Latest Threads
newest posts



Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Traditional Catholicism
 

Welcome to Catholic Answers Forums, the largest Catholic Community on the Web.

Here you can join over 400,000 members from around the world discussing all things Catholic. Membership is open to all, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, who seek the Truth with Charity.

To gain full access, you must register for a FREE account. Registered members are able to:
  • Submit questions about the faith to experts from Catholic Answers
  • Participate in all forum discussions
  • Communicate privately with Catholics from around the world
  • Plus join a prayer group, read with the Book Club, and much more.
Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. So join our community today!

Have a question about registration or your account log-in? Just contact our Support Hotline.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search Thread Display
  #31  
Old Jan 9, '13, 10:02 pm
Justin Swanton's Avatar
Justin Swanton Justin Swanton is offline
Regular Member
Book Club Member
 
Join Date: October 26, 2008
Posts: 786
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: SSPX Update - Redux

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrs Sally View Post
And aren't they (un)officially down to three bishops since Bishop Williamson was sanctioned recently?

No, waiting isn't sustainable, but I had was so hopeful over the summer that the reconcilliation would happen.

I have never been to an SSPX chapel/Mass. I do have friends who were involved in the lay movements of Legionaries of Christ (Regnum Christi). I realize that are totally different groups and situations, but the "brainwashing" atmosphere is the similar.

It is very hard to think of ordinary people being so isolated that they cannot see the true beauty of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church headed by the successor of Peter.
If I was a betting man, I would bet a year's salary there will be no reconciliation between the SSPX and Rome in our lifetimes, if ever.

The problem is the foundation stone of the SSPX's position. It is not the Tridentine Mass, nor it is opposition to the liturgical abuses. It is not even anti-Modernism. It is a rejection of Vatican II and the New Mass as such. For reconciliation two things are needed:

1. That the SSPX recognise that the New Mass, as it is printed in the Missal, does not, in any of its prayers or rites, contain anything that would oblige a Catholic in conscience to stay away from it. This is distinct from the way the OF is actually celebrated in some parishes. It is also distinct from the question of whether the prayers could have been better phrased and whether the New Mass should or should not have more closely resembled the Tridentine rite. The point is: it is acceptable and, presuming it is decently celebrated, no Catholic, even the most Traditional, can call it gravely objectionable. This the SSPX is radically unable to accept.

2. That the SSPX recognise that the documents of Vatican II, inasmuch as they form part of the Church's Magisterium, must be accepted as such. This can go with a clarification of the precise meaning of several passages of these documents, and it can go with a recognition of the fact that several passages, by the nature of their subject matter, do not fall under the Church's Magisterium (which itself covers only Faith and morals). However, the doctrinal parts of Vatican II must be accepted, and the non doctrinal parts also accepted unless one can demonstrate that there is an irreconcilable problem with them. This too the SSPX is radically unable to accept.

It is this that is the origin of the profound mistrust of the Church that is fundamental to an SSPXer. The mistrust feeds the rejection, and the rejection feeds the mistrust. I can see no end to it as the Church can never rescind Vatican II and I think it highly unlikely it will ever repudiate the New Mass (maybe just reform it somewhat). Lose-lose situation folks.
__________________
Author of Centurion's Daughter
  #32  
Old Jan 9, '13, 10:49 pm
JReducation's Avatar
JReducation JReducation is offline
Book Club Member
 
Join Date: December 29, 2007
Posts: 20,198
Religion: CATHOLIC
Default Re: SSPX Update - Redux

Quote:
Originally Posted by triumphguy View Post
Is he dead?
No no no. RIP is a term used in the religious life when someone has left or has been dismissed. We call them dearly departed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chero23 View Post
Since this post is about the SSPX and the possibility of them uniting with the Catholic Church. Do you see other big religions or denominations doing so too? We constantly here of dialogues between the church and the Orthodox Church. That would be 2, SSPX and the Orthodox Church. I have also seen by the news that come out of the Middle East especially Egypt, that the Coptic Christian church is having a hard time against Muslims. Does anybody see them having dialogues with the Vatican to be reinstated back in the church after almost 1500 yrs?
We can't deal with the Orthodox and the SSPX the same way for many reasons.

The Orthodox are real Churches with Apostolic Succession.

The Orthodox are not schismatics

The Orthodox are not under the jurisdiction of Rome

What separates the Orthodox and the Catholics are theological issues; however, they must approach the table as equals, because both the Catholic Churches and the Orthodox Churches are real Churches with valid and licit sacraments. They have equal Apostolic Succession. Neither can claim to be more apostolic than the other. Though some people try.

What separates the SSPX is discipline. The SSPX is a Catholic institute that for its particular reasons refuses to back down and accept what Rome commands. We're not going to get into the validity of their reasons. Suffice it to say that when the boss tells you that he wants you to do something this is not contrary to the Commandments, you have a duty to comply. If you refuse to comply, then we have a disciplinary problem on our hands.

In this case, the disciplinary problem is caused by a disagreement on theological issues. The problem could be caused by anything else as well. It could be over money or property, whatever.

As far as the Church is concerned, the behavior of the SSPX is unacceptable, because it confronts authority and turns its back on authority.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeannetherese View Post
Hey Brother JR, Next time you are praying for a miracle, maybe you could ante up the request a bit?
LOL, that was not the miracle that I want John Paul to work on. I know a single mother who has an inoperable tumor on her brain. I've been preparing her for death. However, I found that my daughter has a first class relic of Bl. John Paul. She has a piece of his hair in a reliquary. He gave it to her in an audience when she was 15. She's 29 now. She's flying it down for me to put on the stand next to my friend.
__________________
Fraternally,

Brother JR, FFV

"Forget not love."


Helping hannds . . .
  #33  
Old Jan 9, '13, 10:49 pm
JReducation's Avatar
JReducation JReducation is offline
Book Club Member
 
Join Date: December 29, 2007
Posts: 20,198
Religion: CATHOLIC
Default Re: SSPX Update - Redux

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin Swanton View Post
If I was a betting man, I would bet a year's salary there will be no reconciliation between the SSPX and Rome in our lifetimes, if ever.

The problem is the foundation stone of the SSPX's position. It is not the Tridentine Mass, nor it is opposition to the liturgical abuses. It is not even anti-Modernism. It is a rejection of Vatican II and the New Mass as such. For reconciliation two things are needed:

1. That the SSPX recognise that the New Mass, as it is printed in the Missal, does not, in any of its prayers or rites, contain anything that would oblige a Catholic in conscience to stay away from it. This is distinct from the way the OF is actually celebrated in some parishes. It is also distinct from the question of whether the prayers could have been better phrased and whether the New Mass should or should not have more closely resembled the Tridentine rite. The point is: it is acceptable and, presuming it is decently celebrated, no Catholic, even the most Traditional, can call it gravely objectionable. This the SSPX is radically unable to accept.

2. That the SSPX recognise that the documents of Vatican II, inasmuch as they form part of the Church's Magisterium, must be accepted as such. This can go with a clarification of the precise meaning of several passages of these documents, and it can go with a recognition of the fact that several passages, by the nature of their subject matter, do not fall under the Church's Magisterium (which itself covers only Faith and morals). However, the doctrinal parts of Vatican II must be accepted, and the non doctrinal parts also accepted unless one can demonstrate that there is an irreconcilable problem with them. This too the SSPX is radically unable to accept.

It is this that is the origin of the profound mistrust of the Church that is fundamental to an SSPXer. The mistrust feeds the rejection, and the rejection feeds the mistrust. I can see no end to it as the Church can never rescind Vatican II and I think it highly unlikely it will ever repudiate the New Mass (maybe just reform it somewhat). Lose-lose situation folks.
You're right, but I would also add that even if the priest acted like a total idiot at mass, as long as the mass is valid; there is no justification for a Catholic to miss mass on a Sunday.

Secondly, Pope Benedict explained that there can be no error in the documents of Vatican II including those that do not deal with dogma and morals. Those documents are the product of a council that is protected from error. There can be problems with implementation. There can always be a better word here or there or a change in sentence structure to make clearer an idea. But there can be nothing in the documents that is an error. He said this in October during the celebration of the 50th anniversary of Vatican II.

It was later repeated by several cardinals and archbishops of the curia who were present and heard him say it. Anyone who watched the 50th anniversary mass on EWTN would have heard him say this in his homily. I believe that he deliberately included this as a message to those out there who say that there can be error in non moral and non dogmatic content.

The other condition that the SSPX has been told that it must accept is the Pope Benedict is the Magisterium and he alone decides what is and is not part of tradition. It is the Magisterium of the popes. The SSPX uses the term Magisterium almost interchangeably with tradition. The term magisterium is attached to an office, the teaching office of Peter. The Magister is the current pope, not the pope who lived 100 years ago. They have a tough time with this one and this one is de fide. They admit that it is de fide. But they can't bring themselves to agree with Pope Benedict. It's a Catch-22 situation. As you say, a no win situation.

If they never come back, which I hope they do come back, then we have a schism. They will not fit into the Catholic or the Orthodox community. They will be the first of an entire new apostolic line. What a mess.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV
__________________
Fraternally,

Brother JR, FFV

"Forget not love."


Helping hannds . . .
  #34  
Old Jan 10, '13, 3:36 am
Justin Swanton's Avatar
Justin Swanton Justin Swanton is offline
Regular Member
Book Club Member
 
Join Date: October 26, 2008
Posts: 786
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: SSPX Update - Redux

Quote:
Originally Posted by JReducation View Post
As long as Canon Law says that you need faculties granted by a legitimate ordinary in order to absolve, then you need such faculties. If you go to confession on Sat for an SSPX priest who has no faculties to absolve you and you are run down by a bus on Sunday, then you're out of luck.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JReducation View Post
You're right, but I would also add that even if the priest acted like a total idiot at mass, as long as the mass is valid; there is no justification for a Catholic to miss mass on a Sunday.
If I may stick my neck out, it seems there is a certain positivism in this approach, in the sense that if something is declared legal, it is automatically and in every case right, whereas if it is declared illegal, it is automatically and in every case wrong. I am no canonist and don't pretend to be one, but I know enough about Canon law to know that the laws cannot predict and cover every possible circumstance that might arise. When they don't, one is obliged to apply a number of fundamental principles to see if the case in question falls under the law or not.

In the case of Sunday Mass, the legislator could not and did not conceive of the circus celebrations that took and to some extent still take place. The guiding principle behind the Sunday Mass obligation was the need for the faithful to gain the supernatural benefit from Mass which they need to maintain themselves spiritually (others can put it in better words). This would be a normal Sunday Mass celebrated with recollection and reverence. A circus Mass is something else again, and whatever kind of reactions it provokes in those attending it, one cannot pretend that they are in any way supernatural. As a liturgy it fails in its purpose, hence falls away from the principle that guided the legislator in making the Mass mandatory on Sunday. One isn't obliged to go to it.

As regards poor Joe Trad, if his confession is invalid then he has been set up for a legal trap. A Catholic is required to do whatever is necessary to secure the good of his soul. If in mortal sin, he is obliged to go to a confession that, in good conscience, he is convinced is valid. Joe did this. It wouldn't cross his mind to confess his sin again. Five years could pass before the accident that carries him off. But according to the positivist approach he is still damned. Sorry, but the law is made for man, not man for the law. The law says that a priest without faculties cannot validly hear confession. Well and good. But the law also states: prima lex salus animarum - the first law is the salvation of souls. Law cannot become a trap to send souls of good will to hell. Good will must be met by God's grace. Joe is either absolved or God makes an exception about the imperfect contrition limitation and forgives Joe directly.
__________________
Author of Centurion's Daughter
  #35  
Old Jan 10, '13, 5:14 am
Boulder257's Avatar
Boulder257 Boulder257 is offline
Regular Member
Prayer Warrior
Forum Supporter
 
Join Date: July 29, 2009
Posts: 1,723
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: SSPX Update - Redux

Two things:

1. First the previous thread, and I am sure this one, really is a testament to the people who participated. Many of us don't agree and we all know who we are. However, the charity was just as clear and that's to be commended. Also, thank you to our moderator for allowing us the room we needed to discuss, but at the same time providing the boundaries that were necessary to keep the discussion fruitful. I learned a great deal from that last thread and look forward to learning more from each of you.

2. For those that think Brother JR may not be as right as often as he thinks - I said the same thing about my parents when I was a teenager. Turns out they WERE right, I just needed to mature.
__________________
Christo et Ecclesiae
Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth - Pope John Paul II
  #36  
Old Jan 10, '13, 5:16 am
Boulder257's Avatar
Boulder257 Boulder257 is offline
Regular Member
Prayer Warrior
Forum Supporter
 
Join Date: July 29, 2009
Posts: 1,723
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: SSPX Update - Redux

Quote:
Originally Posted by Melchior_ View Post
It's less that they need to come home, it's more that they need to take their shoes off and come inside or leave the house so we can stop letting the cold air in. Standing in the shoe foyer isn't doing anyone any good.
Although it's been said earlier, I had to echo the comments that this is a great analogy. As with the others, I hope you don't mind if I borrow it. Hopefully I can remember it correctly and don't end up with something like, "They need to take off their shoes and feel the cold air before they end up in the foyer." That's usually what happens to me when I try to use something like this in a conversation where I don't have the benefit of revision.
__________________
Christo et Ecclesiae
Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth - Pope John Paul II
  #37  
Old Jan 10, '13, 5:19 am
Melchior_ Melchior_ is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: February 7, 2010
Posts: 2,948
Religion: Catholic - The Long Road to a Possible Secondary Vocation
Default Re: SSPX Update - Redux

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin Swanton View Post
If I may stick my neck out, it seems there is a certain positivism in this approach, in the sense that if something is declared legal, it is automatically and in every case right, whereas if it is declared illegal, it is automatically and in every case wrong.
I think some folks (myself included) are getting annoyed that people are passing off SSPX Masses and the like as "oh, it's *only* illicit!" Masses being stripped of their legality due to obedience issues and lack of faculties is a huge deal. Especially when people pass it off as no biggie, then rage against either:

1) Other illicit actions.
2) Valid and licit actions they simply don't like.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin Swanton View Post
I am no canonist and don't pretend to be one, but I know enough about Canon law to know that the laws cannot predict and cover every possible circumstance that might arise. When they don't, one is obliged to apply a number of fundamental principles to see if the case in question falls under the law or not.
Which is why we have the one with the Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven, the chief justice of Canon Law. So when he says "no legitimate ministry", that means "no legitimate ministry".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin Swanton View Post
In the case of Sunday Mass, the legislator could not and did not conceive of the circus celebrations that took and to some extent still take place. The guiding principle behind the Sunday Mass obligation was the need for the faithful to gain the supernatural benefit from Mass which they need to maintain themselves spiritually (others can put it in better words). This would be a normal Sunday Mass celebrated with recollection and reverence. A circus Mass is something else again, and whatever kind of reactions it provokes in those attending it, one cannot pretend that they are in any way supernatural. As a liturgy it fails in its purpose, hence falls away from the principle that guided the legislator in making the Mass mandatory on Sunday. One isn't obliged to go to it.
If the only choices are CIRCUS MASS WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO and invalid Mass, an argument could be made that you need to go to the CIRCUS MASS (woooo!) because an invalid Mass isn't even a Mass due to no Eucharist being there.

Meanwhile, I would say that a CIRCUS MASS (woo!) is also illicit, so this is a poor comparison. You're comparing oranges to tangerines.

Otherwise, one can justify all sorts of reasons to miss Mass.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin Swanton View Post
As regards poor Joe Trad, if his confession is invalid then he has been set up for a legal trap. A Catholic is required to do whatever is necessary to secure the good of his soul. If in mortal sin, he is obliged to go to a confession that, in good conscience, he is convinced is valid. Joe did this. It wouldn't cross his mind to confess his sin again. Five years could pass before the accident that carries him off. But according to the positivist approach he is still damned. Sorry, but the law is made for man, not man for the law. The law says that a priest without faculties cannot validly hear confession. Well and good. But the law also states: prima lex salus animarum - the first law is the salvation of souls. Law cannot become a trap to send souls of good will to hell. Good will must be met by God's grace. Joe is either absolved or God makes an exception about the imperfect contrition limitation and forgives Joe directly.
Those who receive SSPX confessions are in the same boat as those who aren't within the Church; trust in God's Divine Mercy.
__________________
Visit the Vagrant Catholic for Catholic apologetics and commentary.

CAF Group for Catholic IT Workers. Now with 100% MORE MESSAGE BOARD!.
  #38  
Old Jan 10, '13, 6:03 am
agnes therese's Avatar
agnes therese agnes therese is offline
Regular Member
Book Club Member
 
Join Date: August 18, 2010
Posts: 5,355
Religion: Roman Catholic
Default Re: SSPX Update - Redux

[quote=Melchior_;10227554]I think some folks (myself included) are getting annoyed that people are passing off SSPX Masses and the like as "oh, it's *only* illicit!" Masses being stripped of their legality due to obedience issues and lack of faculties is a huge deal. [quote]

This is exactly why I have never attended an SSPX Mass. They do have a chapel in the area, and I would love to attended a Tridentine Mass for the first time since I was about 7 (which I firmly believe was the initial impetus to my conversion to Catholicism several decades later). But I just don't feel comfortable supporting what I see as their defiance of the Vatican.

And before I get hung, please note -- I am NOT passing judgment on those who do attend SSPX Masses. If you feel comfortable doing so, fine by me. I'm only speaking for myself.
__________________
"When all is said and done, we are infinitely loved."
Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium
  #39  
Old Jan 10, '13, 6:13 am
PaulinVA PaulinVA is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: April 7, 2007
Posts: 4,522
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: SSPX Update - Redux

Quote:
Originally Posted by Melchior_ View Post
I think some folks (myself included) are getting annoyed that people are passing off SSPX Masses and the like as "oh, it's *only* illicit!" Masses being stripped of their legality due to obedience issues and lack of faculties is a huge deal. Especially when people pass it off as no biggie, then rage against either:

1) Other illicit actions.
2) Valid and licit actions they simply don't like.
I think it was Cardinal Levada (or Castrillón Hoyos) who said that you could attend SSPX Masses as long as it was to fullfill your Sunday obligation or because of a love for the Ordinary Form, and that you were careful not to "imbibe of the schismatic mentality".

Well, it seems that the SSPX clergy has fully bought into that mentality. I acknowledge they are not in formal schism. So, the laity that goes to the SSPX chapel every week, it seems, is certainly imbibing (Absorb or assimilate (ideas or knowledge)) that mentality if they go to confession or, gulp, have their marriage officiated, at the local SSPX chapel.

What is confusing to me is the Vatican's reaction to this practice. Which is, there is no reaction.
  #40  
Old Jan 10, '13, 6:13 am
Boulder257's Avatar
Boulder257 Boulder257 is offline
Regular Member
Prayer Warrior
Forum Supporter
 
Join Date: July 29, 2009
Posts: 1,723
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: SSPX Update - Redux

Quote:
Originally Posted by agnes therese View Post
This is exactly why I have never attended an SSPX Mass. They do have a chapel in the area, and I would love to attended a Tridentine Mass for the first time since I was about 7 (which I firmly believe was the initial impetus to my conversion to Catholicism several decades later). But I just don't feel comfortable supporting what I see as their defiance of the Vatican.
The Latin Mass is still practiced within the Church. Therefore, you may be closer to attending one than you think. Here is a link to a site that provides a listing of all Latin Masses throughout the US. This list is compiled by the Ecclesia Dei commission, so you can be comfortable in that they are both valid and licit. http://www.ecclesiadei.org/masses.cfm
__________________
Christo et Ecclesiae
Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth - Pope John Paul II
  #41  
Old Jan 10, '13, 7:21 am
Rich C's Avatar
Rich C Rich C is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2011
Posts: 1,845
Religion: Irish Catholic
Default Re: SSPX Update - Redux

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrs Sally View Post
This is a very interesting idea. Scary too, because it acknowledges that the Society is an isolated, insular group. It also says to me that they aren't drawing in many new people. Their growth is based on family growth of those people who "defected" in the 70s. Their priests are children of the original group who have had very little interaction with the larger world.
Just a thought on your use of the term "defected" from someone who has never been to the SSPX but knows something about the history of those times:

You have to remember two things:

1) The SSPX people "joined" in the early 1970s was not in trouble with the hierarchy.

2) These people "joined" the SSPX because it appeared to be in continuity and agreement with the Catholic Church, while all around them the parishes destroyed their sacred art, deformed their ceremonies, and distorted Catholic teaching. Everything appeared to be going off the deep end except the SSPX.

With hindsight we can see where the Society leadership went wrong, but I really think we need to have more compassion for the faithful whose ordinary shepards let them down, and turned to what looked and sounded familiar and true.
__________________
"The … priest is simultaneously the victim offered on the altar… If we don’t see that relationship of priest, altar, and victim in every Holy Mass, then the way Mass has been celebrated has failed. If we don’t look for that relationship, then we are not really Catholic. Mass is Calvary."
-Fr. Z

Last edited by Rich C; Jan 10, '13 at 7:34 am.
  #42  
Old Jan 10, '13, 7:32 am
ringil ringil is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 9, 2011
Posts: 9,273
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: SSPX Update - Redux

Quote:
Originally Posted by Melchior_ View Post
The problem with waiting is that it isn't sustainable. For them to continue to function as they are, they need Bishops to ordain more priests. After the four current Bishops pass away, there will be none left. Unless:

1) They find other Bishops to join them, and continue the work.

2) Ordain new Bishops, and we saw how well that worked out for them last time.

Benedict knows this, especially #2, which is why I think there is a some urgency involved with this.
But the Bishops are RELATIVELY young. Maybe they are waiting for a new Pope.
__________________
To those with only hammers everything looks like a nail.

"tough love thy neighbor as thyself. Get your own loaves and fishes!"- Stephen Colbert
  #43  
Old Jan 10, '13, 7:53 am
Melchior_ Melchior_ is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: February 7, 2010
Posts: 2,948
Religion: Catholic - The Long Road to a Possible Secondary Vocation
Default Re: SSPX Update - Redux

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich C View Post
Just a thought on your use of the term "defected" from someone who has never been to the SSPX but knows something about the history of those times:

You have to remember two things:

1) The SSPX people "joined" in the early 1970s was not in trouble with the hierarchy.

2) These people "joined" the SSPX because it appeared to be in continuity and agreement with the Catholic Church, while all around them the parishes destroyed their sacred art, deformed their ceremonies, and distorted Catholic teaching. Everything appeared to be going off the deep end except the SSPX.

With hindsight we can see where the Society leadership went wrong, but I really think we need to have more compassion for the faithful whose ordinary shepards let them down, and turned to what looked and sounded familiar and true.
The same can be said during several time periods within the history of the Church. During other times when people performed schismatic acts, the acts and those who performed them are typically looked down upon. However whenever the schismatic act benefits what people would like or if they are sympathetic, they tend to brush it off.

Given the choice between His Grace Lefebvre and Francis/Dominic (the Church on Earth wasn't doing too hot at the time back then), who should we emulate and hold as the ideal for handling situations?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ringil View Post
But the Bishops are RELATIVELY young. Maybe they are waiting for a new Pope.
They're on Pope #2 now. I doubt #3 is going to change his tune.
__________________
Visit the Vagrant Catholic for Catholic apologetics and commentary.

CAF Group for Catholic IT Workers. Now with 100% MORE MESSAGE BOARD!.
  #44  
Old Jan 10, '13, 8:04 am
sw85 sw85 is offline
Account Under Review
 
Join Date: July 22, 2010
Posts: 3,550
Religion: Baptized and confirmed Easter Vigil, 2012
Default Re: SSPX Update - Redux

This is somewhat tangential, but does anyone know where SSPX priests tend to go on ordination? I was wondering the same thing about the FSSP. I doubt either organization has the resources to sustain personal parishes in which to house all their priests, and I'm sure some are sent to dioceses to help out with the priest shortage (this was done, for instance, in Bp. Morlino's diocese), but is there anything else they do? Run missions abroad, etc.?
  #45  
Old Jan 10, '13, 8:12 am
Rich C's Avatar
Rich C Rich C is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2011
Posts: 1,845
Religion: Irish Catholic
Default Re: SSPX Update - Redux

Quote:
Originally Posted by Melchior_ View Post
The same can be said during several time periods within the history of the Church. During other times when people performed schismatic acts, the acts and those who performed them are typically looked down upon. However whenever the schismatic act benefits what people would like or if they are sympathetic, they tend to brush it off.

Given the choice between His Grace Lefebvre and Francis/Dominic (the Church on Earth wasn't doing too hot at the time back then), who should we emulate and hold as the ideal for handling situations?
Melchior, I don't think rhetorical questions like this are constructive or add anything to the conversation.

It seems that showing any sympathy for Catholics involved with the Society grinds your gears. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's how your posts come off.

I dislike talking about other Catholics without trying to find good faith in them first. Don't you feel the same?

And since you've asked other people this in the preceding thread, I'll add: yes, I try to be as charitable to those on the other end of the spectrum.
__________________
"The … priest is simultaneously the victim offered on the altar… If we don’t see that relationship of priest, altar, and victim in every Holy Mass, then the way Mass has been celebrated has failed. If we don’t look for that relationship, then we are not really Catholic. Mass is Calvary."
-Fr. Z

Last edited by Rich C; Jan 10, '13 at 8:32 am.
Closed Thread

Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Traditional Catholicism

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search Thread
Search Thread:

Advanced Search
Display

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump




Prayer Intentions

Most Active Groups
6597CAF Prayer Warriors Support Group
Last by: tawny
6138Let's empty Purgatory
Last by: RJB
5162Petitions Before the Blessed Sacrament
Last by: grateful_child
4627Devotion to the Sorrowful Mother
Last by: neweggs
4287Poems and Reflections
Last by: Purgatory Pete
4053OCD/Scrupulosity Group
Last by: Fischli
3290For seniors and shut- ins
Last by: GLam8833
3261Catholic Vegetarians & Vegans
Last by: Herculees
2822Let's Empty Purgatory 2
Last by: tawny
2448SOLITUDE
Last by: beth40n2



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 5:09 pm.

Home RSS Feeds - Home - Archive - Top

Copyright © 2004-2014, Catholic Answers.