So whats the deal with Jesuits?

[MarkThompson]

The SSPX was excommunicated for holding true to two thousand years of apostolic tradition.

Zero. Percent. True.

Ugh, how many times does this claim have to rear its head.

The “SSPX” was not excommunicated at all. Please. Its bishops excommunicated themselves, and were declared by the Apostolic See to have been so excommunicated, by the schismatic acts of the Econe consecrations in spite of explicit Papal forbiddance.

 

[Ockham]

Zero. Percent. True.

Ugh, how many times does this claim have to rear its head.

The “SSPX” was not excommunicated at all. Please. Its bishops excommunicated themselves, and were declared by the Apostolic See to have been so excommunicated, by the schismatic acts of the Econe consecrations in spite of explicit Papal forbiddance.

Therefore the SSPX were excommunicated.

“Pick you battles” Sun Tzu

 

[MarkThompson]

Therefore the SSPX were excommunicated.

Source?

“Pick you battles” Sun Tzu

I’m honestly (I’m not feigning confusion for rhetorical purposes) not sure whether you’re warning me not to “pick” this battle, or whether you’re saying for yourself that you’re conceding the point about “excommunicated for upholding tradition” and opting to argue only the subsidiary question of whom the excommunication covered.

I hope the latter…

 

[Ockham]

Source?

I’m honestly (I’m not feigning confusion for rhetorical purposes) not sure whether you’re warning me not to “pick” this battle, or whether you’re saying for yourself that you’re conceding the point about “excommunicated for upholding tradition” and opting to argue only the subsidiary question of whom the excommunication covered.

I hope the latter…

Mark, the SSPX were ecommunicated for a time. Do you really want to debate who or why? What’s your objective? Why are you picking this battle?

 

[MarkThompson]

Mark, the SSPX were ecommunicated for a time.

Having taken account of all the juridical effects, I declare that the above-mentioned Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre, and Bernard Pellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta have incurred excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See.

Moreover, I declare that Monsignor Antonio de Castro Mayer, Bishop emeritus of Campos, since he took part directly in the liturgical celebration as co-consecrator and adhered publicly to the schismatical act, has incurred excommunication as envisaged by canon 1364, paragraph 1.

The priests and faithful are warned not to support the schism of Monsignor Lefebvre, otherwise they shall incur the very grave penalty of excommunication.
(Source) (emphasis added).

Do you really want to debate who or why? What’s your objective? Why are you picking this battle?

I’ve got no objective except the truth, which is violated when people claim carte blanche that the SSPX were excommunicated for trying to uphold tradition. No. Just no. If nothing else, it’s an oblique slander (not very oblique, at that) on our late Holy Father.

 

[Ockham]

Ok, they excommunicated themselves. Happy? Therefore they were excommunicated for a time.

This thread is supposed to be about the Jesuits. How about starting a new thread and explain why the Vatican chose not to approve Archbishop Levebre’s request to ordain four bishops?

 

[Charlotte408]

there’s a difference between a schismatic group and a protestant group

Whats the difference and which category does the Jesuits fall under?

 

[giuseppeTO]

Zero. Percent. True.

Ugh, how many times does this claim have to rear its head.

The “SSPX” was not excommunicated at all. Please. Its bishops excommunicated themselves, and were declared by the Apostolic See to have been so excommunicated, by the schismatic acts of the Econe consecrations in spite of explicit Papal forbiddance.

Perhaps his point was that the Vatican frequently chooses to use this (or not) based on the agenda of the Pontiff. For instance, the Pope does not issue a Papal statement of excommunication every time a new bishop is consecrated by the Chinese Patriotic Catholics. They sort of shuffle their feet and look the other way without condemnation. So the excommunications technically may have come about as an application of canon law but it was primarily a referendum on the continuation of the work Archbishop Lefebvre was doing, promoting the Traditional teachings of the church in the seminary, and the Mass of Pius V.The Pope could have just as easily recognized the new bishops or not made a statement.

 

[Joe_5859]

So, how about those Jesuits?

 

[Charlotte408]

Yeah I had another question about them a few posts back…but…I think it got lost in the mix of whatever just happened

 

[Charlotte408]

And another one, why did the Jesuits excommunicate themselves?? Thats crazy?? Why would they want to do that? Isnt that- leaving Christs Church???

 

[Ockham]

The Jesuits have not excommunicated themselves. However, they are not the hard core traditionally minded order of days past. How and why this happened I’m not sure.

 

[giuseppeTO]

So, how about those Jesuits?

There is an article about the Jesuits in this month’s Remnant by Scott Montgomery called “Michaelangelo vs. The Fallen Jesuits”. If I get a chance, I’ll quote a few lines later.

 

[Bob_Crowley]

I cant figure it out. Are they good guys? Bad guys??

From what I understand, they are an order, of men only…used to be priests…they want to be like Christ on earth ((sounds like good guys))…they’ve had some scandal…but nothing the CC hasnt (or isnt) dealing with…

Are they in good standing with the church? Or separate from the CC?? Do we condone them? Or are they like some rebel group??

I tried doing a search on CAF to see if there was anything on them, and found mostly opinions…some people just talking about them in general, some of them, not so charitable…((the overall consensus I take from them is that they are not so great-of-guys))

So whats the deal??

I’ve sometimes wondered the same thing. Personally I suspect it goes back to the fact that they were the Vatican’s shock troops of the counter-reformation and thus attracted criticism from Protestants.

Why opposition later arose to them within Catholic circles I don’t know, but after reading some of the stuff written by alleged Catholics, usually right wing Catholics, I’m not really surprised. There are Catholics who think John Paul II served the devil. Some of them seem to think that everything went wrong with Vatican II and still haven’t gotten over it.

My own understanding of them is that they are a religious order that specialises in education, and are thus highly educated themselves.

 

[Ockham]

My own understanding of them is that they are a religious order that specialises in education, and are thus highly educated themselves.

How much have you researched them?

Jesuits Implode

by George Neumayr

*Were Ignatius of Loyola alive today, the Jesuit order he founded wouldn’t ordain him. His once-formidable society is now a corrupt club for homosexual dilettantes and anti-papal dissenters. Real Catholics need no longer apply.

The order is in the throes of a collapse as historically significant as its suppression in 1773. This disintegration, known to traditional Catholics for years (and to bishops too cowardly to stifle its corruption), is now even admitted by liberal pundits. Garry Wills’ article about the book “Passionate Uncertainty: Inside the American Jesuits” appears in the New York Review of Books under the title, “Jesuits in Disarray.” Jonathan Kirsch, a Los Angeles Times reviewer of the same book, notes that the order is in demographic free fall: “former Jesuits now outnumber active Jesuits in the United States.”

Meanwhile, traditional Jesuits who stay and seek to recover the order’s original spark find themselves in exile. The office for the Jesuit Province in California confirmed to TAP that Joseph Fessio, the prolific San Francisco Jesuit publisher of orthodox books and publications, has been ordered to leave San Francisco for a new assignment, effective in May, at an obscure Catholic hospital in Duarte, California. Fessio’s banishment coincides with his recent announcement to start a traditional Catholic school called Campion College next door to the openly dissenting Jesuit University of San Francisco, a school which in recent years has advertised such pagan oddities as a “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Student Alliance.”*

spectator.org/archives/2002/03/13/jesuits-implode

 

[giuseppeTO]

Modernists and those on the extreme left of the (at least they call themselves) Catholic Church absolutely love the Jesuits. They are all about what left politics are about - burning draft cards, social activism, and human secularism.

Just a quick sample from one of the esteemed Jesuit institutions, Georgetown University and Thomas Reese, S.J.

I have never bought the argument that gay marriage is a threat to families. Legalizing gay marriage is not going to cause millions of people in heterosexual marriages to suddenly decide to leave their spouses for a same-sex partner. It could be argued that gay marriage might help heterosexual marriages. For example, in an apartment building filled with unmarried couples in New York City, the gays who get married may inspire the heterosexuals to do the same thing.

He, and his order, are In Communion with the Pope.
He has faculties from his bishop to hear Confessions and give his unique Jesuit spiritual direction to the faithful and to say Mass and preach his Jesuit morality to Catholics.

Those who love this morality love the Jesuits.

St. Issac Joques, SJ - Pray for us.
St. Ignatius, SJ - Pray for us.

 

[Ockham]

Santa Clara, Calif, Nov 4, 2005 / 12:00 am (CNA).- An official from the Jesuit-run Santa Clara University in California told Catholic News Agency that hosting a two-day long conference, on how to promote opportunities for gays and lesbians at Catholic colleges is “the Catholic” way to act as opposed to highlighting the intrinsic immorality of homosexual acts.

As the Vatican prepares a document reiterating its stance, particularly against homosexuality in seminaries, the aim of the conference entitled “Out There” was to highlight scholarships and student affairs being created to cater specifically to gays and lesbians at Catholic institutions.

The conference brought together representatives from the Universities of Georgetown, Loyola Marymount, Gonzaga, Fordham, DePaul, La Salle, Marquette and Emory, as well as Boston College, and College of the Holy Cross. Out of the plus 40 Catholic universities represented, thirteen were Jesuit institutions like Santa Clara.

Some 150 attendees were invited to choose from workshops like, “Curriculum and Same-Sex Marriage in a Jesuit University” and "Can I Be Gay and Catholic

catholicnewsagency.com/news/jesuit_university_says_support_to_gay_organizations_is_the_catholic_thing_to_do/

 

[Ockham]

*The Kansas City Star series mentioned above notes that, of 26 novices who entered the Missouri Province of the Jesuit order in 1967 and 1968, only seven were eventually ordained priests. Of these seven, three have (to date) died of AIDS, and a fourth is an openly gay priest now working as an artist in New York. The priest-artist deplored the fact, not that his fellow Jesuits engaged in homosexual relations, but that they did not take “safe-sex” precautions even after the facts about HIV transmission became known. In this case, four of seven priests in a discrete sample are known to have been actively homosexual. What can we extrapolate from this data about the remaining three men, or about the American priesthood in general? *
catholicculture.org/news/features/index.cfm?recnum=20565

 

[jam070406]

*The Kansas City Star series mentioned above notes that, of 26 novices who entered the Missouri Province of the Jesuit order in 1967 and 1968, only seven were eventually ordained priests. Of these seven, three have (to date) died of AIDS, and a fourth is an openly gay priest now working as an artist in New York. The priest-artist deplored the fact, not that his fellow Jesuits engaged in homosexual relations, but that they did not take “safe-sex” precautions even after the facts about HIV transmission became known. In this case, four of seven priests in a discrete sample are known to have been actively homosexual. What can we extrapolate from this data about the remaining three men, or about the American priesthood in general? *
catholicculture.org/news/features/index.cfm?recnum=20565

THAT, was one of the most disturbing articles I’ve ever read!

 

[Cran]

I can only talk about my personal experience with the Jesuits and clam no general knowledge about the order.

Two years ago, I earned my diploma in theology at a Jesuit-lead university in Germany and I am currently working on my doctorate in moral theology there. (We have an English webpage, too! sankt-georgen.de/default/english.html )
It also houses a seminary for several German dioceses (Limburg an Hamburg, namely).

In my experience, it is true when Jesuits are called “liberal”, and I know many people who frequent this forum don’t like it. But I’d like to make a distinction between a “good” kind of liberals in the church and “bad” ones. “Good” ones: Not particularily attached to traditions with a small “t” and open to try out new things, but faithful to the magisterium. “Bad” ones: Trying new things for the sake of novelty and not caring about being faithful.

I experienced the Jesuits as the good kind of liberals. Not cassock-wearing, most not even collar-wearing, not celebrating the most traditional masses, but never irreverent and open for discussion about everything and very educated indeed - but not questioning the authority of the magisterium, at least not in my hearing, and not diverting from it.

I have to concede two exceptions, I heard one professor, who is also a memeber of the SJ, say that he thinks the arguments against a female priethood weak and aner one who thought it wrong to forbid artificial conception altogether, but both of them added that this was their private opinion only.
I think this is not much for spending four years with them, and unfortunately, I have heard much worse from Non-SJ-students.