SSPX Reconciliation

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

paramedicgirl:

Before I knew the SSPX was in schism, I attended several of their Masses with my brother. It is a very beautiful (illicit) Mass.

I welcome reconcilliation. Their traditionalism will be very good for the Catholic Church. In many ways we have strayed too far away from the beauty and tradition of our faith. Best of all, we will be able to attend their Masses and know they are licit.

And so many, including 3 members of my own family, will no longer be in schism

So I take you you believe that one who is drawen to and prefers the current Mass can not be a traditionalist?

 

[pgoings]

ByzCath:

It depends on the form the reconciliation would take.

If I may ask, what would be a form that you would not welcome?

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

pgoings:

If I may ask, what would be a form that you would not welcome?

Well I have not fully thought on it but for starters I think it is already in existance with the FSSP and the other religious orders dedicated to the old Mass.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

ByzCath:

So I take you you believe that one who is drawen to and prefers the current Mass can not be a traditionalist?

It’s certainly possible to be ‘traditional’ or ‘traditionally minded’ within the context of the current Mass, but that rite is not an organic growth from the living tradition of worship that preceded it. On that ground I think it would be fair to maintain some sort of distinction between ‘traditionalism,’ referring to devotion to the old rite, and simply ‘being traditional’ in terms of preferring those practices of ‘old rite Catholicism’ not abolished by the new rite but nevertheless fallen into disuse and/or even disrepute.

Quick example:
wanting to rescind the indult for communion in the hand but maybe still stand - traditional; wanting the “Judica me” to start your Mass - traditionalist

wanting Eucharistic Prayer II said reverently in Latin - traditional; wanting only the Roman Canon - traditionalist

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Andreas Hofer:

It’s certainly possible to be ‘traditional’ or ‘traditionally minded’ within the context of the current Mass, but that rite is not an organic growth from the living tradition of worship that preceded it. On that ground I think it would be fair to maintain some sort of distinction between ‘traditionalism,’ referring to devotion to the old rite, and simply ‘being traditional’ in terms of preferring those practices of ‘old rite Catholicism’ not abolished by the new rite but nevertheless fallen into disuse and/or even disrepute.

Hmmm, well the same can be said for those who prefer the old Mass as one can not truely be a traditionalist when they ignore the Church and its disciplinary decisions. The SSPX are even further out there as they chose to enter schism over what they veiw as traditional.

I do not think the choice of Mass has anything to do with traditionalism and when one makes the assumption that it does they wound the Church.

As for the communion in hand, one could say that those who want this are more traditional as it is a practice of the ancient Church.

But I do see what you are saying in your examples but I do take exception to the use of Latin. The vernacular can be traditional. After all, the old Mass was said in the vernacular in some places after the Council of Trent and the Eastern Churches have always used the vernacular.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

ByzCath:

Hmmm, well the same can be said for those who prefer the old Mass as one can not truely be a traditionalist when they ignore the Church and its disciplinary decisions. The SSPX are even further out there as they chose to enter schism over what they veiw as traditional.

I do not think the choice of Mass has anything to do with traditionalism and when one makes the assumption that it does they wound the Church.

As for the communion in hand, one could say that those who want this are more traditional as it is a practice of the ancient Church.

But I do see what you are saying in your examples but I do take exception to the use of Latin. The vernacular can be traditional. After all, the old Mass was said in the vernacular in some places after the Council of Trent and the Eastern Churches have always used the vernacular.

Of course Eastern Catholics will have a very different sense of what “traditional” praxis entails, but then again they have proven much more attached to traditional forms, AFAIK, than the ever-innovative Latins.

Communion in the hand is a great case for defining exactly what is meant by tradition(al/alism). When I refer to traditional practice I often use, as I did above, some form of the phrase ‘living tradition.’ I do this in an attempt to denote practices with a long history of use that continue to the present day. That’s because something that is older is not necessarily “the traditional way of doing things.” That’s a necessary distinction when discussing traditionalism because without it you wind up with the conclusion made by the farcical Society of St. Pius I that nothing is traditional if it is not original.

To use that distinction that traditional means time-honored practice still in use, communion in the hand, in the Latin rite, is more of an old practice than a traditional one. Sure that was an early norm, but after it disappeared from use for a millenium it’s a bit of a stretch to call it “more traditional.” I’m not sure when the modern indult was granted, so it could possibly have hit the 30-year mark (which the new rite only is not far past) to be canonically considered tradition at this point.

The new Mass has resurrected plenty of things that, while old, are not traditional in the sense of having survived in practice to the present day (think the general intercessions, kiss of peace in the congregation, canon of Hippolytus, etc.).

 

[EddieArent]

Bishop Williamson basically said there are three options here. A) Either Rome converts. 2) The Society abandons the faith. 3) The two meet half way. Unless this ecumenical nonsense and other hersey & condemned ideas are stopped (even Pope Benedict XVI praised the condemned position of religious liberty in Deus Cartias Est, a full critique by Fr. Scott at websitetoolbox.com/tool/post/apologia/vpost?id=1002398), there is no need for “reconciliation” with that is what is opposed to the Catholic faith. The Society must, like it’s founder Archbishop Lefebvre, fight to preserve the faith and not cave in to popular demand be it from the media or other sources. But rather, they should continue strive to restore all things in Christ. It’s not simply about the Mass, it’s about the faith and Bishop Williamson understand he has the faith and while folks like Cardinal Hoyos may share some common beliefs, the beliefs they hold are more different than similar.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

EddieArent:

Bishop Williamson basically said there are three options here. A) Either Rome converts. 2) The Society abandons the faith. 3) The two meet half way. Unless this ecumenical nonsense and other hersey & condemned ideas are stopped (even Pope Benedict XVI praised the condemned position of religious liberty in Deus Cartias Est, a full critique by Fr. Scott at websitetoolbox.com/tool/post/apologia/vpost?id=1002398), there is no need for “reconciliation” with that is what is opposed to the Catholic faith. The Society must, like it’s founder Archbishop Lefebvre, fight to preserve the faith and not cave in to popular demand be it from the media or other sources. But rather, they should continue strive to restore all things in Christ. It’s not simply about the Mass, it’s about the faith and Bishop Williamson understand he has the faith and while folks like Cardinal Hoyos may share some common beliefs, the beliefs they hold are more different than similar.

The Holy See holds the faith. Bishop Willimson is a schismatic (and POSSIBLY a heretic).

 

[pgoings]

ByzCath:

Well I have not fully thought on it but for starters I think it is already in existance with the FSSP and the other religious orders dedicated to the old Mass.

I’m sorry if I’m being obtuse, but does this mean that you would be against any scheme for reconciling the S.S.P.X. which did not involve them joining the F.S.S.P. or another existing group dedicated to the old Mass?

 

[pgoings]

ByzCath:

Hmmm, well the same can be said for those who prefer the old Mass as one can not truely be a traditionalist when they ignore the Church and its disciplinary decisions. The SSPX are even further out there as they chose to enter schism over what they veiw as traditional.

So, if you prefer the old Mass, you’re* not* a traditionalist? Would you prefer the indult of '88 to be suppressed or revoked?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I voted yes. How could I vote otherwise? We should work to repair all wounds in the Body of Christ. We don’t, however, NEED the SSPX to have unity (or any other schismatic group). The Church already possesses the fullness of unity. It’s for the SSPX to acknowledge this and come back INTO that unity. The Church did nothing to foster this break and HH Pope John Paul the Great of happy memory was bending over backwards to meet what he could of the Archbishop’s desires (an agreement had been reached, accepted, and then reneged on by the Archbishop. He was the one who entered into schism, not the Church). So let’s hope and pray that the SSPX come to their senses and submit to the Holy Father.

I’ve been thinking about the attitude that I would like to cultivate should that eventuality occur (their submission and reconciliation). It seems to me that the parable of the Prodigal Son is instructive. We can pout like the elder son or we can behave graciously. That’s our choice, I hope we all make the right one. That does, of course, assume that the SSPX will take the same attitude as the Prodigal, ie."Father, I have sinned against Heaven and against you and am no longer worthy…,"etc. I doubt that they will (last time I checked the British SSPX site, their superior was crowing that once the SSPX was back “in,” the Pauline Mass would fade. Now, since I love the Pauline Mass, why would I welcome this or anyone who felt that way? We may be nursing a snake to our collective bossom). At any rate, we can only control our own reactions. Let’s hope we do so worthily. God won’t abandon His Church. We can trust the Holy Father to do what is right and needful.

 

[alih]

much attention is given to the piux x organization as it is the
most notable and cohesive group at odds with the “new order”
(novus ordo). not-with-standing, overlooked is a much larger
contingent of traditionists not represented by a cental spokesman
and that are the independant catholics. granted many are the
so called sedevacantists others are just uncomforable with what
has been going on for nearing a half a century.
be that as it may, let us not remember one thing and that is we
all believe basically the same thing.
at some time in the future, in a manner not known to us, at a
time not known to us by persons not known to us, there will
be and must be unity. have a goodyear. ali.

 

[Walking_Home]

I am all for reconciliation.

 

[arch_angelorum]

Hi, I’m new here…

If the Pope wanted to let people in on all the treasures of the Holy Mass (ie. “throw open the windows of the church”) then why not just keep the Mass the same, but just translate the Mass in english, keep the Gregorian chant- but chant it in english and latin, keep the statues, the organs, the high altars.

I don’t see any need for all these drastic changes.Whenever I walk into a modern Catholic church, many times I can’t help but cringe. This setting which is supposed to bring me closer to God and portray His other-worldliness is not present. Many churches are like theatres, offices, sub way stations- frankly just about the same as Protestant churches.

Whenever I’ve entered an SSPX church or Eastern Catholic/ Orthodox church, I was captured in awe by the very real sense of holiness of where I was and what occurs there: the altar, the incense, the candles, the statues/icons, vestments, prayers, and chant all bring God closer to me.

btw, the Antiochian Orthodox Church (an Eastern Orthodox church ) in North America has several Western Rite missions. It is the Tridentine Rite in english.

 

[paramedicgirl]

ByzCath:

So I take you you believe that one who is drawen to and prefers the current Mass can not be a traditionalist?

You are reading way too much into what I said. It actually sounds argumentative. I attend the NO Mass and I have very traditional viewpoints. There goes your theory.

 

[tradconvert]

Yes - of course. But it is not just ensuring the traditional mass can be said universally - ie without special indult, but also it is enabling Catholics to be really Catholic with all the ability to practice the faith in its entirity with all the devotions, beautiful churches and liturgies.

In other words, it is the full “package” not just the traditional mass which will once again make the Catholic church stand out as the one true and holy faith. It was that full package which attracted me (before V2 brought in the changes) as a young boy to the one true faith - albeit that I was turned off by the changes in 1969, only to rediscover the full traditional Catholic faith later on in life thanks to the SSPX. I do not solely attend the SSPX chapels although I full respect them - any traditional latin mass is a wonderful uplifting experience.

So in my strong view, restoring the full “package” to parishes who want it, will bring about many more conversions and a real revival of the the holy mother Church rather than a sad and worrying decline into what is often seemingly just another protestant denomination. In making the last point I do not mean be critical of the many good Catholics who attend the new mass and strive to practice the full faith, but I am critical of those who seek to turn the Church into a pop concert or banal entertainment and reduce the beautiful spirituality of our Catholic faith to nothing.

 

[thistle]

JKirkLVNV:

I voted yes. How could I vote otherwise? We should work to repair all wounds in the Body of Christ. We don’t, however, NEED the SSPX to have unity (or any other schismatic group). The Church already possesses the fullness of unity. It’s for the SSPX to acknowledge this and come back INTO that unity. The Church did nothing to foster this break and HH Pope John Paul the Great of happy memory was bending over backwards to meet what he could of the Archbishop’s desires (an agreement had been reached, accepted, and then reneged on by the Archbishop. He was the one who entered into schism, not the Church). So let’s hope and pray that the SSPX come to their senses and submit to the Holy Father.

I’ve been thinking about the attitude that I would like to cultivate should that eventuality occur (their submission and reconciliation). It seems to me that the parable of the Prodigal Son is instructive. We can pout like the elder son or we can behave graciously. That’s our choice, I hope we all make the right one. That does, of course, assume that the SSPX will take the same attitude as the Prodigal, ie."Father, I have sinned against Heaven and against you and am no longer worthy…,"etc. I doubt that they will (last time I checked the British SSPX site, their superior was crowing that once the SSPX was back “in,” the Pauline Mass would fade. Now, since I love the Pauline Mass, why would I welcome this or anyone who felt that way? We may be nursing a snake to our collective bossom). At any rate, we can only control our own reactions. Let’s hope we do so worthily. God won’t abandon His Church. We can trust the Holy Father to do what is right and needful.

 

[thistle]

arch_angelorum:

Hi, I’m new here…

If the Pope wanted to let people in on all the treasures of the Holy Mass (ie. “throw open the windows of the church”) then why not just keep the Mass the same, but just translate the Mass in english, keep the Gregorian chant- but chant it in english and latin, keep the statues, the organs, the high altars.

I don’t see any need for all these drastic changes.Whenever I walk into a modern Catholic church, many times I can’t help but cringe. This setting which is supposed to bring me closer to God and portray His other-worldliness is not present. Many churches are like theatres, offices, sub way stations- frankly just about the same as Protestant churches.

Whenever I’ve entered an SSPX church or Eastern Catholic/ Orthodox church, I was captured in awe by the very real sense of holiness of where I was and what occurs there: the altar, the incense, the candles, the statues/icons, vestments, prayers, and chant all bring God closer to me.

btw, the Antiochian Orthodox Church (an Eastern Orthodox church ) in North America has several Western Rite missions. It is the Tridentine Rite in english.

Are you really suggesting the Mass be in Latin or English. The majority of the world’s Catholics live in Latin America, Africa and Asia. Are you saying they should not be able to participate in a Mass said in their own languages?

 

[Marilena]

A reminder to all as Marian Carroll stated, keep the topic on the subject of the post. Please do not go into this and that. It must
be relevent to the post.

Originally Posted by Marian Carroll
General Notice

The topic of this thread is addressing a possible reconciliation of the SSPX group with Rome. It is not to disparage the Novus Ordo Missae. If there are any further remarks of a negative nature about either liturgical rite the thread will be closed. Please limit your remarks to the subject. Your cooperation will be appreciated.

 

[arch_angelorum]

I’m sorry if it seemed I was saying anything negative about the NO Mass. My intentions were not so. I was merely saying that in my opinion, it would’ve been better for the Mass to be translated into the vernacular but still use the old mass, with some latin thrown in such as some prayers or chants with the majority of the prayers and chants in the vernacular.

Sorry for getting off topic.