Seeking advice about intervening with someone consorting with sedevacantists on Facebook

[fnr]

I am a member of several closed groups on Facebook for Catholics. On the pages for those groups, Facebook provides suggestions for other closed groups that might interest me. I was interested to see that I have one Facebook “friend” in a group “against modernism,” so clicked to see who it was. Turns out it’s someone I know personally and who lives near me.

Below is a redacted set of information from the group’s main page, about who is eligble and who will be banned. The group explicitly welcomes sedevacantists and other “RadTrads” and seems to hold positions that put it outside communion with the Magisterium. I’m crossing out the name of the group, and will substitute in bold brackets to let you know what’s mine and what’s missing.

The person I know who’s a member of this group has been a pretty hard-edged traditionalist since I’ve known him, but I’m worried that he’s falling outside the Catholic pale. I realize, of course, that there are Catholics faithful to the Magisterium who associated with these types of radical traditionalists, and see the need to reach out to them. However, to have one’s name associated with what seems to be a schismatic Facebook group does seem to invite scandal.

Here among the traditionalists on CAF, I am hoping for advice. Is it a good idea for me to intervene with this person or not? What would be a good approach to use if I did? Also, how does the Church respond to splinter RadTrad groups claiming to represent the “Roman Catholic Faith,” when they do not? Would it be appropriate to let someone in authority know about this Facebook group? What about contacting Facebook because the group is misrepresenting Catholicism? Do any traditionalists on CAF have experience or advice to share?

Thank you and God bless!

Here on the [redacted title – Anti-Modernist] group, we want to preserve the Roman Catholic Faith by maintaining everything which was taught and done by the Church prior to Vatican II.

This is not your average Trad Cat group with the sole purpose of promoting the Latin Mass.

This group’s primary purpose is to oppose the errors taught in the “Second Vatican Council” and the errors of the 1983 “Code of Canon Law”. This group is also opposed to the Novus Ordo Missae and the new catechisms.

People who are welcome here include those who adhere to the Sedevacantist position, those who adhere to the Recognize and Resist position, and those who adhere to the Indult/“Fight From Within” position.

Anyone who adheres to the idea that the traditional Catholic groups or independent priests are operating illegitimately due to a lack of Ordinary Jurisdiction will be banned from this group.

Anyone who claims that Archbishop Lefebvre’s consecration to the episcopacy was invalid will be banned from this group.
HERE IS A LINK TO READ ABOUT THIS CONTROVERSY:
traditionalmass.org/images/articles/MasonicBishops.pdf

Anyone who claims that the consecrations performed by Archbishop Thuc are invalid will be banned from this group.
HERE IS A LINK TO READ ABOUT THIS CONTROVERSY:
traditionalmass.org/articles/article.php?id=60&catname=13

ANYONE WHO ADHERES TO THE DOCTRINES OF FR. FEENEY WILL BE BANNED FROM THIS GROUP. In the 1940’s, Fr. Leonard Feeney S.J. promoted the heresy that there was no such thing as baptism of blood or baptism of desire. Fr. Feeney’s teaching is contrary to the universal ordinary magisterium of the Catholic Church. It was condemned in 1949 by the Holy Office. All Catholics are bound under pain of mortal sin to give assent to the teachings of the Holy Office. A number of lay Catholics mistakenly adhere to this heresy, falsely thinking that it is the teaching of the Catholic Church.

HERE IS A LINK TO THE OATH AGAINST MODERNISM.
franciscan-archive.org/bullarium/oath.html

HERE IS A LINK TO READ ABOUT THE THREE PRINCIPAL ERRORS OF VATICAN II: Personalism, a false notion of the Church, and collegiality.
traditionalmass.org/articles/article.php?id=33&catname=5

 

[PaulfromIowa]

… However, to have one’s name associated with what seems to be a schismatic Facebook group does seem to invite scandal… Is it a good idea for me to intervene with this person or not?

This person probably does not even know that Facebook is selling and giving away his name. Whether you should tell him about it depends on your relationship with him: friend, or just acquaintance.

how does the Church respond to splinter RadTrad groups claiming to represent the “Roman Catholic Faith,” when they do not?

There have always been schismatics. Whether, and how, the Church should respond varies. Sedevacantist groups are so small, it may be best to ignore them, rather than give them publicity.

Would it be appropriate to let someone in authority know about this Facebook group?

Do you think that the Church doesn’t already know about these people?

What about contacting Facebook because the group is misrepresenting Catholicism?

You don’t think that Facebook cares about protecting the Catholic faith, do you?

 

[Joe_5859]

How you intervene depends largely on your relationship with this friend. It’s more likely going to take several friendly, in-person conversations rather than a brief Facebook message.

Telling an authority or reporting it to Facebook isn’t going to do anything. People have a right to free speech, even if we don’t like what they are saying.

 

[Cathoholic]

Hello fnr.

You’ve got the right idea about staying with the Church.

I have a friend who goes mostly to the Indult who wrote a book on this for locals. (Defending the Church against some of the more extreme ideas that come out of “traditionalist” camps.)

We also have an aggressive SSPX group . . . aggressive that is, until this friend started challenging them . . . . now they avoid the Indult Tridentine Catholics like the plague except some of them that have come into full communion with the Catholic Church (Yes, I do understand there are differences with SSPX folks and sedevacantists).

This is exactly the reason he wrote it. To protect Catholics (Indult AND “novus ordo” Catholics from being snatched into these ecclesial communions).

I too have found the information useful dialoguing with Sedevacantists and some of the more extreme SSPXers.

I will try to clean out enough of my PM email box which may be full, and send you this guy’s book.

Expect a PM from me soon. (I’m hoping you can help out your friend here).

God bless.

Cathoholic

 

[Michael85]

Are sedevacantists really schismatic? I thought to be schismatic, you had to deny that the Pope has the authority to command the faithful. Sedevacantists believe that the Pope has that authority, they just don’t believe that there currently is one.

 

[jas84173]

Yah most groups who use the extraordinary form of mass are completely in good standing with the Vatican. In fact the Vatican itself performs a daily extraordinary mass, that isn’t the problem. The problem is a lot of the people who may attend these masses may not do so just because they prefer the extraordinary form but more so because they reject the second Vatican council and believe no legitimate Pope is on the seat. Some groups have went as far as electing their own pope.

 

[gracepoole]

This person probably does not even know that Facebook is selling and giving away his name.

Are you on Facebook? Because what the OP described isn’t what you’re describing. The OP noticed that a friend is part of a FB group. That isn’t FB “selling and giving away his name.”

 

[PaulfromIowa]

The other person may very well not be aware of the fact that Facebook publicizes his membership in a closed group. Facebook is a privacy nightmare. Its’ business model is compiling personal information and selling it.

 

[otjm]

My experience is all I can speak from.

Having met and spoken with some who buy into this sort of tripe, I have come to the conclusion that reasoning with them is akin to reasoning with folks who are conspiratorialists. As a group, I consider them Flat Earth folks who wandered so close to the edge that they fell off, and are in free-fall somewhere “out there”.

Folks who buy into that page’s parameters are completely and totally bereft of any knowledge of theology, let alone theological history leading up to Vatican 2, and in particular actions and statements by, oh, say Pius X and Pius XII. And they don’t want to know that history.

I don’t know about the status of the OP’s friend/acquaintance, but the old saying - never argue with a fool, as an observer may not be able to tell which is which comes to mind. Flat Earth folks simply are not dealing with a full deck, are not dealing with the rational world, are usually highly emotionally attached to their fantasies, and there is normally something much deeper at play. And those who are highly emotionally attached tend to spin out of orbit rapidly when challenged. And that accomplishes nothing.

My suggestion would be to take them up in prayer, and then go do something interesting with the time you didn’t spend getting sucked into the vortex of their world view. Something like a retreat, or if you have none available, go do yard work for someone who is home bound, or go fishing - both are repetitive and allow your mind that retreat time. The focus of the retreat could be the tremendous blessings the Church has given us with Vatican 2.

 

[Clevus]

There is no problem. Which ever rite one follows, we still have the same sources of law that the Faithful need to abide by. Canon law and the Catechism are the same. Points of law are reserved to selected people to do just that. It is irrelevant which person or who states what, one is either in or out. As far as I recall, associations still need canonical approval from Bishops, but if the intent is spiritually aiding and are not a threat to the Faith, are strictly controlled,non disruptive and orderly, usually they are tolerated, but still are outside the official structure of the Church.

Either the Church has decided on an issue, is still holding it in theological discussion, or has rejected it. Nevertheless, we are all to believe De Fide teaching. What remains are in the forum of hierarchy’s of truth. There are Opinio Tolerata, Sententia Pia* and other categories, so it is dangerous ground critiquing others. Even then, one does not accept a teaching or belief unless we have Nihil Obstat either verbally or written from a Church authority.

This generation seems to enjoy fragmentation and is probably a side effect of our democratic processes as if the Church were a democracy. We tire of things easily. Man seems to like to control everything. There doesn’t seem to be enough novelty and to them tradition is a word that chains one freedom.

Chain me, Jesus can shackle me anytime he chooses.

*The Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, Ludwig Ott