SSPX Update - Redux

  • Thread starter Thread starter Melchior_1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tomdstone said:
Would that mean that a Catholic is denying obedience to Christ if he were to express disagreement with a situation where a Pope kisses the Koran?
Click to expand...
That wouldn’t fall under obedience, since the Holy Father did not command anyone to do the same.

However, in that case, I have noticed that statements have been made that go beyond disagreement. These statements are offensive to Christ.
  1. Accusing the Holy Father of Heresy. Accusing anyone of heresy is a very serious accusation. Especially a pope.
  2. Ridiculing the Holy Father on forums and blogs, thus encouraging others to join in is a travesty. Everyone has a right to their good name. Popes are no exception. It is one thing if people disagree with the kissing of the Q’Uran. It is quite another to bash the pope on a public forum that makes him look less Catholic and less holy.
  3. Denying or refusing to accept that he deserves to be beatified or canonized because of this incident falls under grave injustice and presumption. People have done exactly this. They seem to forget several things. A saint is often misunderstood. Saints see things that we cannot see. I’m not speaking about visions. I’m speaking about layers of discourse and communication. If one visits Assisi, right next to the habit of St. Francis there is a type of horn that was given to him by the Sultan. Francis actually used the horn to warn the Sultan of an attack by the Christians, because he believed that the attack was going to cost many innocent lives. He was right. Many innocent people died that day, not just soldiers. Also, the fact that this particular pope has one miracle under his belt proves something about his holiness. As far as I understand, he may have several more that can’t be challenged. If that’s the case, his canonization is imminent. To deny God the praise that is due to him for what he has done through his saints, because our opinions differ from that of the saint is an affront to God. God can sanctify whomever he so chooses, regardless of our opinions.
While this particular case does not call for obedience, it does call for charity, respect, control of the tongue, prudence, withholding judgment of another person’s sanctity and justice to God.

In the case of the SSPX, the same pope ordered the Archbishop not to ordain bishops. That order was not respected. The same pope ordered that Vatican II be accepted as it is, that was not respected. Other things like this happened during his papacy.

When people are challenged on these blatant acts of insubordination, they have the audacity to throw out there that the pope kissed the Q’Uran. It’s audacity, because it’s refusal to obey legitimate authority, because we have judged his mind and his soul, not just disagree with an observable action, but taken it the next step.

We have the right to agree and disagree, until the Church says that we do not. We never have the right to judge what’s in the heart and minds of men. If one notices, when speaking about the actions of the Archbishop, no one has ever said the things about him that have been said about Bl. John Paul. The Holy See has restrained itself to saying that he excommunicated himself. In private correspondence between the popes and him, he was challenged and chastised by them. They had the right to do so. They never made those letters public. Those letters were made public by his friends.

We must take note of the difference in dealing with perceived human weakness. The Holy See deals with it very privately and the other side deal with it very aggressively and at times disrespectfully. Even with a sense of entitlement, “I’m entitled to correct a pope and I’m entitled to bash anyone whom I want to bash.”

There is a real difference between the two approaches. Obedience is only one issue.
 
Tomdstone said:
Would that mean that a Catholic is denying obedience to Christ if he were to express disagreement with a situation where a Pope kisses the Koran?
Click to expand...
Where did Jesus tell us that we must comment on the actions of another? I recall that Jesus actually said the dead opposite and urged us to refrain from judging others. Even David knew better than to take the replacement of Saul under his own hand. This generation, this country, is so lost when it comes to the understanding of authority. We place or religion of freedom of speech over our moral responsibility to sometimes just shut up.
 
I accept that I, as a layman, have no right to judge or even question the actions of the Holy Father.

I’d still like to know why he kissed the Koran though. Not in order to judge or vindicate the Pope, but just because I want to know. The Koran says Jesus is not God and that all who believe in the Trinity commit blasphemy.
 
pnewton said:
Where did Jesus tell us that we must comment on the actions of another? I recall that Jesus actually said the dead opposite and urged us to refrain from judging others. Even David knew better than to take the replacement of Saul under his own hand. This generation, this country, is so lost when it comes to the understanding of authority. We place or religion of freedom of speech over our moral responsibility to sometimes just shut up.
Click to expand...
I think the problem has roots in two misunderstandings.

The first is that we often misunderstand the difference between fraternal correction and judgment. They’re not the same. If the person is not in your presence, then it’s not fraternal correction. It’s passing judgment.

The second is as Bl. John Paul pointed out in his writings. Modern man does not understand democracy. He abuses it. Democracy does not mean that we do whatever we want. It never did. Therefore, we do not have a right to say everything that crosses our minds.
EphelDuath said:
I accept that I, as a layman, have no right to judge or even question the actions of the Holy Father.

I’d still like to know why he kissed the Koran though. Not in order to judge or vindicate the Pope, but just because I want to know. The Koran says Jesus is not God and that all who believe in the Trinity commit blasphemy.
Click to expand...
I doubt that we will find out in this life. We’ll have to wait until we meet him in heaven.

The Q’Uran contains many errors, also many truths. But neither would be the reason for kissing it. One of the problems that some people have with Bl. John Paul is that they forget that when dealing with saints, these men and women are unpredictable. They often do or say things that the rest of us would find very strange, because they are spontaneous. They don’t usually explain themselves, because they are very free. They are not slaves to what others think. Again, I go back to what St. Francis often said whenever he was questioned. He rarely explained himself, because most of the time those questioning him had no right to know. His standard answer was, “I am what I am before God, nothing else.”

All of us have to learn this great lesson. We don’t have a right to know everything. There are many people in this world, but very few of them owe us explanations. As is the tradition of the Church, the pope owes no man an explanation for anything that he does or say. If he offers one, it’s not justice. It’s charity.

We have a man who is a pope and a mystic. Both positions give him an advantage over the rest of us. He sees what we may miss.
 
JReducation said:
I agree with and believe everything that you have posted here. I appreciate your research; however, don’t you think that this may be a little too much for the average person in the pew?

It may be more information than the average person really want or needs. Suffice it to say that obedience and faith are inseparable in the life of the Christian, just as they were inseparable in the life of Christ.

***If the vocation of the Christian is the perfection of love, then the Christian must obey legitimate commands from legitimate authority to do the contrary is not love. ***(my bold)

In the case of the various traditionalist groups that are in conflict with Vatican II, this puts them in conflict with the Holy See. The Holy See is legitimate authority.

Something has to give in order to maintain the disobedience.

One proves that the command is contrary to Revelation or one proves that the person issuing the command does not have the legitimate right to give such a command.

So far, neither of these have been proven. The accusation of objective disobedience stands.

The same can be said of the extreme at the liberal side. They cannot prove that the Church’s position is illegitimate or that the pope is not the pope.
Click to expand...
Lovely words here Br JR - worth keeping them close:love:

“It may be more information than the average person really want or needs…”
😉 The “average person” is quick to criticize and quick to disobey according to their moods and perceptions - perhaps it is more than they want - but they do need it!

In the history of the Church has there ever been as much rank disobedience and slander/libel of the Holy Father and the Church by so-called catholics - who don’t put a fraction of their critical thinking into informing themselves of the basic teachings of their Faith on obedience??

Too much hard work - ok, that’s perhaps a cynical view - but, my point is they have plenty of energy for mischief.
 
Dee_S said:
Lovely words here Br JR - worth keeping them close:love:

“It may be more information than the average person really want or needs…”
😉 The “average person” is quick to criticize and quick to disobey according to their moods and perceptions - perhaps it is more than they want - but they do need it!
**
In the history of the Church has there ever been as much rank disobedience and slander/libel of the Holy Father and the Church by so-called catholics - who don’t put a fraction of their critical thinking into informing themselves of the basic teachings of their Faith on obedience??

Too much hard work - ok, that’s perhaps a cynical view - but, my point is they have plenty of energy for mischief**.
Click to expand...
Bold is mine.

Unfortunately, this is true. We haven’t learned to stay focused on our journey without focusing on everyone else’s journey. As a result, we end up spending a lot of time and energy on other people’s lives, not just that of the pope either.

The lesson to be learned is to keep the eyes on the prize. The prize is given for the race that we run, not someone else’s race.
 
We haven’t learned to stay focused on our journey without focusing on everyone else’s journey. As a result, we end up spending a lot of time and energy on other people’s lives, not just that of the pope either.
Click to expand...
The lesson to be learned is to keep the eyes on the prize. The prize is given for the race that we run, not someone else’s race.
Click to expand...
👍
 
JReducation said:
I think the problem has roots in two misunderstandings.

The first is that we often misunderstand the difference between fraternal correction and judgment. They’re not the same. If the person is not in your presence, then it’s not fraternal correction. It’s passing judgment.
Click to expand...
Correction also requires authority. It is possible that this authority is moral authority. This would be fraternal correction, as in, brother to brother. If there is any part of us that is unable to do this without total love of the other, then we can not have the moral authority. It is not hard to see in the tenor of most posts condemning this person or that for actions if charity is lacking. I say this of posts about Bl. John Paul as well as posts about Ab. Lefevbre.
 
This does not qualify as an update, as such, but I think it is relevant to the discussion on obedience because it helps us to understand how and why such an important precept has been flouted and ignored, even so far as for the SSPX to not be willing to reconcile in any way with the Church and even appear to prefer to stay where they are

These extracts from Q & A given by Fr Peter Scott on their website - are eye openers for us:eek:

I do not believe that it is right for the Society of St. Pius X to say “we are not the Church,” for are not the other bishops all apostates?

The statement that “we are not the Church” is made in answer to the accusation that we in the Society of St. Pius X believe that outside the Society there is no salvation. Now this is a manifestly preposterous statement. Society priests do not have a monopoly of the Catholic Faith. There are many other Catholics, in all the rites, who accept all that the Church teaches.

**The problem with many of the modern-day Catholics and bishops who have effectively apostatized, since they deny one or more doctrines of Faith,… is that they are still members of the visible Church. **
They perform functions in the Church, and they hold authority in the Church (which they abuse by spreading their modernist errors), although they are dead and corrupt members (separated from the principle of union, Christ, by their lack of faith and supernatural charity). However, since they have not been publicly condemned as having separated themselves from the Church, they remain within the visible structure of the Church.

Furthermore, there are many faithful and priests in the post-Conciliar Church who do not understand the gravity of the modern errors, but who are yet in good faith and have supernatural faith and charity. Due to ignorance, they fail to understand the contradiction of the new humanistic ideas with the Catholic Faith. The motive of their faith is still intact, that is the authority of God who reveals. They are not only visible members, but also living members, of the mystical body, and some of them have a sanctity which puts to shame some traditional Catholics who have regular access to the traditional sacraments and true Mass. [Answered by Fr. Peter R. Scott]

:(Now, that’s a lot to chew on!
 
JReducation said:
Bold is mine.

Unfortunately, this is true. We haven’t learned to stay focused on our journey without focusing on everyone else’s journey. As a result, we end up spending a lot of time and energy on other people’s lives, not just that of the pope either.

The lesson to be learned is to keep the eyes on the prize. The prize is given for the race that we run, not someone else’s race.
Click to expand...
This is very beautiful. To be able to focus on one’s own journey and the lives of those whom God has put in our charge without wringing our hands about the rest of the world is very liberating.

Abandonment to Divine Providence by Jean-Pierre de Caussade comes to mind.

We sometimes forget that God is a Father. We have to be willing to ask in prayer and then walk away in faith, knowing that God has heard us through the silence. Although we feel no different after we pray and even though it seems like nothing ever changes, we have to be willing to accept the fact that God will answer in his own way and on his own schedule, not ours. We have to be willing to accept that the answer might be “No” or that the answer might come after we are dead. Father’s want our trust more than our obedience.

What the Pope did at a mosque really won’t impact my ability to get into Heaven, and after all, the man was instrumental in bringing about the fall of communism in Europe. I trust that God is leading his Church.

Trust is very liberating.

-Tim-
 
TimothyH said:
This is very beautiful. To be able to focus on one’s own journey and the lives of those whom God has put in our charge without wringing our hands about the rest of the world is very liberating.

Abandonment to Divine Providence by Jean-Pierre de Caussade comes to mind.

We sometimes forget that God is a Father. We have to be willing to ask in prayer and then walk away in faith, knowing that God has heard us through the silence. Although we feel no different after we pray and even though it seems like nothing ever changes, we have to be willing to accept the fact that God will answer in his own way and on his own schedule, not ours. We have to be willing to accept that the answer might be “No” or that the answer might come after we are dead. Father’s want our trust more than our obedience.

What the Pope did at a mosque really won’t impact my ability to get into Heaven, and after all, the man was instrumental in bringing about the fall of communism in Europe. I trust that God is leading his Church.

Trust is very liberating.

-Tim-
Click to expand...
I learned this lesson a long time ago. When the abuse scandals started to come out, people were appropriately upset about it. After a while, it became a preoccupation as in “there is nothing else to talk about.” Later it went further, it got into finger pointing. From there it snowballed into “Let’s see what other warts we can find on the Church.”

I thought to myself, of course the Church has warts. She’s made up of human beings and having warts is very human. Do we like warts? No we don’t. However, someone else’s warts have nothing to do with my own.

One day, I picked up Brother Lawrence’s book on the presence of God, which has a similar line of thought to de Caussade. The sign of true holiness is detachment. I began to think that the man whose eyes are focused on the sinner and who is too preoccupied with the sins of the other is probably sinning as well.

There are sins and there are sins. A sin where innocent people are threatened or hurt merits out full and immediate attention. A sin where there is no such threat does not require that we dwell on it. In fact, dwelling on it can actually lead us to sin.
 
numealinesimpet said:
[cont’d] The Faithful are being asked to abandon essential bastions of the Faith in the name of Obedience, a situation which cannot be permitted. In the last resort, one must say “I will serve God before men”. When Obedience is pitted against Faith, then Faith must prevail. Obedience is at the service of the Faith, not Faith at the service of Obedience. Many who support the stance of the SSPX further believe that the entire situation is intimately related to the Message of Fatima - something which is also being systematically distorted by powerful figures, but the truth of this too is emerging, especially in very recent years.

Those holding VIEWPOINT (2) state that the Church is enduring one of the most serious and dangerous crises the Church has ever had to pass through. In particular, the proponents of Modernism, - ‘the synthesis of all heresies’ - despite the most strenuous efforts of the popes since the eighteenth century, have succeeded in gaining high positions of power within the Church, and are now trying to obliterate the Faith which has been handed down from the Apostles. In particular, a version of Religious Liberty and Ecumenism which was repeatedly condemned in the strongest terms is now being promoted, not to say imposed. These forces are working to establish a man-centred religion instead of the God-centred religion that we have been given by Christ. In the face of this, the actions taken by Mgr Lefebvre & the others are fully justified within the Mind and Law of the Church: the sanctions imposed on the SSPX are null and void, in most cases being an escalation of an already untenable situation, being penalties for refusing to accept a sanction that was null and void in the first place; and that therefore the entire edifice of condemnation falls to the ground. This is not to justify each and every statement or action of the SSPX. Before the advent of the internet, it was next to impossible for the SSPX to have their case heard. They have been systematically excluded from official Catholic forums, while the secular press were either hostile or apathetic. Forces within the Church are extremely hostile to the vision of the Church espoused by the SSPX, and many senior prelates do not understand the real reasons for the SSPX’s actions, which are nothing other than the continued fight for the integrity of the Faith. There is a discernible pattern of statements and sanctions that have the appearance of authority, but on closer examination are nothing of the sort. For different reasons, the popes themselves have taken action against the SSPX, but these actions too are such that they must be resisted, in true obedience, for the sake of the Faith. Astonishing as this may seem to many faithful Catholics, the theology is well established and there are historical precedents. This viewpoint has scandalised many, but nevertheless has been persuasive enough that the SSPX has continued to grow year by year, steadily adding at least 20 priests annually to the Catholic Church, despite every sanction up to and including an alleged excommunication that has been attempted. The SSPX have strenuously denied that they are against the Pope or the Church, and believe that the Pope and the Church will realise that the SSPX are among the truest friends of the Papacy and the Church; and that the time will come when the Church will be asking for their help in the restoration of the Mystical Body. From the beginning, concerned seminarians and priests have been, like Nicodemus, visiting SSPX priories by night. This is done with discretion. The SSPX leadership do not see a formal, canonical reconciliation as the first priority; while there remain fundamental disagreements about Catholic dogma, any agreement is bound to unravel, sooner rather than later. That is why they have pressed, for decades, for a thorough consideration of the doctrinal issues in the Church since Vatican II.

From the beginning of the rift, the SSPX have been given quiet encouragement by many, not only laypeople but prelates up to the level of Cardinal; concrete actions have been taken by the mainstream Church that would be impossible if the SSPX were really excommunicated or in schism; and very recently, faced with the continuing decline in their dioceses, SSPX priests are being asked by diocesan bishops to take an active part in priestly formation.

This is, I believe, a summary of the Viewpoint of those who support the SSPX. In presenting it I am not denying the heroic work of those other souls who are working in The Lord’s vineyard and who cannot agree with the SSPX’s position.

Whole books have been written on this situation, both on the current crisis in the Church and on the SSPX in particular. I am trying, simplesoul, to gather some links that comment in more detail on each of the points raised above, but I think this is the best answer I can make to your question.
Click to expand...
👍👍:thumbsup:Good job- I’m your Huckleberry!
 
JReducation said:
I learned this lesson a long time ago. When the abuse scandals started to come out, people were appropriately upset about it. After a while, it became a preoccupation as in “there is nothing else to talk about.” Later it went further, it got into finger pointing. From there it snowballed into “Let’s see what other warts we can find on the Church.”

I thought to myself, of course the Church has warts. She’s made up of human beings and having warts is very human. Do we like warts? No we don’t. However, someone else’s warts have nothing to do with my own.

One day, I picked up Brother Lawrence’s book on the presence of God, which has a similar line of thought to de Caussade. The sign of true holiness is detachment. I began to think that the man whose eyes are focused on the sinner and who is too preoccupied with the sins of the other is probably sinning as well.

There are sins and there are sins. A sin where innocent people are threatened or hurt merits out full and immediate attention. A sin where there is no such threat does not require that we dwell on it. In fact, dwelling on it can actually lead us to sin.
Click to expand...
I lost my breath when you mentioned Bro. Lawrence. That was probably the first spiritual book I read when I came to Christ in earnest. There is a part where he speaks about this directly - praying for some person’s conversion and then leaving it in the hands of God. I wish I could read it again but I gave my copy away.

I think Opus Dei is very powerful for the everyday man in this regard. They practice focusing on the present moment so well. People think Opus Dei is stodgy and stiff, but their teaching is quite beautiful and the people I know in Opus Dei will be the first to tell you that they have learned to remove distractions from their lives so they could focus on the present, focus on loving their wives or husbands, caring for their children, doing their job and loving Jesus.

A Cistercian novice director said the same thing as you about detachment, but he called it “A process of subtraction”.

The SSPX or the liturgy or whether Vatican II contradicts earlier Church teaching might be an emergency but it is not MY emergency. Right now, my emergency is a twelve year old who told me at 9:00 PM that she needs manila folders for a project due tomorrow. :rolleyes:
I began to think that the man whose eyes are focused on the sinner and who is too preoccupied with the sins of the other is probably sinning as well.
Click to expand...
I’ll only say this. I see people freaking out over liturgy, freaking out about how other people recieve communion, losing sleep over the SSPX or what some bishop did half way around the globe, and I wonder if these people have ever really been taught how to pray.

-Tim-
 
TimothyH said:
I lost my breath when you mentioned Bro. Lawrence. That was probably the first spiritual book I read when I came to Christ in earnest. There is a part where he speaks about this directly - praying for some person’s conversion and then leaving it in the hands of God. I wish I could read it again but I gave my copy away.

I think Opus Dei is very powerful for the everyday man in this regard. They practice focusing on the present moment so well. People think Opus Dei is stodgy and stiff, but their teaching is quite beautiful and the people I know in Opus Dei will be the first to tell you that they have learned to remove distractions from their lives so they could focus on the present, focus on loving their wives or husbands, caring for their children, doing their job and loving Jesus.

A Cistercian novice director said the same thing as you about detachment, but he called it “A process of subtraction”.

The SSPX or the liturgy or whether Vatican II contradicts earlier Church teaching might be an emergency but it is not MY emergency. Right now, my emergency is a twelve year old who told me at 9:00 PM that she needs manila folders for a project due tomorrow. :rolleyes:

I’ll only say this. I see people freaking out over liturgy, freaking out about how other people recieve communion, losing sleep over the SSPX or what some bishop did half way around the globe, and I wonder if these people have ever really been taught how to pray.

-Tim-
Click to expand...
Hi Tim, I always enjoy your posts. You can read online or download Brother Lawrence book at this site. I read parts of it years ago.
Thanks for mentioning the book Br Jay. I am going to try and download it nowl

gutenberg.org/ebooks/5657
 
I don’t know exactly how to ask this question without being criticized for asking it but I know it may be on many people’s minds that frequent this particular thread so I’ll just go ahead and ask:

What effect does the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI have on the SSPX?

It seems to me like Pope Benedict XVI tried very hard to normalize the SSPX’s status.

Wouldn’t it be smart for the SSPX to respond totally and positively to Pope Benedict XVI’s overtures since it is all together possible that they will not receive a better deal from any future popes?
 
Jerry-Jet said:
I don’t know exactly how to ask this question without being criticized for asking it but I know it may be on many people’s minds that frequent this particular thread so I’ll just go ahead and ask:

What effect does the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI have on the SSPX?

It seems to me like Pope Benedict XVI tried very hard to normalize the SSPX’s status.

Wouldn’t it be smart for the SSPX to respond totally and positively to Pope Benedict XVI’s overtures since it is all together possible that they will not receive a better deal from any future popes?
Click to expand...
We can’t possibly know, and anything we say is going to be speculation. If that is what you are asking for, than my answer would be the SSPX sees this as an opportunity to restart the clock. They’ll probably try all over again what they have already done to see what they can get away with.
 
I am saddened that Pope Benedict XVI’s fond hope of SSPX reconciliation is not likely to be realized during his papacy. Perhaps,though, being relieved of the tremendous burden of the office, his life may be extended and it may still happen during his lifetime.

I pray for Pope Benedict XVI and for the Church. I pray that the next pope is orthodox and conservative and will continue the great work done by Pope Benedict, including the patient efforts of rapprochement with the SSPX and the support of the Traditional Latin Mass.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top