What Impact Has The SSPX Had On The Church?

[stevusmagnus]

Is there still a crisis in the Church? Had you been at the same Easter Mass I was at yesterday and hadn’t been subjected to forty years of desensitizing, you’d know the answer to be an emphatic YES!!! You don’t recognize it anymore because you have absorbed it. I realized that this morning. The way the people conducted themselves yesterday was blasphemous. I said to myself, “It’s not so much the Mass as the people,” and then I realized that the Mass was precisely the reason WHY the people had become so bad.

This morning I ran into a parishioner. She thought the Mass and homily were “awesome.” She also considers herself a “conservative.” Do you know what the “homily” was about? One religion isn’t any better than another! This 71 year old woman has absolutely no idea of how much she’s been changed simply by absorbing the liberal atmosphere in the Church for the past forty-five plus years. She still thinks she is the same Catholic. She’s not. And she doesn’t even realize it.

Yesterday, if you closed your eyes, you would have thought you were in a Piano Lounge in New York City instead of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Compare this to what most SSPX folks experienced yesterday -the Haec Dies and that beautiful sequence “Victimae Paschali Laudes.” And everyone was apparently in the state of Sanctifying Grace because they all received Holy Communion.

There is a crisis. And it’s worse than ever…made so because no one recognizes it anymore so used to it you’ve all become.

Amen! You nailed it! it is the frog in boiling water analogy.

 

[ProVobis]

Have you heard about the miracles attributed to Pope John Paul II? He will be a saint very quickly. Will you deny his sainthood, too?

What other proclamations from the Holy See are you going to decide aren’t to your liking? Obedience isn’t demanded of us at times when we agree with the directive. Obedience demands our faithful trust in the man Christ chose on earth to represent Him and trust that He is speaking as the Vicar of Christ. Otherwise, we’re all just pharisees.

…or in modern-day language, cafeteria Catholics.

That’s good but you still didn’t answer my question. Why are Muslims growing faster than Catholics?

 

[numealinesimpet]

… While Athanasius was removed and restored many times, he had a more obedient actions through his trials than Lefebvre. St. Athanasius did not ordain his own bishops for his own little clan.

Are you saying that this (it’s hard to untangle your sentence structure, but I suppose you mean, a small cosy sect) was the motive of Mgr Lefebvre? Or the SSPX? Do you claim to be telepathic? Is it not possible that his “priestly fraternity without vows” was the only mechanism to keep alive the integrity of the Faith when it was being forcibly extinguished everywhere else? The proof that their motive is not sectarian, but for the good of the whole Church, is given by the fact that Bp Fellay lobbied the Vatican very hard, over a good part of his lifetime, for the TLM to be publicly allowed to every Catholic priest. In so doing, he knew quite well that some would thereafter stop going to SSPX Mass centres if there was a Parish TLM ‘down the road’. That’s not the action of someone’s ‘own little clan’.

He was fighting for a concrete reality that was being denied, the deity of Christ.

Are you saying that Mgr Lefebvre and the seminarians who came to him, and dragged him out of retirement in the 1970s because they could not find even one Seminary that was still teaching the Faith, whole and entire, were not facing a concrete reality? The demolished altars all over the world are another Concrete Reality, come to think of it.

… Again, his example is** a begging of the question**, whether it is accepted or denied.

Your favourite phrase … do you actually know what it means? It means "assuming what is meant to be proved’. On this thread (and elsewhere) we are not ‘starting from the assumption that Mgr Lefebvre is in the right’. That would be begging the question. What I and others are doing is, firstly, presenting general Catholic Principles, and then showing how the actions of Mgr Lefebvre are in line with those principles. The theological exercise of applying general principles to specific cases is known as casuistry, not “begging the question”. It would be refreshing if you would answer in the same vein.

For example:

(1) What advice would you have given Athanasius & Eusebius of Samosata about ordaining and consecrating priests and even bishops? This is at least the 3rd time I have asked you, pnewton.

… Likewise the duty of supplying, within the limits of his own power of orders [which includes the power of consecrating other bishops-Ed.] can fall upon a bishop when the pope, for whatever reason – culpable or not—does not provide “in a sufficient manner” for the spiritual needs of souls. Dom A. Grea, whose attachment to papal primacy is beyond all suspicion, writes that “thus in the 4th century St. Eusebius of Samosata traveled among the eastern churches devastated by the Arians and consecrated Catholic bishops without having any special jurisdiction” or, as the young Conciliar priest might put it, “without the required authorization.” Other Catholic bishops, defenders of Catholic orthodoxy whom the Church today venerates on her altars, acted in the same way. “Without the required authorization” they conferred not only the power of orders, as Archbishop Lefebvre did, but also, when necessity demanded it, the power of jurisdiction over individual dioceses. Dom Grea calls this action “the extraordinary action of the episcopate,” called by extraordinary circumstances to “supply a remedy to the pressing need of the Catholic faithful,” and he writes that in such cases the episcopate acts “with the tacit consent of its head made certain by the necessity.”
See sspxasia.com/Documents/SiSiNoNo/2004_May/Consecrations_Archbishop_Lefebvre.htm

(2) Also for at least the 3rd time (check previous threads) Would you now like to comment on S. Thomas Aquinas’ analysis of Obedience? I realise it’s more fun to bandy insults…

 

[sidbrown]

That’s good but you still didn’t answer my question. Why are Muslims growing faster than Catholics?

For one thing Muslims love children and they love to have large families. For example, in our neighborhood, the Muslim family has six children with more coming, whereas most Catholic families here have two children.

 

[SpiritusSanctus]

Huh? I think you’re missing the point here.

 

[Dempsey1919]

For one thing Muslims love children and they love to have large families. For example, in our neighborhood, the Muslim family has six children with more coming, whereas most Catholic families here have two children

This is a symptom of the crisis in the Church. If the teachings of Humane Vitae were universally accepted by all Catholics, then it stands to reason that all Catholic families would be large. The Muslims are overtaking Christianity in large part due to birthrates; if Catholics stopped using contraception as the divine law demands, then we would keep pace with them and our Churches would be full.

My priest once said that Humane Vitae marked a turning point in the Church; he said it was the first time in his life when he witnessed open dissent among Catholics. Father John Corapi also links dissent from Humane Vitae with the current crisis in the Church.

I really believe the reaction to Humane Vitae was a major factor in causing the crisis in the Church. When have you heard priests preach Humane Vitae from the pulpit while condemning contraception? I have heard this only ONCE! The fact that our priests are afraid to preach the Catholic faith during Mass gives many people the impression that it is okay to dissent from the teachings of the Church. The SSPX has its faults, but at least the priests of the Society are not afraid to proclaim the faith loudly and proudly!

 

[pnewton]

I realise it’s more fun to bandy insults…

If I have insulted you, then I apologize. I do not think I have, though. Perhaps you are referring to others. Yes, I use the phrase “begging the question” a lot, because it happens a lot. I did not use the phrase in reference to supporting the SSPX, but rather the use of St. Athanasius as a support for the actions of AB LeFebvre. As to the advice I would give him, it would be the same. One can object and fight without disobedience. St. Athanasius did just that. We obeyed the summons he was given and was deposed multiple times. Yet he kept on fighting for the Faith. The two were not mutually exclusive. He did not take the path of separation, and God rewarded his efforts in his lifetime.

I am not going to comment at this time on St. Aquinas as it is beyond my study. No everybody knows everything, at least as far as most of us are concerned.

 

[sidbrown]

I really believe the reaction to Humane Vitae was a major factor in causing the crisis in the Church. When have you heard priests preach Humane Vitae from the pulpit while condemning contraception? I have heard this only ONCE! The fact that our priests are afraid to preach the Catholic faith during Mass gives many people the impression that it is okay to dissent from the teachings of the Church. The SSPX has its faults, but at least the priests of the Society are not afraid to proclaim the faith loudly and proudly!

I was at the local SSPX recently, and I noticed that one family there had 14 children. The older teenage girl was taking care of two or three of her very young sisters (or were they brothers?), and the mother was with one small baby, and the father and the other children were together. However, at the local Catholic Church, most families that I am aquainted with, have two or at most three children.

 

[Dempsey1919]

I was at the local SSPX recently, and I noticed that one family there had 14 children. The older teenage girl was taking care of two or three of her very young sisters (or were they brothers?), and the mother was with one small baby, and the father and the other children were together. However, at the local Catholic Church, most families that I am aquainted with, have two or at most three children.

Thanks for sharing this. It is another example of the legacy of Archbishop Lefebvre. His Order is fully Catholic, and we should judge them by their fruits. They clearly produce fruit; their congregations are devout faithful Catholics. The supporters of the SSPX are not the lepers many make them out to be.

 

[pnewton]

Excellent point. Is the legacy of the SSPX fruitful.

Galations 5:22 - 23 the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law.

Yet the question at hand is the impact of the SSPX on the Church. If one is saying one finds “x” in the SSPX and one does not find “x” outside the SSPX, it is an argument that they have had little impact, not that they are a benefit to the Church as a whole body.

 

[numealinesimpet]

It must be remembered that all Popes have the authority to change or alter the Mass. Changing the Mass does not mean that the Pope is abandoning the faith. Furthermore, the Church did not end with Vatican II. The Church will never end. The Church was the true church before Vatican II and after Vatican II.

Archbishop Lefebvre thought the liturgical reform was a disaster and I agree with him. I think the reformers went too far. I accept the fact that the Mass often requires change over time, but this should be done gradually. It was wrong to completely change the Mass.

I think the liturgical reform caused many people to lose the faith, and it caused apostasy. If the Mass could be changed, then everything else could be changed, even the faith. The Mass of Paul VI was not the cause of apostasy; but the liturgical reforms gave the impression that nothing was constant; people saw the changes and thought that doctrines could change as well; perhaps this is why many people revolted so violently against Humane Vitae?

The Tridentine Mass clearly expresses Catholic doctrine and confirms and strengthens the faith. It promotes Catholic doctrine and repels heresy. Archbishop Lefebvre knew this, and that is why he fought so hard to save it. I sincerely believe that the EF Mass has the ability to bring dissent to an end. The Catholic world would become more devout and faith would increase if all Roman Catholics attended the EF Mass. The prayers and gestures of the EF Mass would increase the faith of many people.

Thank you for this measured and thoughtful response. You have not come out either for or against the claims of the SSPX, but you have set down many of the most important issues. I don’t fully concur with all you say, but if I may say so, the posting is worthy of a Catholic Discussion forum, unlike some others we are having to plough through.

Remember what happened in the reign of Pope Pius XII, immediately before the Second Vatican Council:

Mgr Eugenio Pacelli, before he was elevated to the papacy as Pope Pius XII, made this statement:

“I am worried by the Blessed Virgin’s messages to Lucy of Fatima. this persistance of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide of altering the Faith, in Her Liturgy, Her theology and Her soul … I hear all around me innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the Universal Flame of the Church, reject Her ornaments and make Her feel remorse for Her historical past.”

His biographer, Mgr Roche, noted that at this moment in the conversation, as related by Count Galeazzi, his gaze, “seen through the lens of his glasses, became supernatural, and there emanated from his tall and slender body an irresistible mystical force”. A Curial Cardinal present at this meeting objected. Pacelli replied firmly:
"A day will come when the civilised world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God. In our churches, Christians will search in vain for the red lamp where God awaits them…Like Mary Magdalen, weeping before the empty tomb, they will ask, “Where have they taken Him?”
Fr Kramer asks, "How did the future Pope Pius XII know these things?
See e.g. “The Devil’s Final Battle”, Ed. & compiled by Fr P. Kramer, ISBN 0-9663046-5-9.
Publ. by The Missionary Association, 1-800-954-8737 www.devilsfinalbattle.com
Retrieved from “http://www.tradwiki.com/wiki/The_Prophetic_Words_of_Pope_Pius_XII:_“I_am_worried...””

 

[numealinesimpet]

If I have insulted you, then I apologize. I do not think I have, though.

Hmmmm. “I don’t see how I can possibly have insulted you, but if you are that stupid, then I apologise”. Luckily I do not take your words and attitude as a personal insult. I just wish us all to stick to the topic.

Perhaps you are referring to others.

Actually, I am. For example, "Hypocrites’ is a word that the wise use sparingly, as it claims to see the inner soul. “Clairvoyants” was a very colourful phrase, and it certainly helped you to evade the point. You certainly sound in your posts as though you would have told Athanasius and the others to sit tight, do nothing, and “let God take care of things”… I and other posters are urging the point that God usually works through human hands. That indeed is one of the crucial issues, and it is precisely because of his relentless battle over a long lifetime, defying even the pope when it had to be done, that he was canonised – and Liberius was not.

Yes, I use the phrase “begging the question” a lot, because it happens a lot. I did not use the phrase in reference to supporting the SSPX, but rather the use of St. Athanasius as a support for the actions of AB Lefebvre.

Actually, you use it all the time. You seem to think it is impossible for anyone to remark that there are certain precedents, certain lessons to be learned, from the case of Arianism and the activity of Athanasius and the other Catholic bishops, without having already made a judgement on the validity of the SSPX. But there are plenty who note the parallel without coming out in full support of the SSPX. As I said before, these things can be discussed intelligently, not swept aside the way you do.

As to the advice I would give him, it would be the same. One can object and fight without disobedience. St. Athanasius did just that.

Do you accept that he and others went around ordaining other priests outside their territory? Would you call that obedience?

He obeyed the summons he was given and was deposed multiple times. Yet he kept on fighting for the Faith. The two were not mutually exclusive. He did not take the path of separation, …

He most certainly did, if you accept the validity of excommunication. He was excommunicated several times, once with the endorsement of Pope Liberius, and he simply ignored it.

I am not going to comment at this time on St. Aquinas as it is beyond my study. No everybody knows everything, at least as far as most of us are concerned.

In that case, with respect to a fellow-Catholic and seeker after the Truth, my advice is to stop lecturing people on Obedience until you have learned what it actually is, from the Doctors of the Church. It is always possible to make time, you know; it’s only a question of prioritising.

 

[numealinesimpet]

Thank you for this posting, mariediana. There are points in it that we can discuss.

The “traditional Mass” is what the Vatican Council, enlightened by the Holy Spirit, says it is.

Most unfortunately, as I pointed out in a previous posting, the Second Vatican council’s teaching on the Liturgy was so riddled with let-out clauses that it can hardly be said to have ‘taught’ anything. The Novus Ordo Missae as it was eventually thrust upon the people was the cretion of Archbishop Bugnini’s Commission, which was allowed to over-rule the congregation of Rites, who strenuously opposed it. Bugnini had recourse to “The Spirit of Vatican II” and the New mass went far beyond, and even disobeyed, certain of the Vatican II documents. for example, Vatican II mandated “No changes should be made unless the good of the Faithful genuinely and certainly requires it” “Changes must in some way grow organically from what has gone before”. The Offertory prayers were junked for a prayer based on the jewish Grace Before Meals. the real reason is clear, however: the New Mass will be seen to have dumped any explicit affirmation of the doctrine of Propitiatory Sacrifice.

You hold on to meaningless minutia.

Not so. As I wrote before, the “changes” are very far from random. They systematically exclude whole secions of infallible Catholic dogma. The end result is neither meaningless nor minute: vast numbers of the Older Generation did not notice the omissions, but vast numbers of the New Generation simply never learned them. They fell away, because they did not see anything worth keeping. To have allowed this is a very, very heavy material mortal sin. I only pray that it was not done deliberately. That is why the Ottaviani Intervention speaks of the TLM as “an insurmountable barrier against heresy”. and we were told to put it in the wastebasket.

Yes, you have beautiful golden chalices and silken chasubles. Yes, you hear the Mass in Latin instead of in the vernacular. Yes, you have lots of pomp and circumstance. And you know what? So did Henry VIII! He had even more gold and silk after he ravaged all the monasteries. I’ll bet those ceremonies were absolutely stunning!

The reasosn the “dialogue” with the SSPX was stalled for decades is that the Vatican would insist on portraying the SSPX’s motives in this light, whereas if they had only listened, they would have learned this is not the main point. Mgr lefebvre himself stated, “I would rather have the Old Mass in the Vernacular than the New Mass in Latin. It is not about the ritual for its own sake. it is about the Faith. In fact, the TLM is only the most visible aspect. The real problem is the unchecked spread of heresies such as Ecumenism-as-indifferentism and “The Right to Religious Liberty” which the Catholic church has always strenuously denied. God may tolerate out weakness and error, but we have no right to it.

Those of us who grew up and loved the Latin Mass missed it for many years. In fact, when I travel, I really wish it were still in Latin because it unifies us. HOWEVER, those things are incidental. The important part of the Mass is the Word and the Eucharist. THOSE have never been changed! We still have them LICITLY, yet the SSPX people chose to receive the Eucharist illicitly because their nice, comfortable surroundings were tweaked a bit.

Perhaps something to do with it was the sight of the Blessed Eucharist being trampled into the ground at Open-Air masses. I know a good (then mainstream) priest who witnessed this at a papal Open Air Mass and spent half an hour or more gatherin up the pieces. It was only the wise counselling of Bp Fellay, whom he went to see in great distress, who stopped him from joining the Sedevacs, but instead to remain in the church with the SSPX, and just offer up the misplaced antipathy that would fall to his lot.

A Catholic cannot go through his life hating other Catholics. I can imagine the disdain your chldren see as you pass one of our churches and I can hear the criticisms of the style, dress, sacred vessels in your cars as you go by. I can also imagine your children doing the same thing without even knowing why they hate such a place. It’s all very sad.

I genuinely hope this has not been your personal experience. I have certainly not raised any of my nine children to take any such attitude.
continued …

 

[pnewton]

In that case, with respect to a fellow-Catholic and seeker after the Truth, my advice is to stop lecturing people on Obedience until you have learned what it actually is, from the Doctors of the Church. It is always possible to make time, you know; it’s only a question of prioritising.

I will decline your advice. St. Thomas is not the whole of Catholic truth. One does not pick only what what wants. I still have the Catechism, and I still have Holy Scripture, which I use primarily, as it is my primary area of expertise. Also, I have the Saints and Doctors, as I have time. If only those who “have arrived” here, there would be few. I try to treat others here as I would wish to be treated in keeping with the teaching of Jesus.

FYI - I did not think posting Scripture was considered lecturing.

 

[stevusmagnus]

nume,

Pnewton is a hardened idelogue who cannot be reasoned with. He will simply refuse to answer your questions or try to discredit anyone you hold up as an example, even Aquinas. He’s not open to the truth or reasonable discussion.

 

[pnewton]

Do you accept that he and others went around ordaining other priests outside their territory? Would you call that obedience? He most certainly did, if you accept the validity of excommunication. He was excommunicated several times, once with the endorsement of Pope Liberius, and he simply ignored it.

I was unaware that he was every ordered to cease ordaining priests during a time period that he ordained them. And ignoring excommunication is not disobedience. Disobedience is when you are told specifically do this or do not do this and you do the opposite of what you are ordered.

You really are having a hard time having some one of a varying opinion, aren’t you, even when it is on something irrelevant? All this is over me thinking Athanasius being a poor analogy. Is this the legacy of the SSPX?

 

[pnewton]

Pnewton is a hardened idelogue who cannot be reasoned with. He will simply refuse to answer your questions or try to discredit anyone you hold up as an example, even Aquinas. He’s not open to the truth or reasonable discussion.

This is actually one of the deeper insults that I have taken and it cuts. Again, what impact has the SSPX had on the Church? Is this the legacy of the SSPX?

Matthew 7:16 By their fruits you will know them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Just so, every good tree bears good fruit, and a rotten tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a rotten tree bear good fruit.

 

[ProVobis]

I was at the local SSPX recently, and I noticed that one family there had 14 children. The older teenage girl was taking care of two or three of her very young sisters (or were they brothers?), and the mother was with one small baby, and the father and the other children were together. However, at the local Catholic Church, most families that I am aquainted with, have two or at most three children.

I agree. This has been the real impact the SSPX has had on the Church. Even the diocesan EF’s attendees tend to have larger families. Two more generations and the EF will have shown significant growth.

 

[stevusmagnus]

Matthew 7:16 By their fruits you will know them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Just so, every good tree bears good fruit, and a rotten tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a rotten tree bear good fruit.

Society Fruits: thriving seminaries, large families, academies, true religious life, Traditional priesthood and sacraments preserved, true Ignatian retreats, TLM preserved, reverence in every Mass and Chapel,Indult, FSSP, ICK & Ecclessia Dei communities, universal freeing of the TLM after 40+ years of bondage, remitting of “excommunications” and now doctrinal discussions to finally clear up VCII for the entire Church after 50 years.

Fruits of VCII/ NO: Empty seminaries, loss of faith, sex abuse scandals and cover-ups destroyed Church credibility, loss of vocations, lack of reverence, “Silent apostasy”- JPII, “Smoke of Satan entering the Church”- Paul VI, “NO is a banal on the spot product”- Card. Ratzinger, Protestantized beliefs & worship, ugliness in church architecture, CITH, girl altar boys.

Not to mention this and this.

But, of course you will ignore all of this and parrot out “obedience”, “springtime”, “silence”.

For those who have eyes to see, let him see…

 

[At_Trent]

They have met their goal, Deo gratias !

“At Econe, during the Pontifical Mass on Easter Sunday, Bishop Fellay announced that the 12 million rosaries have been “greatly exceeded.” He also invited all the faithful to pray for the Holy Father who suffers from the media’s attacks.”

sspx.org/whatsnew.htm