'Traditionalist' order recalls seminarians from Lefebvrite seminary

[rien]

Sounds a lot like 1970.

I was just a young child then but if you are saying the initial enthusiasm at something new wore off then and is wearing off now with the EF then I think you are right.

The Catholic church is in dire circumstances and OF, EF, something more is wrong. Look at the Pew study. By more I mean is the religion perhaps not true - dare I say that?

 

[Padua_Minded]

Quite far enough. First of all, how are the SSPX in any way anti-Catholic?

Bishop Fellay
“Williamson and I are on the same line, that which believes that we could hardly re-enter a Church as is. And the reasons are quite simple. Benedict XVI has indeed liberalized the ancient rite, but I cannot explain for what reason he made such a decision if he then allows the majority of Bishops to criticize and disobey him regarding what he determined. What should we do? Re-enter the Church and then be insulted by all those people?”

This is clearly a schismatic (and prideful) mentality. If Bishop Fellay was truly Catholic, he would “re-enter the Church”(to use his words) and would forget about whether or not he would be insulted for it.

Second of all, “Lefebvrism” or “Lefebvrist” implies that they are in some way heretics, as this kind of labeling is usually reserved for that kind of ilk (ex. Arians, Nestorians, etc.) (it’s also against forum rules to call them such, read the rules please)

First of all, it does not imply that they are heretics, no more than calling somone a Thomist or a Molinist does. I have never once claimed that the Lefebvrists are necessarily heretics.

Secondly, I tend to use the term Lefebvrist (a more encompassing and inclusive term) to identify all those who adhere to the “movement of Archbishop Lefebvre” (John Paul II—Ecclesia Dei) including the laity who adhere to their schism. The SSPX explicity deny that laypeople are members of their society (bar members of the their Third Order). Similarly I would not want to give the impression that I actually believe that their priests are incardinated into the society.

Thirdly the term “Lefebvrist” is also used by the founder of Catholic Answers, Karl Keating. “Lefebvriani” (the Italian equivalent) is also used by a Church dicastery to refer to the followers of Marcel Lefebvre. It is also used by Jimmy Akin, Fr Mitch Pacwa SJ, Catholic World News, Catholic News Agency, The Catholic Herald, Catholics United for the Faith and others of great distinguishment. The Lefebvrists may reject the title, but it is hard to see how it is an example of unacceptable name calling that mods would forbid.

I refuse to believe that Cardinal Kasper, the Neocatechumenal Way, etc. are in the Church, but somehow one of the only groups that actually is Catholic, is somehow not.

I regard this as a cheap shot. It doesn’t take a genius to realize that the Church is currently experiencing a great (but declining) crisis. Whatever about Cardinal Kasper’s errors (which have often been criticised by Pope Benedict), I hold him in far higher regard than Bishop Williamson, whose deranged views on the Jews make it seem like the SSPX was a wholly owned subsidiary of the Front National.

Read the letter accompanying the Motu Propio where Pope Benedict XVI speaks of an “internal reconciliation.” The only thing they can be accused of is being in a canonically irregular situation.

The SSPX are certainly in partial communion with the Church. Anyway just because the Lefebvrists are schismatics doesn’t necessarily mean that they have even defected from the Church (if they had defected from the Church, the Church would recognize their marriages and confessions as valid). Besides, this may not necessarily even be referring to the Lefebvrists; the aim of the motu proprio was not only to satisfy them. I have encountered similar anti-VII ‘traditionalism’ among the laity who attend masses of certain societies in full communion with the Roman Pontiff. The Pope also made known to the bishops in the accompanying letter that many Catholics in good faith and canonical standing had felt alienated because of the unjust attitude towards the '62 missal and the liturgical abuses which often accompanied the new rite.

 

[ProVobis]

If Bishop Fellay was truly Catholic, he would “re-enter the Church”(to use his words) and would forget about whether or not he would be insulted for it.

If it were only that simple. Don’t forget, there a few hundred thousand attendees at the SSPX Masses. Many of them would follow the bishop no matter what. But a lot would take away their support altogether if there were a slight chance they’d be forced to accept the modern practices and not only with the Mass. And once accepted into these new practices, there is no going back.

Hence the hesitation, I think, but no one invited me to those meetings.

 

[GodIsSalvation]

Puada_Minded,

I think SemperFidelis objected more to the use of the word “cult” than to the term Lefebvrist. Hopefully you’ll agree that that wasn’t the best choice of words, especially given the sensitive nature of this type of topic.

I do have a question for you, though. How can you possibly think that certain cardinals, whose abuses you seem to admit, are to be held in higher-esteem than the SSPX bishops? Are you implying that mere lip-service to the Pope while going against dogma is better or more deserving of respect than steadfastly adhering to sincere beliefs about Catholic faith? Also, could you point out some of the things that Williamson has said about Jews?

And I agree with you, ProVobis. Many of the SSPXers I know won’t attend SSPX chapels because they are truly scared that if they attended a regular parish they would be forced to endure many of the liturgical abuses and questionable teachings that are prevelant in many of our churches today. I think (and hope and pray) that someday soon SSPX will be offered their own prelature in the Church and that they’ll be smart enough to accept it.

 

[Auntie_M]

This issue about the SSPX being a “cult”

Take a look at these descriptions of a “cult” and see if any of them fit in the SSPX:

Go to whyiamacatholic.com/SSPX

Scroll down to about halfway and click on "What are the Characteristics of a Religious Cult?

Read the Entire text and then ask yourself if this is describing you or the SSPX.

Answer this honestly and report back here. Maybe this will solve the “cult” question…HOPE SO

 

[GodIsSalvation]

Auntie M,

It might be more persuasive if you posted a link that wasn’t so clearly biased. And, after reading the section on what constitutes a cult, there are probably more than a few people who would think the Catholic Church as a whole is a cult (e.g., the group is focused on a living leader to whom members seem to display unquestioning commitment, the group is preoccupied with bringing in new members, the leadership dictates sometimes in great detail how members should think, act, and feel, etc., etc., etc.). As a matter of fact, I found a website too:
rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/Cults/Catholicism/isitcult.htm

I don’t think your site proves anything one way or another.

 

[Padua_Minded]

Puada_Minded,
Also, could you point out some of the things that Williamson has said about Jews?

The modernist bishops in the Church aren’t going around ordaining bishops without papal mandate. They aren’t giving annulments to people without ever having been granted the authority to do so by Rome. They aren’t telling people that they have “don’t have the right to attend the indult mass or the Novus Ordo Mass” and that they are not under their Sunday obligation when there is not a Lefebvrist chapel in the locality. Furthermore, I don’t give attention to the modernist bishops, because IMO the liberals are on the way out. I would rather that tentative links be kept with Rome instead of a schism which could result if were to Rome to “clamp down”. The Church has always recovered from every disaster thrown at her. This crisis should prove no different.

 

[GodIsSalvation]

I’m not sure what this has to do with Williamson’s remarks about Jews, but I agree with most of what you’re saying. However, I don’t understand how you can honestly believe that things you mention are so bad while at the same time you seem to be basically ignoring others within the Church. There are indeed some bishops within the Church who tacitly approve and in some cases seem to encourage liturgical abuse and teachings that are entirely contrary to Church authority. Is there really that big of difference between them and SSPX? Are those in the former category any more “obedient” just because, at least in name, they’re “in communion with Rome?” And if you really want to preserve “tenative ties,” seemingly no matter how bad the abuse is, why don’t you take that position in relation to SSPX?

I agree that the Church will get through Her current crisis. However, it’s going to be difficult if people believe the true crisis is the SSPX and not the pernicious attitude of some of those within the Church.

 

[markadm]

I agree that the Church will get through Her current crisis. However, it’s going to be difficult if people believe the true crisis is the SSPX and not the pernicious attitude of some of those within the Church.

It will be difficult either way. Whether one is a “liberal”, an SSPX-supporting Trad, a sympathetic-to-SSPX person, or a non-SSPX Trad. Why don’t we all stop sitting on our backsides, bickering about it, and actually get to the real work.

 

[Margarite]

Well, back to the first two posts, SemperFidelis, you seem to switch sides, or maybe it is just me.

In the first post, we were talking about how a group of people who had broken away from the Church a while ago were coming home. (I don’t care if they only slightly broke, they were broken.) Then you SemperFidelis, posted

I got to go will finish later sorry!

Sorry this has taken me so long to get back too, I have been very busy.

But to finish my sentence,

You SemperFidelis, posted and seemed to support a priest who was saying basically that it was not good that this group was trying to reconcile with Rome, he seemed to be saying, that the SSPX is more important than the Church, that the SSPX should not try to help the Church, but should always remain separated.
I was wrong in saying that you switched sides, because I have just reread what you have said, and I see that you are all SSPX and totally against the NO.
I just wish that all the SSPX people would stop being so self righteous and would instead help us.
This is one way that I see it,
The SSPX has created for itself, a seemingly perfect little model of a church from many, many years ago, and they stand in their little church and they look out the windows at the real Church. They see that it is dirty and covered with dust and cobwebs and that there are hardly any people cleaning it, but many people helping to dirty it. So instead of the SSPX people jumping in and helping the cleaning crew, so that they can catch up and control the dirtying people, the SSPX people say just ridicule the cleaning crew, and make the cleaning crew want to give up and live the easy life in the miniature model of an old church. But a few of us refuse and daily we get more and more tired of fighting the battle, and we get more and more tired of cleaning without help, and we get more and more tired of being ridiculed by those who have taken the easy road. So that is when we start yelling at SSPX people, we are tired and grouchy and we are crying for help, but no one will help. The Church is just as beautiful as before, it is just covered in muck, and we just have to clean the muck up in order to see the beauty. The work is abundant but the laborers are few.

 

[Auntie_M]

QUOTE]QUOTE=GodIsSalvation;3641480]Auntie M, 

It might be more persuasive if you posted a link that wasn't so clearly biased.  And, after reading the section on what constitutes a cult, there are probably more than a few people who would think the Catholic Church as a whole is a cult (e.g., the group is focused on a living leader to whom members seem to display unquestioning commitment, the group is preoccupied with bringing in new members,  the leadership dictates sometimes in great detail how members should think, act, and feel, etc., etc., etc.).  As a matter of fact, I found a website too:

Yes you are right, there are those non’Catholics who believe we all worship Mary too…

As these type of websites state that no one will ever admit to being in a cult or a leader of cult. I for one, DID not have to take a vow when I converted to Catholism, unlike the SSPX requirements when you “hold” an official position such as a teacher of catechism…Have you taken this vow to ALWAYS uphold the teachings of the SSPX?

I don't think your site proves anything one way or another.

That may be a matter of opinion>>>>>>>>>>>>>