SSPX not likely to 'come home'

[Big_Feet]

Why is that only the SSPX should be served stern discipline, yet dissenters from moral Teaching should be treated “gentle”?

The attitude around here is … cut those Pharisee type SSPX loose!

The SSPX are not the only ones “served with stern discipline.” There have been many who have been many individuals ex-communicated or had their teaching authority revoked by the church in recent years, and rightfully so!! (some examples are: the sister in Phoenix, AZ who approved of an abortion in a “Catholic” hospital. Hans Küng - theologian who the Vatican has rescinded his authority to teach Catholic theology)

As I have said before, in this thread and in others, I continue to pray for the return of not only the SSPX, and it’s members, but all those who have been disobedient to the Church, and the Holy Father. Reconciliation and obedience are wonderful things that our Lord has allowed us!

 

[jam070406]

The SSPX are not the only ones “served with stern discipline.” There have been many who have been many individuals ex-communicated or had their teaching authority revoked by the church in recent years, and rightfully so!! (some examples are: the sister in Phoenix, AZ who approved of an abortion in a “Catholic” hospital. Hans Küng - theologian who the Vatican has rescinded his authority to teach Catholic theology)

As I have said before, in this thread and in others, I continue to pray for the return of not only the SSPX, and it’s members, but all those who have been disobedient to the Church, and the Holy Father. Reconciliation and obedience are wonderful things that our Lord has allowed us!

Good point.
Blessings to you!

 

[Big_Feet]

Other organizations and individuals that have incurred a decree of excommunication, just in the 21st Centry (list from Wikipedia):

• Members of multiple organizations in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Lincoln, Nebraska were excommunicated by Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz in March 1996 for promoting positions he deemed “totally incompatible with the Catholic faith”. The organizations include Call to Action, Catholics for a Free Choice, Planned Parenthood, the Hemlock Society, the Freemasons, and the Society of St. Pius X. The Vatican later confirmed the excommunication of Call to Action members in November 2006.

• Emmanual Milingo, former archbishop of Lusaka, for consecrating four bishops without the papal mandate. Also excommunicated were those receiving consecration.
  The Community of the Lady of All Nations for heretical teachings and beliefs after a six-year investigation. The declaration was announced by the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops on September 12, 2007.

• Rev. Dale Fushek (also laicized by Pope Benedict XVI 02/2010) and Rev. Mark Dippre. Former Priests were issued a Decree of Excommunication by Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted for operating “an opposing ecclesial community” in direct disobedience to orders to refrain from public ministry.

• Father Marek Bozek (since laicized by Pope Benedict XVI), and the lay parish board members of St. Stanislaus Kostka Church in St. Louis, Missouri in December 2005 were declared guilty of the ecclesiastical crime of schism by then-Archbishop Raymond Leo Burke. Their excommunication was ratified by the Vatican in May 2008. Four of the parish board members have since reconciled with the Church.

• The Archbishop of Olinda and Recife in Brazil, Jose Cardoso Sobrinho, announced the automatic excommunication of the mother and doctors of a nine year old girl who had an abortion after being raped and impregnated by her stepfather.

• Margaret McBride, a nun, for allowing an abortion. McBride later reconciled with the church and is no longer living in a state of excommunication.[Noted in earlier post]

Please do not think that only the SSPX are being “picked on.” If one does something against Church teaching (in any direction), and it is severe enough to cause public scandal, the Church will deal with it.

 

[ProVobis]

I’ll give my take on the SSPX situation. I agree with the OP that the SSPX will not likely ‘come home.’ There are many good priests and faithful there, but since they will not likely be allowed to speak in terms of “errors of the Council,” which in part defines who they are, they will not likely reconcile, unfortunately. I hope I am wrong.

I don’t think you’re wrong. But if you read some of the posts of recent years, I don’t think anyone really expected all of SSPX to “come home,” as the OP puts it. As we’ve discussed often here, the ones who were initially involved in the 70’s are more culpable than the current set, of whom many laity and priests know no other home. The contributions and support have been overwhelming, witness the many self-supporting chapels out there. From a marketing perspective they have done very well in getting people to attend there; that can’t be denied. So the question is how can we get everyone to reconcile with everyone else. As I said before, the Law of Distribution says you can’t.

As far as “errors of the Council,” chances are most of them (as well as non-FSSPXers) have never read the documents, much less in their original Latin form. Only a handful, if that much, were actually present at the council. So is the criticism of Vatican II really valid? After all many just parrot what they’ve been taught themselves. But this same goes for the 75% (and growing) number of Catholics who don’t attend Mass. It was really a sad day to hear from our own pastor that of the recent 200 or so First Communicants in our English/Spanish/EF parish, that most of them will never step foot inside a church again. Very sobering thought indeed.

 

[OurBeloved]

The SSPX are not the only ones “served with stern discipline.” There have been many who have been many individuals ex-communicated or had their teaching authority revoked by the church in recent years, and rightfully so!! (some examples are: the sister in Phoenix, AZ who approved of an abortion in a “Catholic” hospital. Hans Küng - theologian who the Vatican has rescinded his authority to teach Catholic theology)s

A question worth asking is how many “Hans Küng” like Theologians are still enjoying preaching and teaching their errors.

I agree that the Church is not entirely sleeping. After all, it does crack down on priests involved in sexual abuse cases. But the point is that there are a significant amount of priests/theologians who are left unchecked.

Cracking down on these dissidents can help the Catholic faithful. At the same time, the dissidents such as SSPX will be able to understand that the Church is indeed Catholic. Right now, the church seems to admit that Vatican II has been taken out of context and abused by many priests. But the church does less work to expose and show which are the errors and abuses. So if there is indeed abuse, and someone outside might see it and be told that it is the teaching of Vatican II, there is a good chance that the person might reasonably conclude that Vatican II is in error.

So the way I see it, perhaps its is better to first concentrate all that energy in cleaning out the bad inside the church to a degree in which the actual council teachings are practiced by the majority of the church. Then dissidents are a minority and easier to spot and groups like the SSPX will be able to see that there is no reason to deny Vatican II.

You have to remember that the people who belong to SSPX are usually those who just got scandalized due to the abuses of Vatican II. The solution then is to first get rid (obviously complete riddance is impossible but to the level where abuse if minority) of the abuses. Then the SSPX or anyone else who left will probably join in anyway.

Now if one does want to use a discussion based approach with SSPX on doctrinal differences and the logical merit of being separated from the Vicar of Christ, then one has to remember that they should adopt these same stance with Protestants and other non-Catholics as well. I am all for such an approach as well. But at least be consistent. We can’t just have “lets sing and worship together with Protestants to get them to become Catholic” or “lets do charity work in Islamic countries to get to them to become interested in Catholicism” and then talk about actively discussing the SSPX errors with them. That to me a is a bit hypocritical.

In short, I think reason should play the major role and discussions should be the method of choice with any non-Catholic. But lately, I am starting to realize that the church wants to try and use a “appeal to the heart” (which I think is more appropriate to be called appeal to emotion) approach. So if that is the approach one wants to take, then one should clean house to a degree where a person can actually see that what is appealing is actually in the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[OraLabora]

I think it’s a bit like catching speeders on the highway. You can’t catch them all. Those you nab you can throw the book at, but you need solid evidence, not just hearsay that Fr. So-and-So gives lousy or heretical homilies. It will never be perfect I’m afraid.

 

[OurBeloved]

I think it’s a bit like catching speeders on the highway. You can’t catch them all. Those you nab you can throw the book at, but you need solid evidence, not just hearsay that Fr. So-and-So gives lousy or heretical homilies. It will never be perfect I’m afraid.

Oh for sure. But in most cases, priests who abuse the liturgy are known and just simply called “enthusiastic”.

Then there are also those who make public statements, like Fr. Joaquin Bernas in the Philippines. He is still having a jolly good time spreading his error and potentially destroying the respect that the Catholics in that country have towards orthodox bishops and priests. He is probably writing up another article to a newspaper as you are reading this saying that the Catholic Church is out of line in trying to enforce it’s view on contraception on the public using political means.

So there is no need for perfection. Just at least get rid of those who stick out like a sore thumb so that at least a Catholic can know who to trust for guidance regarding spiritual matters. Actually, no need to even get rid of them. Just WARN THEM officially and let it be known to the public that he was warned for so and so. When one arrives at that level of perfection, then even an outsider would be able to see the Catholic teaching clearly.

 

[pnewton]

As I said, I’m taking a break, but I didn’t want this question hanging as if I’m making things up.

Thank you for responding. I was serious about wanting to see the context. The crisis that AB DiNoia sees is that we need to be more evangelical. Good. He is in a prime spot to assist the SSPX into coming back into the ministry of the Catholic Church. While I too get discouraged with some of the posturing, I would never suggest that the Catholic Church should abandon all hope in going after the one in ninety-nine.

 

[jam070406]

thetablet.co.uk/latest-news/4315

Archbishop Gus DiNoia OP, who last week became the Vatican’s de facto leader for relations with the Society of St Pius X (SSPX), has told an American Catholic paper he believes “the dominant progressivism reading of the [Second Vatican] Council is in retreat” and this should make it easier to reconcile the so-called Lefebvrists with Rome. “So Benedict has liberated us for the first time. You can now criticise De Lubac, Congar, Chenu” the American Dominican told the National Catholic Register. Archbishop DiNoia said he was “sympathetic” towards the Lefebvrists and some of their concerns, “but the solution is not breaking off from the Church.” He insisted: “Catholicism is broad enough to include a tremendous amount of theological diversity and debate.”

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

Sounds promising.

Those who sold us the “spirit of Vatican II” have much to answer for.

 

[Big_Feet]

Archbishop DiNoia said, “Catholicism is broad enough to include a tremendous amount of theological diversity and debate.”

How true!!! I so wish that those from all sides of “the debate” can see this, and come to the “table” with this understanding. It is then from that table that the Church, and she alone, through her processes define these ideas as right/wrong/within the realm of potential development.

 

[Zosimus41]

There are folks within the Catholic Church that hold kooky ideas. Individual kooky ideas does not an official stance of a society make.

Amen and Amen

 

[Melchior_1]

There’s a couple of minor characteristics I have noticed within the Catholic Church, on two sides. I’m speaking of the “liberal” side and the “traditional” side.

“Throw the book at them!” are the cries that are raised. “Look at what ‘they’ are doing wrong”. “Excommunicate them! Strip them of their positions!”. Essays, texts, and sermons devoted to showcasing the errors performed. “We need to move the Church in XYZ direction!”

Sound familiar? It’s the hymn sung by those on both sides of the disputes that are happening.

The shoe is then on the other foot at this point. Discipline was handed down, and there’s a backlash. When people are treated as they expect others to be treated, they are surprised. A group renowned for “punish those who are disobedient” finds themselves sitting in the waiting room of a party, because of disobedience. They look to others who were invited, and feel slighted, without thinking that the very method they wanted to apply to others is being applied to them.

I’ve noticed on CAF, and especially other boards, the hardline stances that people take on things. These same people typically have an issue with the Feast of the Divine Mercy, which I understand why. Either;

• The hardline stances held simply cannot account for the Divine Mercy of God, that God’s Mercy is infinite.
• The other side of the coin, they can’t fathom anything good can come from two old fashioned Pope’s, JP2 and BXVI (especially the latter). And they can’t fathom that God is also infinite justice.

Mercy is missing in all of this from both sides. I acknowledge I have lacked mercy in the past on this issue, and lacked charity. This past year, when the news came down that talks were optimistic, I noticed it was very close after Divine Mercy Sunday. There’s no such things as coincidences, folks. I decided that, yes, I want them in the party, not in the foyer waiting to come in.

Yet the mercy is still not there from either side, there continues to be fighting, hardline stances. Both sides call for the removal of the other, both sides call for punishment. No give when there can be some give be given. I guess no one has learned that to live by the sword is to die by it. And people continue to act surprised when they call for fierce punishments for disobedience, yet cry foul when they break Church law themselves.

 

[OurBeloved]

There’s a couple of minor characteristics I have noticed within the Catholic Church, on two sides. I’m speaking of the “liberal” side and the “traditional” side.

“Throw the book at them!” are the cries that are raised. “Look at what ‘they’ are doing wrong”. “Excommunicate them! Strip them of their positions!”. Essays, texts, and sermons devoted to showcasing the errors performed. “We need to move the Church in XYZ direction!”

Sound familiar? It’s the hymn sung by those on both sides of the disputes that are happening.

The shoe is then on the other foot at this point. Discipline was handed down, and there’s a backlash. When people are treated as they expect others to be treated, they are surprised. A group renowned for “punish those who are disobedient” finds themselves sitting in the waiting room of a party, because of disobedience. They look to others who were invited, and feel slighted, without thinking that the very method they wanted to apply to others is being applied to them.

I’ve noticed on CAF, and especially other boards, the hardline stances that people take on things. These same people typically have an issue with the Feast of the Divine Mercy, which I understand why. Either;

• The hardline stances held simply cannot account for the Divine Mercy of God, that God’s Mercy is infinite.
• The other side of the coin, they can’t fathom anything good can come from two old fashioned Pope’s, JP2 and BXVI (especially the latter). And they can’t fathom that God is also infinite justice.

Mercy is missing in all of this from both sides. I acknowledge I have lacked mercy in the past on this issue, and lacked charity. This past year, when the news came down that talks were optimistic, I noticed it was very close after Divine Mercy Sunday. There’s no such things as coincidences, folks. I decided that, yes, I want them in the party, not in the foyer waiting to come in.

Yet the mercy is still not there from either side, there continues to be fighting, hardline stances. Both sides call for the removal of the other, both sides call for punishment. No give when there can be some give be given. I guess no one has learned that to live by the sword is to die by it. And people continue to act surprised when they call for fierce punishments for disobedience, yet cry foul when they break Church law themselves.

Well, what you have to realize friend is that mercy is given to those who realize they need it and ask for it.

A person who continues to murder person’s does not receive mercy because in their heart, they think they are doing something right.

So asking person’s who are promoting error to be called out is not against mercy. It is actually good because then it calls that person to ask for God’s mercy. It is also good in that it prevents a lot of people from accidentally following this person in error.

Therefore, lets not confuse what mercy really means.

 

[curlycool89]

Yes, the SSPX are disobedient and that is wrong. That doesn’t negate the fact that they deserve a nod for preserving our traditional liturgy and Catholic practices.

I think a quote from the Catechism will suffice here.

312 In time we can discover that God in his almighty providence can bring a good from the consequences of an evil, even a moral evil, caused by his creatures: “It was not you”, said Joseph to his brothers, “who sent me here, but God. . . You meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive.” From the greatest moral evil ever committed - the rejection and murder of God’s only Son, caused by the sins of all men - God, by his grace that “abounded all the more”, brought the greatest of goods: the glorification of Christ and our redemption. But for all that, evil never becomes a good.

Yes, God can even bring good from morally evil acts, but that never justifies the acts themselves (the ends never justify the means).

I understand what you are saying.
But I think you underestimate the SSPX. I also believe people project an intent on them that comes from a judgmental spirit out of dislike for them. You mention disobedience but never give credit for their desire at unity.

What desire for unity? We’ve seen barely any effort of the part of the SSPX to resolve anything. Most it has been the Vatican that has been trying to move things forward, with the SSPX just constantly mentioning that they’re “not satisfied yet” or something like that.

Like I said, maybe they say it but their actions speak otherwise.

It’s very telling that the head of the CDF stated that the faith is viewed differently now and that the SSPX needs to converted to this new way of thinking. Image if Rome said we needed to convert the ECs to our way of thinking!
Just like you, the SSPX wants to retain their traditions. I would think that someone like you could appreciate that. The difference is, the SSPX would feel a greater impact against their traditions then your EC church. That’s my 2 cents.

What you’re doing here is called a category mistake (a fallacy originally defined by Gilbert Ryle). The SSPX are not in the same category as Easter Catholics Churches. The ECs are Churches in the proper sense of the word, while the SSPX is not. They do not have traditions that are apart from the Roman Catholic Church, nor are they negotiating as equals with the CDF. The ECs negotiate as equals because they are a Church, the SSPX are subordinates.

But let us not pretend that we are only in crisis today. Every generation brings a new crisis to the Church.

It’s good for people to release this because we have an inherent bias for our times. What I mean is that we always think the time we’re living in is the worst time ever because we’re living through it.

 

[thewanderer]

Well, what you have to realize friend is that mercy is given to those who realize they need it and ask for it.

A person who continues to murder person’s does not receive mercy because in their heart, they think they are doing something right.

So asking person’s who are promoting error to be called out is not against mercy. It is actually good because then it calls that person to ask for God’s mercy. It is also good in that it prevents a lot of people from accidentally following this person in error.

Therefore, lets not confuse what mercy really means.

I’m sorry, but I have to ask, does this apply to those who sin by confecting illicit sacraments yet continue to do so because they are convinced they are right as well?

Don’t get me wrong, I am all for reconciliation, I think it is well past time that SSPX is fully a part of the Church and able to follow out their mission with Church Authority to back them up, but I found it interesting that while your reply applies to both sides of this issue you only focused on one.

 

[OurBeloved]

I’m sorry, but I have to ask, does this apply to those who sin by confecting illicit sacraments yet continue to do so because they are convinced they are right as well?

Yes. But more so on the ones who do confer the illicit sacraments.

Don’t get me wrong, I am all for reconciliation, I think it is well past time that SSPX is fully a part of the Church and able to follow out their mission with Church Authority to back them up, but I found it interesting that while your reply applies to both sides of this issue you only focused on one.

If SSPX are outside the church, then the church has done their part on the issue with respect to SSPX. Anyone who wants to join SSPX has a clear warning that to do so is to put oneself in error.

BUT, the church has not done it’s part in cleaning the rest of the remaining house. There are dissidents inside the church who get away with preaching/teaching and supporting things contrary to the faith. It’s time to put those people outside too.

 

[Melchior_1]

Well, what you have to realize friend is that mercy is given to those who realize they need it and ask for it.

A person who continues to murder person’s does not receive mercy because in their heart, they think they are doing something right.

So asking person’s who are promoting error to be called out is not against mercy. It is actually good because then it calls that person to ask for God’s mercy. It is also good in that it prevents a lot of people from accidentally following this person in error.

Therefore, lets not confuse what mercy really means.

Do get upset when you call the kettle black, if you the pot are black yourself. Calling for others to be punished for their disobedience is all well and good, but don’t be upset when you are called to take your own lumps.

Mercy is correcting with charity. And in the case of asking for mercy, I see on both sides a distinct lack of openness. It’s as if they want mercy, but they don’t want to make themselves vulnerable to receive that mercy. And that’s when we are the most ready to receive the Divine Mercy, is when we open ourselves up in that fashion.

 

[OurBeloved]

Do get upset when you call the kettle black, if you the pot are black yourself. Calling for others to be punished for their disobedience is all well and good, but don’t be upset when you are called to take your own lumps.

So let me understand you correctly. You are afraid to call others to be punished because you are afraid that you would be punished as well?

In any case, the idea of calling out dissidents is really not just punishment. It is also for the sake of the faithful so that they may not embrace their error and be careful when they deal with them. So you should be happy that you would be called out as well in the event that you do end up obstinately spreading error.

Mercy is correcting with charity. And in the case of asking for mercy, I see on both sides a distinct lack of openness. It’s as if they want mercy, but they don’t want to make themselves vulnerable to receive that mercy. And that’s when we are the most ready to receive the Divine Mercy, is when we open ourselves up in that fashion.

Well, Melchior, now we are getting off track. Who are both sides? If we are talking about the dissidents vs. the non dissidents, then the ones who need the mercy with respect to being dissident are the dissidents. Not both sides.

I feel that you are confusing things here now.

Also, to open up for divine mercy, one needs to know that they have transgressed. The Church has to take the initiative to correct some people and show them that they have transgressed.

You are also making it sound like excommunication is not Biblical. As I said before, St. Paul himself asked a sexual offender to be removed from the congregation.

 

[Melchior_1]

So let me understand you correctly. You are afraid to call others to be punished because you are afraid that you would be punished as well?

Not at all. I’m saying that those who call out others shouldn’t act so hurt and betrayed when they are called out themselves. Hold yourself to the standards you hold others. If you can’t catch the ball, don’t throw it.

Well, Melchior, now we are getting off track. Who are both sides?

I was quite clear in my initial post which sides I am referring to.