Did Archbishop Mueller say that the SSPX is in schism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter GloriaMaria
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Brendan_64 said:
A person doesn’t have to be immersed to be baptised (even if our separated brethren in the Baptist communities disagree). A person could quite easily pour water on himself.
Click to expand...
"I baptize me in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."

It just doesn’t sound right. I think the baptism of desire would kick in here.

-Tim-
 
TimothyH said:
For a Catholic in the pew, whether the priest says anything bad about the Pope or the Church has nothing to do with it.

-Tim-
Click to expand...
I must respectfully disagree. What was being discussed was the issue of a schismatic mentality, which I was addressing, not about suspension of the SSPX priests.
 
TimothyH said:
The priests are suspended. The Church has said that they have no no faculties to perform their ministry. For a Catholic in the pew to know this and receive the sacraments from that priest anyway, when another priest who is not suspended is available, is an act of disobedience to the Church.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. A person IS permitted by our Church to attend a Mass celebrated by a priest from the SSPX and receive the Eucharist at that Mass. So long as they are attending out of a love of the Latin Mass and they are not going out of protest against the Pope or the Church, then they are free to attend such a Mass and receive the Eucharist.

Confessions are a different matter, as the SSPX priests have no faculties then their confessions are not deemed valid by the Church.
 
TimothyH said:
"I baptize me in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."

It just doesn’t sound right. I think the baptism of desire would kick in here.

-Tim-
Click to expand...
“I baptise myself in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” doesn’t sound inappropriate to me. And, as you say, baptism of desire would kick in here, so, in a round about way, the baptism would have been effective.
 
Denise1957 said:
But speaking to SSPX adherents about the values of obedience and unity will be of no use unless the underlying issues are dealt with, which are complicated to say the least.

When I attended an SSPX chapel, there were indeed some there who held a schismatic mentality. But there were even more who did not, and they never said anything negative about the Pope or hierarchy - really they just wanted to practice their faith as their Catholic ancestors had always done - and as it was practiced before the Council.

Also, in the three years that I attended, not even one of the priests there said anything negative or critical about the Pope. And there was a very nice photo of Pope Benedict hanging in a prominent place at the chapel. Of course the leadership of the SSPX do say negative things about the Pope - but on the local level, they do not, in my experience. Other adherents of the SSPX, or former adherents, may have a different experience.
Click to expand...
Not everything that is permissible is prudent. If you attend, you have no way of knowing if maybe the SSPX priest there was thinking of entering into full communion with the Catholic Church. Your going there helps him confirm him to stay put. Your neighbor may see you there, and they may be leaning towards schism. Your attending there may confirm them that it is ok for them to schism. Your daughter is influenced by the anti-authority American culture. When you defend the anti-Magisterium SSPX, you don’t intend to reinforce her different temptations (that the Church has no right to limit contraception, same sex marriage, etc). But your actions make it more likely she will oppose the Church.

Saying “things are complicated” is another way of justifying procrastination. I hear the same argument from people who justify continued contraception, or divorce/remarriage situation, or who stall getting out of a certain political party or dissenting Call to Action, and other things they should be changing now. When people tell me to lose weight, I tell them “things are complicated now”. The problem with the SSPX is not that it’s too old fashioned, the problem is that it’s too 2014. 100% percent of Catholics have some grievance against the Church. Should we all say “I’m not going to change yet; there are complications”?

There’s huge pressure on people in the SSPX to “stay put, another year, there are other concerns that must be addressed first, there’s this new issue that came up, we’re almost there, the Vatican’s statement leaves question marks, let’s not be hasty, hold the fort, if we surrender now we reward injustice, maybe the next pope, don’t break ranks, wait…wait…wait.” I predict they will be doing this 40 years from now. Individuals should look at the larger impact of “staying put”.
 
TimothyH said:
For a Catholic in the pew, whether the priest says anything bad about the Pope or the Church has nothing to do with it.

The priests are suspended. The Church has said that they have no no faculties to perform their ministry. For a Catholic in the pew to know this and receive the sacraments from that priest anyway, when another priest who is not suspended is available, is an act of disobedience to the Church.

One cannot say that he is a child of the Church, that he supports the Church, that he recognizes the Pope, that he supports his bishop, and that the Church is the legitimate authority of Christ on earth and then turn around and knowingly receive the sacraments from a priest whom the Church has said may not celebrate the sacraments licitly. There is dichotomy there.

Such a person says they support the Church with their mouth but does not support the Church with their actions.

-Tim-
Click to expand...
I agree. Say your father asks you to pick apples from the tree in the yard. You go across the street and pick apples from the tree there. Yes, you come home with a bushel of apples, but you haven’t done what your father asked. You have picked valid but illicit apples.

I think also that if SSPX chapel is full, the priest there will have no reason to question what he’s doing. In the meantime, if Catholic parish is not so full, those who are there may look in the wrong dirrection when trying to find the missing.

We need to be obedient not just in what we think and say, but in what we do. Orthopraxis tells us we should attend at the parish in full communion with Rome where the priests are both valid and licit.
 
Denise1957 said:
I must respectfully disagree. What was being discussed was the issue of a schismatic mentality, which I was addressing, not about suspension of the SSPX priests.
Click to expand...
The schismatic mentality descends through the ranks, in my experience as a former attendee. Before we left our chapel, we received a sermon where our priest was (literally) enraged and disgusted by the upcoming beatification of Pope John Paul II. The things he said were numerous and lacked all respect.

He also referred to the Church as “The Church of Vatican II” to separate it from the “One, True Church”.

When discussing a friends marriage validity (married in the SSPX) this person exclaimed, “I know my marriage is valid. I was married by an SSPX priest in the Traditional Rite. I don’t care what those moderns (referring to the Church hierarchy) think!”

The schismatic mentality is very contagious. I think it is dangerous to let there be so much room for interpretation as to whether or not people can go to their chapels for Mass. It’s a very slippery slope.
 
GloriaMaria said:
The schismatic mentality descends through the ranks, in my experience as a former attendee. Before we left our chapel, we received a sermon where our priest was (literally) enraged and disgusted by the upcoming beatification of Pope John Paul II. The things he said were numerous and lacked all respect.
Click to expand...
I’m sorry to hear that one of the SSPX priests spoke this way about the Pope. I never heard anything like this (nothing critical at all), but perhaps my situation was an unusual one.
 
commenter said:
Not everything that is permissible is prudent. If you attend, you have no way of knowing if maybe the SSPX priest there was thinking of entering into full communion with the Catholic Church. Your going there helps him confirm him to stay put. Your neighbor may see you there, and they may be leaning towards schism. Your attending there may confirm them that it is ok for them to schism. Your daughter is influenced by the anti-authority American culture. When you defend the anti-Magisterium SSPX, you don’t intend to reinforce her different temptations (that the Church has no right to limit contraception, same sex marriage, etc). But your actions make it more likely she will oppose the Church.

Saying “things are complicated” is another way of justifying procrastination. I hear the same argument from people who justify continued contraception, or divorce/remarriage situation, or who stall getting out of a certain political party or dissenting Call to Action, and other things they should be changing now. When people tell me to lose weight, I tell them “things are complicated now”. The problem with the SSPX is not that it’s too old fashioned, the problem is that it’s too 2014. 100% percent of Catholics have some grievance against the Church. Should we all say “I’m not going to change yet; there are complications”?

There’s huge pressure on people in the SSPX to “stay put, another year, there are other concerns that must be addressed first, there’s this new issue that came up, we’re almost there, the Vatican’s statement leaves question marks, let’s not be hasty, hold the fort, if we surrender now we reward injustice, maybe the next pope, don’t break ranks, wait…wait…wait.” I predict they will be doing this 40 years from now. Individuals should look at the larger impact of “staying put”.
Click to expand...
Well, I was trying to point out my observations and experiences, having actually attended an SSPX chapel. Though subjective, I try to approach the matter as fairly and justly as possible. I was saddened by the fact that the SSPX did not reconcile under our dear Pope Benedict, because he truly cared about the SSPX, and had sympathy for their situation, while at the same time being firm in what he expected from them. I have great admiration for the stance that he took.
 
Denise1957 said:
I’m sorry to hear that one of the SSPX priests spoke this way about the Pope. I never heard anything like this (nothing critical at all), but perhaps my situation was an unusual one.
Click to expand...
Your experience was not unusual. I have not heard anything about Popes in my time in an SSPX chapel, perhaps from laity, specifically. I have actually heard more criticism of this Pope by a priest in “full communion” with Rome.
 
sebastian1213 said:
Your experience was not unusual. I have not heard anything about Popes in my time in an SSPX chapel, perhaps from laity, specifically. I have actually heard more criticism of this Pope by a priest in “full communion” with Rome.
Click to expand...
I’m happy to see that my experience is not unusual. Adding to that the fact that there were five different priests from the priory who offered Mass, there was more opportunity for negative things to be said about the Pope, but it never happened. We did have a regularly assigned priest, but he couldn’t always travel to the chapel (all the priests had to take a plane flight to the chapel on weekends). There was no priest in residence living at the chapel. I also took catechism lessons from one of the priests, and he also never said anything negative at all. He just wanted me to understand and know the truths of the Faith.
 
Denise1957 said:
Well, I was trying to point out my observations and experiences, having actually attended an SSPX chapel. Though subjective, I try to approach the matter as fairly and justly as possible. I was saddened by the fact that the SSPX did not reconcile under our dear Pope Benedict, because he truly cared about the SSPX, and had sympathy for their situation, while at the same time being firm in what he expected from them. I have great admiration for the stance that he took.
Click to expand...
In my earlier post I came on a little harsher than I intended. I very much respect the fact that your comments are based on direct attending experience, often the best teacher, while my comments are based on one very bad experience with a SSPX priest, and no other direct SSPX contact, just the websites. (But I have had several very bad experiences all with liberal priests. In fact I can be someone’s pretty bad experience myself, and I am a layman). So I consider your comments not as “subjective” but as factual data. My comments are subjective, but possibly right.

I believe Pope Benedict did enormous good in the crucial work of restoring doctrinal foundations. In the future, he may well be regarded as the most important pope of this era.
 
commenter said:
In my earlier post I came on a little harsher than I intended. I very much respect the fact that your comments are based on direct attending experience, often the best teacher, while my comments are based on one very bad experience with a SSPX priest, and no other direct SSPX contact, just the websites. (But I have had several very bad experiences all with liberal priests. In fact I can be someone’s pretty bad experience myself, and I am a layman). So I consider your comments not as “subjective” but as factual data. My comments are subjective, but possibly right.

I believe Pope Benedict did enormous good in the crucial work of restoring doctrinal foundations. In the future, he may well be regarded as the most important pope of this era.
Click to expand...
I appreciate your thoughtful post. I understand where you’re coming from in regards to the bad experience with an SSPX priest. I had a bad experience, too, which is the main reason why I left the SSPX - a new priest at the chapel started giving very strange sermons on the Blessed Virgin Mary, and I couldn’t sit through another Mass of his anymore. There were other problems, too. I was rather harsh towards the SSPX for a couple of years, but time has softened my stance, and now I try to remember the good things about the SSPX, too.

Yes, Pope Benedict did enormous good work in restoring the doctrinal foundations. He certainly has been the most important Pope of this era, in my opinion.
.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top