Not schismatic, not in union

[laudamus_te]

bear06:

I also have to laugh because we’re now up to 5 interviews that say that. Really? Where are they? Nobody ever seems to quote the other four.

It’s not too difficult to find these things. For starters:

“Regarding the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X, Castrillón said:
“They are not schismatics, the priests are under a suspension for illicit exercise, and the Bishops are excommunicated because the ordination of new bishops without a permission from Rome received this punishment latæ sententiæ.””
rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2007/05/for-record-mexican-agency-interviews.html

“CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: Unfortunately Monsignor Lefebvre went ahead with the consecration and hence the situation of separation came about, even if it was not a formal schism.”

“The Fraternity has always recognized in John Paul II, and now in Benedict XVI, the legitimate successor of Saint Peter. That is not a problem.”
30giorni.it/us/articolo_stampa.asp?id=9360

“Later in the March 17 interview, Cardinal Castrillón affirmed once again publicly, “The Fraternity of St. Pius X is not a consolidated schism per se, but its history has included some schismatic actions…””
ecclesiacatholica.blogspot.com/2007/03/verso-il-ritorno-della-messa-in-latino.html

“We are not facing a heresy. One cannot say in correct, exact, precise terms that there is a schism [here]. There is a schismatic attitude in the consecration of bishops without a pontifical mandate. They are inside the Church; there is only lacking a full, a more perfect — as was said in the meeting with Msgr. Fellay — a fuller communion, because there is communion”
qien.free.fr/2005/200511/20051113_hoyos_eng.htm

“We take care of those who did not wish to follow Archbishop Lefebvre – which is not exactly a schism [sic].”
qien.free.fr/2007/200702/20070204_rorate.htm

This from a letter from Monsignor Perl:
“While it is true that participation in the Mass at the chapels of the Society of St Pius X does not of itself constitute “formal adherence to the schism”, such adherence can come over a period of time as one slowly imbibes a schismatic mentality which separates itself from the teaching of the Supreme Pontiff and the entire Catholic Church…”
“It is precisely because of this schismatic mentality that this Pontifical Commission has consistently discouraged the faithful from attending Masses celebrated under the aegis of the Society of St Pius X.”
matt1618.freeyellow.com/schism.html

Note the faithful has consistently been “discouraged,” not “forbidden.”

 

[laudamus_te]

Is there no “authority” who is part of this Forum who can answer with certainty questions about SSPX, schism, valid/illicit masses, abuses, etc.? There are several different opinions on this thread so far, and some of you have posted links to prove your opinion and others have posted no links. Who am I to believe? Who’s in charge here anyway?

From the same letter of Monsignor Perl which I quoted above: "How authoritative is your response?

A. You want to know how authoritative our responses are. We must indicate to you that this letter accurately reflects the practice and pastoral solicitude of this Pontifical Commission, but is not an official declaration of the Holy See. Those declarations are fundamentally limited to Quattuor abhinc annos of 3 October 1984 and Ecclesia Dei of 2 July 1988, both of which were published in the Acta Apostolicæ Sedis. **The Holy Father does not ordinarily make detailed statements on very specific questions such as those which you have submitted. He entrusts such responses to the various dicasteries and organisms of the Holy See which have competence in particular areas. With regard to the matters which you have brought up, the competence belongs to this Pontifical Commission. **"
matt1618.freeyellow.com/schism.html

The statements of Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos and Monsignor Perl are to be accepted as in line with the Pope.

 

[paramedicgirl]

It would seem that either one would lead some to reject Pastor Aeternus. Again, pick the one less likely to get sucked into. I’m not attracted to the liberal in the least. I can attend there and have no trouble rejecting the foolishness. It’s not attractive to me in anyway. Once again, all that glitters is not gold. People have to stop and ask themselves “How’s the devil going to try and get me?” For most here, the devil isn’t going to get them via liturgical dancing.

What if you were exposed to liturgical nonsense at every Sunday Mass you attended, would you still say the SSPX is the more dangerous option for your salvation?

Believe me, there are people in that position. Not everyone has access to reverent Masses, and some only have access to just one Mass and one parish. If the lack of reverence at that one Mass is sucking the piety from their soul, would you still say it’s better to go there than to go to the SSPX?

 

[paramedicgirl]

Of course they do!
The Lutherans are no longer under the DEAD Trent Tradition of anathema.
The EO are no longer under the DEAD Florence Tradition of anathema of schism.
Both proclaimed by the LIVING Traditions of the post VATII church.
SSPX is the Only LIVING Tradition of 1984 anathema of schism.
And as many have posted, when all that’s left of the SSPX are people born into it, that will be removed as well.
Time makes any non-catholic religion holier, and in fact becomes a working of the Holy Spirit unto salvation. That’s the real LIVING Tradition of EENS. No salvation outside the Church. BUT, eventually EVERYONE is part of the church.

Based on our previous discussions here about EENS, you’re right. All descendants of SSPXers will be saved, according to the new logic of No Salvation Outside the Church

 

[BobP123]

What if you were exposed to liturgical nonsense at every Sunday Mass you attended, would you still say the SSPX is the more dangerous option for your salvation?

Believe me, there are people in that position. Not everyone has access to reverent Masses, and some only have access to just one Mass and one parish. If the lack of reverence at that one Mass is sucking the piety from their soul, would you still say it’s better to go there than to go to the SSPX?

Note that this letter is written to a particular individual. But it seems as if it could apply to anyone attending “schismatic” activities of any kind.

from unavoce.org/Protocol539-99.htm

1. The situation of the faithful attending chapels of the Society of St. Pius X is more complicated. They may attend Mass there primarily because of an attraction to the earlier form of the Roman Rite in which case they incur no penalty. The difficulty is that the longer they frequent these chapels, the more likely it is that they will slowly imbibe the schismatic mentality which stands in judgement of the Church and refuses submission to the Roman Pontiff and communion with the members of the Church subject to him. If that becomes the case, then it would seem that they adhere to the schism and are consequently excommunicated. For these reasons this Pontifical Commission cannot encourage you to frequent the chapel of the Society of St. Pius X. On the other hand it would seem that you are among those who attend Mass in chapels of the Society of St. Pius X because of the reverence and devotion which they find there, because of their attraction to the traditional Latin Mass and not because they refuse submission to the Roman Pontiff or reject communion with the members of the Church subject to him. At the same time it must be admitted that - this is an irregular situation, even if the circumstances which have caused it have come about through no fault of your own, and it should be remedied as soon as circumstances permit.

With prayerful best wishes I remain
Sincerely yours in Christ,
Msgr. Camille Perl
Secretary

 

[bear06]

From the same letter of Monsignor Perl which I quoted above: "How authoritative is your response?

A. You want to know how authoritative our responses are. We must indicate to you that this letter accurately reflects the practice and pastoral solicitude of this Pontifical Commission, but is not an official declaration of the Holy See. Those declarations are fundamentally limited to Quattuor abhinc annos of 3 October 1984 and Ecclesia Dei of 2 July 1988, both of which were published in the Acta Apostolicæ Sedis. **The Holy Father does not ordinarily make detailed statements on very specific questions such as those which you have submitted. He entrusts such responses to the various dicasteries and organisms of the Holy See which have competence in particular areas. With regard to the matters which you have brought up, the competence belongs to this Pontifical Commission. **"
matt1618.freeyellow.com/schism.html

The statements of Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos and Monsignor Perl are to be accepted as in line with the Pope.

The Church does not speak through magazine articles though.

 

[bear06]

What if you were exposed to liturgical nonsense at every Sunday Mass you attended, would you still say the SSPX is the more dangerous option for your salvation?

For me it would be because I am far more attracted to the illicitness at an SSPX chapel than I am at the illicitness at the liberal church.

Believe me, there are people in that position. Not everyone has access to reverent Masses, and some only have access to just one Mass and one parish. If the lack of reverence at that one Mass is sucking the piety from their soul, would you still say it’s better to go there than to go to the SSPX?

 

[paramedicgirl]

How does the lack of reverence around you suck the piety from your soul? Wouldn’t it seem that it would make one more resolved against the abuses? More willing to fight the insults to Our Lord?

 

[Aramis]

But that doesn’t answer my question. What is worse for your soul? Being exposed to irreverence and abuses that can cause you to sin, and change the way you practice your Catholic faith, or going to a reverent, sacred and holy Mass that is illicit?

Exposing your soul to a mass that is illicit does it no good.

Knowingly going to said illicit mass in lieu of a potentially licit one is a sin.

as to the SSPX…
Ecclesia Dei is explicit on the 5 excommunicated. Following the instructions of one who is excommunicated as if they are still a licit and empowered member of the Hierarchy is almost definitely schismatic.

But there is expressed hope for rejection of the schism. That’s not happened yet, either, in any real sense.

There is still hope for reunion. But I doubt even the upcoming MP will bring that reunion in total.

So the SSPX are schismatic, but not yet formally in Schism.

 

[laudamus_te]

The Church does not speak through magazine articles though.

But the spokesmen for the Church do.

 

[bear06]

But the spokesmen for the Church do.

Newpaper articles are not Magisterial teachings that we are even remotely held to.

 

[Genesis315]

For people who are sick of liturgical abuses, and for those who desire reverence in Mass, the SSPX is a very attractive option. What is worse for your soul, going to an SSPX Mass or going to a Mass where there are countless abuses?

What did the saints who went to Masses with countless abuses do? What do the saints suggest we do in such situations? Do they suggest some very meritorious practices, that are very good for the soul?

 

[BobP123]

But there is expressed hope for rejection of the schism. That’s not happened yet, either, in any real sense.

There is still hope for reunion.

Not for people in constant denial of current events.

 

[BobP123]

What did the saints who went to Masses with countless abuses do? What do the saints suggest we do in such situations?

Well, if they just sat there and did nothing, how did they make a name for themselves?

Seriously, though, shouldn’t you be asking what Christ thinks of the abuses? I think that’s what most of the saints would be asking.

 

[laudamus_te]

Newpaper articles are not Magisterial teachings that we are even remotely held to.

Who is talking about Magisterial teachings? You asked for links to articles, I provided them. There’s just no pleasing some people.

 

[paramedicgirl]

What did the saints who went to Masses with countless abuses do? What do the saints suggest we do in such situations? Do they suggest some very meritorious practices, that are very good for the soul?

Are you by any chance able to enlighten us and list these meritorious ways we can achieve sanctity by attending Masses that are causing our souls to become lukewarm?

 

[paramedicgirl]

Exposing your soul to a mass that is illicit does it no good.

Knowingly going to said illicit mass in lieu of a potentially licit one is a sin.

as to the SSPX…
Ecclesia Dei is explicit on the 5 excommunicated. Following the instructions of one who is excommunicated as if they are still a licit and empowered member of the Hierarchy is almost definitely schismatic.

But there is expressed hope for rejection of the schism. That’s not happened yet, either, in any real sense.

There is still hope for reunion. But I doubt even the upcoming MP will bring that reunion in total.

So the SSPX are schismatic, but not yet formally in Schism.

Exposing you soul to a Mass that is irreverent does it no good either.

 

[gorman64]

"paramedicgirl:

When one is repeatedly exposed to watered down Catholicism, and has no other avenues for experiencing the Mass the way it should be said, it gradually affects your faith.

Lex orandi, lex credendi - the law of prayer is the law of belief

Yes, and heretics always corrupt the liturgy (the prayer) to change the belief. For if they only managed to get a following for a time…without changing the liturgy, the prayer…they would not be as successful in keeping those followers as they would return to their old beliefs. The Church says Lex Orandi est Lex Credendi for a reason…heretics are generally intelligent people…they know this and use it to their advantage.

Being fully cognizant of the necessary connection between faith and worship, between “the law of believing and the law of praying”, under a pretext of returning to the primitive form, they corrupted the Liturgical Order in many ways to suit the errors of the reformers. - Pope Leo XII, Apostolicae Curae, September 18, 1896

Sound familiar?

Gorman

 

[Walking_Home]

Yes, and heretics always corrupt the liturgy (the prayer) to change the belief. For if they only managed to get a following for a time…without changing the liturgy, the prayer…they would not be as successful in keeping those followers as they would return to their old beliefs. The Church says Lex Orandi est Lex Credendi for a reason…heretics are generally intelligent people…they know this and use it to their advantage.

Quote:
Being fully cognizant of the necessary connection between faith and worship, between “the law of believing and the law of praying”, under a pretext of returning to the primitive form, they corrupted the Liturgical Order in many ways to suit the errors of the reformers. - Pope Leo XII, Apostolicae Curae, September 18, 1896

Sound familiar?

Gorman

---

Sounds very familiar.

 

[jmcrae]

Are you by any chance able to enlighten us and list these meritorious ways we can achieve sanctity by attending Masses that are causing our souls to become lukewarm?

They put the law of obedience ahead of the idea that they were owed something.

Lutherans and Anglicans also have more beautiful Masses than many Catholics; would it be okay to join those churches for the sake of one’s soul?

They are no different than the SSPX - just older. Their founders, too, were “merely” excommunicated from the Catholic Church; they didn’t voluntarily or intentionally go into schism. (They also made no attempt to get out of schism once they were in it, which also seems similar to the SSPX.)

In their first generation, they, too, had valid Sacraments, yet the Reformation Saints such as St. Teresa of Avila, St. John of the Cross, etc., would have died rather than attend a Lutheran Mass, even when the Masses in their own parish churches left much to be desired, including priests who, because they could not speak Latin, made nonsense of the words of the Consecration.

They also didn’t sit back and do nothing. They went to their Bishops - but not only to complain - they also asked what they could do to help.

That’s what we need to do. Don’t just complain. Put together a plan of action, and run it by your Bishop, or else ask him what you can do to help make your Catholic parish more reverent, and inspire your priest to greater holiness.