Will the Liberal Church 'Schism'?

[Emmit_Fitzhume]

My brother, I think you are confusing us with the Dimond Brothers. If you can not substantiate, you should not level the charge. On the otherhand, myself and other supports of the SSPX have backed up everything I have said with documentation.

I posted it once. I really don’t have the inclination of doing it again.

 

[maurin]

Really, you make sound like some sort of horror movie. When should this happen?..at midnight under a full moon?

And you make it sound as if it doesn’t matter, unimportant, laissez faire, devil may care.

It is the lukewarm He spews from his mouth.

 

[VetA]

Hello everyone,

I was very distressed to see in the National Catholic Reporter, which purports to be actually Catholic, articles which encouraged women’s ordination, praised politicians for defying the bishops (most specifically in regards to abortion), and the like.

These liberals tend to raise the Social Teaching of the Church, which is great and should be cherised, but they raise the social teaching over and above the infallible teachings on faith and morals.

This is heresy, is it not? But my understanding is the Church’s teaching in regards to artificial contraception, abortion, and homosexual acts are not changeable. Truth can’t change, regardless of whether one likes it or not. It seems to me these liberal dissenters simply see the Church as what they Want it to be, rather than what it is- the Fullness of Truth, the fullness of Christian Doctrine.

Question is, will the Church ever ‘change’ these teachings? If not, do you see a possible schism later on?

Thanks

Peace in Christ,

Eric

my first reaction was to say this:

If they feel this way and freely choose to put themselves in schism in thier hearts and then attempt to lead unsuspecting catholics into schism with them, then just let them break off into their own protestant ‘churches’

but i know this is wrong, i pray that they will have a change of heart and come to realize whats true is true.

 

[floresco]

My credibility is intact. I have never allied myself with schismatics since my conversion to Catholicism. All the Lefebvre is simply the Jack Hyles of Catholicism.

You appear to pride yourself on your loyalty to the Pope. Yet he has made it clear that reconciliation with the SSPX is very important to him. Do you support his wishes by this kind of posting? Personally, I try to model my attitude to the SSPX on that of the Pope. We see nothing inflammatory or belligerent from him. He speaks of them respectfully and shows that he values them. Shouldn’t Catholics who are loyal to the Pope imitate him in this?

 

[ConstantineTG]

You appear to pride yourself on your loyalty to the Pope. Yet he has made it clear that reconciliation with the SSPX is very important to him. Do you support his wishes by this kind of posting? Personally, I try to model my attitude to the SSPX on that of the Pope. We see nothing inflammatory or belligerent from him. He speaks of them respectfully and shows that he values them. Shouldn’t Catholics who are loyal to the Pope imitate him in this?

The Pope also desires reconciliation with the Anglicans. I don’t see you speak so highly of them

 

[floresco]

The Pope also desires reconciliation with the Anglicans. I don’t see you speak so highly of them

That’s because the subject of Anglicans has not come up. If it were to do so, I expect that I would speak respectfully of them and focus on positive aspects of their beliefs. I completely support the Pope’s teaching in Anglicanorum Coetibus.

 

[Magnus467]

Why on earth the SSPXers hijacked this thread to discuss their status I’ll never know, anyway:

“However it is clear that the doctrinal questions remain, and until they are clarified the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers cannot legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.”
Ecclesiae Unitiatem 7/8/09

This is the most recent official statement on the status of the SSPX with relation to Rome. There will not be another one while talks are ongoing.

I have posted this as well. It can not be any clearer. The fact remains that they reject the 2nd Vatican Council. This was a legitimate council.

 

[maurin]

I have posted this as well. It can not be any clearer. The fact remains that they reject the 2nd Vatican Council. This was a legitimate council.

Magnus,

Now you must provide a quote from either Archbishop Lefebvre or from His Excellency Bishop Fellay which states that the Society rejects the legitimacy of the Council or the Council itself.

When youi are unable to provide such quotes-- which you can’t because your statement is wholly false-- you will need to retract your defamation and slander of the Society’s stance.

For anyone of good will who has actually read the Archbishop’s and the Bishop’s writings knows the Council was not only legitimate, but also that the Society accepts all that which can be reconciled with the two thousand years of Traditional Teaching which came before the Council. This of course absolutely precludes the false ecumenism, the changing of the definition of the Church, and as Cardinal Ratzinger himself wrote, artificial or fabricated Liturgy. This last is even agreed with by most posting on this forum, yet still abounds in the Church.

 

[reggieM]

People do change their views. I’ve known several liberals who became SSPX’d. It’s actually fairly common. I’ve seen several also who leave the SSPX and join diocesan parishes. I’ve known other liberals who set aside their dissent against doctrinal teaching (while staying in the same parish). Others opened themselves up to the traditional Mass and found spiritual growth there.

The Church knows this. As the environment changes for the better, many will set aside dissident views. Schisming off large parts of the flock will not help in that kind of change.

The SSPX mentality (as an attitude that I recognize) is a temporary thing. The SSPX’s position with the Church also was meant to be temporary, and not something to be embraced as a permanent condition.

Dissident-liberalism is an evil that stretches back at least a century to the Modernist crisis, and is probably present in every heresy to some degree (even in “traditionalist” heresies/schisms like Jansenism & Old Catholics).

So, these positions are in flux. The center-point or nucleus is the Holy See. Various interests and spiritual energies rotate around the nucleus – polarizing to one side or another. The center can move slightly also, but always retaining orthodoxy and orthopraxis.

Some break off entirely, others come closer to the center. The human and divine work together. Very often, we passionately argue for a human perspective to be triumphant.

But this is because we place our needs, loyalties, certainties and committments in a framework that cannot sustain that much trust (nor should it be the focus of that kind of misapplication of divine certainty or faith).

 

[reggieM]

When considering the NCR-folks, I consider these meditations.

Book of Proverbs 22: 24-25
Be not a friend to an angry man, and do not walk with a furious man:
Lest perhaps thou learn his ways, and take scandal to thy soul.

Hebrews 12:15 See to it that no one fails to obtain the grace of God; that no “root of bitterness” springs up and causes trouble, and by it many become defiled.

Psalm 64:3 They sharpen their tongues like swords and aim their words like deadly arrows.

Ephesians 4:31-32 Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you …

 

[Joe_5859]

Why on earth the SSPXers hijacked this thread to discuss their status I’ll never know

Indeed. Perhaps we should petition the moderators to change the thread title to “Yet another SSPX thread…”

I haven’t checked this thread since it first started and (with over a hundred posts) I was looking forward to a good discussion on the topic presented in the OP. How disappointing.

 

[StTommyMore]

Why on earth the SSPXers hijacked this thread to discuss their status I’ll never know, anyway:

“However it is clear that the doctrinal questions remain, and until they are clarified the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers cannot legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.”
Ecclesiae Unitiatem 7/8/09

This is the most recent official statement on the status of the SSPX with relation to Rome. There will not be another one while talks are ongoing.

Mostly because the SSPX like to crow about ho much holier they are than us poor, deluded, faithful, Catholics.

 

[Dum_Spiro_Spero]

Perhaps you have an inferiority complex, because I have never once claimed that about your or anyone else. I am the most broken, weak Catholic out there. I sure hope you and everyone else is a better Catholic than me. I struggle daily to remain faithful to Holy Mother Church and the Vicar of Christ. If you feel that way towards the SSPX, it is because you have induced yourself to feel that way…not because of something I or anyone else has done.

Mostly because the SSPX like to crow about ho much holier they are than us poor, deluded, faithful, Catholics.

 

[kozlosap]

Mostly because the SSPX like to crow about ho much holier they are than us poor, deluded, faithful, Catholics.

I’m a member of the poor, deluded, faithful Catholics too. Read back (it will take a while) on some of the numerous SSPX threads and you will see how correct Tommy is when he talks about “crowing”

 

[Dum_Spiro_Spero]

It was necessary that we discuss the SSPX, because we are the only group inside THe Church that seems to have our eyes open and who is actively fighting against the liberal modernists seeking to destroy our Church.

Indeed. Perhaps we should petition the moderators to change the thread title to “Yet another SSPX thread…”

I haven’t checked this thread since it first started and (with over a hundred posts) I was looking forward to a good discussion on the topic presented in the OP. How disappointing.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

but i know this is wrong, i pray that they will have a change of heart and come to realize whats true is true.

Jesus said that His sheep know His voice and will follow Him. The rest will be lost…

Pray for the Liberals that deny Christ by denying our Holy Father and our Church.

 

[Dum_Spiro_Spero]

If by crowing you meant that we expect some reverance and respect during Mass, no abuses, etc. then I guess we crow a lot. The shame of the matter is you all are just indifferent and you apparently know better. It is different for a Catholic who doesn’t know a certain thing is an abuse to stand by silently as it happens…it is another thing for an informed Catholic to stand by silently while abuses happen all around them. Apathy, or indifference, is the glove into which evil slips its ugly hand.

You can bash me all you want, but I will choose an “illicit” yet totally valid Mass offered by the SSPX any day over some place I have to be afraid of running into clowns, Devil’s handing out communion, horrid music, female priestesses, sugar cookies, etc…at least that “illicit” Mass is properly celebrated and not a danger to my faith and does not bring scandal to me or others. As Catholics, we have an obligation to avoid anything that would damage our faith…and every time I go to a Novus Ordo there is something there that does just that, whether it is something perpetrated by the laity or the priest. Either way, it is problematic.

I’m a member of the poor, deluded, faithful Catholics too. Read back (it will take a while) on some of the numerous SSPX threads and you will see how correct Tommy is when he talks about “crowing”

 

[LoyalViews]

Mostly because the SSPX like to crow about ho much holier they are than us poor, deluded, faithful, Catholics.

I don’t think they that’s what they are like. The SSPX does not send across the “holier than thou” message. They send the “humble and wanting to fix” message. Like I said earlier they lack only one thing. They may support the Pope, pray for him, but they are not in full communion with him. Only partial. Now, it is different for the laity, as one can support the SSPX, but id one decides to join the SSPX as a Priest or a nun, or a monk or something, then they would farther themselves from our Holy Father.
I support the FSSP and ICRSS, but I see nothing wrong with the SSPX. I only see one flaw with the SSPX, and that is they lack communion.

They are not schismatic, it would be silly to call them schismatic. I have learned this.

 

[kozlosap]

If by crowing you meant that we expect some reverance and respect during Mass, no abuses, etc. then I guess we crow a lot. The shame of the matter is you all are just indifferent and you apparently know better. It is different for a Catholic who doesn’t know a certain thing is an abuse to stand by silently as it happens…it is another thing for an informed Catholic to stand by silently while abuses happen all around them. Apathy, or indifference, is the glove into which evil slips its ugly hand.

You can bash me all you want, but I will choose an “illicit” yet totally valid Mass offered by the SSPX any day over some place I have to be afraid of running into clowns, Devil’s handing out communion, horrid music, female priestesses, sugar cookies, etc…at least that “illicit” Mass is properly celebrated and not a danger to my faith and does not bring scandal to me or others. As Catholics, we have an obligation to avoid anything that would damage our faith…and every time I go to a Novus Ordo there is something there that does just that, whether it is something perpetrated by the laity or the priest. Either way, it is problematic.

I spent this morning reading back on SSPX posts over the past year or so, and yes, some posters do come across as “my way or the highway” and if you don’t believe in exactly as we believe then you are not in a state of grace and partaking in sacraments that are not valid. When you attended college did you believe everything that every professor lectured about, or did you use your intellect to come to a decision about certain theories? It’s the same when trying to say that the SSPX is the only way for a Catholic to be in full communion with what our Lord wanted for his children. It must be lonely up on that mountain top with the (percentage wise) few other SSPX and look down on the rest of the Roman Catholic world. What’s interesting is that most of the rest of the RCC world is just fine with you worshiping as you see fit, yet those of the SPPX continually denounce the way in which we (the other 99.99%) worship. If you are correct, then Heaven will be a very sparse place.

 

[StTommyMore]

I don’t think they that’s what they are like. The SSPX does not send across the “holier than thou” message. They send the “humble and wanting to fix” message. Like I said earlier they lack only one thing. They may support the Pope, pray for him, but they are not in full communion with him. Only partial. Now, it is different for the laity, as one can support the SSPX, but id one decides to join the SSPX as a Priest or a nun, or a monk or something, then they would farther themselves from our Holy Father.
I support the FSSP and ICRSS, but I see nothing wrong with the SSPX. I only see one flaw with the SSPX, and that is they lack communion.

They are not schismatic, it would be silly to call them schismatic. I have learned this.

“Humble and wanting to fix”? Give me a break. “My way or you are going to hell” is more accurate