SSPX Update - Redux

[JReducation]

Yes, but others - here and IRL - complain about the problems (real and perceived) that caused them to drift away. And then seem shocked to discover that perhaps the local parish is not **EWTN and that every priest is not Fr Z **and that the parish school is not fully staffed by the Nashville Dominicans.

The efforts put in by those who stayed are not acknowledged or appreciated. The fact that some stayed simply for lack of interest in moving is decried.

Anyway, I promised to bite my tongue not one post back! I don’t accuse anyone specifically, just the general mindset that I’ve heard.

The bold is mine.

I don’t know the age of Fr. Z, so I won’t comment on him.

The Poor Clares who built EWTN went through many changes and many challenges over the last 50 years. To their credit, they hung in there. They lost many women and almost lost the station too. They did not lose hope. Look at them today. There are 20,000 of them around the world.

The Nashville Dominicans is another group that hung in there when the ship was passing through the hurricane. Look at them too. They have grown to several hundred. They even gave birth to several new Dominican communities.

The Franciscans have stayed in there. In the USA alone, the Franciscans have given birth to 15 new Franciscan communities of men, women and seculars.

It’s not praise that people want. It’s respect. To hear people say that only the SSPX can save the Church is either ignorance of what others are doing for the Church or dismissive. The latter is disrespectful. The former requires a little education.

 

[Faithdancer]

Now that you mention it, you’re right. I have never seen them together at the same place and time either…

:clapping:

Sounds like a grand conspiracy. I hope there are no albino monks or cryptic maps involved.

 

[Eufrosnia]

The bold is mine.

I don’t know the age of Fr. Z, so I won’t comment on him.

The Poor Clares who built EWTN went through many changes and many challenges over the last 50 years. To their credit, they hung in there. They lost many women and almost lost the station too. They did not lose hope. Look at them today. There are 20,000 of them around the world.

The Nashville Dominicans is another group that hung in there when the ship was passing through the hurricane. Look at them too. They have grown to several hundred. They even gave birth to several new Dominican communities.

The Franciscans have stayed in there. In the USA alone, the Franciscans have given birth to 15 new Franciscan communities of men, women and seculars.

It’s not praise that people want. It’s respect. To hear people say that only the SSPX can save the Church is either ignorance of what others are doing for the Church or dismissive. The latter is disrespectful. The former requires a little education.

Not to take a drastically different position here once again

But I think the SSPX might play the major role one day. At least in the European and American part of the world.

I say this because it feels like the most orthodox (apart from rejecting Vatican II and a radical insistence on the old Liturgy) with respect to the faith as a group (I say group because there are always great individuals like the Pope) seems to be SSPX.

They seem to be more consistent and more in tune with traditions (I don’t mean the capital T here) with respect to dealing with everyday life.

Now the gut reaction by many to this point will be two fold. You might say the following Brother

1. Franciscans adhere very strongly to their traditions since it was created.
2. “traditions” are man made practices so not that valuable anyway

In reply to the first, the traditions of Franciscans are built around a very specific function that it was entrusted with. But when it comes to everyday living for the average lay person, there are certain “traditional values” which a Franciscan might not know.

For an example, what constitutes a modest dress? The Franciscan superior might have very little idea on what that is (though he might certainly know a good theological definition of it). But an average lay person with traditional sensibilities might even have a superior understanding in the practical sense.

Why is that? Its because concepts such as modesty, prudence for an example is based on gathered experience of trying to live a certain way. The more a society strives to live prudently without leading themselves and others to sin, the more the experiences of their actions get collected and gathered over time. In the span of centuries, these values will get adopted by entire societies as common sense measures/guidelines to determining prudence or modesty of a matter/action/approach etc. The values then become, not rules of an order, but cultural values that are passed down from generation to generation.

With the destruction or abandonment of these traditional values (which are not preserved in any order), one creates a vacuum. So today, a very devoted priest with no traditional values might make many erroneous calls with respect to prudence on some matters. They will then realize after the fact that “it was not the greatest idea” they ever had. The damage though would have been done. At the same time, someone with some traditional knowledge might say that wasn’t it obvious that it was going to happen!

Now quiet interestingly, the SSPX from what I hear seems to have preserved much of that knowledge within its groups.

For the church to actually make society progress toward moral living, these values are essential. Or we are looking at people making these mistakes of prudence and modesty over and over again (which leads others to sin and confusion) until the faithful redevelop these values/knowledge from scratch. What is problematic is that if there is no adherence to prudential values and modesty, teaching morals to people might not be effective. If a person is told that lusting is immoral but they have to put up every moment of their lives in an environment where no one dresses modestly, the person is going to have a very tough time. Perhaps our own society has reached that point and its why most Catholics just think the Church’s sexual teaching is unrealistic.

The SSPX can offer a short cut in this sense to avoid such issues.

Another short-cut might available in the Eastern countries which still haven’t abandoned all of their own traditional values. BUT, it is not a secret that these cultures too are rapidly deteriorating with influence from the West through its media and other NGO organizations that actively seek its destruction.

Now for anyone who does not understand why these values are important, I would like to tell you about a branch of Planned Parenthood that operates in foreign countries. Their major obstacle to carrying out their plans is usually listed as “the conservative culture” or “values of the society”. It is these values that make these people reject as common sense the propaganda of organizations such as Planned Parenthood. It is these values we need to instill in our own public.

All of that wealth is still preserved today in the SSPX. So if they come to their senses and decide to work with Rome, I see a huge potential.

 

[PaulinVA]

I say this because it feels like the most orthodox (apart from rejecting Vatican II and a radical insistence on the old Liturgy) with respect to the faith as a group (I say group because there are always great individuals like the Pope) seems to be SSPX.

Other that the part about how they ordain priests who are immediately suspended upon ordination and have no ministry in the Church and those same priests hear confessions without faculties and conduct illicit Masses, I guess you could call them orthodox.

Truthfully, I think we should keep the light on for all cafeteria Catholics who pick and chose what to believe and what not to follow and want to return.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

Truthfully, I think we should keep the light on for all cafeteria Catholics who pick and chose what to believe and what not to follow and want to return.

:clapping:

Excellent post. We should indeed be looking for the full return of all, either as individuals or in groups.

 

[Eufrosnia]

Other that the part about how they ordain priests who are immediately suspended upon ordination and have no ministry in the Church and those same priests hear confessions without faculties and conduct illicit Masses, I guess you could call them orthodox.

Truthfully, I think we should keep the light on for all cafeteria Catholics who pick and chose what to believe and what not to follow and want to return.

Well, I couldn’t list all of them down but good that you added it

I hope you did catch the important point of my post rather than the fact that these shortcomings by the SSPX were missing in that short list between the brackets

 

[Faithdancer]

Other that the part about how they ordain priests who are immediately suspended upon ordination and have no ministry in the Church and those same priests hear confessions without faculties and conduct illicit Masses, I guess you could call them orthodox.

Truthfully, I think we should keep the light on for all cafeteria Catholics who pick and chose what to believe and what not to follow and want to return.

You beautifully echo the sentiments of Tom Bodett. I agree- keep the light on, including the warming lights over the steam table, just in case.

 

[Lormar]

Well, I couldn’t list all of them down but good that you added it

I hope you did catch the important point of my post rather than the fact that these shortcomings by the SSPX were missing in that short list between the brackets

Just so I make sure I have not misunderstood what you have written, are you calling the lack of jurisdiction to absolve someone from their sins and saying illicit Masses shortcomings?

 

[Eufrosnia]

Just so I make sure I have not misunderstood what you have written, are you calling the lack of jurisdiction to absolve someone from their sins and saying illicit Masses shortcomings?

No. I am saying that it has no bearing on the main point I tried to express in my post

 

[Mrs_Sally]

Wow. I just don’t know what to say if the love for the externals of our traditions is more important than obedience.

 

[Lormar]

No. I am saying that it has no bearing on the main point I tried to express in my post

What main point was that?

 

[Mrs_Sally]

Not sure if this is an update or has been posted before.

The New Mass puts at risk the Catholic Faith and the numerous examples of faithful and priests who have lost the Faith directly linked with the celebration of the Novus Ordo are quite blatant.

This is a quote from Bishop Fellay clarifing a comment attributed to him by Cardinal Canizares. Here is what the Cardinal said:

On one occasion, Bishop (Bernard) Fellay, who is the leader of the Society of St. Pius X, came to see me and said, “We just came from an abbey that is near Florence. If Archbishop (Marcel) Lefebvre had seen how they celebrated there, he would not have taken the step that he did”… The missal used at that celebration was the Paul VI Missal in its strictest form.[1]

As I said on the thread in Catholic News discussing this, I am truly scandalized by the Bishop’s statement. I cannot imagine how this attitude will help the faithful at all. I still pray for reconcilliation, but I hope that there is a program of training put into place for the SSPX priests before they are allowed to minister to the faithful in a general way.

 

[gentle_atheist]

It was also stated by Vatican I that besides the obligation to give an assent of faith on matters of faith and morals, Catholics must also assent to the authority of the pope on all matters pertaining to discipline and governance without exception. I have often explained this as the rights of authority to govern. This seems to be a real problem here. The SSPX and now its offspring, SSPX-SO cannot seem to accept their moral obligation to obey in matters of discipline and governance.

OK. So if JP2 ordered all Catholics to kiss the Koran and pray to St. John the Baptist to protect Islam, would they be bound to obey?

 

[PaulinVA]

I hope you did catch the important point of my post rather than the fact that these shortcomings by the SSPX were missing in that short list between the brackets

Well, you can’t claim orthodoxy or that you are the defender of the true faith if you do that while suspended for schismatic acts. It doesn’t make sense.

I believe that the SSPX priests, like all people who have things to repent of, should repent and take up a ministry in the Church, HOWEVER, their past behavior, from their ordination to their illicit Masses to their confessions without faculties preclude them from ever talking the high moral ground as the saviors of the Church.

 

[choliks]

Well, you can’t claim orthodoxy or that you are the defender of the true faith if you do that while suspended for schismatic acts. It doesn’t make sense.

I believe that the SSPX priests, like all people who have things to repent of, should repent and take up a ministry in the Church, HOWEVER, their past behavior, from their ordination to their illicit Masses to their confessions without faculties preclude them from ever talking the high moral ground as the saviors of the Church.

I agree. It doesn’t make sense. How can one claim orthodoxy when you’re teaching the faithful disobedience, and instilling in their hearts resentment and fear? How is that?

 

[JReducation]

Not to take a drastically different position here once again

But I think the SSPX might play the major role one day. At least in the European and American part of the world.

I say this because it feels like the most orthodox (apart from rejecting Vatican II and a radical insistence on the old Liturgy) with respect to the faith as a group (I say group because there are always great individuals like the Pope) seems to be SSPX.

They seem to be more consistent and more in tune with traditions (I don’t mean the capital T here) with respect to dealing with everyday life.

Now the gut reaction by many to this point will be two fold. You might say the following Brother

1. Franciscans adhere very strongly to their traditions since it was created.
2. “traditions” are man made practices so not that valuable anyway

In reply to the first, the traditions of Franciscans are built around a very specific function that it was entrusted with. But when it comes to everyday living for the average lay person, there are certain “traditional values” which a Franciscan might not know.

For an example, what constitutes a modest dress? The Franciscan superior might have very little idea on what that is (though he might certainly know a good theological definition of it). But an average lay person with traditional sensibilities might even have a superior understanding in the practical sense.

Why is that? Its because concepts such as modesty, prudence for an example is based on gathered experience of trying to live a certain way. The more a society strives to live prudently without leading themselves and others to sin, the more the experiences of their actions get collected and gathered over time. In the span of centuries, these values will get adopted by entire societies as common sense measures/guidelines to determining prudence or modesty of a matter/action/approach etc. The values then become, not rules of an order, but cultural values that are passed down from generation to generation.

With the destruction or abandonment of these traditional values (which are not preserved in any order), one creates a vacuum. So today, a very devoted priest with no traditional values might make many erroneous calls with respect to prudence on some matters. They will then realize after the fact that “it was not the greatest idea” they ever had. The damage though would have been done. At the same time, someone with some traditional knowledge might say that wasn’t it obvious that it was going to happen!

Now quiet interestingly, the SSPX from what I hear seems to have preserved much of that knowledge within its groups.

For the church to actually make society progress toward moral living, these values are essential. Or we are looking at people making these mistakes of prudence and modesty over and over again (which leads others to sin and confusion) until the faithful redevelop these values/knowledge from scratch. What is problematic is that if there is no adherence to prudential values and modesty, teaching morals to people might not be effective. If a person is told that lusting is immoral but they have to put up every moment of their lives in an environment where no one dresses modestly, the person is going to have a very tough time. Perhaps our own society has reached that point and its why most Catholics just think the Church’s sexual teaching is unrealistic.

The SSPX can offer a short cut in this sense to avoid such issues.

Another short-cut might available in the Eastern countries which still haven’t abandoned all of their own traditional values. BUT, it is not a secret that these cultures too are rapidly deteriorating with influence from the West through its media and other NGO organizations that actively seek its destruction.

Now for anyone who does not understand why these values are important, I would like to tell you about a branch of Planned Parenthood that operates in foreign countries. Their major obstacle to carrying out their plans is usually listed as “the conservative culture” or “values of the society”. It is these values that make these people reject as common sense the propaganda of organizations such as Planned Parenthood. It is these values we need to instill in our own public.

All of that wealth is still preserved today in the SSPX. So if they come to their senses and decide to work with Rome, I see a huge potential.

There you go again on your “Bash the Franciscans Campaign”.

What do Franciscans have to do with this?

For that matter, how do you even know that Franciscans don’t know what the SSPX knows about traditional customs such as modest dress?

What does it matter?

We’re talking here about the moral and canonical status of the SSPX and the fact that it (as a Society) feels that it can bail out, because things are going rough, while the rest of us have remained there during the past 50 years and done the best we can.

OK. So if JP2 ordered all Catholics to kiss the Koran and pray to St. John the Baptist to protect Islam, would they be bound to obey?

No one can order you to commit a sin.

Let’s looks at this.

1. Kissing the Koran – is it a sin? No. Is it prudent? Matter of dispute.
2. Praying for Islam - is it a sin? No. The fact is that you don’t pray for a religion. You pray for its people, which is what Bl. John Paul meant. We don’t pray for Catholicism either. We pray for Catholics. The wording was awkward. However, anyone who knows Bl. John Paul would immediately pick up that the wording was awkward and would have picked up his meaning.

On the other hand, anyone with an ax to grind or with an agenda, would take the phrase, “pray for Islam” and run with it, making themselves look very silly, because everyone with common says knows that we don’t pray for any religions. We pray for people and their situations

 

[Eufrosnia]

Well, you can’t claim orthodoxy or that you are the defender of the true faith if you do that while suspended for schismatic acts. It doesn’t make sense.

I believe that the SSPX priests, like all people who have things to repent of, should repent and take up a ministry in the Church, HOWEVER, their past behavior, from their ordination to their illicit Masses to their confessions without faculties preclude them from ever talking the high moral ground as the saviors of the Church.

Well you do realize that my original post was not arguing for Complete Orthodoxy of the SSPX necessarily but a different aspect of it? Perhaps I used the wrong word at the outset.

 

[JReducation]

OK. So if JP2 ordered all Catholics to kiss the Koran and pray to St. John the Baptist to protect Islam, would they be bound to obey?

I’d like to know is why does this matter to an atheist? Atheist do not believe in God. Therefore, the power of prayer is a non-question with atheists.

 

[Eufrosnia]

No one can order you to commit a sin.

Let’s looks at this.

1. Kissing the Koran – is it a sin? No. Is it prudent? Matter of dispute.
2. Praying for Islam - is it a sin? No. The fact is that you don’t pray for a religion. You pray for its people, which is what Bl. John Paul meant. We don’t pray for Catholicism either. We pray for Catholics. The wording was awkward. However, anyone who knows Bl. John Paul would immediately pick up that the wording was awkward and would have picked up his meaning.

On the other hand, anyone with an ax to grind or with an agenda, would take the phrase, “pray for Islam” and run with it, making themselves look very silly, because everyone with common says knows that we don’t pray for any religions. We pray for people and their situations

But can’t someone say “pray for the spread of Islam?”.

More importantly, what if the Pope says that all men and women should share a bed regardless of whether they are married? The act itself would be a matter of prudence so not intrinsically immoral. But following it would cause someone to sin. What does one do then?

 

[Eufrosnia]

There you go again on your “Bash the Franciscans Campaign”.

What do Franciscans have to do with this?

I only used them as an example because I thought it would seem more relevant since you are a Franciscan It could have been any other name of an Order.

For that matter, how do you even know that Franciscans don’t know what the SSPX knows about traditional customs such as modest dress?

I honestly don’t know if they are aware of all of it right now. But I felt certain that

1. They know the Theology of it
2. Even if they knew how to practically apply modesty for lay persons, since this is not part of their rule, it might soon get abandoned or discarded as non-essentials