Respectful question about SSPX and their motivations

[Matthew_Light]

I was brought back to God by Christians, slowly, when I started being educated by them on how disastrous unfettered license is to society, particularly regarding sexual behavior.
Their arguments were absolutely compelling - sexual behavior is appropriate in the context of a married husband and wife, and destructive otherwise. They posted clear reasoning explaining why, and lots of statistics proving that - celibacy outside of marriage and faithful sexuality within it is the healthiest and best way to live from an emotional, social and spiritual POV. Even though I originally held to the alternative belief (that is, people should express their sexuality in other ways), after a lot of study it became clear to me that religion was right after all, and the sexual revolution terribly destructive to individuals and to society.

These individuals, mainly bloggers, most of them Catholic, were (and still are!) very conservative. And they are very skeptical of Pope Francis, some of them feel he might not even be a real believing Catholic. And some of them have deep sympathies with SSPX and nothing good to say about Vatican II. Those seem to believe that Pope Francis is going to sell them out regarding abortion and other core tenets of the Catholic faith.

I’m not trying to open a huge can of worms here. I’m just wondering why these particular conservative Catholics are so distrustful of Pope Francis. Is this mostly about people who have fear at the core of their religious identity instead of love (after all, perfect love casteth out fear - no truer words were ever written)?

And I want to add - I consider these people to be very sincere religious believers and a lot of what they write I agree with.

 

[2HeartsSlave]

When the heresy of modernism swept through the Church, some people had the treasures of their Faith violently, brutally, ripped away from them. This scared them; it terrified them. The things to which they had devoted their life were gone. When somebody, especially somebody in authority like a bishop, let alone the Holy Father, says something that some interpret as sympathetic to modernism, or acts in such a way that others think he is condoning modernism, this terror is brought back to life. Maybe these accusations against the Holy Father are completely unfounded; that doesn’t matter. The mere mention of something so teriifying as a pope who sympathizes with heresy like this can be very, very scary. So I don’t think that it’s so much that their faith is fear based, but that they have personally experienced so much terror and pain that they are, perhaps, overly sensitive.

It’s like someone who is attacked by a dog as a child…after the attack, they’re likely to still jump when they hear a dog bark, even if there’s no danger. Those who lived through the destruction of the liturgy, traditional doctrine, parish life, etc. at the hands of modernism, still jump when they hear the word, even if there is no danger.

Now whether there is or isn’t danger is a different question. But that’s for a different thread Probably a different forum lol

 

[PaulfromIowa]

We cannot know the motives of others nor can we control their actions. Speculating on the motives of bad actors is almost always a bad idea. We can only control ourselves.

 

[esieffe]

I’m not trying to open a huge can of worms here.

Umm, really?

I accept Church doctrine. “If you don’t accept Church doctrine then you are not Catholic.” That is what my OCI sponsor and director told me.

I think VII rocks. Please tell me why you don’t?
Pope Francis is Catholic. Pope Francis rocks. To suggest that he is not Catholic at heart or to suggest that he is some how or might at some point might be… a “sellout” really is an insult to the Holy Father, and to all good Catholics IMHO.

You are always welcome here no matter what your religion is. You are just asked to be respectful to Catholics, and we do the same with you. Please be careful when you “report” the thoughts and views of others here. Putting a big bow on a box of disrespect will not fly.

 

[2HeartsSlave]

Umm, really?

I accept Church doctrine. If you don’t accept Church doctrine then you are not Catholic. That is what my OCI sponsor and director told me.

I think VII rocks. Please tell me why you don’t?
Pope Francis is Catholic. Pope Francis rocks. To suggest that he is not Catholic at heart or to suggest that he is some how or might at some point might be… a “sellout” really is an insult to the Holy Father, and to all good Catholics.

You are always welcome here no matter what your religion is. You are just asked to be respectful to Catholics, and we do the same with you. Please be careful when you “report” the thoughts and views of others here. Putting a big bow on a box of disrespect will not fly.

I didn’t detect an ounce of disrespect in the OP. It seemed like a very genuine, respectfully asked question.

 

[pianistclare]

Umm, really?

I accept Church doctrine. “If you don’t accept Church doctrine then you are not Catholic.” That is what my OCI sponsor and director told me.

I think VII rocks. Please tell me why you don’t?
Pope Francis is Catholic. Pope Francis rocks. To suggest that he is not Catholic at heart or to suggest that he is some how or might at some point might be… a “sellout” really is an insult to the Holy Father, and to all good Catholics IMHO.

You are always welcome here no matter what your religion is. You are just asked to be respectful to Catholics, and we do the same with you. Please be careful when you “report” the thoughts and views of others here. Putting a big bow on a box of disrespect will not fly.

I think you completely misunderstood his post.


And by the way…he isn’t Catholic.

 

[esieffe]

I didn’t detect an ounce of disrespect in the OP. It seemed like a very genuine, respectfully asked question.

I think it was delicately written. But he said in his last sentence that he agreed with opinions of those he had read about in other forums, that Pope Francis was somehow not Catholic, and that he would rollover on core positions of the church such as abortion and so on.

Just because people have irrational fears that Pope Francis is going to suddenly “cave in” on abortion, does not make those fears any less irrational. The Holy Father has never ever once said anything to suggest that he would ever encourage abortion, re-qualify the definition on marriage, none of that. You are free to disagree with the Pope. You don’t even have to like Vatican II. Others do like the Pope and do agree with VII and I just don’t, IMO, feel like it is ok to publicly endorse these harsh judgments, no matter how flowery the language is.

I apologize to the OP if it sounds like I am over reacting, but this comes up quite a bit. VII is not going to go away.

 

[esieffe]

I think you completely misunderstood his post.


And by the way…he isn’t Catholic.

I know he is not Catholic, but thanks. And I think I understood his post really well.

 

[pianistclare]

I know he is not Catholic, but thanks. And I think I understood his post really well.

Nope. You need to go back and read it again.
He’s ASKING a question…not making blanket statements about the Pope.

 

[Matthew_Light]

I know he is not Catholic, but thanks. And I think I understood his post really well.

I’m just honestly wondering why the Christians (most of whom identify as Catholic) who brought me back into a relationship with Abraham, Moses and Christ are so negative about Pope Francis.

Because when I read what Pope Francis has to say, I see someone with a very Christ-like approach in many ways. I don’t see what they see. And these are people I have a great deal of respect for, too.

 

[esieffe]

Nope. You need to go back and read it again.
He’s ASKING a question…not making blanket statements about the Pope.

Read the last sentence please. Lets just agree to disagree.
Pax.

 

[Matthew_Light]

I think it was delicately written. But he said in his last sentence that he agreed with opinions of those he had read about in other forums, that Pope Francis was somehow not Catholic, and that he would rollover on core positions of the church such as abortion and so on.

I agree with a lot about what they say. Like that the sexual revolution is a catastrophe for society, that divorce is a terrible evil and people should do almost anything they can to avoid it, that children need a mother and a father, that religion is terribly important for social stability.

I do NOT agree with them about Pope Francis!!!

 

[esieffe]

I agree with a lot about what they say. Like that the sexual revolution is a catastrophe for society, that divorce is a terrible evil and people should do almost anything they can to avoid it, that children need a mother and a father, that religion is terribly important for social stability.

I do NOT agree with them about Pope Francis!!!

I appreciate very much that you noted the exception on their thought. I apologize that I rushed into judgement on your post.

 

[Matthew_Light]

I appreciate very much that you noted the exception on their thought. I apologize that I rushed into judgement on your post.

No worries mate!

 

[pianistclare]

Read the last sentence please. Lets just agree to disagree.
Pax.

Matthew Light said:
“And I want to add - I consider these people to be very sincere religious believers and a lot of what they write I agree with.”

Yeah. I see what you mean, he tore up the Pope alright.
And that fake compliment? Honestly.

Keep up the good work.

 

[digitalpapist]

We cannot know the motives of others nor can we control their actions. Speculating on the motives of bad actors is almost always a bad idea. We can only control ourselves.

Ah, but you have already made that the judgment that they are bad actors.

 

[Aramis]

Anyone trying to claim that Pope Francis isn’t a valid pope is committing a schismatic act. Beware them. Anyone claiming he’s not orthodox needs to re-evaluate their entire line of thinking - he’s probably more orthodox than even HH Benedict XVI.

Why do they do it? Delusional thinking, misattribution of blame, malice, spite, ignorance, and misunderstanding of the church all come to mind as reasons for the SSPX and it’s lay-fanboys to do what they do that is counter to the church. The problem is that, at its core, the SSPX is built upon a misunderstanding piled upon many more misunderstandings. Their founders misunderstood the meanings of church documents. And reacted to misunderstanding-derived changes elsewhere. ANd then, taking their misunderstanding further, they entered into disobedience because they misunderstood not only what had changed, but also what was allowed, and how rome would react.

 

[Cider]

I was brought back to God by Christians, slowly, when I started being educated by them on how disastrous unfettered license is to society, particularly regarding sexual behavior.
Their arguments were absolutely compelling - sexual behavior is appropriate in the context of a married husband and wife, and destructive otherwise. They posted clear reasoning explaining why, and lots of statistics proving that - celibacy outside of marriage and faithful sexuality within it is the healthiest and best way to live from an emotional, social and spiritual POV. Even though I originally held to the alternative belief (that is, people should express their sexuality in other ways), after a lot of study it became clear to me that religion was right after all, and the sexual revolution terribly destructive to individuals and to society.

These individuals, mainly bloggers, most of them Catholic, were (and still are!) very conservative. And they are very skeptical of Pope Francis, some of them feel he might not even be a real believing Catholic. And some of them have deep sympathies with SSPX and nothing good to say about Vatican II. Those seem to believe that Pope Francis is going to sell them out regarding abortion and other core tenets of the Catholic faith.

I’m not trying to open a huge can of worms here. I’m just wondering why these particular conservative Catholics are so distrustful of Pope Francis. Is this mostly about people who have fear at the core of their religious identity instead of love (after all, perfect love casteth out fear - no truer words were ever written)?

And I want to add - I consider these people to be very sincere religious believers and a lot of what they write I agree with.

Considering the rules here on casting aspersions against clergy and the fact that CAF is not representative of SSPX sympathizers I’m not sure what kind of answer you are expecting. I’ve always found that the persons espousing a belief to be the best source for why they believe something. Why not ask them themselves instead of outside sources?