SSPX Bishop Williamson: "Our Answer Will Be Negative"

[BrendanD]

It’s a matter of common sense. The schismatic Patriarch of Constantinople has more deference to and respect for the See of Rome than any of the society’s Bishops.

The Society recognize Papal infallibility and include the Pope in their prayers at every Mass. The schismatic Orthodox reject the Pope. Let’s not forgot which of those two groups is Catholic and which is not.

If they can’t accept such basic conditions, they clearly aren’t serious about reconciliation. They’ll have finally become an entity entirely distinct from the Church; a schismatic group.

That’s one possibility. Personally, I’m not going to claim to know what the Pope and the Church are going to do in the future.

 

[Chaldean_Rite]

Are you denying that they teach ecumenism, religious liberty and collegiality? If so, you need to do a bit of reading, the days of blind obedience are over…

You say the Church teaches errors…that is detrimental to ones faith.

 

[RC_Matt]

…but realize for the sake of your own soul and the sake of the souls of your family, that the church today teaches many errors…and many souls are being led to hell…

With all due respect, please specifically explain how the Catholic Church is leading souls to hell. I’ve heard this lots of times from Mormons, Baptists, Nazarenes, Pentecostals and the like, but this is a whole new angle and I’m really curious to hear this one.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

No. He’s right. They’re not in schism.

How can you say this yet then say…

It’s a matter of common sense. The schismatic Patriarch of Constantinople has more deference to and respect for the See of Rome than any of the society’s Bishops.

Either the Church is right and if it is then neither are in schism or the Church is wrong and both are in schism.

According to you Cardinal Hoyos says that the SSPX are not in schism and the Catechism of the Catholic Church says that those born into the Orthodox Faith are not in schism either.

818 “However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church.”

Agreed, and I think people here should stop saying they are.

Just as people here should stop saying that the Orthodox are schismatics.

But at least the Orthodox do not perform invalid confessions, marriage, confirmations, and annulments for Catholics.

 

[piouswoman]

With all due respect, please specifically explain how the Catholic Church is leading souls to hell. I’ve heard this lots of times from Mormons, Baptists, Nazarenes, Pentecostals and the like, but this is a whole new angle and I’m really curious to hear this one.

When you teach error…you lead souls away from God, away from the faith…it is the duty of the Holy Father, our bishops and priests to teach the true faith, not watered down, not contrary to what has always been taught, but the truth. The other religions you have listed above are not members of the Catholic Church established two thousand years ago by Jesus Christ…they have all denied some doctrine of the Catholic faith and are therefore, not pertinent to this discussion…the modernists are teaching much that is contrary to what has always been taught, and many who think they are living as Catholics should, simply are not. For example, there are many “Catholic” politicians that do not live their faith, and that is detrimental for the salvation of their souls.

 

[piouswoman]

You say the Church teaches errors…that is detrimental to ones faith.

No it isn’t. It is knowing one’s faith, and rejecting error. You have a mind, you should recognize that which is false, it is your duty as a Catholic, you should defend the truths of your faith…truth is not changeable with the times, it is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.

 

[belgianwaffles9]

Bishop Richard Williamson has been a couragous man, but he can be too careless and harsh at times.
Formal Schism is nothing to rejoice over.

I agree there. I’d like to see him courageously lead his flock back into a noramlized relationship with the Church.

I believe he is wrong. Rome won’t do anything. Their modernism makes them incapable of doing anything. It is an empty threat. They don’t have the gall to do something so crazy, stupid, and unjust like formal schism.

First of all, you underestimate Pope Benedict XVI. No one in Rome has more gall than he does. As Ratzinger, he was reviled by many for his willingness to stick to the letter of the law. He has been spending his entire life, post VII, trying to undo the negative consequences of it. True, he played a part in VII as a very young priest, but became almost instantly disillusioned with it, because, as one biography I’m reading explains, his camp, which wanted to re-emphasize the importance of early Christianity as the way to reform, lost out to the liberals who hijacked the council and decided to reform things by recreating them

I respect and admire Benedict XVI and i truly think the SSPX will never again have a Pope more willing to work with them.

However, if they choose not to, Benedict XVI will not be afriad to deliver some consequences. Rome has become more and more willing to do that under his watch. Look at his positions on Islam, Protestantism, and the recent “womenpriests” issue.

And i still do not understand how you claim that declaring the SSPX to be in formal schism is stupid or unjust. The SSPX claims to be fully Catholic, and recognizes Benedict XVI as Pope. Yet if they refuse to sign an agreement which asks only that they act politely towards him (very generous terms), they show themselves by their actions to be no Catholics at all. I do not think it will come to that. I pray that I am right.

Bishop Fellay is in charge and it is his decision. Prayers are needed to move the hearts Pope Benedict, Cardinal Hoyos, and Bishop Fellay so there can be regularization.

What I wonder is, if he decides to accept and begin moving in to normalcy, will the order follow him? Obviously the SSPX has no problem splitting off whenever they have a disagreement, so is the SSPX even capable of returning to normalcy?

You are the one with delusions…I have no intention of “jumping ship”…not now, not ever…You don’t jump from the ship of Divine Tradition…there is only ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC CHURCH, the Church established by Jesus Christ…and all of its doctrines…you would be well advised that for a person to reject even ONE solemn doctrine of faith, is not a Catholic at all. The Catholic Church cannot change because the TRUTH does not change…so go right on ahead with your ill advised statements…but realize for the sake of your own soul and the sake of the souls of your family, that the church today teaches many errors…and many souls are being led to hell…

This right here is the problem. Many in the SSPX, whether they be clergy or laypeople, act as if they have the superior position, and can judge Rome from on high. Your post was a great example of that, and proof positive of the problem. You are right: there is only one true church. And it is in ROME. the SSPX is being graciously offered to return to the fullness of communion with Rome. The SSPX is NOT the church, as your post so arrogantly implies. ROME is. And might i remind you that the SSPX’s official position is just that: that Rome is the Church and benedict XVI. Yet you and many of the SSPX continue to talk like sedevacatists. It is not US who are in need of this, it is you.

 

[BrendanD]

But at least the Orthodox do not perform invalid confessions, marriage, confirmations, and annulments for Catholics.

If this is supposed to imply that the SSPX perform invalid confessions, marriages, and confirmations…I would wonder why the Church hasn’t warned 1 million+ faithful that their sins are not absolved and their marriages are not valid.

 

[Dauphin]

Just as people here should stop saying that the Orthodox are schismatics.

They’re both schismatics and heretics, and I won’t stop saying it until that reality changes.

 

[belgianwaffles9]

They’re both schismatics and heretics, and I won’t stop saying it until that reality changes.

I believe the official position is that they are guilty only of schism, not of heresy. Therefore, the Eastern Orthodox churches are schismatics, but not heretics.

 

[BrendanD]

They’re both schismatics and heretics, and I won’t stop saying it until that reality changes.

The definition of heresy requires that they reject a doctrine. What doctrine do the SSPX reject?

It sounds like it is you that substitutes your own authority for the Ecclesia Dei Commission and its President as appointed by the Pope. Seems pretty selective to ignore the representatives personally selected by Benedict XVI when they disagree with you.

 

[belgianwaffles9]

The definition of heresy requires that they reject a doctrine. What doctrine do the SSPX reject?

It sounds like it is you that substitutes your own authority for the Ecclesia Dei Commission and its President as appointed by the Pope. Seems pretty selective to ignore the representatives personally selected by Benedict XVI when they disagree with you.

The reference to was to the Orthodox, i believe…

 

[DonaNobis_Pacem]

They’re both schismatics and heretics, and I won’t stop saying it until that reality changes.

I am going to hold out hope for a return to full communion with Rome for the SSPX, as unlikely as it appears to be and as unlikely as people say it is. I will be praying that charity will be found among those in the SSPX and those who are faithful to Rome and want to see these Catholics come back into the fold.

It grieves me, as much as it must grieve Christ, to see this separation in His Mystical Body. And the separation of the SSPX from the Church would cut the Body right to the heart.

Please, Lord God, let Your will be done.

 

[piouswoman]

I agree there. I’d like to see him courageously lead his flock back into a noramlized relationship with the Church.

First of all, you underestimate Pope Benedict XVI. No one in Rome has more gall than he does. As Ratzinger, he was reviled by many for his willingness to stick to the letter of the law. He has been spending his entire life, post VII, trying to undo the negative consequences of it. True, he played a part in VII as a very young priest, but became almost instantly disillusioned with it, because, as one biography I’m reading explains, his camp, which wanted to re-emphasize the importance of early Christianity as the way to reform, lost out to the liberals who hijacked the council and decided to reform things by recreating them

I respect and admire Benedict XVI and i truly think the SSPX will never again have a Pope more willing to work with them.

However, if they choose not to, Benedict XVI will not be afriad to deliver some consequences. Rome has become more and more willing to do that under his watch. Look at his positions on Islam, Protestantism, and the recent “womenpriests” issue.

And i still do not understand how you claim that declaring the SSPX to be in formal schism is stupid or unjust. The SSPX claims to be fully Catholic, and recognizes Benedict XVI as Pope. Yet if they refuse to sign an agreement which asks only that they act politely towards him (very generous terms), they show themselves by their actions to be no Catholics at all. I do not think it will come to that. I pray that I am right.

What I wonder is, if he decides to accept and begin moving in to normalcy, will the order follow him? Obviously the SSPX has no problem splitting off whenever they have a disagreement, so is the SSPX even capable of returning to normalcy?

This right here is the problem. Many in the SSPX, whether they be clergy or laypeople, act as if they have the superior position, and can judge Rome from on high. Your post was a great example of that, and proof positive of the problem. You are right: there is only one true church. And it is in ROME. the SSPX is being graciously offered to return to the fullness of communion with Rome. The SSPX is NOT the church, as your post so arrogantly implies. ROME is. And might i remind you that the SSPX’s official position is just that: that Rome is the Church and benedict XVI. Yet you and many of the SSPX continue to talk like sedevacatists. It is not US who are in need of this, it is you.

I won’t take any reminders from you, it is not your place to give them…and as you are not a priest or theologian, I suggest you stop pretending to have all of the answers. I never said the Church is not in Rome…you implied that I did. I never said the SSPX is the church, but you have implied that I have. The arrogance is all yours, and your careless and assuming post is proof positive. You have like many, found the SSPX to be a thorn in your side and you react with a condescending attitude…why is that?

 

[Dauphin]

The definition of heresy requires that they reject a doctrine. What doctrine do the SSPX reject?

It sounds like it is you that substitutes your own authority for the Ecclesia Dei Commission and its President as appointed by the Pope. Seems pretty selective to ignore the representatives personally selected by Benedict XVI when they disagree with you.

I was referring to the Orthodox. Someone contended that they weren’t schismatics.

 

[ReConverted]

:byzsoc:

 

[Dauphin]

I believe the official position is that they are guilty only of schism, not of heresy. Therefore, the Eastern Orthodox churches are schismatics, but not heretics.

If you can find me an Orthodox who accepts the immaculate conception, Papal infallibility, and the filioque, I’ll show you a Catholic-to-be.

The reality is that the Orthodox reject certain Catholic doctrines which the Church has infallibly proposed for belief by every christian. It’s plain nuttiness to say otherwise.

 

[BrendanD]

I was referring to the Orthodox. Someone contended that they weren’t schismatics.

Correct about the Orthodox of course, but you said “They’re both schismatics and heretics”. Who is the “both”?

 

[Dauphin]

You said “They’re both schismatics and heretics”. Who is the “both”?

It’s just an extra word put there to emphasize that they are schismatics and also hertics.

What I said only applied to the Eastern Orthodox.

 

[belgianwaffles9]

Are you denying that they teach ecumenism, religious liberty and collegiality? If so, you need to do a bit of reading, the days of blind obedience are over…

The Church practices ecumenism, yes. “Ecumenism” isnt a belief you can “practice.” I, personally, think many of them go about it in the wrong way. But most of the Church’s ecumenism is being run be aging hippies who won’t matter in the next couple of years anyway after we get their requiem masses, complete with bongo drums, dancers, and puppets, out of the way…

When Ecumenism is practices positiviely, however, that is in a way which clearly defines Catholic teaching and attempts to bring others to it, it is a wise and beneficial choice. Good examples include the recent Tridentine Mass said in the Anglican Winchester Cathedral, and Pope Benedict XVI’s visit to Constantinople. We should all be working towards Christian unity (which means unity in the Catholic Church). That is the definition of good ecumenism.

Religious Liberty is not something the Church “practices” or “teaches,” it is a fact the Church recognizes. Religious liberty EXISTS! People can choose what to believe. No one can possibly force someone to believe something. It is simply, completely, IMPOSSIBLE. We cannot force people to be Catholic, we can only convince them to be.

As for **collegiality **, do you really not believe that ]the bishops of the world, collectively share the responsibility for the governance and pastoral care of the Church? If you don’t believe every Bishop being called to protect the Church, how can you justify Lefebvre’s action to lead the SSPX off into its akward canonical status. Do you not justify it by saying he was within his right as a Bishop called to provide governance and poastoral care for the Church (whatever conception of “the Church” any SSPX member has…)

Wow… look at all that insight and thought i just put out there. Looks like the days of blind obedience really are over for me.

And look at the little soundbited you’re more than willing to just spit out left and right without any justification, explanation, or evidence. Looks like the days of blind obedience are *just beginning * for you.