SSPX Could Return This Week - Agreement With Rome Near

[Margarite]

It was I who said that you were young and loyal to your parents. It was not meant as an insult. I was young once, too, and am still loyal to my parents. But age and experience away from one’s parents does tend to change one’s outlook. All that aside, my main concern, as I said earlier, is your airing of family problems on a public forum. I can only imagine what you tell your close friends. Please beware of the sin of detraction. It is a very serious sin. Already, some comments on your story:
These people do not know your family. Yet they’ve already formed conclusions and made judgments on them from what you have said. It matters not if all that you have said is true. We are not allowed to reveal the sins of others, real or imagined. We must carry our crosses in silence, God in heaven knows our problems and deals with them in His way.

Thank you, for your words of caution, and I agree that it is wrong to tarnish a person’s name, but I have purposely given no names. I am using my family as an example, because I know them best out of any SSPX people. I am feel it is my duty to use my experiences. God was the one who put me in this family, he allowed me to experience the Church from many different viewpoints, he gave me parents who were able to teach me why, though we prefer the mass said by the SSPX, why we attend the NO. I don’t believe that God gave me these experiences for me to keep within myself, but rather so that I could use them in defense of the Faith. God can bring good out of bad, and hopefully out of the bad that is causing a rift in my family he can bring good. I think that it is important for people to expose what is not good for what it really is. I think it is important for people to see that the SSPX isn’t as good as they claim. The only way I can make my comments about the SSPX valid, is if I show you all a real life example. I am 19 after all, and why should anyone believe a 19 year old unless that 19 year old has experiences to prove what they believe.
I lived in St. Marys when I was little, when I left I must admit that I had a very SSPX viewpoint even though I had been attending the FSSP. I thought that the mass at EWTN was horribly liberal. Even at age 9 I was stubbornly saying the creed and Pater Noster in Latin during the NO mass. I looked down upon all the fools who didn’t know the Latin, and who thought that the NO mass was a good mass. Then my parents seeing the ugliness in their own children realized that they had to show us, despite their dislike for the less beautiful NO mass, that the NO was valid, and should be viewed equal to the TLM in validity even if it wasn’t as beautiful. So, they made us participate in the mass, they showed us where we could stick to our tradition without sticking our noses in the air, in such issues as altar girls. We always received Holy Communion from the priest, until we moved to Vegas, because here the EMHE are needed. There is one or two priests per parish, and sometimes 10,000 member families. So, over time, we have learned that the NO mass is beautiful, not as extravagantly beautiful as the TLM, but beautiful nonetheless (when it is celebrated correctly). Right now, we try to attend the hybrid mass in our diocese. It is the only mass that is even close to the TLM that is in union with Rome. Sometimes we don’t make it because it is at 9:30am and we have to get up at 7:30 am to make it, and sometimes my parents are too tired to make it. Then we go to our local parish, the music is protestant, the tabernacle is on the side, the priests are great, there are about 1,500 people at every mass, they now have a beautiful crucifix that is at least 20 feet tall and takes up the whole area behind the altar, we learned that the pastor is trying to learn the TLM in his rare free moments. It is the best parish in Las Vegas. My father writes to the priest almost every week, either complaining about the music, or complementing a sermon or a new change for the better.

We are in a battle, we need help, so the only way to keep the help we have and to maybe get some help is to show the truth about those who are trying to take away from our ranks. The SSPX may be technically within the Church, but it is fighting against the healing that the Pope is striving for, and they are weakening those of us who love the TLM, they make it easy for us to give up. We need them to join in the fight, and to renew the strength and determination of all of us who are fighting. Don’t you see that Truth is the only way to victory, whether it is truth about them, or about us, or about the enemy, but Truth will win.
Again I am sorry for writing so much.
Have a Wonder Full day!

 

[Margarite]

I guess it’s because they see problems with what happened to the Church since Vatican II. Do you want examples? There are many, but one that I see is the huge increase in marriage annulments. For example, in 1930, there were 9 marriage annulments per year in the USA, whereas in recent times it has gone as high as 60,000 marriage annulments per year in the USA.

I would say that this should be the case, back in the 1930’s divorce was rare no matter what your religion, so when people got married they expected to stay married. Nowadays, even if one of the people is expecting to stay married for life, that does not mean that the other person is. Many people are weak Catholics, and they go into marriage thinking that it is just temporary. Isn’t that the condition for annulment, if one of the people went into the marriage thinking of it only as temporary? We have a family friend, and his wife did that. He thought he was marrying her and would remain her husband until they died, but she had other plans, so he is seeking an annulment. It isn’t anything wrong with the Church, but rather what is wrong with society today. The Church cannot look into the souls of each couple being married and see their intentions.

 

[ethelzguy]

I guess it’s because they see problems with what happened to the Church since Vatican II. Do you want examples? There are many, but one that I see is the huge increase in marriage annulments. For example, in 1930, there were 9 marriage annulments per year in the USA, whereas in recent times it has gone as high as 60,000 marriage annulments per year in the USA.

Keep in mind that society over that same time period has come to accept divorce.

It is quite probable that MANY couples stayed together, not because of any church, but the social stigma that used to come with divorce.

With societal acceptance of divorce, it became more common, and likely correlated with the increase of annulments requested and granted within the Church.

But, we’ve been through this before, haven’t we?

 

[pnewton]

I guess it’s because they see problems with what happened to the Church since Vatican II.

Then the will always remain outside looking in. I have no respect for those that desert, then criticize; those that cut and run. Williamson has spoken. Now Fellay has spoken. They both continue to role the dice with their salvation. From Ecclesia Dei:

Everyone should be aware that formal adherence to the schism is a grave offense against God and carries the penalty of excommunication decreed by the Church’s law. [Cf. Code of Canon Law, 1364.]

 

[laudamus_te]

What they say on their website, and what they actually preach are two completely separate things. They say they respect the authority of the Pope on their website, and yet they will not do what he says. They say they believe in the validity of the NO, yet, they would rather skip Sunday mass than attend a NO. The SSPX priests have even preached that it is better to skip Sunday mass than to attend a NO. The priests give permission for this. The SSPX members even question the validity of the FSSP masses because the FSSP priests accept and sometimes celebrate the NO mass. So, BrendanD, what you say may be true of their website, but it is not true in practice. I wish it was the way you say it is, but it is not.

How do you know, personally, what SSPX priests preach if you do not attend their masses? Or are you basing this on hearsay? As for their position regarding the authority of the Pope, it is TRUE that they recognize Joseph Ratzinger as the Pope, i.e. they are not sedevacatist. That is not the same thing as obeying the Pope in matters which are not infallible. It is their right and duty to question and speak out against the Pope when they believe that he is leading the faithful astray. I understand that such words sting the ears of many Catholics who have been indoctrinated with the concept that the Pope is God and cannot be in error. To have the audacity to believe that the Pope can err! Yet he is a man, and he can err.

True, however, that they advise against attending the NOM, not because it is unvalid, but because it is a danger to souls. I can vouch for that, personally. My soul was in grave danger due to my mainly NO upbringing. I had completely lost belief in the Real Presence, and I was not alone. It is a fact that many Catholics today do not believe in the Real Presence, and unfortunately that heretical belief is growing. In 2001 it was 67 percent who believed in the Real Presence; in 2008 it is 57 percent (according to this poll). You will also notice from this poll that most Catholics do not believe that it is a sin to miss Mass on a Holy Day of Obligation. Talk about your Cafeteria Catholics!

 

[ethelzguy]

You will also notice from this poll that most Catholics do not believe that it is a sin to miss Mass on a Holy Day of Obligation. Talk about your Cafeteria Catholics!

How is missing Mass on a Holy Day any different than refusing to attend Mass where the only thing available is the NO?

The sword cuts both ways.

 

[Margarite]

Could you give some examples of this?

The SSPX has many rules that the consider essential that are no longer the case such as:
no eating for 3 hours previous to Holy Communion (the rule is 1hr)
women must only wear dresses or skirts, and they should at least reach mid-calf for daily wear and down to the ankle for mass
women should not participate in sports
women shouldn’t study too much
women are inferior to men
it is better to miss Sunday mass than to attend a NO
they don’t obey the pope or anyone who believes the NO is valid

While some of these rules are good and fine, they are horrible because the SSPX looks down and condems those who do not follow these rules. While it may be beautiful for a person to fast for 3hrs, and wear only dresses, it is ugly when a person looks down on all those who do not follow these practices.
Also, the second half of the list is full of things that are bad. Women as well as men need sports to stay healthy, women as well as men should educate themselves and should develop their God-given talents. The Church has said that women are equal to men, men and women have different roles, but women are still equal to men before God. Sunday mass should be observed if it is at all possible and all steps should be taken to make it possible. Finally the Pope should be obeyed. It was Christ who put Peter at the head of the Church, and if you disobey the pope, it is like disobeying God, because he is God’s representative on earth.

There are many other rules, they are not written, but they must be spoken in sermons, because it is consistent with SSPX members. Just as an example of how silly some of them are, my aunts send me modesty books from the 1800’s. Well, fashions have changed since then, and I think I would look rather ridiculous in a long dress with puffed sleeves like Anne of Green Gables. I’m sorry, but this just shows how ridiculous they are. Also, I am a very modest person, I have found a way to be modest and modern at the same time.

 

[Margarite]

How do you know, personally, what SSPX priests preach if you do not attend their masses? Or are you basing this on hearsay? As for their position regarding the authority of the Pope, it is TRUE that they recognize Joseph Ratzinger as the Pope, i.e. they are not sedevacatist. That is not the same thing as obeying the Pope in matters which are not infallible. It is their right and duty to question and speak out against the Pope when they believe that he is leading the faithful astray. I understand that such words sting the ears of many Catholics who have been indoctrinated with the concept that the Pope is God and cannot be in error. To have the audacity to believe that the Pope can err! Yet he is a man, and he can err.

True, however, that they advise against attending the NOM, not because it is unvalid, but because it is a danger to souls. I can vouch for that, personally. My soul was in grave danger due to my mainly NO upbringing. I had completely lost belief in the Real Presence, and I was not alone. It is a fact that many Catholics today do not believe in the Real Presence, and unfortunately that heretical belief is growing. In 2001 it was 67 percent who believed in the Real Presence; in 2008 it is 57 percent (according to this poll). You will also notice from this poll that most Catholics do not believe that it is a sin to miss Mass on a Holy Day of Obligation. Talk about your Cafeteria Catholics!

People practice what is taught to them, and if a huge group is all doing the same thing, then you must find where they learned to do what they do, and if the only place they all get together is a SSPX mass, well then logically that is where they learn it.

Again the same is true with the NO, people have been taught nothing, there are priests who had bad training so they put the tabernacle on the side, and they rush through the consecration, and they have only a short period of time on Saturdays for confession, and the Catholic schools have had to hire non-Catholics. It is a crisis. People know almost nothing. But here the SSPX could help, they could help by educating these uneducated people. Already, it is getting better because most of the new priests are coming from really good seminaries, so the young priests are full of good knowledge and are ready to go fight the good fight, but they need support from they laity.

Cafeteria Catholics are all over, but they just don’t know anything and that is why they are the way they are, if we can educated them, then they will cease to be Cafeteria Catholics. Once we get good priests, then they can preach strongly and give good advise in the confessional, and the Church will heal, but running away and pointing fingers and laughing does not help clean up the mess, everyone needs to put on their apron and roll of their sleeves and jump and and clean it up together.

And as ethelzguy said it is worse for the SSPX people to miss mass because they claim to believe in the true presence, if you don’t believe in the true presence, the why would it be so bad to miss mass every Sunday? The Cafeteria Catholics are much less accountable for the rules they break because they don’t either know or believe the rules, the SSPX people know the rules, but don’t follow them.

We all know that the pope can err, but he does not err when he excommunicates, thus the SSPX must be wrong. The SSPX wants the TLM, the pope has already allowed the FSSP and other groups like them to say only the TLM, now the TLM is available anywhere and everywhere, so what is the SSPX’s problem, unless it is that they are too proud to accept the pope as their leader? Please, please tell me what reasons the SSPX could possible have for remaining outside full communion with the Church?

PS: It is wrong for a priest to speak publicly against his bishop and against all in authority over him. If he wanted to do that, he should have remained a layman.

 

[pnewton]

You will also notice from this poll that most Catholics do not believe that it is a sin to miss Mass on a Holy Day of Obligation. Talk about your Cafeteria Catholics!

Straw man. No one is disagrees with this. It is a sin to miss Mass on a Holy Day of Obligation. That is the teaching of the Catholic Church (unless your point is that one can be unfaithful because others started being unfaithful first. )

 

[laudamus_te]

Thank you, for your words of caution, and I agree that it is wrong to tarnish a person’s name, but I have purposely given no names. I am using my family as an example, because I know them best out of any SSPX people. I am feel it is my duty to use my experiences. God was the one who put me in this family, he allowed me to experience the Church from many different viewpoints, he gave me parents who were able to teach me why, though we prefer the mass said by the SSPX, why we attend the NO. I don’t believe that God gave me these experiences for me to keep within myself, but rather so that I could use them in defense of the Faith. God can bring good out of bad, and hopefully out of the bad that is causing a rift in my family he can bring good. I think that it is important for people to expose what is not good for what it really is. I think it is important for people to see that the SSPX isn’t as good as they claim. The only way I can make my comments about the SSPX valid, is if I show you all a real life example. I am 19 after all, and why should anyone believe a 19 year old unless that 19 year old has experiences to prove what they believe.
I lived in St. Marys when I was little, when I left I must admit that I had a very SSPX viewpoint even though I had been attending the FSSP. I thought that the mass at EWTN was horribly liberal. Even at age 9 I was stubbornly saying the creed and Pater Noster in Latin during the NO mass. I looked down upon all the fools who didn’t know the Latin, and who thought that the NO mass was a good mass. Then my parents seeing the ugliness in their own children realized that they had to show us, despite their dislike for the less beautiful NO mass, that the NO was valid, and should be viewed equal to the TLM in validity even if it wasn’t as beautiful. So, they made us participate in the mass, they showed us where we could stick to our tradition without sticking our noses in the air, in such issues as altar girls. We always received Holy Communion from the priest, until we moved to Vegas, because here the EMHE are needed. There is one or two priests per parish, and sometimes 10,000 member families. So, over time, we have learned that the NO mass is beautiful, not as extravagantly beautiful as the TLM, but beautiful nonetheless (when it is celebrated correctly). Right now, we try to attend the hybrid mass in our diocese. It is the only mass that is even close to the TLM that is in union with Rome. Sometimes we don’t make it because it is at 9:30am and we have to get up at 7:30 am to make it, and sometimes my parents are too tired to make it. Then we go to our local parish, the music is protestant, the tabernacle is on the side, the priests are great, there are about 1,500 people at every mass, they now have a beautiful crucifix that is at least 20 feet tall and takes up the whole area behind the altar, we learned that the pastor is trying to learn the TLM in his rare free moments. It is the best parish in Las Vegas. My father writes to the priest almost every week, either complaining about the music, or complementing a sermon or a new change for the better.

We are in a battle, we need help, so the only way to keep the help we have and to maybe get some help is to show the truth about those who are trying to take away from our ranks. The SSPX may be technically within the Church, but it is fighting against the healing that the Pope is striving for, and they are weakening those of us who love the TLM, they make it easy for us to give up. We need them to join in the fight, and to renew the strength and determination of all of us who are fighting. Don’t you see that Truth is the only way to victory, whether it is truth about them, or about us, or about the enemy, but Truth will win.
Again I am sorry for writing so much.
Have a Wonder Full day!

Thank you for accepting my comments for what they were: sincere concern for another soul. Reading what you have said above, I would agree that when you were younger you did indeed have a prideful attitude, and your parents were wise to recognize it and correct you. Actually, it’s a pretty common thing for young people, as well as those who are new to tradition, to adopt that kind of snooty attitude. God has a way of nipping that kind of thing in the bud, however! I fail to see, though, how you can lay the blame for this (if that is what you are doing) on the SSPX - especially considering that you attended FSSP.

I agree with you wholeheartedly that Truth is the only way to victory. There is only one Truth, that is Our Lord Jesus Christ and the Catholic Church which He founded and died for, and the SSPX is teaching it daily. They are not “taking away” from anyone’s ranks - they are merely teaching the Faith as it has been taught for two thousand years, until the council which opened the windows of the Church to the world, and allowed the errors to flood in. Perhaps the Pope is striving to heal… I believe that he is. But his ideas of what needs to be healed differ somewhat from those of the SSPX and indeed most Traditional Catholics. He still clings tenaciously to “his baby” the New Mass, and I fear that he is hoping to create a new New Mass which will replace both the TLM and the NOM. However, it is not for us to presume, we can only pray. I pray every day for the Pope and the bishops to return to the traditional teachings of the Church.

 

[laudamus_te]

Straw man. No one is disagrees with this. It is a sin to miss Mass on a Holy Day of Obligation. That is the teaching of the Catholic Church (unless your point is that one can be unfaithful because others started being unfaithful first. )

I wasn’t intending to bring up a “straw man.” I just thought it was an interesting statistic, and underscores the lack of proper catechesis in today’s Church.

 

[Margarite]

Thank you for accepting my comments for what they were: sincere concern for another soul. Reading what you have said above, I would agree that when you were younger you did indeed have a prideful attitude, and your parents were wise to recognize it and correct you. Actually, it’s a pretty common thing for young people, as well as those who are new to tradition, to adopt that kind of snooty attitude. God has a way of nipping that kind of thing in the bud, however! I fail to see, though, how you can lay the blame for this (if that is what you are doing) on the SSPX - especially considering that you attended FSSP.

That is the attitude of SSPX members about the NO, I was living in a SSPX town, and was around all my SSPX relatives much more often than my FSSP priest.

I agree with you wholeheartedly that Truth is the only way to victory. There is only one Truth, that is Our Lord Jesus Christ and the Catholic Church which He founded and died for, and the SSPX is teaching it daily. They are not “taking away” from anyone’s ranks - they are merely teaching the Faith as it has been taught for two thousand years, until the council which opened the windows of the Church to the world, and allowed the errors to flood in. Perhaps the Pope is striving to heal… I believe that he is. But his ideas of what needs to be healed differ somewhat from those of the SSPX and indeed most Traditional Catholics. He still clings tenaciously to “his baby” the New Mass, and I fear that he is hoping to create a new New Mass which will replace both the TLM and the NOM. However, it is not for us to presume, we can only pray. I pray every day for the Pope and the bishops to return to the traditional teachings of the Church.

What authority put the SSPX bishops above the pope? What authority gave them the right to say that almost every mass the last three popes have said is bad, or in error? What makes the SSPX the supreme authority on what is right and wrong? I think it was you who said that the pope can err, yes he can, but I am sure he errs much less than the mere bishops in the SSPX. God and the Church set up the hierarchal system for a reason, so that there would be someone calling the shots, and the rest to do the work. There cannot be more than one boss, that is why the Eastern Churches were excommunicated, they wanted two bosses, well, now the SSPX seems to want two bosses, it doesn’t work.

I won’t be on here until probably tomorrow morning, so don’t think I am ignoring you, it is just that I have other more demanding things to do. Have a great day all.

 

[laudamus_te]

The SSPX has many rules that the consider essential that are no longer the case such as:
no eating for 3 hours previous to Holy Communion (the rule is 1hr)

FALSE. The SSPX encourages the traditional fast, and in fact encourages the VERY traditional fast from midnight. It is not considered essential, nor sinful if one observes the 1 hour fast.

women must only wear dresses or skirts, and they should at least reach mid-calf for daily wear and down to the ankle for mass

FALSE. Dress codes are displayed prominently at my SSPX chapel, and are frequently posted in the bulletin. Women are asked to wear dresses or skirts, which must cover the knees when sitting. NEVER have I seen “down to the ankle” as a rule. I have seen women in pants, and they HAVE NOT been ridden out of the chapel on a rail!

women should not participate in sports

FALSE.

women shouldn’t study too much

FALSE. Margarite, where are you coming up with this nonsense? You are spreading very wrong information here.

women are inferior to men

FALSE FALSE FALSE! This absolutely takes the cake, and is so far off target I am speechless.

it is better to miss Sunday mass than to attend a NO

Finally, you got one right! However, I don’t think you can attribute this as a blanket statement to the SSPX.

they don’t obey the pope or anyone who believes the NO is valid

**FALSE. **And I had hope for you with that last one - oh well! They obey the Pope in matters which are not a danger to the Faith as dogmatically set down by the Magisterium. They are not required to obey anyone else, whether they believe the NO is valid or not.

While some of these rules are good and fine, they are horrible because the SSPX looks down and condems those who do not follow these rules. While it may be beautiful for a person to fast for 3hrs, and wear only dresses, it is ugly when a person looks down on all those who do not follow these practices.

Again with the falsehoods. The SSPX does not “look down” NOR 'condemn" anyone. If there are people in your life who do this, that is your experience. But it is very wrong to label the Society so falsely.

There are many other rules, they are not written, but they must be spoken in sermons, because it is consistent with SSPX members. Just as an example of how silly some of them are, my aunts send me modesty books from the 1800’s. Well, fashions have changed since then, and I think I would look rather ridiculous in a long dress with puffed sleeves like Anne of Green Gables. I’m sorry, but this just shows how ridiculous they are. Also, I am a very modest person, I have found a way to be modest and modern at the same time.

I would almost like to hear what these “many other rules” which are not written but must be spoken of are. But I’m sure it would be more falsehoods. Also, I have yet to see anyone frequenting the SSPX chapels dressed like Anne of Green Gables. Although, I have to admit that I think it would be rather cute. To each his/her own, who am I to judge?

 

[saint_rafael]

Margarite,

as far as the women playing in sports, they can play if they dress modestly. The problem is that the uniforms tend to be immodest.

The whole pants issue:
The Bible is clear.
“A woman shall not be clothed with man’s apparel, neither shall a man use woman’s apparel; for he that doeth these things is abominable before God.” (Deut.22:5)

Never in the history of Western civilization did women wear the clothes of men in the form of pants. skirts and dresses were always the norm because of the role and nature of the female sex.

Most people dress the way they do because of the cultural revolution of the 60’s. It was a godless atheistic revolution against authority, God, nature, and virtue.
Look at the way before dressed before and after the 60’s. In classical movies one can see how women dressed like.

I hope this two articles are helpful:

olrl.org/virtues/pants.shtml

olrl.org/virtues/modesty.shtml

 

[laudamus_te]

Margarite, you have lost so much credibility with that last post of blatant falsehoods, I hesitate to answer you further. But I will try to clear up a few things:

What authority put the SSPX bishops above the pope?

Have the SSPX declared that they are above the Pope? No.

What authority gave them the right to say that almost every mass the last three popes have said is bad, or in error? What makes the SSPX the supreme authority on what is right and wrong?

They have not said that every mass the last three popes have said is in error. They do believe that it is not a good mass, that it is a heavily protestantised mass, that it can be dangerous to souls, and they have as proof the sobering statistics of Catholics who do not believe in the Real Presence. The SSPX is not, nor have they ever declared themselves to be the “supreme authority” on right and wrong. They are simply holding fast to the Immutable Truths of the Church, as handed down by the Apostles. Jesus is the Supreme Authority on right and wrong.

I think it was you who said that the pope can err, yes he can, but I am sure he errs much less than the mere bishops in the SSPX.

What does it matter if he errs less or more? Error is error, pure and simple. Because something is just a little wrong doesn’t make it right.

God and the Church set up the hierarchal system for a reason, so that there would be someone calling the shots, and the rest to do the work. There cannot be more than one boss, that is why the Eastern Churches were excommunicated, they wanted two bosses, well, now the SSPX seems to want two bosses, it doesn’t work.

You don’t have a very good understanding of how the Church is run nowadays. The Pope is not the one “calling the shots” in most cases. And the SSPX does not want two bosses. They want one boss who does his job, as it should be, rather than the collegial system in place now. It is the Episcopal Colleges who call the shots, why else do you think the SSPX is so much opposed? They have been opposed since Day 1 by the powerful liberal bishops.

 

[pnewton]

I wasn’t intending to bring up a “straw man.” I just thought it was an interesting statistic, and underscores the lack of proper catechesis in today’s Church.

I totally agree. We also have Catholics for a Free Choice. We have people come to Mass in places dressed in appropriately. We have priests which welcome homosexual unions and politicians that promote abortion.

None of this has to do with anything, though. Sin on the part of people does not justify disobedience. I don’t blame Fellay for shuddering when he sees some of the things that have happened in the Church. I do blame him for jumping ship. I mostly blaming for encouraging others to abandon ship. I hate to tell him, but its not going to sink. He would have been much more use aboard, bailing and putting out fires than floating in the water and ranting at all the problems that are happening on board.

 

[laudamus_te]

I totally agree. We also have Catholics for a Free Choice. We have people come to Mass in places dressed in appropriately. We have priests which welcome homosexual unions and politicians that promote abortion.

None of this has to do with anything, though. Sin on the part of people does not justify disobedience. I don’t blame Fellay for shuddering when he sees some of the things that have happened in the Church. I do blame him for jumping ship. I mostly blaming for encouraging others to abandon ship. I hate to tell him, but its not going to sink. He would have been much more use aboard, bailing and putting out fires than floating in the water and ranting at all the problems that are happening on board.

Actually, it has much to do with everything. Sin, blatant sin which is counter to the teachings of the Church, among Catholics and particularly among the clergy, is indicative of the state of the Church and how miserably it has failed to properly catechise, particularly in the last 40+years. What you see as “jumping ship” I see as maintaining an even keel. Abp. Lefebvre may have jumped the VII ship, but not the Church’s ship. It is all of the others who have jumped the ship of the Church, and they want the SSPX to jump out and sink, too! Fellay does not rant about the problems, because he is not a part of them. He is maintaining a thriving Society, with many faithful, without any of the problems that are attacking the “Church of Vatican II.”

 

[pnewton]

What you see as “jumping ship” I see as maintaining an even keel. Abp. Lefebvre may have jumped the VII ship, but not the Church’s ship.

However, there is not Catholic version of the theory of relativity. The Catholic Church is not something everyone defines for themselves. When Lefebvre was excommunicated, he did not take the Church with him. It remained with Pope John Paul II. It was from the Catholic Church that he was excommunicated.

I likewise acknowledge that many today who call themselves Catholic have cut themselves off from the Church through the sin that you mentioned.

 

[piouswoman]

However, there is not Catholic version of the theory of relativity. The Catholic Church is not something everyone defines for themselves. When Lefebvre was excommunicated, he did not take the Church with him. It remained with Pope John Paul II. It was from the Catholic Church that he was excommunicated.

I likewise acknowledge that many today who call themselves Catholic have cut themselves off from the Church through the sin that you mentioned.

Cut themselves off through what* sin?* Could you clarify?

 

[LilyM]

Actually, it has much to do with everything. Sin, blatant sin which is counter to the teachings of the Church, among Catholics and particularly among the clergy, is indicative of the state of the Church and how miserably it has failed to properly catechise, particularly in the last 40+years. What you see as “jumping ship” I see as maintaining an even keel. Abp. Lefebvre may have jumped the VII ship, but not the Church’s ship. It is all of the others who have jumped the ship of the Church, and they want the SSPX to jump out and sink, too! Fellay does not rant about the problems, because he is not a part of them. He is maintaining a thriving Society, with many faithful, without any of the problems that are attacking the “Church of Vatican II.”

Actually your sort of thinking is pre-cisely how Luther and other Protestant leaders justified THEIR abandonment of the Church - only in their day it was things like the sale of indulgences and Church offices and Popes who blatantly broke their vows of celibacy etc that ‘proved’ to their satisfaction that the Church had ‘jumped ship’.

Did St Ignatius of Loyola or any of the other great Saints of the Reformation EVER feel it necessary to blatantly disobey a Pontiff as Lefebvre did in order to achieve reforms in an era where they were absoutely needed JUST as badly. Even though in THEIR day clearly a large percentage of people (almost a majority of the huge percentage of Europeans who became Protestant in fact) ALSO didn’t believe in the Real Presence and many other Church doctrines either? Probably, for that matter, as with today, through lack of proper catechesis and teaching from their priests?