SSPX Update - Redux

  • Thread starter Thread starter Melchior_1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It is not reasonable. The Jews are not enemies of the Church no matter how the word “Enemies” is defined. I know many Jews who are married to Catholics and who have become Catholics. I know many Jews - reformed, conservative and orthodox - and have sat up nights having conversations with them, and have never met one who is opposed to the Church’s mission to save souls.

Such a position is hardly reasonable.
Agreed.

I seem to recall there’s some friar who frequents the board who is ethnically Jewish…

I’ve known of several jews who came into the Church when they realized their ancestors missed the Messiah’s first showing. (Several went into Orthodoxy, several into Catholicism. Some of those into the Clergy. Fr. Deacon Moshe Zorea comes to mind.)
 
No, no, no. Unless I misread Br JR’s posts in the first few pages of this thread. This is why there is a time element: because they will have no priests as they have no Bishops to ordain them. Perhaps Br JR will comment.
The SSPX bishops can ordain other bishops. They can not do so and remain in the church, but they have the ability to validly ordain bishops.

The situation is much like that with the Old Catholics following V I… the semi-autonomous Union of Utrecht ordained bishops for the schismatic priests rejecting V I’s decisions, and were excommunicated along with them. Now, they’re a parallel church, and one in disintegration.

What started in Traditionalism to the point of disobedience became schism, then further schism (The Old Catholics have fractured into several different communions) and on to heresy (Ordaining women as priests).

The Catholic Church in union with Rome accepts the ordinations of Male Old Catholics who have no female bishops in the ordaining bishop’s line of succession. It treats the Old Catholics just like the Orthodox. And, should they be declared in schism but not anathematized, so will it treat the SSPX.
 
No, no, no. Unless I misread Br JR’s posts in the first few pages of this thread. This is why there is a time element: because they will have no priests as they have no Bishops to ordain them. Perhaps Br JR will comment.
???
 
Ok here is why I think this is a good thing (the “clarification” on the US site)
If indeed the SSPX had decided against The Church then they would not feel the need to clarify any statement their leader had made. Everyone here is hung up on the idea of the comments being disgusting (they are) but the significant thing here is that they “corrected” the comments for somebody or something. I think that something is still the Church. The SSPX as brother points out is always walking right next to the line. Seeing how far they can go and how close they can get to saying things. Then we already have Bishop Fellay talking about how he “tested” the Vatican with statements earlier. It could be that they are recognizing authority by correcting the statement. IF they were not still considering coming home there would be no need to clarify any statement.

PS
I dont care how they word it the statements were disgusting.
 
Anti Judaism began very very early in the history of Christianity. Many scholars have theorized that it had to do with persecutions The theory is that the early Christians were a small sect that refused to worship the Roman Gods. The Jews also did not worship the Roman Gods yet were not persecuted for it. That was because they had an ancient tradition of not worshiping the Roman gods or any other gods except their own. The Romans respected that fact due to its antiquity. The Christians did not have that history. In order to gain legitimacy the early Christians often claimed thet the books of the Jewish Bible really pertained to them, the Christians, as the Jews had been led astray and broke the covenant almost as soon as they had received it, as evidenced by Moses smashing the tablets. They the Christians were the rightful heirs of the promises made to the Jews by God. The Jews had forfeited that right. So the Jewish was God was really the Christian God and not the other way around.

This attitude solidified into what could best be described as an active dislike, maybe even hatred for all things Jewish. There was a move in the early Church to lessen the culpability of the Romans in Jesus death and increase the culpability of the Jews. Some writings of the period went so far as to say that King Herod ordered the execution not Pilate. In fact, in the Ethioipic Orthodox Church, Pilate and his wife eventually became Saints and are still venerated as such. Go figure.

In any event anti Semitism was a fact of life for nearly 2,00 years in Christianity and still rears its ugly head on occasion.
Interesting. The opposition between Judaism and Catholicism that originated in this way would have been perpetuated by the social order of that time, which was very different from today. Church and State were linked, which meant that the government and social institutions of a state had to actively support the dominant religion of that country. Other religions at best were tolerated but they represented a threat since their adherents would naturally want *their *religion to become the one supported by the state. The idea of a secular, religiously neutral state did not exist.

This system could not really accommodate a people with a distinct religion and no homeland, and who had a bad history with Catholicism. There were saints, like St Bernard, who opposed the pogroms of the time and strove to protect the Jews, but there was no real answer until the French Revolution created the secular state. Since then the situation has gradually settled down to live and let live, with some spectacular exceptions. Jews today are in pretty much the same situation vis-a-vis Catholicism as members of any other non-Catholic religion, and - if I’m not mistaken - the anti-Catholicism of Judaism has been expunged from its texts. Anyhow the average Jew does not pick up an anti-Catholic bias from his religion so far as I know.

Of course, there is no need to go to the opposite extreme either. The Old Testament Covenant is dead and gone, and Judaism has as much and as little legitimate status as any other non-Catholic religion. Personally I think the holocaust has been sufficiently lamented and the nation responsible has made reparation. Isn’t about time we had a few movies about the killing of the ten million Kulaks by Stalin? While we’re about it why not bewail the wholesale genocide in the Middle East in the 13th century that took place at the hands of Tamburlain? We could even take time out to grieve for the elimination of Neanderthal Man by Homo Sapiens. :crying:

Fact is, it’s time to look on the Jews just like anybody else, with everything that implies.
 
I’m VERY sorry, I came to this thread late and missed the fist thread all together.
Could somebody PLEASE explain to me what SSPX is and what the controversy is about?
I am a convert and this is one area I have little info on.:confused:
 
You have ggod points. How many Jews persecute Christians/Catholics today? Israel does not. Most Catholics just practice and want to practice their religion in peace. They have no knowledge of the SSPX, have no interest in being mini/minor theologians delving into Vatican II and other Church documents, have no interest and have no need to point fingers and say who is wrong etc. Modernist is not a term most Catholics use or even know off. They are too busy worshiping God, living their lives and struggling with their problems.
Good point about the general unawareness of the very existence of SSPX. I also agree that modernist Catholics would not likely refer to themselves as modernist; rather it is everyone else who is old fashioned. And worshiping God? That would be nice, but I think many more worship mammon and their own hubris.
 
I’m VERY sorry, I came to this thread late and missed the fist thread all together.
Could somebody PLEASE explain to me what SSPX is and what the controversy is about?
I am a convert and this is one area I have little info on.:confused:
You could start with the Wiki article. It gives a good overview.
 
The SSPX bishops can ordain other bishops. They can not do so and remain in the church, but they have the ability to validly ordain bishops.

The situation is much like that with the Old Catholics following V I… the semi-autonomous Union of Utrecht ordained bishops for the schismatic priests rejecting V I’s decisions, and were excommunicated along with them. Now, they’re a parallel church, and one in disintegration.

What started in Traditionalism to the point of disobedience became schism, then further schism (The Old Catholics have fractured into several different communions) and on to heresy (Ordaining women as priests).

The Catholic Church in union with Rome accepts the ordinations of Male Old Catholics who have no female bishops in the ordaining bishop’s line of succession. It treats the Old Catholics just like the Orthodox. And, should they be declared in schism but not anathematized, so will it treat the SSPX.
They still have valid Orders? Wow. I thought they “ordain” women.
 
I’m VERY sorry, I came to this thread late and missed the fist thread all together.
Could somebody PLEASE explain to me what SSPX is and what the controversy is about?
I am a convert and this is one area I have little info on.:confused:
Here’s a link to the original thread. forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=711717

It’s very long. Look for the posts by JReducation. He is a Franciscan Brother Superior and has a lot of good posts.
 
The SSPX bishops can ordain other bishops. They can not do so and remain in the church, but they have the ability to validly ordain bishops.

The situation is much like that with the Old Catholics following V I… the semi-autonomous Union of Utrecht ordained bishops for the schismatic priests rejecting V I’s decisions, and were excommunicated along with them. Now, they’re a parallel church, and one in disintegration.

What started in Traditionalism to the point of disobedience became schism, then further schism (The Old Catholics have fractured into several different communions) and on to heresy (Ordaining women as priests).

The Catholic Church in union with Rome accepts the ordinations of Male Old Catholics who have no female bishops in the ordaining bishop’s line of succession. It treats the Old Catholics just like the Orthodox. And, should they be declared in schism but not anathematized, so will it treat the SSPX.
This is what Br JR said:
#62 Archbishop Lefebvre even quoted a canon that says that in a perceived state of emergency a bishop can ordain another bishop. Pope John Paul pulled the rug out from under him and said, “I declare that this law does not apply to you. Therefore your request for an appeal is denied.” This is somewhere in the documents that went back and forth between the pope and the SSPX.
#66 If the SSPX became a sui iuris Church as are the Orthodox Christians, then one of their bishops would become the patriarch. A patriarch is an ordinary. He can grant faculties, ordain other bishops and preside over the synod of bishops.
As long as a person or a group insists that he or she is a Catholic, the said person must submit to the law.
Unless the SSPX declares itself a different church, the Bishops cannot ordain. But if they claim to be part of the Church, they can have a ceremony and call it ordination, but they cannot ordain in a literal sense. Now maybe I am misunderstanding what he meant, so I hope he will clarify.
 
Sorry I was out. I was having a stint put into my heart. Just reading the posts before I left, everything that is being said boils down to two discussions, both of which are very interesting. Let’s take one at a time.

Any bishop can validly ordain another bishop. He does not need a co-consecrator. That’s not require. That is a custom, not part of the matter and form of the sacrament of Holy Orders.

However, any bishop who ordains another bishop in the Latin Church, without a papal mandate excommunicates himself. Any man who accepts the ordination excommunicates himself. It is not the Church that excommunicates you, it’s the law that excommunicates you.

The second point being discussed is whether the Jews are enemies of the Catholic Church. The answer to this question is, “NO.” For someone to be your enemy, you have to perceive him as such and he has to perceive himself as such. Neither the Jewish people, nor the Catholic hierarchy hold this perception.

Whatever the relationship was between Catholics and Jews is a moot point. That would be like saying that we cannot be allies with the UK, Germany, Russia or Japan, because we were once antagonistic toward each other. First of all, the hey words are “we were,” but we’re not now. Second, the fact that there are Jews and Catholics who are antagonistic toward each other, neither represents his faith community. These individuals have no such authority to make those representations.

Therefore, the SSPX has no legal authority to make such a claim in the name of the Church. Bishop Fellay can say that this is what he believes. I can respect his right to believe it. I disagree with him, because the people in authority on both sides, Jewish and Catholic don’t feel this way.

To bring up what the pope said about the Jews 500 years ago or what the Rabbis said about the Catholics 100 years ago is useless. Neither that pope or that rabbi have any authority in today’s world.

In today’s world, the person who speaks for Catholics is the pope and those who he appoints to speak for him.

Finally, those who feel that the Good Friday prayer for the Jews is weak are missing the point of the prayer. The point is that the Jews will reach the fulfillment of the Covenant. If they do so, they will find Christ, because Christ is the fulfillment of the Covenants that God made with Israel.

We Jews do not have to cease to be Jews, just to please the Gentiles in order to become Catholic. We can remain faithful Jews and be very good Catholics. Some are even canonized saints, such as St. Edith Stein. It almost feels as if Gentile Catholics want a prayer that says that we will repudiate Judaism and embrace Catholicism.

Any Jew that repudiates Judaism cannot embrace Catholicism, because Catholicism is rooted in Judaism. It is the fulfillment of the Covenant between God and Israel. In order to reach Catholicism, we have to embrace our Judaism and the Covenant. When we do that, then we can follow the covenant to its logical conclusion.

The reason that so many Jews find it difficult to become Catholics is because they’re lousy Jews. There are such people as Cafeteria Jews. Catholics do not have a monopoly on the Cafeteria.

I for one came to Catholicism because the Capuchin Franciscans helped me to understand the Covenant and to live it. Once I was doing that, I had no place to go, but to Catholicism.

We don’t need a prayer that the Jews repudiate their faith. Nor do we need a prayer that calls them names such as “perfidious”. A simple prayer that Jews will embrace the Covenant is enough. The Covenant prepared Israel for Christ. I for one am very proud to be Jewish and am very proud of how I came into Catholicism. I’m also very grateful to the Franciscans for not having shoved my face into a Gospel book. They led me into Catholicism through their passionate love for St. Francis.
 
I for one am very proud to be Jewish and am very proud of how I came into Catholicism. I’m also very grateful to the Franciscans for not having shoved my face into a Gospel book. They led me into Catholicism through their passionate love for St. Francis.
And I am very grateful to the Franciscans as well that they led you into Catholicism. In fact, I am exceedingly grateful.

Thank you, St. Francis.

Thank you, Franciscans.
 
But the fact is that as individuals, most Jews, Freemasons, and modernists, are not enemies of the Church.
Frankly, if every Jew, Mason and Modernist was as enemy of the Church, it still would’t matter - “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

From an outsider’s viewpoint - I certainly hope that this is just silly polemics from the SSPX and not a lack of faith in the church on their part.
 
Good point about the general unawareness of the very existence of SSPX. I also agree that modernist Catholics would not likely refer to themselves as modernist; rather it is everyone else who is old fashioned. And worshiping God? That would be nice, but I think many more worship mammon and their own hubris.
I was actually referring to most Catholics. I do not like labels which are thrown around so easily. Most Catholics worship Mammon? I do not think so. The love of money and greed are not attributes of any one group in particular.
 
And I am very grateful to the Franciscans as well that they led you into Catholicism. In fact, I am exceedingly grateful.

Thank you, St. Francis.

Thank you, Franciscans.
They did such a good job, that when I was widowed, I decided to become a Franciscan. Now that’s what I call working overtime. :yup:

No, in all seriousness, what attracted me was the passion and sweetness in the friars whenever a Franciscan holy day came around and when they spoke about the Seraphic Father. They were so enthusiastic. No matter what you said, they always had a sage piece of advice from St. Francis or one of the early Franciscans. Then there is the great solemnity of St. Francis, which is a long as the Easter Triduum and follows the same patter of liturgical celebrations, culminating with the solemn mass celebrating Francis’ entrance into glory.

I was only 10 at the time. I was in their school because in southern schools they practiced segregation and we were not welcome. The only other choices were to move to another town or attend a Catholic school that welcomed Jews and did not try to convert us. When we found out that the Franciscans ran the local parish and school, my parents were thrilled. The Franciscans have a very good reputation among Israelis. They have been in Palestine since 1219. My brothers and I were the only boys in Catholic school uniforms who wore a kippah. We had to take religion class, because it’s an academic subject. We didn’t have to participate in any religious services unless we wanted to. My parents insisted that we attend and sit politely or stand when the congregation stood. We were not allowed to kneel. Jews don’t kneel.

The kindness of the friars and their love for their father triggered my curiosity about this man at the age of 10. I started to read as much as I could find on him. After my Bar Mitzvah it became clear to me that the next logical step, once I had accepted my place as a Jewish man, was to follow the Covenant. I found the Covenant being lived by the friars. This pushed me to want to learn more about Francis of Assisi. I wanted to know about this man that had such a tight hold on these men 750 years later.

You can’t study Francis of Assisi and not see Jesus. If you don’t see Jesus, it’s the wrong Francis. What impressed me most were his obedience, his detachment, his love for his brothers and his charm. He was everything but a stuffy Catholic as were many whom I had met. He was actually very funny and very naive at times, which made him adorable.

I had already been through years of religious education. See Catholicism lived by the friars and having it explained by Francis’ simple gestures and passion for the scriptures sealed the deal for me. By 16 I knew that in order to be a good Jew, I had to become like Francis. The rest is history. That was 46 years ago, but I remember it as if it were yesterday.

From my perspective, the Good Friday prayer says exactly what it needs to say, because it is comprehensible to any Jew without being offensive. This is important when we raise public prayers for others. The prayer has to reflect our faith, be comprehensible to the person for whom we pray and avoid antagonizing that person. Otherwise, you’re asking God for the impossible. You’re asking God to convert someone who believes that you hate him.
 
Those who receive SSPX confessions are in the same boat as those who aren’t within the Church; trust in God’s Divine Mercy.
I don’t think this is the case.

Repentance followed up with even a non-sacramental confession, and working to avoid sins in faith with God’s love and help, is rather more than trusting or hoping that God will forgive you your sins. The former includes repentance; whereas, the latter doesn’t.
 
I was actually referring to most Catholics. I do not like labels which are thrown around so easily. Most Catholics worship Mammon? I do not think so. The love of money and greed are not attributes of any one group in particular.
Catholics don’t have a monopoly on sin. They may be the largest population in hell, but hat’s another story.
 
I don’t think this is the case.

Repentance followed up with even a non-sacramental confession, and working to avoid sins in faith with God’s love and help, is rather more than trusting or hoping that God will forgive you your sins. The former includes repentance; whereas, the latter doesn’t.
That does not necessarily follow. Catholic theology certainly does not say this. The person who repents, must still entrust himself to God’s mercy.

Trusting God’s mercy requires repentance. Read the writings of St. Faustina.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top