPX being given full faculties. Yet it was so close to happening. And still could to be honest. The SSPX is to blame too. They have taken on what I like to call the “newt Gingrich” effect. That they stand for the conservative yet are portrayed and act hard hearted, or Grinch like. While the media (even in the Church) and others who seem to shy from traditional things much like a vampire shys from a crucifix the SSPX do themselves no favors by shutting their doors and railing against a broken world and to some extent a broken Church.

They may be right, they may be incredibly right. But they are as foolish with their message as they think the Pope is with his. Both are ignorant of how they are being used by those who care nothing about the Church but about their own wrongheaded ideas.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

The Catholic Church has never taken away any devotions. People are always welcome to participate in whatever approved spiritual devotion they deem best.

If that were true could you direct me to the nearest EF that is in communion with Rome? No, not in my diocese you cant.

 

[pnewton]

Are you claiming that it is a sin to celebrate a clown Mass?

Yes, it can be, at least the way it has been described. At the very least, again the way it has been described, it is wrong, in that it is a violation of Church authority.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I think we need another Godwin’s Law corollary.

Okay, take an incident of sin, be it a priest having a clown Mass, or a priest caught in a sexual sin. Neither one is an act of the Church changing doctrine toward either the importance of the Eucharist, or the sinfulness of sexual immorality. While we can be understanding to the one that allows the act of a priest to lead him to abandon the Catholic Church, can we at least agree that some sort of break over an act of sin is wrong? It some people in the pew should not leave the Church over a scandal of sex, why are we trying to justify this same action over a scandal in liturgy?

This is an interesting point.

Would we fault an abused for leaving the Church? Would God? Are we prepared to equate abuse of tradition with abuse of minor boys?
And what of the people still in the Church that are allowed to have their changes implemented at every level, even liturgical all in the name of avoiding the next sex scandals?
And at what point does the Church’s actions necessitate one to follow their consciences right on out the door? These are not rhetorical questions, these are questions many of us may have to face after October… Hopefully not!