Talks over with SSPX?

[Timothysis]

I noticed that you don’t dispute “secularist and modernist trends.” I’m glad there is clarity on that point, as well as on the overarching point that the Vatican wants SSPX back in the fold and therefore, even if for no other reason than that, we should too.

I didn’t dispute “secularist and modernist trends” because it is nothing but hyperbole in much the same way that “liberal and conservative” are thrown around. In other words, it means nothing.

Also, I think that Pope Benedict is more concerned with getting this thing settled than a “need” to get the SSPX “back in the fold.”

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

5
I agree that no one should be dismissive of 570 priests, and the half a million plus souls to whom they pastor. We need SSPX back in the fold in a big way, in my opinion, if only to counter the secularist and modernist trends, and to kick start attendance in some of the languishing churches and seminaries of Europe and the US. The Vatican wants SSPX in, and all of us should too.

Please explain how a priestly society who cannot enter a diocese without the permission of the bishop will “counter” anything, or “kick start attendance” in churches and seminaries.

Once SSPX is re-assimilated, permission of many bishops, particularly those who are appointments of Pope Benedict XVI, will follow. Our Pope is doing his best, evidenced by his appointments in Minnesota, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle and elsewhere, to counter the liturgical abuses and the liberal/modernist/Protestant spirit which has infected some Catholic dioceses.

Even if this is so they are still not going to have much of an effect.

Even if they each man enters a different diocese that would only be 570 of the 2795 dioceses in the world.

 

[JReducation]

Hold on Brother Jay,

The statement that the SSPX can do a lot of good in the church says nothing about dedicated Religious - absolutely nothing!

If anything, one would think it says negative things about all the wonderful secular priests who are offering Masses every day.

It is not saying anything about them either.

However, an obedient SSPX can do good to the service of the Church.

Archbishop DiNoia, was asked in a recent interview

So it is not a bad thing to say that the Society can do a lot of good and it is not an indictment on anyone else.

Please, please do not take it that way.

I don’t think that there is disagreement with Archbishop DiNoia’s statement, though many of us wonder if he’s trying very hard to be diplomatic, because those who know the ICRSSS, FSSP, Sons of the Holy Redeemer, Good Shepherd, Canons of St. John Cantius, Carmelites of Wyoming, and Franciscans of the Immaculate know that we have that link of which he speaks. They’re not bringing something new. They will be grafted onto the tree that already exists.

The absence of any credit to those who have been around was first brought up, not by religious or by diocesan priests and deacons, but by laymen, very devout laymen, such as members of Opus Dei, Knights of Columbus, people in the pro-life movement (where the SSPX has refused to participate alongside other Catholics and Christians) and some people on this very thread. This feedback got the attention of religious and diocesan.

If I were going to say what the Archbishop said, I would have begun with the FSSP, since they were the first courageous traditionalist group who ventured out there on their own, in the mainstream. They have earned the respect and love of many. Then I would have said that the SSPX could merge into that force that is already in place to strengthen it and help it grow.

I believe that what makes the FSSP so acceptable to diocesan priests and to religious orders is there humility. I remember an interview that they did on EWTN. They were interviewed by a layman and a friar. The layman said something about them and used the expression, “your order”. The FSSP priest, whom I liked very much for his wonderful sense of humor, immediately jumped and said.

“Wait a minute. Before anyone becomes confused. We’re not an order or religious of any kind. We serve the ministry of the priest and the preservation of the liturgy, but we cannot nurture the soul of the Church. Only religious can do that. We’re secular priests.”

The Canons of St. John Cantius are also very beautiful in their presentation of themselves. They present themselves as consecrated religious who are also priests and whose mission is to preserve traditional liturgical life and to nurture the soul of the Church in union with the body of consecrated religious. They do both.

Here is where I often get confused. My friend who’s the SSPX priest says that they don’t see themselves as encompassing all of tradition, only liturgical tradition. But the people who write blogs and post on the internet present them as if a Catholic won’t need anyone else but an SSPX priest, which is contrary to the doctrine of the Church. I don’t know if it’s the one priest who sees himself as the FSSP sees itself or if the friends of the SSPX see them as bigger than life and present them that way to the world. It’s a little confusing at times.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[TrueLight]

Here is where I often get confused. My friend who’s the SSPX priest says that they don’t see themselves as encompassing all of tradition, only liturgical tradition. But the people who write blogs and post on the internet present them as if a Catholic won’t need anyone else but an SSPX priest, which is contrary to the doctrine of the Church. I don’t know if it’s the one priest who sees himself as the FSSP sees itself or if the friends of the SSPX see them as bigger than life and present them that way to the world. It’s a little confusing at times.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

I’ve said it before, but I think the best way to get a feel for what the FSSP and SSPX stand for is to listen to sermons by different priests.

Audiosancto.org has a bunch of sermons by mostly FSSP priests. There is also an excellent homilist on there who is a Franciscan friar!

It’s not only about liturgy for the FSSP. They also strive to preserve tradition. However, they take a more positive approach. They do what they do in the best way possible, within the boundaries they are given.

 

[Dom_Desiderius]

The SSPX are greatly disliked by some/many Catholics because they are a living rebuke to those who are content with the status quo of the Church after the 1960’s.

Would it be fair to say that there are many Catholics today who would be much happier to attend an ‘ecumenical service’ than set foot in an SSPX chapel?

In my experience, that is profundly true.

I once spent time with some of the “charismatics” who claim to be in communion with Rome, and that was my experience with them. My view of supporting strictly the traditions and placing importance on them made them very comfortable, loosy goosy as they were.To make up for their uncomfortability I was instead made to feel that I was somehow “missing the boat” and wasting my time - simply because I read my 1955 “Sunday Sermons of the Great Fathers”

Sermon for the Sixteenth Sunday after Pentecost

by St. Anthony of Egypt:

"For the tongue of a deceitful man provokes strife among peoples, and the shedding of blood. He who enters into a friendship with a deceitful woman, enters into the same with a most wicked devil. He who enters into friendship with a most deceitful man, joins company with spillers of blood, and becomes guilty of his own death… Far, far better to dwell in solitude, than in the company of a treacherous man; for if you once enter, he will drag you down to his own foulness. You are safer in the company of wild beasts, than in the company of a deceitful man.

And should such a man approach you pleasantly, and speak mildly with you; nevertheless, should you once trouble his heart, (all) of a sudden the hidden guile bursts forth and he will destroy you when you least expect it. Because of this let God be with you, as He was with our Fathers, Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, that He may deliver you from him whose strength is in his loins ; that is, the devil, who at all times looks with malice on men who serve God, and strives to catch them with his hook, that he may devour them.

But we have One Who makes intercession for us (Heb. vii 25), Jesus Christ our Lord, Who has given us power to tread down his strength (Lk. x. 19). The eye that is not filled with seeing, and the ear that is not filled with hearing (Eccles. i. 8), tells us that love is a fulfillment of such things as these: That you be all of one heart in Christ Jesus; helping one another, loving one another, so that the Lord may prepare our hearts to fulfil His commandments, until the day of the manifestation of the fullness of His Glory in Jesus Christ, unto all generations that are without corruption: the brethren whom I love, through Christ Jesus; to Whom be Glory and Honour, now and for ever, throughout all ages of ages. Amen."

This is exactly how many SSPX attendees and clergy have been made to feel.
They spend their days living and following teaching such as these -
only to be told they are wasting their time and are in need of the truth, that they need to “relax” more.

Edited by moderator - see note below

 

[bernibradley]

I am not as sophisticated as all those on this forum. Some of your arguements are clearly over my head. I am trying to understand my faith and have been reading to learn more about our Lord’s truth.

I am Roman Catholic, my parents and siblings left and are now all regular attendees of St. Pius X. I did not grow up in the pre-Vatican II era. As a matter of fact I left the church for over 20 years and came back four years ago.

St Pius X is strict and is one of the reasons I used to think my family was radical, the daily rosary’s, the sacrificial charitable giving, the self induced denial for penance, and other busy requirements was unrealistic to me. This doesn’t include their closed minds to acceptable social norms.

Since I have returned to the church I have no doubt that the Eucharist is the body of Christ through my weekly adoration. I attend mass and see people chewing gum to receive our Lord and ignoring his Presence by not kneeling when He is before them. Not to mention Eucharistic Ministers (females) that wear low cut shirts and shorts or mini-skirts. He is our King and it pains me to be part of this.

I have talked to my parish Priest and he sympathises. I went to the Chrism mass this last Easter and the Bishop and all the priests allowed pagan faiths to dance around the altar. I began to cry and left because I felt Christ was being forcibly humbled to those who could care less about Him. Most of those dancing had hardly any clothes on!

I do not attend St.Pius X masses but as I slowly learn the search for His truth and the knowledge that I will answer for my actions…I gotta say…something is not right with the Roman Catholic church. When fellow parishoniers vote for abortionist and believe homosexual marriage is a conscious belief, I wonder who we really are? When my parish will allow Methodists to participate in our mass and us in their services but cry foul with the actions of St Pius X? I pray more Catholics will study their faith and that the Priests lay it out without fear of losing parishoners, it’s all about our Lord’s truth, Jesus doesn’t lie to us. The church will never go away, we should not have fear of offending parishoners if they are told the truth.

Please forgive my ignorance, I know I have so much more to learn then those who have posted here, I’m not against my parish, I’m just confused and concerned.

 

[clem456]

Originally Posted by RogerDeCourcy
The SSPX are greatly disliked by some/many Catholics because they are a living rebuke to those who are content with the status quo of the Church after the 1960’s.

Would it be fair to say that there are many Catholics today who would be much happier to attend an ‘ecumenical service’ than set foot in an SSPX chapel?

In my experience, that is profundly true

.
It’s a false dilemma. Why would a Catholic attend either instead their parish Mass?

Edited by moderator - see notes below

 

[clem456]

I…something is not right with the Roman Catholic church. When fellow parishoniers vote for abortionist and believe homosexual marriage is a conscious belief, I wonder who we really are? .

Who is responsible for sin?

 

[Thomas_Casey]

MODERATOR NOTE

As a fully Catholic apostolate in full communion with the Holy See, we do not allow shismatic statements to be made in defense of any position. They may be used in a historical reference, not as a support for an argument.

 

[JReducation]

I’ve said it before, but I think the best way to get a feel for what the FSSP and SSPX stand for is to listen to sermons by different priests.

Here, I’m going to respectfully disagree. While the words may sound similar, to the theologian and student of the ecclesiology, the two institutes DO NOT stand for the same thing. Their similarity stops at the preservation of tradition.

The FSSP encompasses the whole of tradition, including unity with the primacy of Peter in the person of the reigning pontiff. It also embraces unity with the rest of the Church, accepting the tradition and diversity can co-exist and that two points can be different and both be true and part of the same Church. The FSSP also embraces fraternal cooperation with other institutes and secular clergy in accomplishing the mission of the Church.

Through its actions, the FSSP gives a living witness of the truth about the Holy Eucharist. There is but one sacrifice, one redeemer, one victim and one triumph over sin and death. Therefore, the Eucharist unites us as one people of faith, regardless of our differences. It does not juxtapose us. To embrace the Eucharist while embracing separation is a failure to live the Eucharist’s deepest theological message found in Christ’s priestly prayer at Gethsemane.

All too often both the defenders of the traditionalist movement and its detractors focus only on the window dressing and do not see the deeper theological layers to be found no in the rituals and sermons, but in the daily operations of an institute. When the daily operations are inconsistent with the ritual and the externals, their is a break in the spiritual harmony of the soul. Such a break, while it may contains salvific elements, falls short of the whole.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[Lormar]

This is exactly how many SSPX attendees and clergy have been made to feel.
They spend their days living and following teaching such as these -
only to be told they are wasting their time and are in need of the truth, that they need to “relax” more.

More victims, real or perceived, we do not need. Let them “put their money where their mouth is”, so to speak, and get back in the Church where they belong.

 

[Faithdancer]

I didn’t dispute “secularist and modernist trends” because it is nothing but hyperbole in much the same way that “liberal and conservative” are thrown around. In other words, it means nothing.

Also, I think that Pope Benedict is more concerned with getting this thing settled than a “need” to get the SSPX “back in the fold.”

Timothysis, you may note that I said “want” not “need.” Also, the Pope is even now in urgent talks with the leading bishops from around the world and a principal topic at hand is the “tidal wave of secularism” sweeping the western world; to use the terms secularist or secularism, then, is not exactly hyperbole. “Liberal and conservative” are terms most appropriate to political science and economics, and I don’t think they are appropriately applied to Catholicism, although they often are. Perhaps “orthodox” and “heterodox” are more appropriate terms.

 

[Cristiano]

I’ve said it before, but I think the best way to get a feel for what the FSSP and SSPX stand for is to listen to sermons by different priests…

If you look at that then you have to assume that every priest has the authority to speak for their own fraternity and that it is not true. If it were true then you would have contradictions because there are some SSPX priests that discourage attendance to FSSP TLM and deny the validity of the OF. I think that the superior general is the only one that could and should speak for the fraternity.

 

[Faithdancer]

To those who trivialize the importance of getting the SSPX back into full communion with Rome based on their relatively low numbers- I submit that the impact of having 570 highly traditional-minded priests and their congregations reunited with us may provide a spiritual impact greater than their numbers alone would suggest. In other words, that would be 570 priests guaranteed not to give us “clown masses” and “pagan faith dances” and other abominations.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Here, I’m going to respectfully disagree. While the words may sound similar, to the theologian and student of the ecclesiology, the two institutes DO NOT stand for the same thing. Their similarity stops at the preservation of tradition.

The FSSP encompasses the whole of tradition, including unity with the primacy of Peter in the person of the reigning pontiff. It also embraces unity with the rest of the Church, accepting the tradition and diversity can co-exist and that two points can be different and both be true and part of the same Church. The FSSP also embraces fraternal cooperation with other institutes and secular clergy in accomplishing the mission of the Church.

Through its actions, the FSSP gives a living witness of the truth about the Holy Eucharist. There is but one sacrifice, one redeemer, one victim and one triumph over sin and death. Therefore, the Eucharist unites us as one people of faith, regardless of our differences. It does not juxtapose us. To embrace the Eucharist while embracing separation is a failure to live the Eucharist’s deepest theological message found in Christ’s priestly prayer at Gethsemane.

All too often both the defenders of the traditionalist movement and its detractors focus only on the window dressing and do not see the deeper theological layers to be found no in the rituals and sermons, but in the daily operations of an institute. When the daily operations are inconsistent with the ritual and the externals, their is a break in the spiritual harmony of the soul. Such a break, while it may contains salvific elements, falls short of the whole.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

Since you mentioned about accepting a diversity of tradition and practice, I wonder if any of them (SSPX or FSSP) are willing to concelebrate in a Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom? And if they do, just for kicks, the Byzantine Rite celebrant should put them on the far side of the table so they are facing the people

 

[Boulder257]

In other words, that would be 570 priests guaranteed not to give us **“clown masses” **and other abominations.

There it is. I was wondering how long it would be before we heard that phrase…

 

[Faithdancer]

There it is. I was wondering how long it would be before we heard that phrase…

To be fair, I haven’t heard of any “clown masses” occurring in a while. But as a previous poster mentioned, pagan faith dances around the altar seem to be in vogue, and are just as sacrilegious, imho.

 

[Cristiano]

To be fair, I haven’t heard of any “clown masses” occurring in a while. But as a previous poster mentioned, pagan faith dances around the altar seem to be in vogue, and are just as sacrilegious, imho.

Where is the evidence? How many priests allow that? Are we really justifying one form of disobedience to counter another form of disobedience? If yes, are we telling all the obedient faithfuls that have been holding their place that their proper behaviors have been useless?

 

[Faithdancer]

Where is the evidence? How many priests allow that? Are we really justifying one form of disobedience to counter another form of disobedience? If yes, are we telling all the obedient faithfuls that have been holding their place that their proper behaviors have been useless?

If the SSPX priests are reunited with the Church, then they won’t be considered disobedient anymore, will they? And if you want evidence of liturgical abuses, YouTube has plenty of examples.

 

[Denise1957]

Here’s a recent event in which it appears that the dance/skating is featured as a sort of procession at the beginning of Mass. The music sounds like a type of carnival music…I’d advise turning down the sound if you view the video:

youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=MxfO7a7_bWs