Simple question about the SSPX

[Pax_et_Caritas]

Can you please provide a quotation from an authoritative document that shows that this was done? Heretic is a pretty strong charge, I’d like to see your proof of this.

The following is a direct quote from the document I was referring to:

“Reflections on Covenant and Mission,” August 12, 2002: “A deepening appreciation of the eternal covenant between God and the Jewish people . . . lead to the conclusion that campaigns that target Jews for conversion to Christianity are no longer theologically acceptable in the Catholic Church.” (Issued by the USCCB). Here’s a link to the document. Notice who they quote as their authority for the teaching. bc.edu/research/cjl/meta-elements/texts/cjrelations/resources/documents/interreligious/ncs_usccb120802.htm

Here’s a link to an article in which Karl Keating commented on the above document.

catholic.com/thisrock/2002/0210fr.asp

You can find the document mentioned on the USCCB website by clicking here: usccb.org/seia/jewish.shtml

Here is a more authoritative document that teaches this error.

United States Catholic Catechism for Adults: “The Catholic Church also acknowledges her special relationship to the Jewish people. The Second Vatican Council declared that ‘this peopleremains most dear to God, for God does not repent of the gifts he makesnor the calls he issues’. When God called Abraham out of Ur, he promisedto make of him a ‘great nation’. This began the history of God’s revealinghis divine plan of salvation to a chosen people with whom he madeenduring covenants. Thus the covenant that God made with the Jewish
people through Moses remains eternally valid for them” (Page 131).

Lastly, in the interview with Raymond Arroyo on EWTN, Cardinal Ratzinger said this:

Raymond: Very important. In God And The World, you reflect a little on Dominus Jesus, a document released in 2000. **It was greeted with some controversy, because in it you said, “God did not revoke His covenant to the Israeli people, or the people of Israel, rather; but that Jesus is the Messiah for everyone and therefore, conversion was still necessary, or should be a possibility.” How do you reconcile those two ideas?

Cardinal: Perhaps, it’s not our possibility to reconcile it, [but] to leave it to God.

Sure:

Also, if following the teaching of Pope John Paul II makes one a heretic, as you say, then it would seem Pope John Paul II ceased being Pope. When exactly did that happen? And is there currently a Pope?

Thanks!

I am not a Sedevacantist. A Pope can retain his jurisdiction if he falls into heresy. He only looses his jursdiction if he falls into “notorious and public heresy”. I stop short of saying that John Paul II was a public notorious heretic; therefore, I don’t hold that he lost his office.**

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

Woah, woah, woah! Can you spell it out in very simple manner what you mean by this? What do I have to believe about what you are talking about to not be considered a heretic?

Thanks for asking: You have to believe that the old Covenant is null and void, and that anyone who attempts to be justified by the Old covenant commits a mortal sin. That is what the Council of Florence taught, and you can access it online.

Also read the encyclical Mystici Corporis Christi, of Pope Pius XII. He also clearly teaches that the Old Covenant ceased to be efficacious when the New Covenant came into existence.

 

[hamburglar]

Thanks for asking: You have to believe that the old Covenant is null and void, and that anyone who attempts to be justified by the Old covenant commits a mortal sin. That is what the Council of Florence taught, and you can access it online.

Also read the encyclical Mystici Corporis Christi, of Pope Pius XII. He also clearly teaches that the Old Covenant ceased to be efficacious when the New Covenant came into existence.

Wait, so some people believe that Jews don’t need to become Catholics, and that Jewish people do not need conversion?

 

[Pious_Mat]

I’m hoping and prayer for the day when the SSPX Bishops re-enter the Catholic Church. I know that this probably won’t happen for a long time, but aren’t we closer to it now than ever before?

I wonder what it would take to bring the SSPX back into communion with Rome?..

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

Wait, so some people believe that Jews don’t need to become Catholics, and that Jewish people do not need conversion?

YES!

In fact, there was a thread here recently (Ithink started by SemperFidelis), in which he was asking for peoples opinion on the subject. The reason he was asking was because he was being called a heretic by Catholics for saying that the Old Covenant is null an void, and that the Jews needed to convert.

People were quoting the New Catechism and John Paul II showing that the Old Covenant was still valid. When he quoted the council of Florence and other documents as his authority, they claim he was “misinterpreting” them, even though they are as clear as they can be.

These people had all been led astray by the “churchmen” who they were following.

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

Here’s a link to the thread I was talking about:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=192709&highlight=Old+Covenant

 

[hamburglar]

YES!

In fact, there was a thread here recently (Ithink started by SemperFidelis), in which he was asking for peoples opinion on the subject. The reason he was asking was because he was being called a heretic by Catholics for saying that the Old Covenant is null an void, and that the Jews needed to convert.

People were quoting the New Catechism and John Paul II showing that the Old Covenant was still valid. When he quoted the council of Florence and other documents as his authority, they claim he was “misinterpreting” them, even though they are as clear as they can be.

These people had all been led astray by the “churchmen” who they were following.

Did John Paul II say that the Old Covenant was still valid?

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

Did John Paul II say that the Old Covenant was still valid?

I’ll quote from the document issued by the USCCB back on 2002. In this quote, the document quotes, as its authority, the teachings of John Paul II.

Reflections on Covenant and Mission: ** "The Roman Catholic reflections describe the growing respect for the Jewish tradition that has unfolded since the Second Vatican Council. ** A deepening Catholic appreciation of the eternal covenant between God and the Jewish people, together with a recognition of a divinely-given mission to Jews to witness to God’s faithful love, lead to the conclusion that campaigns that target Jews for conversion to Christianity are no longer theologically acceptable in the Catholic Church. … . Nostra Aetate initiated this thinking by citing Romans 11:28-29 and describing the Jewish people as “very dear to God, for the sake of the patriarchs, since God does not take back the gifts he bestowed or the choice he made.”… **John Paul II has explicitly taught that Jews are "the people of God of the Old Covenant, never revoked by God," (footnote provided) “the present-day people of the covenant concluded with Moses,” (footnote provided) and "partners in a covenant of eternal love which was never revoked." (footnote provided)" (The Bishops Committee for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs, USCCB, August 12, 2002).

The following is a link to the entire document where you can verify the footnotes. bc.edu/research/cjl/meta-elements/texts/cjrelations/resources/documents/interreligious/ncs_usccb120802.htm

The above document was issued by the USCCB. Cardinal Keeler introduced the document declaring it to be “a significant step forward to the dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Jewish community in this country”.

We find the same general teaching given by Cardinal Kasper who rose from the level of parish Priest to Cardinal under the watch of John Paul II. In fact, John Paul II was so impressed with him that he made him the President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity. He held that office as the point man for ecumenism under John Paul II for many years, which clearly indicates that the two were in agreement. After all, no true shepherd of the Church would allow one who they believed to be a heretic to hold such a position of authority, by which he would so easily lead others astray. Would anyone claim that John Paul II was so hateful and lacked such basic charity for his flock that he would allow one who he believed to be a heretic to hold such a position? It would be very uncharitable for anyone to think such a thing. Therefore, we must conclude that John Paul II was in agreement with the Cardinal who served in that capacity for so many years. With that in mind, this is what Cardinal Kasper said:

Cardinal Kasper: "The term mission, in its proper sense, refers to conversion from false gods and idols to the true and one God, who revealed himself in the salvation history with His elected people. Thus mission, in this strict sense, cannot be used with regard to Jews, who believe in the true and one God. Therefore, and this is characteristic, there exists dialogue but there does not exist any Catholic missionary organization for Jews." (17th Meeting of the International Catholic-Jewish Liaison Committee in May 2001).

continue**

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

continuation

You know, I wonder why the apostles bothered to convert from Judaism to follow Christ? I guess they didn’t realize that it was completely unecessary. Those poor misguided apostles who endured such persecution for following Christ and preaching the Gospel. They should have just remained as good Jews and lived out their life in peace. And the audacity of them going into the synagogue of all places to try to covert the Jews. Who can blame the Jews for throughing St. Paul out of the synagogue, as recorded in Acts, or for putting St. Steven to death? After all, just read what St. Stephen said to the poor well-meaning Jews (Acts 7: 51-57). Who can blame them for stoning him? Well, at least the modern churchmen have finally learned that Jesus and the apostles did not know what they were talking about. After all, Jesus actually told the Jews that they would die in their sins if they did not believe that He was the Messiah. I’m sure Jesus would be very happy to know that his Vicar on earth “corrected” this anti-Semetic teaching of His by assuring the Jews that “the old covenant has never been revoked by God”.

Abraham Foxman of the ADL: "Pope John Paul II’s moral inspiration and leadership was a shining light to the world. Throughout his lifetime the Pontiff defended the Jewish people… John Paul II worked tirelessly to repair the Church’s painful 2,000-year history with the Jewish people. Pope John Paul II revolutionized Catholic-Jewish relations. … He was the first Pope in history to visit the central synagogue in Rome, where he recognized Jews as elder brothers, announcing to the Chief Rabbi of Rome and Jews around the world: “I am Joseph, your brother.” … Most importantly, the Pope rejected the destructive concept of supersessionism [that the new covenant replaced the Old] and has recognized the special relationship between Christianity and the Jewish people, while sharing his understanding of Judaism as a living heritage, of the permanent validity of God’s covenant with the Jewish people….

Abraham Foxman, who hates Christianity, sure seemed to like John Paul II… but would Abraham Foxman have liked John Paul II if he would have taught what Jesus did?

John, Chapter 8: “Jesus said to them: I go, and you shall seek me, and you shall die in your sin. Whither I go, you cannot come. The Jews therefore said: Will he kill himself, because he said: Whither I go, you cannot come? And he said to them: You are from beneath, I am from above. You are of this world, I am not of this world. Therefore I said to you, that you shall die in your sins. For if you believe not that I am he, you shall die in your sin. They said therefore to him: Who art thou? Jesus said to them: The beginning, who also speak unto you. … You do the works of your father. They said therefore to him: We are not born of fornication: we have one Father, even God. Jesus therefore said to them: If God were your Father, you would indeed love me. For from God I proceeded, and came; for I came not of myself, but he sent me: Why do you not know my speech? Because you cannot hear my word. You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and he stood not in the truth; because truth is not in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father thereof. But if I say the truth, you believe me not. Which of you shall convince me of sin? If I say the truth to you, why do you not believe me? He that is of God, heareth the words of God. Therefore you hear them not, because you are not of God. …They took up stones therefore to cast at him.”

 

[FATIMAisUrgent]

Can you please provide a quotation from an authoritative document that shows that this was done? Heretic is a pretty strong charge, I’d like to see your proof of this. Also, if following the teaching of Pope John Paul II makes one a heretic, as you say, then it would seem Pope John Paul II ceased being Pope. When exactly did that happen? And is there currently a Pope?

Thanks!

I’m not sure which document Pax was refering to but the “old covenant heresy” is clearly taught in the recent US Catechism for adults, page 131 I believe. And no, if Pope JP II did believe that (I can’t say if he did or not) he would not cease to be pope, it just means he would have had an erroneous opinion (it’s happened more than once in church history). And when Pax said “heretic” he meant objective heresy, not that they were fully culpable for it.

 

[FATIMAisUrgent]

And in some cases, confession and marriage, those sacraments are invalid if a Catholic attempts to receive them.

As has been stated by the Catholic Church and is easily found within Canon Law.

A priest must have faculties to administer either of those sacraments which the SSPX do not have.

As for “churchmen” leading the faithful into perdition, if the Catholic Church has remained silent on this matter then it is just as guilty as those “churchmen”, so again, I say, the Council of Trent has something to say about that and if a person disagrees with it then I believe that they are in objective heresy.

Your conclusion is a false dilemma. We are not bound to except everything that comes out of a “Churchman’s” mouth, especially if it is error or is harmful to your faith. The Infalliable Magisterium of the Church is not guilty because of bad “Churchman.” Having widespread error and immorality in the HUMAN element of the Church in no way compromises Chirst’s promise.

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

I’m not sure which document Pax was refering to but the “old covenant heresy” is clearly taught in the recent US Catechism for adults, page 131 I believe. And no, if Pope JP II did believe that (I can’t say if he did or not) he would not cease to be pope, it just means he would have had an erroneous opinion (it’s happened more than once in church history). And when Pax said “heretic” he meant objective heresy, not that they were fully culpable for it.

Your right. That is what I meant. In fact, I started to write those exact words in one of my posts, but I don’t think I did.

 

[FATIMAisUrgent]

I think the question we should all be asking ourselves is why can’t SSPX priests be incardinated in the local diocese? Is it because they are truely schismatic or heretical like the Eastern Orthodox or the Old Catholics? Or is it because they refuse to accept the Novus Ordo Mass, the “authority of Vatican II” (btw, what binding teaching did Vatican II teach?), sex-education for Catholic children, etc.?

If the latter is the case, then I have to say that we are living in ‘extraordinary’ times. By the way, I usually attend a “diocesan approved” Traditional Mass at a “regular parish church.” I think in the next several years we are going to see many things “clarified” that were not so clear before. But I do hope that the SSPX will be regularized for the sake of clarity and peace. We need to pray that the Holy Father will finally cast out the wolves in sheep’s clothing and encourage the faithful shepherds.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

I think the question we should all be asking ourselves is why can’t SSPX priests be incardinated in the local diocese? Is it because they are truely schismatic or heretical like the Eastern Orthodox or the Old Catholics? Or is it because they refuse to accept the Novus Ordo Mass, the “authority of Vatican II” (btw, what binding teaching did Vatican II teach?), sex-education for Catholic children, etc.?

SSPX priests can’t be incardinated because they don’t want to be incardinated. When they choose communion with Rome and her canonical bishops, they are free to come home - provided, just as with any other priests, that they have no outstanding issues of heresy or delicts.

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

I think the question we should all be asking ourselves is why can’t SSPX priests be incardinated in the local diocese? Is it because they are truely schismatic or heretical like the Eastern Orthodox or the Old Catholics? Or is it because they refuse to accept the Novus Ordo Mass, the “authority of Vatican II” (btw, what binding teaching did Vatican II teach?), sex-education for Catholic children, etc.?

If the latter is the case, then I have to say that we are living in ‘extraordinary’ times. By the way, I usually attend a “diocesan approved” Traditional Mass at a “regular parish church.” I think in the next several years we are going to see many things “clarified” that were not so clear before. But I do hope that the SSPX will be regularized for the sake of clarity and peace. We need to pray that the Holy Father will finally cast out the wolves in sheep’s clothing and encourage the faithful shepherds.

I agree with everything you said. Interestingly, I converted to the Catholic Church through Queen of Angels in Dickenson, which is near where you live in Houston. There must be something in the water in the area that produces clear thinking minds

 

[GerardP]

SSPX priests can’t be incardinated because they don’t want to be incardinated. When they choose communion with Rome and her canonical bishops, they are free to come home - provided, just as with any other priests, that they have no outstanding issues of heresy or delicts.

Untrue. They aren’t incardinated because the local ordinaries don’t want to engage them in delineanating what Catholic doctrines they agree on and what policies they disagree on.

The fact is, the local ordinaries are busy ruining churches in many cases and destroying the faith of countless Catholics.

The SSPX has made overtures for the local bishops to extend juridiction to them but they refuse to even acknowledge them in some cases with the courtesy of a reply.

This is because the SSPX is actually teaching Catholic doctrine and the local bishops and priests often don’t believe in the “fullness” of Catholic doctrine.

That’s why heresy (eg. you don’t have to believe that Jesus was literally tempted by the devil ) is being proclaimed from the parish pulpits.

Anyone who doesn’t believe we are in a calamitous state of emergency, does not know the Catholic Faith.

 

[Sure]

This is because the SSPX is actually teaching Catholic doctrine and the local bishops and priests often don’t believe in the “fullness” of Catholic doctrine.

No, it’s because they’re suspended and excommunicated and they have to go through the Holy See (Ecclesia Dei) to remedy that. Just like Bishop Rangel and his followers did.

 

[GerardP]

No, it’s because they’re suspended and excommunicated and they have to go through the Holy See (Ecclesia Dei) to remedy that. Just like Bishop Rangel and his followers did.

Oh silly me. I thought it was because of the heterodoxy among the bishops and the parishes. I’m sure once the SSPX gives up the fight, the bishops and priests will stop promoting heretical views and start preaching real doctrine again.

It’s obvious that liturgical abuse and heterodoxy, paganism, indifferentism, syncretism, pyrrhonism and a whole gamut of plagues affecting the diocesan structure of the Church is the fault of the SSPX. (sarcasm off)

 

[FATIMAisUrgent]

I agree with everything you said. Interestingly, I converted to the Catholic Church through Queen of Angels in Dickenson, which is near where you live in Houston. There must be something in the water in the area that produces clear thinking minds

Wow what a small world! Queen of Angels is a beautiful Church but it is a bit of a drive for me.

 

[FATIMAisUrgent]

Numerous priests have been “suspended” or “excommunicated” for reasons such as simply choosing to offer the traditional Mass (which was never abrogated, oops) or disagreeing with the Vatican’s OPINION about the third secret of Fatima, while homosexual rapists are tolerated, heresy is spread, liturgical abuses and disobedience from “liberal” bishops and priests is mostly ignored. My friends, we are living through a real crisis! There is hope though. Keep praying for Pope Benedict XVI and keep offering up Rosaries and sacrifices for sinners! Also we all need to spread devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, particularly the First Five Saturdays.