The following comes from an August 6 Madison Catholic Herald column by by Robert C. Morlino, Bishop of Madison
The 50 years since the close of the Second Vatican Council have been tumultuous for the Church. Forces both inside and outside of the Church tried to distort and exploit the council and the post-conciliar liturgical reforms to create a new Church after their own image.
Too many of us endured years of sloppy or irreverent liturgy and mushy or even unorthodox preaching and catechesis. Too often when we voiced our concerns we were ignored.
Most of the faithful Catholics who saw this happening fought hard for a “reform of the reform.” Sadly, others decided that the only way forward was to work outside of — and sometimes against — the hierarchical Church and its structures.
This was the choice made by the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX), a worldwide society of priests best known for its strong opposition to the post-conciliar reform of the Mass. The Masses that they celebrate in their own chapels according to the 1962 Missal have attracted sizeable communities of the lay faithful, even here in the Diocese of Madison.
I want to be cautious and fair about the SSPX. Many of their concerns are legitimate. Many of their values and aspirations are admirable, and their zeal is impressive. Their priests wish to serve the Lord and His people. The people who attend their chapels are fervent.
We should always be cordial, respectful, and welcoming to them as brothers and sisters in Christ. Yet, their relationship with the Church is complex and developing. Moreover, the situation of SSPX bishops, of SSPX priests, of the faithful who formally align themselves with the SSPX, and of the faithful who occasionally or informally attend Mass with the SSPX, are all different in important ways. It would be inaccurate to call it a schismatic group in a strict sense, and we should all pray that it may someday be fully reconciled with the Church.
Having said that, all is not well with the SSPX, and my advice, my plea to the traditionally-minded faithful of the diocese is to have nothing to do with them. As Pope Benedict XVI made clear, the SSPX “does not possess a canonical status in the Church” and its ministers “do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church” (March 10, 2009, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church).
The priests of the SSPX are validly ordained priests, but because for the most part they were ordained illicitly (i.e., by a bishop who had no jurisdiction over them and no permission to ordain), they are suspended ipso facto from the moment of their ordination (c. 1383); that is to say, even though they are ordained, they have no permission from the Church, which is necessary, to exercise priestly ministry.
Their Masses are valid but are illegitimately celebrated. The same is true, in most cases, with their baptisms, their conferral of the anointing of the sick, and provided it is administered by a bishop, their confirmations. Thus, Catholics should not frequent SSPX chapels or seek sacraments from the priests of the SSPX.
But there are two other, serious, sacramental problems that must be understood by everyone who may wish to attend SSPX chapels. If you take nothing else away from this letter, at least hear this — the SSPX’s marriages and absolutions are invalid because their priests lack the necessary faculties.
The SSPX argues for the validity of their marriages and absolutions based on the canonical principle that the Church supplies the faculty in cases of doubt or common error. In certain rare and exceptional cases that might apply to their situation, especially with regard to confession, but for the most part their arguments are not persuasive.
Part of their argument hinges on the faithful erroneously believing that the SSPX priests have the requisite faculty; well, if you were in error about that up until now, you are not in error anymore.
The SSPX also makes the argument that they have permission because the Church is in a state of “emergency.” However, 1) the Legislator (the Pope) and the bishops with him don’t think there is a state of emergency, and 2) the sacraments offered by the SSPX are already widely available at legitimate parishes and chapels, i.e., no one is being denied the sacraments.
This is not the place for a discourse on the technical points of canon law, but the point is: do you want to take that kind of a risk with your marriage or even with your soul? Apart from legal and sacramental concerns, there is also the danger that affiliating with the SSPX can gradually cause one to absorb a schismatic mentality.
You might attend your first Mass at an SSPX chapel for good and noble reasons, e.g., such a strong initial desire for a reverently celebrated liturgy that you are willing to tolerate the SSPX’s irregular status. But as you attend more and more, it ceases to become something you tolerate and starts to become a mark of identity, even a badge of pride. You adopt a fixed posture of separation from the Church. That is a perilous position for any soul to be in.
[Comments for the article closed 8/16]
Another bishop on the SSPX:
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: “there are no weighty reasons in order to deny the clergy and faithful of the SSPX the official canonical recognition”
Posted by Adfero. at 8/10/2015
Our partners at Adelante la Fe, who run Rorate Caeli en Español, have interviewed His Excellency Bishop Athanasius Schneider, on a wide range of topics. While the entire interview is worth reading, his remarks on the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) merit a close examination. This follows two visits to SSPX seminaries, as requested of him by the Holy See.
Adelante la Fe: Your Excellence has recently visited the SSPX [seminaries] in the United…
This is true. But Abp Athanasius Schnieder DID NOT recommend attending an SSPX Mass and going against the official position of the CHURCH which is:
QUOTE; ” In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.” – Pope Benedict, March 2009.
Official Church restrictions must be lifted by a Pope.
No, Ted, what Bishop Schneider did was SPEAK THE TRUTH.
There is no valid reason for withholding jurisdiction to the Society, unless that is the hierarchy is seeking to usher in something novel – i.e. Fr. Barron’s assertion that we can hope that Hell is empty, that in Orange County that Catholics need to deny the reality that God Himself gave man dominion over the earth, and that illegal immigration and corporal punishment are of as much import as crushing the heads of innocent babies and selling their bodies for profit, that there is an inherent good in homosexual unions, and that those living in the state of adultery should continue to do so and receive the blessings of the Catholic Church.
Jurisdiction can and should be given…
…. by individual bishops in their respective diocese, Ted.
And THAT is what should occur if we truly desire the Faith to triumph and not a false sense of obedience that aids self destruction.
The Second Vatican Council says, “the faithful…should be closely attached to the Bishop as the Church is to Jesus Christ and as Jesus Christ is to the Father.” St. Ignatius of Antioch the successor of St. Peter in that See wrote, “let no one do anything concerning the Church in separation from the Bishop.”
“…. should be,” covers a multitude of possibilities, Abeca.
Bishops should be promoting the fullness of the Faith and yet they don’t. That is why quoting VII as if it is a silver bullet to all your prayers is foolish. One needs to understand what it means.
That’s why your comments here to imply those who follow the Faith are somehow abandoning Christ is a fools errand.
I suggest you write a letter to Bishop Schneider so that he may correct your misunderstanding.
Ann Malley, individual Bishops can not give permission to allow anyone to attend an SSPX Mass or other SSPX service because they hold no ministry in the Catholic Church at this time.
Provide an Official link with proof of your opinion statement that the SSPX holds a ministry within the Catholic Church, and that SSPX Bishops or any other Bishop can give permission to fulfill our Sunday Church obligations. https://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/letters/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20090310_remissione-scomunica.html
Should be indicates mankind has free will. And the church does contain and does teach the faith. Your right there needs to be clarity and United effort by all but remember because of sin, since the beginning of time, God’s people showed disobedience but no matter what the reality is. We must be faithful to Christ and His teachings, truth from His church.
Al, you misunderstand if you think my view is that the Society currently holds an official ministry in the Church. If this were so, there would be no discussion here. As to fulfilling Sunday obligation:
Canon 1248 of the Latin Code of Canon Law states, “§1 The obligation of assisting at Mass is satisfied wherever Mass is celebrated in a catholic rite either on a holyday itself or on the evening of the previous day.
That is why there is confusion and differences of opinion, AL. That is also why Catholics can and do fulfill their Sunday mass obligations at Orthodox Churches – even though the Orthodox represent formal schism.
Ann Malley, heretic Robert Barron has nothing to do with the article or anything else.
Bishop Schneider did NOT say we should disobey the Church – to attend an SSPX Mass at all.
Pope Benedict has said “NO”, and until the Church changes that, the answer is “NO” – because the SSPX holds no ministry within the
AL – The one you now call heretic was lawfully elevated to the position he holds in Orange County. With regards to the discussion, his elevation goes to point to the reality of a crisis situation within the Church. Promoting heresy, that is promoting those who speak heresy, is not indicative of healthy, Catholic times.
While I’m sorry you’re angered, there is no need to imply that Bishop Schneider told anyone what you said. What His Excellency did say, after being tasked with visitation, was that he can see no call to withhold jurisdiction from the Society. He also called for Catholic faithful to ban together.
If you take issue with his comments or find them offensive, write him. But do not misinterpret them. That is unfair.
Ann – The vatican-2 heretic cult (founded on 8 December 1965) has *zero* ordained priests. This is because of the mountain of Catholic Dogma on *automatic* excommunication for heresy. The “vatican-2 council” has well over 200 fantastic heresies … against Catholic Sources of Dogma from … Trent, Lateran, Florence and the other Dogmatic Councils.
When the (apparent) bishops signed approval of the documents they *all* ceased … being Catholic Bishops, they all ceased have Catholic Jurisdiction … and could no longer ordain priests or consecrate bishops.
LEFEBVRE also signed the documents and fell automatically excommunicated for heresy.
This is why the “sspx” (like the vatican-2 heresy) … has *zero* priests.
The “sspx” like vatican-2 … are simply putting on stage shows that look like Mass (which the Catholic God has taken away from the world.
Please enter the Catholic Church (which has no buildings in these times) … by the four steps I list on Section 2.1 of my site > http://www.Gods-Catholic-Dogma.com
Another bishop on the SSPX (cont’d):
Adelante la Fe: Your Excellence has recently visited the SSPX [seminaries] in the United States and France. We know it was a “discreet” meeting but, can you make an evaluation for us of what you saw and talked with them about? What expectations do you have of a coming reconciliation and which would be the main obstacle for it?
Mons. Schneider: The Holy See asked me to visit the two [seminaries] of the SSPX in order to conduct a discussion on a specific theological topic with a group of theologians of the SSPX and with His Excellency Bishop Fellay. For me this fact shows that for the Holy See the SSSPX is not a negligible ecclesiastical reality and that it has to be taken seriously. I am keeping a…
Another bishop on the SSPX (cont’d):
I am keeping a good impression of my visits. I could observe a sound theological, spiritual and human reality in the two [seminaries]. The “sentire cum ecclesia” of the SSPX is shown by the fact that I was received as an envoy of the Holy See with true respect and with cordiality. Furthermore, I was glad to see in both places in the entrance area a photo of Pope Francis, the reigning Pontiff. In the sacristies there were plates with the name of Pope Francis and the local diocesan bishop. I was moved to assist the traditional chant for the Pope (“Oremus pro pontifice nostro Francisco…”) during the solemn exposition of the Blessed Sacrament.
To my knowledge there are no weighty reasons in order…
The vatican-2 heretic cult (founded on 8 December 1965) has *zero* ordained priests. This is because of the mountain of Catholic Dogma on *automatic* excommunication for heresy. The “vatican-2 council” has well over 200 fantastic heresies … against Catholic Sources of Dogma from … Trent, Lateran, Florence and the other Dogmatic Councils.
When the (apparent) bishops signed approval of the documents they *all* ceased … being Catholic Bishops, they all ceased have Catholic Jurisdiction … and could no longer ordain priests or consecrate bishops.
LEFEBVRE also signed the documents and fell automatically excommunicated for heresy.
This is why the “sspx” (like the vatican-2 heresy) … has *zero* priests.
The “sspx” like vatican-2 … are simply putting on stage shows that look like Mass (which the Catholic God has taken away from the world.
Please enter the Catholic Church (which has no buildings in these times) … by the four steps I list on Section 2.1 of my site > http://www.Gods-Catholic-Dogma.com
Another bishop on the SSPX (cont’d):
To my knowledge there are no weighty reasons in order to deny the clergy and faithful of the SSPX the official canonical recognition, meanwhile they should be accepted as they are. This was indeed Archbishop Lefebvre’s petition to the Holy See: “Accept us as we are”.
I think the issue of Vatican II should not be taken as the “conditio sine qua non”, since it was an assembly with primarily pastoral aims and characteristics. A part of the conciliar statements reflects only its time and possesses a temporary value, as disciplinary and pastoral documents do. When we look in a two millennia old perspective of the Church, we can state, that there is on both sides (Holy See and the SSPX) an…
Another bishop on the SSPX (cont’d):
When we look in a two millennia old perspective of the Church, we can state, that there is on both sides (Holy See and the SSPX) an over-evaluation and over-estimation of a pastoral reality in the Church, which is Vatican II.
When the SSPX believes, worship and conducts a moral [life] as it was demanded and recognized by the Supreme Magisterium and was observed universally in the Church during a centuries long period and when the SSPX recognizes the legitimacy of the Pope and the diocesan bishops and prays for them publicly and recognizes also the validity of the sacraments according to the editio typica of the new liturgical books, this should suffice for a canonical recognition of the SSPX on…
Over the years, I’ve had the opportunity to interact with several priests who belong to SSPX. Per their own disclosure, SSPX has its own agenda: to re-establish the pre Vatican II Church. They do not regard any Pope since Piis XII as licit. They are wolves in sheep’s clothing…and not to be trusted.
But you’ll entrust your soul to Cd’s Wuerl, Dolan and O’malley? The priests you mentrioned don’t sound like wolves, as they were pretty up front with you and they were acting on what they openly believed simply by serving in an SSPX church. The whole expression ‘wolves in sheeps’ clothing’ means deceptive and disguised, and it is the Arian heretics professing to be faithful Catholics who are the wolves and the sheep are incredibly vulnerable to such duplicity.
You don’t entrust you soul to the Cardinals. And what has Cardinal Wuerl done to offend you? Cardinal Dolan? Cardinal O’Malley?
Anonymous asks Dana, “And what has Cardinal Wuerl done to *offend* you? Cardinal Dolan? Cardinal O’Malley?” = They have each publicly scandalized and COMPROMISED the faith, thus “offending” God.
Just Who is Silencing The Church’s Voice? = Cardinal Wuerl silenced and ostracized Father Marcel Guarnizo for simply being a faithful Catholic priest.
Cardinal Dolan leads NYC St. Patrick’s Parade as first-ever gay activist group joins | News | LifeSite = Cardinal Dolan compromised Church teaching. Scandalizing, “ostracizing” the fullness of truth, thus confusing and scattering Christ’s sheep. Cardinal Dolan’s fear of the loss of respect of politically correct or corporate men, trumped the wiser fear of never wanting to offend God.
‘Controversy over Kennedy funeral must not divide the Church, Cardinal O’Malley says’
Boston, Mass., Sep 3, 2009 / 02:11 pm (CNA).- Warning against overzealousness, Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Seán P. O’Malley has responded to the controversy surrounding Sen. Edward Kennedy’s funeral Mass. He said that changing hearts, not “ostracism”, is vital to the spread of the Catholic faith and the success of the pro-life cause.
Actions of selectively “ostracizing” faithful priests and faithful Catholics speak so much louder than empty words.
Our Lady of Akita called it “compromise.”
Cardinal O’Malley?- Let pederasts run wild through the LA Archdiocese while claiming ignorance
Cardinal Wuerl- removed a faithful priest from his parish for denying communion an out and loud lesbian.
Cardinal Dolan-where do I begin
Canisius, you are thinking of Cardinal Mahoney.
anon I stand correct.. though O’Malley from Boston is useless as well
No one will trust their Soul to any bad Clergy who violate the
Doctrine of the Faith – as stated in Sacred Scripture and the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition” of 1997.
…..No one? Ted, wake up. Myriad souls are even now entrusting their souls to bad clergy who violate the Doctrine of the Faith. Good grief, man, where have you been?
Yes, you are.
Just because there are some heretical Bishops within the Church, is not an excuse for attending any SSPX services.
The SSPX does not hold any ministry within the Catholic Church at this time -per Pope Benedict.
Amen AL…..its not up for debate and those outside always want to debate
You’re right, AL.
Posters who purposely bring up other extraneous issues are trying to hide the truth from readers. This is tantamount to lying. Causing confusion is the work of the devil.
THERE is NO LEGITIMATE excuse for ATTENDING any SSPX SERVICES, because they hold NO MINISTRY within the Church.
Dana this article is about the SSPX and it’s official status within the Catholic Church.
It has nothing to do with some bad Bishops. Please stick to the topic.
You are just as bad as bad Clergy who try to distract and confuse – when you mix topics. Just admit that the SSPX holds no ministry within the Church now.
Then, pray, Sidney stick to the truth that there is no schism properly called and so branding those who attend or support the position of the SSPX as schismatics is also lying, Those who also imply that posters are trying to say that Bishop Schneider recommends attending the SSPX are similarly lying. Please DO stick to the topic at hand, not your narrow interpretation thereof.
You are just as bad as the bad Clergy when you attempt to distance those in the SSPX or those who share Bishop Schneider’s analysis of the situation by implying that more is being said. Shame on you.
Stop trying to confuse, conflate, and promote disunity. That is the exact opposite of Bishop Morlino and Bishop Schneider’s clarion call to true charity.
The Church is in a state of emergency. While the Institute of Christ the King, and the Fraternity of St. Peter offer the traditional Latin Mass, and are almost always traditional, their hands are tied because they are not supposed to go against the local bishop even if he is in grave error. The SSPX is not afraid to speak out against errors.
Pilar, as usual, you are right on target. When the Institute of Christ the King was yanked out of, first, 5 Wounds Parish in San Jose (in 2011), with no advance warning except an e-mail on Saturday afternoon the day before the last Mass—Fr. Moreau, God bless his soul, was on the point of weeping—it was such a humiliation, after all his work to be obedient to the Bishop of San Jose diocese and not offend anyone.
As a reward, they were then forced to have the Traditional Latin Mass at the tiny Oratory chapel in Santa Clara — a privately owned, converted evangelical church that barely seats 48 people! It was Bp PJ McGrath’s way of saying: “See: we have a Latin Mass! Ha-HAH!”
The Mass at 5 Wounds attracted 150-200…
Steve Phoenix– actually, the situation you described, of the Institute of Christ the King, in San Jose– was reversed! They were first at the little chapel– designated an Oratory, by Bishop McGrath– in Santa Clara! And today, they have their Oratory– at Five Wounds parish, in San Jose! Bishop McGrath is very liberal, and hard to deal with, for traditional Catholics! I bet you know all these facts, but typing fast can sometimes make things come out funny! Bless you! Are you a member of their Oratory, at Five Wounds??
Steve Phoenix– It’s wonderful, that you support the Institute of Christ the King, in San Jose! I would give anything, to be able to someday move, and join an all-Tridentine Mass parish, led by an all-Latin Mass group of priests! Or else– join a group, such as the Oratory, at Five Wounds, in San Jose! It is wonderful to attend the Latin Mass– but even better, to join a group, led by an all-Latin Mass religious order of priests! I would also love to join a lay religious order or group, of the Tridentine Mass! (With no confusion, mixing parishioners of both the Novus Ordo and the Latin Mass beliefs– for example, feminism, and altar boys, etc.)
Linda M, yes the Institute of Christ the King has survived the zig-zags and the whipsaws of the Diocese of Sham Jose: even though it is a long drive for us (from SF, if we cannot go to a SF-based TLM or a relatively orthodox N.O. parish in SF [aaah, like NOT ironically named Most Holy Redeemer], we have always maintained our membership with 5 Wounds, once the Institute was re-instated at that parish some years ago..
However, make no mistake, were it not for the SSPX, the Institute and the Latin Mass would never have regained its permission to celebrate the TLM at 5 Wounds: PJ McGrath is no friend of the Latin Mass and wishes it would just die out (it is not): but he has only contempt for the SSPX. He was losing too many to the SSPX…
Look at what’s happened to Fr. George Rutler’s old church on 5th Ave in NYC. It is scandalous and outrageous! https://www.nationalreview.com/article/421601/our-saviour-church-icons-george-rutler-tradition
These Arian heretics are vandalizing our Church. They’re barbarians and visigoths wearing robes and looking pious.
You might want to actually look up what an Arian is.
You might want to read what is the savour of an Arian heresy…Arianism is not dead, it’s just evolved…please read to the end. I have Belloc’s book on the great heresies, and it’s still one of the best on the subject. Actually, I hope everyone reads this. God bless. And I’m so very sorry that good and faithful people are following the prominent leaders of our Church rather than our Church Fathers who must be spinning in their graves at what is taking place around the world under the banner of mercy. Blessed Mother, pray for us.
While the author is entitled to make his report, perhaps it would be better to be a separate article. Let’s enforce the 750 character rule, or remove it. In general, my unscientific observation is that more commentators are ignoring the rule — because they dont get called on it.
Perhaps some people have more to say than others, Mike. Some people think more and say less…that must be you. Some people think more, say more and don’t complain when others don’t. Some people complain more. That could be you! Do you actually count our words? hmmm. What if we stop at 746 words? Is that okay?
It is too bad that a man of seeming support of Catholic Tradition caves in to the anti-SSPX hysteria that pervades much of the Vatican, and the Zombie-Liberal clerical leadership worldwide. Benedict’s lifting of the excommunications of the SSPX bishops was as much to do with his unseating — yes, Catholic Reader, Benedict was, effectively, deposed — as anything. Since then, virtually no one of any rank, except Francis, oddly enough, seems to hold out any real hope for a reconciliation with the SSPX.
Now, along comes Abp. Schneider. What a man; what courage! He said it like it was, there is no real “weighty” reason to deny rapprochement with the SSPX; it is all political nonsense having to do with being made to swallow the many…
(Continued) “ambiguities of Vatican II (which many have counseled to be resolved, regardless of the SSPX).
It is unfortunate that a good man, like Bishop Morino, fails to stand up to the strictly political nonsense of the Vatican regarding the SSPX. Men of Faith are needed now, not “corporate priests”. Oddly enough, aside from certain Traditionalists within the Church, it is Francis that seems to hold out the most hope presently for full communion with the SSPX.
Face it Catholic Reader, who is in actual schism, the SSPX, or the German Episcopacy which has great doctrinal opposition to many issues within the Church, including most Catholic doctrine on marriage, sexual ethics and morality, and, astoundingly, the primacy of the…
(Continued #3) “Pope. Cardinals Marx and Kasper sound more Lutheran all the time (and, at times, Kasper writes as if he were a “Unitarian”).
The Synod in October should be a time when the Pope faces up to the Germans, demands their public support in the Full Deposit of Faith of the Church, and then sends them home to “fix” the broken Church in Germany.
At the same time, the SSPX seminary in Zaitzkofen is full of seminarians, learning the True Faith, and yearning to go into the world to combat Satan and save souls. Francis would be wise to embrace the enthusiasm of the SSPX, and not be limited by politics.
Rather than scare mongering about SSPX, it would make more sense to focus on what’s wrong with Vatican II that made SSPX necessary.
Wrong Barbara. There is alot of wrong and problematic in the SSPX choosing to not unite. Your comments is one that is fear mongering ill informed and slander on the facts of V2.
Good comment, Abeca.
Excellent and effective suggestion for root causing the wellspring of ongoing crisis within the Church, Barbara. Examine and reassess Vatican II – the pastoral council – in all its particulars. Would that more folks were interested in actually getting to the bottom of problems instead of just putting bandage after bandage on the open wound.
Too many forget that a white bandage saturated in red blood is no sign of closure. And until the wound is tended, there won’t be enough gauze in the world to stem the bleed out.
Bishop Morlino is very very friendly to the TLM and offers it on a regular basis, he made sure his seminarians learn both forms of the Holy Mass. Bishop Schneider who is from Kazahkstan is also another wonderfull bishop who offers the TLM on a regular basis, having said that the S.S.P.X. our brothers and without them the TLM would have been lost forever, and thank God for His Grace Archbishop Marcel Leferve who will one day be a saint in the Roman Catholic Church!!
“without them the TLM would have been lost forever”. Complete nonsense Janek. No honest historian would support this claim.
…..we don’t need an historian to back the claim, Jay. The facts on the ground by those who lived through the new springtime and all that went with it remember the loveliness that you and Abeca find too frightening or confusing to even attempt to understand.
What we need is honest clergy, top and bottom, and an honest faithful seeking the fullness of Truth…. not just the easy road of being told what to do, even if it contradicts reason or even what the Catholic Church actually teaches.
You may want to ask Janek a question next time, learn, and forgo revealing your compete ignorance on the subject.
Jay S is correct.
Jay, you should read the history of the time when the SSPX started, and why! Then, see how the Latin Mass was suppressed for many years! The Vatican, and many local bishops, worldwide– went on horrific “witch hunts,” to persecute and stop priests in their dioceses, from saying the old Latin Mass– even very old and sick priests, in very delicate health! This was a POLITICAL “witch hunt,” to suppress the Tridentine Mass, and to FORCE the Novus Ordo, on al! Instead– why not have a “witch hunt,” to suppress priests who favor evils like abortion, gay “marriage,” and pedophilia??
I agree with Janek– I think Abp. Lefebvre may oneday be a Saint, too, in our Church– just like others who were cruelly martyred for the True Faith, throughout our Church’s history! I am not a member of the SSPX– but have always admired them! I appreciate Bishop Morlino’s article! Too bad Pope Francis would not try to stand up for the Faith– even to a potential martyrdom! He would have millions of followers! And millions more– if he endured any kind of martyrdom, for the Truth!! Everyone in the world, would want to be just like him– a hero, a saint– for Christ, following His true teachings!
All a Bishop has to do is institute a Tridentine Mass in his Diocese to attract Traditional Catholic people. Most refuse to do so and try to create a disdain for Catholics who decline to attend the Novus Ordo. Many Bishops conduct an uncharitable and vindictive campaign against those who just want to be left alone to worship as Catholics did until Vatican II. Most traditional Catholics receive no consideration from the Bishops even where a Traditional Mass is allowed. They are simply seen as a cash cow in a failing Diocese who loses more and more money each year, have continuing scandals involving the clergy which drives more people away.
Well said, John. Until I attended my first Latin Mass I didn’t know what I was missing! I know it used to bother me how similar the Mass was at my parish Church to my old Presbyterian Church that I’d left. Even most of the hyms were the same , even old spirituals like “Deep River”. That is why I’ve drastically changed my opinion on so many things now…and with this new pope and so many of the Cardinals et al, acting in ways that are contrary to what previous popes and cardinals taught, it’s really frustrating. So many are in denial. They’re afraid to question anything for fear they’re in schism, not understanding what that really means. I’ve read some very reputable writers who question whether Cupich is even Catholic…
With all due respect, Bishop Morlino and the FSSP and those in the diocese of Madison should be giving thanks for the existence of the SSPX. Without her, there would be no majority ecclesiastical consensus on the ‘necessity’ to offer the TLM or the practice of the Faith in all it’s traditional and faithful forms. There would only be the majority of modernism and going along to get along in the aftermath confusion of VII.
So while Bishop Morlino states that there is no formal schism – and there isn’t – he is doing what he must to build up Catholic Tradition in his diocese. And the SSPX is playing a critical role in that – God bless them for taking the hit so that others can have the fullness of the Faith while not taking the hit of being…
… cast as outside the Church.
That is why His Excellencies admission that confessions, marriages, etc (in rare circumstances) may be valid is important to key in on. If there were no crisis, the FSSP wouldn’t be being used as a foil against the so-called baddies. And Archbishop Lefebvre wouldn’t have had to consecrate Bishops out of fear of not getting a replacement to carry on the traditional formation of priests.
The FSSP is still awaiting their promised bishop. They are reliant upon the diocese. And Bishop Morlino, having stated that there is no consensus from the top that there is a state of necessity, is a clear indicator, at least to me, that the majority is not thinking, seeing and/or speaking clearly. (A petition to the…
… Holy Father to clarify Church teaching on marriage is not something that occurs in normal times and would, again in my view, indicate a clear state of necessity.)
But then the world has always needed it’s heroes and villains. Even if it is a good guy who acted prudently to preserve the TLM and all that is Catholic tradition when he stood ALONE for all intents and purposes now being thrown under the bus to make way for those who, despite not realizing as much, can look to him as ‘their’ bishop.
Our Lord was surely cast as such when He was sentenced to crucifixion.
Barbara said: “Rather than scare mongering about SSPX, it would make more sense to focus on what’s wrong with Vatican II that made SSPX necessary.”
I agree. Would there be a SSPX or any number of sedevacantist groups if the Church hadn’t fallen into such a sad state after the Council? What were faithful Catholics to do when the years following the Council saw many priests and religious leave their vocation, the Mass changed radically, doctrine discarded, heterodoxy celebrated and discipline lost?
So the result is the faithful flocked to where the Mass of All Ages was celebrated and they are fed solid meat in the form of traditional Catholic teaching and praxis. Father John Zuhlsdorf (Father Z.) says the SSPX Masses are valid, but illicit. I really pray that will be rectified someday. I pray too for the TLM to be celebrated more often and in more parishes. In future generations, hopefully, the attempt of the Church to adapt herself to the world will be seen as the fruitless endeavor it has become.
Praise be Jesus Christ. This article is faithful and true.
…praise be Jesus, His Excellency Bishop Morlino is speaking to those in is diocese wherein he provides the Traditional Latin Mass. His Excellency also clearly states that the situation is not schism. He also states quite clearly that there are cases in which Sacraments are indeed valid. He also quite clearly states the Catholics should be kind in their dealings with the Society and not attempt to lump folks into an erroneous category.
He also states that the is no declared state of emergency from the top. And yet that self-same top is in such a state that Bishops, priests, and faithful have felt it necessary to petition His Holiness for a clarification on the Pope’s position with regard to marriage.
If you believe this…
…article to be faithful and true, try following it Abecca in all its particulars. That would be a huge step forward. For just as may have tried to school you, there are many who attend the Society out of justifiable need. The presumption that one will take on a mark of pride in doing so is only supposition and belies the preceding paragraph that so clearly outlines that motives are not as clear cut as many – like you – perceive.
And don’t look to CMTV for answers – they just cut off Bishop Schneider’s full interview, mangling his closing statements about the Society in favor of using only partial points of Bishop Morlino. So let’s stop the schism lie already and try to actually work toward the good instead of just talking…
Yes, Abeca, and you’ve got the perfect pope to carry you through to the theological end of your spiritual journey! Lucky you! It’s unfortunate that you don’t live in Chicago to share in the recent appt by this pope of Blaise Soupish Oops. Cupich.
as Cardinal. If you love Vatican II he’s the guy for you! He’s carrying on Cd Bernardin’s seamless garment tradition and you’ll be thrilled to know he says unemployment and the tragic death of inmates to capital punishment are of equal gravity to the dismemberment and selling of.babies’ organs and tissue. It’s smooth sailing for all you Vat II fans! The Synod this fall will be the culmination of years of hard work tearing out altar rails, selling off Church properties etc. etc. to…
…. etc. to rid the Church of all her burdensome traditions. Ah, Abeca, so worthy and above us old, stodgy traditionalists, the SSPX, the hangers on and rebels…the New and Improved, environmentally friendly, non- judgemental, tree huggin’, keep on chug gun’ Church will be open to a whole one world, ecumenical, all religions are equal free for all. Wow. Doesn’t it just choke you up, folks?
“Doesn’t it just choke you up, folks?”
Apparently it does work on some folks Dana! View the evidence. Welcome to the new climate warming theology being pushed on trusting sheep!
At first I thought that was some Saturday Night Live skit…
Then realize these people are for real! Wow! They have completely lost their minds!
….After what I heard on Saturday at the Cathedral…I could picture the sisters of St. Joseoh of Orange leading a group like that in the forest.
I don’t get it. What does that video have to do with anything?
Was it just some kind of put down or exaggeration?
If you don’t like the Catholic Church, no one is forcing you to be Catholic. You can join whatever wacky group you want.
You can’t however tell the Pope how to be Catholic or tell Catholics not to follow him. Well, you can, if you want to set yourself up as an anti-Christ.
“You can join whatever wacky group you want.” Um, Anonymous, you may think that the Catholic Church is just another wacky group open, but no. And the big shocker, the Pope has to follow the Faith, too. He doesn’t get to make it up as he goes along. For allowing teaching to deviate 180 degress from what Christ taught is, in reality, anti-Christ.
That is against Christ, Anonymous. And the Pope doesn’t have the power to do that to Christ’s spouse which is the Church. That would just be wacky. But hey, if wacky is what you want, go seek elsewhere.
We want the Catholic Church to be Catholic.
Ah, I remember that one…snicker. I’ll bet every one of those cry babies are fine with abortion and euthanasia, though, right? Sad, that. They’re really weeping for the lost souls of men, for if trees know anything it’s that God made them and they’d be pitying these pathetic people (if they could) :)
What religion are you?
Certainly, not Christian.
Ann Malley, I do not think the Catholic Church is a wacky group. I was telling the whiners and grumblers that if they don’t like the Church they don’t have to go to it. There are a lot of other choices. There are eternal consequences for leaving, but there are also eternal consequences for staying and being unfaithful. Faithful Catholics follow and obey the Pope. We have confidence in God and in the Pope.
In the words of another convert to Catholicism, “if you don’t like it, leave.”
The article says “Don’t give into the temptation to leave the Church.”
No,Anonymous. How about Catholics ban together and insist that the Catholic Church actually be Catholic. There are laws on the books in this country that do require a certain amount of truth in advertising.
So if those with a mind for Gaia worship want a Church, morally speaking,they should build their own.
Perhaps a lawsuit is in order wherein faithful Catholics should be compensated for the bandying about of their name to make use of it’s timeless recognition to sell a bogus product.
The words of a deserter.
Spoken like one who has no clue what team Catholics are supposed to be on – Christ’s.
Anything to be mean. Very Christian.
Dana no one is perfect but our Lord. Your comments were meant as a joke right? If you are going to be taken seriously make some sense, your sarcasm displays bad will.
The Schismatics never stop. Typical….
“A word of caution about the Society of Saint Pius X
Don’t give into temptation to leave the Church” excellent!
Somewhere when Ms. Oxymoronically-Named Christian was contemptuously yawning, she seems to have missed the part by Bp. Merlino about “..It would be inaccurate to call it a schismatic group..”—never mind about the part asking Catholics to “…be cordial, respectful, and welcoming to them [SSPX] as brothers and sisters in Christ.”
I am convinced that many need to release their contempt on the SSPX in order to elevate their own Catholic status, some how, as if this would do so.
Many who like to cite the famous letter of P. BXVI (Mar 2009) regarding the SSPX having no canonical status carefully avoid acknowledgement of the content of the rest of the letter:
Pope Benedict XVI: “At times one gets the impression that our society needs to have at least one group [i.e. the SSPX] to which no tolerance may be shown; which one can easily attack and hate. And should someone dare to approach them – in this case the Pope – he too loses any right to tolerance; he too can be treated hatefully.” (Letter Mar. 10, 2009 on the Remission of the Excommunication of the 4 SSPX Bishops)
Or, as in John 15:18: (Jesus speaking:) “As they have hated Me, so they will hate you.”
Steve its your quack quack. Typical of the SSPX supporters.
Steve Phoenix is reflective of those who support the Catholic Faith, Abeca. Nothing typical as that is increasingly rare.
Since you choose instead to pretend to fly while being on automatic pilot, your definition of quacking and, well, just about anything is suspect.
Next time you want to, “Praise Jesus,” about the accuracy of a Bishop’s letter, you may want to read past the headline. Stop using schism incorrectly. And try to be charitable in truth, not just your own estimation.
Life and the Faith need to be lived, not just programmed in so we don’t need to read or use our intellect.
Again it is proven: I am convinced that many need to release their contempt on the SSPX in order to elevate their own Catholic status, some how, as if this would do so.
…releasing contempt on the SSPX seems to release the need to read, be charitable, prudent, thorough, and/or attempt in any way to understand the Faith. Of course, such an emotional distraction in no way releases one from the duty of learning the Faith, but that’s just typical rhetoric from those who understand and believe.
Thanks once again, Steve Phoenix, for your ever illuminating and faithful commentary.
…and who would the schismatics be, Abeca? Bishop Morlino clearly states that that is not the proper term with regard to this situation. Perhaps you should go back to praising his letter or at least read it all before prematurely lauding it.
Maybe you could write to His Excellency to correct him.
No, he said that they are not schismatic in the strict sense. I believe because they at least pay some kind of lip service to the Pope. They have not formally declared themselves to be opposed to the papacy. However, in effect, they refuse obedience to him and tell people not to follow him. And as Bishop Morlino points out they have a schismatic mentality. There is two kinds of schism: formal and material.
Schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.” [Code of Canon Law c.751]
Steve nope. You are wrong again.
Barbara is right on the money. Basically, if the Church was not busted, why fix it. Vatican is destroying the Church, and this destruction has greatly sped up with the election of Pope Francis. By destroying the Catholic Church, the Mystical Body of Christ is suffering. Kudos to Archbishop Schneider for supporting or at least giving a favorable opinion concerning the SSPX.
Since the end of the Second Vatican Council, with my shock at seeing all Church discipline abandoned, new “hippie freedom for all” preached by the Church, excellent, traditional Church moral teaching mocked, and immorality suddenly accepted by some clergy and nuns, ecumenism embraced, Protestantism idolized, failure and closure of many Catholic schools, collapse of religious orders of nuns, ugly new “Catholic” churches built, the horrifyingly secularized, modernized, “Protestantized,” poorly-contrived Novus Ordo Missae– as well as over 200,000 priests and prelates resigning from the Church– are we still Catholic, or even “Christian??” I will continue…
Since the very first Novus Ordo Missae (Mass of Pope Paul VI) in my hometown parish, in 1969– I and many others, being so horrified– I myself, vowed to pray daily, for the full return of our Faith, and the beautiful, inspiring, theologically-correct Latin Mass! I would daily pray, lifelong, if that’s what it takes! When Abp. Lefebvre (likewise horrified at Vatican II, and the New Mass!) began his SSPX society, about this time– I was very enthusiastic! He and his priests had the courage, and dedication, to keep the True Faith alive for us! Would he someday be made a Saint, I wondered– is he perhaps a martyr, like St. Joan of Arc, or St. Thomas More– bravely standing, even to martyrdom, for the True Faith??
I will continue, with my above posts. I had always thought, that Vatican II only needed to make two changes, for our Church– first, to always teach the Catechism with great, Christ-like love, and kindness! And secondly, to regard non-believers with Christ-like love, be friends with them, if we wish– and leave the rest up to God, Who created them, and loves them, as His children! I saw that Abp. Lefebvre was an excellent Catechist in his missionary work, and his Society was kind, loving, and Christ-like, too- as well as dedicated to the True Faith! I have always admired the SSPX– but cannot join them, for the reasons stated above, in the very excellent and accurate article, written by Bishop Morlino.
I am so happy, to see this excellent and accurate article, written by Bishop Morlino! I hope that someday, God-willing– the True Faith will again shine brightly in our Church of Rome– with no further need, for the SSPX! There are some laws, beliefs, and practices, that are prejudicial, “political,” unjust, and immoral, in our society. Likewise– the same thing has existed, from time to time, in our Church, sadly! In this case– just like St. Thomas More of England, considered a Catholic criminal, guilty of treason (similar to Christ)– with the punishment of execution– I side with Abp. Lefebvre’s SSPX, and hope, God-willing, to see history validate their position, someday!
The beloved St. Padre Pio refused to say the new Mass, and I laughed and laughed, many years ago, reading that the feisty, honest, beloved Italian priest, told Rome “no,” very loudly, on this subject— plus, he told them off, refusing to also accept the Second Vatican Council– before, during, and after the Council! It was so funny! Finally– the Vatican allowed him to have his way, and he was allowed the special privilege, of saying only the old, beloved Latin Tridentine Mass! In 1968, when he died, millions of people mourned, the world over!
Considering a few words of Bp. Morlino in particular:
“We should always be cordial, respectful, and welcoming to [the SSPX] as brothers and sisters in Christ… It would be inaccurate to call it a schismatic group…Their priests are validly ordained…”
Even considering the other negatives he cites, these 3 concessions alone (“be respectful, they are not schismatic, their priests are validly ordained”) are like hot molten lead in the ears of some very self-assured good-good Catholics. Especially that he acknowledges the SSPX are not schismatic. That will set off howls.
This Saturday is the Solemn Feast of the Assumption if you are near an FSSP chapel, the traditional Norbertines’ abbey or church, or for that matter, an SSPX one. For them, it is a Holy Day of obligation.
In my post-Catholic LA diocese parish, it is nothing. If I go to the 8am Saturday Mass: perhaps the priest will mention it. If he isn’t in too much of a hurry. Hardly anyone notices anymore.
This is the latest Official position of the Church – by Pope Benedict, March 10, 2009. And will remain in effect until/unless changed by a Pope.
” In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church. ”
Official Church position on the SSPX – by Pope Benedict
The SSPX does not ” legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.”
End of paragraph #3.
Only a Pope can change this.
Thank you TED B. Your persistence in presenting this fact in the comments section of this website is to be commended. Keep up the great work.
I agree Jay S. Right in!
Ted B. come October the Pope and large part of the hierarchy will be manifest heretics….
Ted B.– What is God’s point of view, on this?? ( I think Pope Benedict emeritis actually is in favor of the SSPX– despite their differences!) Perhaps oneday, we will all be surprised, to see God’s handiwork, in making the situation turn out right! I wonder what poor St. Padre Pio (and many other similar holy priests and bishops) would have done, if he had been a few years younger, and had lived well beyond the Council– which he viewed as a corruption of the Faith! Would St. Pio have been forced to leave his religious order– or even leave the Church –( rather, the Church left him!) similar to Abp. Lefebvre?? (By the way– the two knew each other!)
Until and unless a Pope changes the OFFICIAL position of Pope Benedict, the SSPX holds no ministry within the Catholic Church.
(Personal opinions of posters never negate the Official position of Pope Benedict.)
Sidney, no one is arguing that with you.
I will clarify what I just wrote, about Abp. Lefebvre and St. Padre Pio. Abp. Lefebvre went to see St. Padre Pio one time, at his monastery– and they had a brief meeting. Both dearly loved the True Church! And both struggled with the problem of obedience to Church authority, on matters of discipline, to obey things they considered wrong. Love them both! Each had his own way of handling difficult and painful issues. Today, I think all of us, are trying to do likewise! Obedience to Christ– and also, how to manage, with Church leadership, when it seems to go in the wrong directions, contrary to Christ! Now– what of the upcoming October Synod?? Very painful, potentially!
Ted, with all due respect, the Church is in an ongoing state of increasing emergency. The head may not declare it to be so, but that is much of the problem. Just look around.
Ann …. Please understand that only you, a small percentage of the faithful, the SSPX, sedvacandests(sp?) etc believe in this “emergency.” How do you believe the emergency will be resolved? TLM only worldwide? Complete rejection by all of us of Vatican II. Following Bishop Williamson’s hostility towards the Jewish people? What?
….Anonymous, only a scant few in Jerusalem believed Christ was the Messiah, too. Rejecting novelty is no rejection of people. Rejecting novelty is to keep the Faith as it has been handed down so that we, in turn, can hand that to our children.
“…all of ‘us’ of Vatican II,” is rather personalizing an event.
We are supposed to be one in the Mystical Body of Christ. That is why the push to change or, at the very least, circumnavigate, His word, much like we’re seeing proposed in our October Synods, is so troubling. But not unexpected.
2Timothy 4:3,4″…For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears:…
…: 4And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables.”
This is what’s going on, Anonymous. The flock doesn’t want to endure sound doctrine. And too many prelates are turning toward that desire and their own to satisfy the itching ears with fables.
(A proposed practice for divorced and civilly remarried ‘Catholics’ that overrides the Christ’s own words. Looking for a way to address homosexual civil unions inside the Church.. This is not sound Catholic doctrine, friend.)
I’m so sick of your bigotry and prejudice. You distort everything. I just can’t do anything but pray for you and your poor misled children. I hope you have taught them to pray the Rosary and consecrate themselves to the Immaculate Heart. Mary will intercede for them. She is their hope and Jesus is their Savior.
What Church wold you have gone with at the time of the Great Schism?
There is no emergency.
Pope Benedict gave us “SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM”.
Pope Benedict did not lift the restriction on the SSPX – that they hold no ministry within the Catholic Church.
Then let all the bishops adhere to SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM. They do not, Sydney. And there is a reason for this. One you seem intent on denying.
Sidney lad, good comments!
Linda, you are right. St. Padre Pio never said the Novus Ordo, and God took him before the Mass of Paul VI was forced upon the world.
Pilar you sound like a “Sedevacantist”, who pretends to be Catholic but does not acknowledge the Pope’s authority in matters of Faith and Morals.
All you ever do is complain.
What are you doing, PETE, save complaining based on your own opinion. Making false, baseless accusations about another is not Catholic.
One must not only reiterate the Pope’s authority in matters of Faith and Morals, but understand what that means – it’s limitations and the safeguards of canon law put into place to protect the Faith. The Pope is not a dictator, answerable to no one.
Based on your posts, it could be suspected that you are part of the herd of sheeple being easily led for lack of true knowledge of the Faith into the pit.
Poor St. Padre Pio! He was very obedient to religious authorities, and he even kept a picture of the Pope in his cell, for whom he prayed and sacrificed, daily! He was deeply hurt and angered, over being forced to say the new Vatican II Mass, being devised, in Rome! He felt that so many of the Council Fathers betrayed our Church! He could hardly hold his tongue– bless him!– on the new, required Vatican II revisions of his religious order! He was the only priest to receive the Pope’s special permission, to continue to say the Tridentine Mass! Yet– he died the year before the New Mass was forced upon the world! God love dear St. Padre Pio!
Linda Marie, please provide a link to support your statements regarding Padre Pio and his beliefs regarding the OF Mass.
I could find no such thing.
Al– where have you been? Everyone knows, that St. Padre Pio was the only priest in the entire world, to receive a special permission, straight from the Pope, to continue to celebrate the Tridentine Latin Mass! Read a biography on St. Pio of Pietrelcina! There are many! I bet the computer has something, too! He is so famous, and so well-loved! Perhaps the computer even has a “YouTube” episode, of St. Pio, celebrating one of his famous Masses– or else, also, his canonization ceremony, too! I am sure you must know of his famous stigmata, and miracles!
SSPX reminds me of the members of the so-called “Old Catholic Church,” who also broke away, in that case because they disagreed with papal infallibility.
Like Martin Luther and others, such know-it-all schismatics are confusing to the faithful, pretending to be leaders of the faithful while they have turned their back on the Vicar of Christ, the Pope of Rome!!
You may want to stop presenting your recollections as accurate, Barbara. Your post sounds much like a know-it-all, in this case, know nothing who cannot even read His Excellencies stating quite clearly that there is no state of schism.
Turning one’s back on the Vicar of Rome would be to go along with that which is against the Faith. We are called to correct our brothers, Barbara, even if that charity is exercised in the necessary resistance to that which obfuscates the teachings of the Catholic Church.
Obedience in all but sin, Barbara. That’s supporting the Pope in doing his duty.
Just reminding everyone here that doc turned its back on the Pope when it trained seminarians against his express wishes and ordained bishops against the express warnings of Rome. Fancy talk by Ann mallet changes nothing
And yet YFC,, they grow and the Church shrinks….
Mold grows, my friend, and the bread on which it feeds shrinks. What exactly is your point?
To compare good Catholics to mold is satanic and while you praise sodomy I find it almost laughable. When Bergoglio and the rest of modernist fall into heresy this October will you say a word.??
Take your issue up with Bishop Merlino, YFC. He’s the one who states there is no schism. Talk with Bishop Athanasius Schneider. That’s who you have the beef with. Pope Francis, too. He states that the Society is Catholic. Thoroughly Catholic.
No amount of shinnying by Your Fickle Compromiser is going to change that.
Thank God that Archbishop Lefebvre did continue to train priests faithful to the Faith. Somebody had to. Much like I’d thank someone for feeding/teaching my children should I have the misfortune of being bound and gagged in a back room by “friends” holding a gun to my head to “sign the papers” that would rob my family blind.
It was nice of the website to post this warning to you and to the others who have defected from the Church.
It is too bad that the only part of the article you talk about is the part you can spin.
Read the article. Stay away from the SSPX.
…no warning to me, Anonymous. I don’t live in Bishop Merlino’s diocese. That is why you should stick to what you know and proceed to ask questions about that which still confuses you.
Read the article. Discontinue your uncharitable assertions and assumptions. And if you cannot refrain from speaking out of turn, stay away. That’s code for don’t engage, Anonymous. You have neither the grace, the jurisdiction, nor the comprehension to do so. Not credibly.
Ann Malley, I think Bishop Marino’s letter was an amazing portrayal of pastoral concern for those tempted to go the way of SSPX. Please read it carefully and at face value.
Indeed, I do sense his pastoral concern, YFC. I take no issue with that. His Excellency is doing what he must in his diocese wherein he provides for his sheep. Not all bishops do, contrary to what you may believe or your experience.
That said, I find your post interesting since you’ve predicated your own decisions on the primacy of conscience. One would think then that the primacy of conscience wherein an upholding of the fullness of the Faith and the whole of Catholic morals would get more encouragement from you.
Thanks for your note.
Ann Malley, why are 95% of your posts abusive? You come on a Catholic website and are mean and nasty to people for being Catholic. What do you think is going to happen? Catholics are going to say, “Wow, this person knows so much more than the POpe. We should follow her.”?
If you are so content with the SSPX, why aren’t you on their websites conversing with people who agree with you. Why come here and publish things that are untrue about the Catholic Church? I doubt that you benefit from it financially, but there is something in it for you or you wouldn’t waste your time on it.
Abusive how? Anonymous, read Bishop Morlino’s letter in its entirety. Read what Bishop Schneider, tasked with visitation to the Society, has to say. There is no need to post anything that isn’t true. That’s my point.
Perhaps you should review why valid observations, even by Bishop Schneider, are offensive to you. As to what I’m content with, I’m content with the truth. All of it. Not hit pieces.
And it is never a waste of time to pursue and share the Truth.
Abusive, how? OK You asked. You are abusive when you demean people and degrade them. You question their faithfulness. You say mean things to them.
Bishop Scnieder wrote this email to Church Militant TV:
.Dear Michael Voris, here are some clarifications about the issue of the SSPX:
1. I have not said that there are no reasons which would hinder a canonical recognition of the SSPX, but I said more cautiously “To my knowledge there are no weighty reasons”.
2. I have not said that the current canonical situation of the SSPX is OK. The contrary, because of the their uncanonical status it is necessary that they receive the recognition from the Holy See.
3. I said that the SSPX should be received as they are, meanwhile. My thought is this: for pedagogical and pastoral reasons they should be meanwhile accepted as they are, in order to correct by time those things…
4. I never said, that I support the positions of the SSPX about Vatican II. I only said, that there is on both sides, i.e. the Holy See and the SPPX an over-evaluation and overestimation of Vatican II, yet on opposing points of views. The question is the right measure, i.e. we must have an estimation and a good evaluation of Vatican II, but not in an exaggerated manner. We have not to make Vatican II a Council isolated from all the previous Councils or a kind of super-Council.
5. This is the tragedy of the history, that in confused times as this is our time, the good forces in the Church, which want to restore the true faith and Divine worship often fight one against the other, to the detriment of the true renewal and to the…
6. Of course, the SPPX has to make their critics with more respect towards the supreme authority of the Church and has to avoid incorrect and exaggerated expressions and judgements. One has to act with the principle “veritatem facientes in caritate” (to defend the truth with love). This I often told to the representatives of the SSPX.
7. One has to have enough intellectual honesty and objectivity as to admit that the SSPX makes some theological criticism of some not strictly dogmatic affirmations in the texts of Vatican II and of some postconciliar documents, which have to be taken seriously. Unfortunately their criticism lacks sometimes the due respectful form. Nevertheless, some theological objections of the SSPX can be…
8. Each true catholic should only be glad and thank God, when the SSPX with all their priests and Catholic families, from which the majority are faithful Catholics, would be recognized by the Holy See, so that there would be a new considerable force for a renewal of the Church according to the mind of the Saints, of our forefathers and of the true intention of Pope John XXIII, the intention which is demonstrated in his speeches and especially in the document drafts (schemata) which this Pope ordered to prepare and which he personally approved.
9. The current situation of the Church is similar to that of the Arian Crisis in the 4.thcentury: there is a naval battle in the night, where the enemies of the Church attack…
….thank you for posting this, Anonymous. All of it!
This exactly what I’ve been trying to say, with the one addition/modification being that those who are currently in the position of not being in an irregular situation to not presume the worst of others….. do not put words or intentions into other people’s mouths or hearts. To do so is to, perhaps, inadvertently provoke.
Most of the SSPX are indeed faithful Catholics.
I respect His Excellency for reporting the situation ‘as he sees it.’
too many anonymous to keep up with but Anonymous from
August 15, 2015 at 2:23 pm IS right but I wouldn’t say 95% but in some topics its correct or could be more higher percentage.
Sorry about that last Anonymous. That was me. Cleaned the cache again. Thank you for posting Bishop Schneider’s comments. They reiterate exactly what he stated the first time. If CMTV had not edited out the whole of his interview, they could have avoided wasting the bishop’s time for an unnecessary clarification.
I hope CMTV has got the message now.
I agree Barbara.
Yes i echo that “stay away from SSPX”
“such know-it-all schismatics are confusing to the faithful” = Saul Alinsky-ite tactic
BARB, Stop disobeying the Pope that you claim to obey. Who are YOU to Judge? No different than the response of the Pope regarding his thoughts on homosexuals. If the SSPX is striving to be holy and seek God then WHO ARE YOU TO JUDGE? If you do NOT like that ambiguous or unclear response then you’ll be happy to promote Bishop Athanasius Schneider’s call for clarifications without ambiguity. Otherwise, your leftist promoting, tree hugging tactics, remain exposed.
Your post clearly demonstrates the hatred and fear that leftists within the Church show for all Traditional Catholics, especially the ones that belong to a diocese.
This doesn’t sound like Catherine at all.
….this sounds precisely like Catherine. Shutting down useful idiots by calling out their inconsistency in being “faithful”.
Key words “useful idiots” so she says. Matthew 5:21-22
“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.’ But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire.
The key here or rather the question, Abeca, is why you continue to smear individuals in contradiction of Bishop Morlino’s letter. Why are you acting on your own authority? Why are you dismissing the assessment of Bishop Schneider, especially when he was sent specifically by the Vatican to make such a review?
You you make take issue with the term useful idiot, but it is a term with a specific meaning. Much like the terms schism and, most pointedly, schismatic have particular meanings. Being liable to hell fire is not limited to those who believe themselves to be righteous.
I catered for some friends who were married by a priest (had been ordained in the RCC) from the American Catholic Church. Lovely ceremony, . It was just like a nuptual mass ….but of course it wasn’t……The brides were beautiful. They are married in the eyes of the state, their families, friends and they believe God as well. HOWEVER they did not receive the sacrament of matrimony. From what I can tell from this discussion, this paralells the situation with the SSPX. Am I wrong? How is it different?
“The brides were beautiful.” …. “They are married in the eyes of the state, their families, friends and they believe God as well.” …… “Am I wrong?” = Yes, you, the state, the families and friends and the so-called “brides” are all wrong but you already knew that when you catered up a divisive post to intentionally mix apples with rotten oranges.
1.The SSPX is an internal Church matter.
2. So called “same sex marriage” is an infernal matter.
1: These two women are not married in the eyes of the Church
2: A man and woman married by an SSPX priest are not married in the eyes of the Church.
Ooops….. That was me. Somehow the autofil thinggy didn’t kick in.
Once again without the S.S.P.X. and His Grace Archbishop Lefebvre there would be no Traditional Latin Mass anywhere!!!!! And Barbara the S.S.P.X. never turned it’s back on Rome or the Pope it was Rome who turned its back on the TRUE MASS OF ALL TIMES!!!
This is really true, what Janek is saying– Rome turned her back on the Mass of All Time, and for what?? For “aggiornamento,” for modernism in the secular world, for ecumenism, for competition with Protestantism, for accessibility of the Mass to the least-interested, Latin-hating, bored Catholic layman, for keeping up with the decline and fall of Western civilization— or for WHAT?? Didn’t the Council Fathers love and cherish their very own Faith, and their beautiful Tridentine Latin Mass?? Didn’t it MEAN ANYTHING AT ALL to them?? I still say that, even today, when things go wrong, in the Church– didn’t it MEAN ANYTHING, to the prelates in charge– who simply DON”T CARE ANYMORE??
The beautiful Mass of All Time, the Tridentine Mass– was once the heart and soul of the whole Catholic Faith! It was very beautiful, very holy, and very highly revered! Christ came to earth, on the holy altar, by means of Transubstantiation– an absolute FACT, to all Catholics! To degrade and destroy the Mass, was UNTHINKABLE!! The sacred Priesthood also was held in very high esteem, and every Catholic boy, at some point– thought of becoming a priest! Celibacy was very highly respected! So– how could the Council Fathers even DREAM of destroying the Tridentine Mass– the very heart and soul, of our Faith?? How?? Even non-Catholics wondered, during the time of the Council!
To all the SSPX haters out there you know who you are. Tell me when this Synod gets through violating the direct words of Our Lord Jesus Christ and Church officially falls into heresy will you have the same vitriol for Francis and his leftist gang of modernist destroyers. No I imagine not. but you will still be ranting about non-canonical status of the SSPX…..
First of all, the direct word of God says that divorce is permitted in the case of adultery.
No it does not.
Well, it is complicated (and our space is short).
There appear to be grounds, very few, for the possiblity of divorce. For example sexual immorality appears to be one of them: “But I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, excepting for the cause of fornication, maketh her to commit adultery: and he that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery.” Matt. 5:32 (DRA)
Also, abandoment by a non-believer is a ground for divorce. See, 1 Corinthians 7:15.
Of course, divorce is not required, only supportable (apparently, with some debate here).
The “adultery” referred to means the adultery of the “marriage” itself when one of the spouses was already married. Therefore, when one finds that his/her spouse is adulterous in the marriage because such spouse is bound to previous marriage, then divorce from such adulterous subsequent marriage is allowed. Hence “divorce in the case of adultery.”
Canisius just because we state what the church says about the SSPX does not make a person a hater. Lets just get that clear.
No Abeca the people who post against the SSPX hate them, lets just get that clear.. And I will say this again, once the liberals get their way ( that includes Bergoglio) at the coming Synod they will have fallen into formal heresy. I want to hear you rail against them they way you do against the SSPX
its not true Canisius…its not hate! No one has said I hate so and so! No they are just stating the truth and it is about salvation! They broke away and that is a serious matter and no soul should, after knowing these facts, attend SSPX, they are in grave spiritual predicament just like any other sin of disobedience. But with love we say this to discourage such disobedience and in hopes that they will reflect and return in unity! That is the main reason to speak up the truth, we desire them to return and as much as you like to believe that its hateful actions, then you are misunderstanding us! Now whatever Ann Thinks of my comments, well it doesn’t matter,,,,,,,we are to serve and follow Christ! Only HIM! Eye’s on HIM! PAX…
…when you over exaggerate and falsely label others as schismatic, Abeca, you are going beyond the call of duty into bias and personal judgement. Throwing stones at faithful Catholics who love Holy Mother Church is not charity.
Also intimating that what occurred was a simple breaking away is devoid of intellectual honesty. Yes, there should be a healing and a proper canonical status renewed. But that is not the only matter on the table, Abeca, as we all know.
If your eyes are truly on HIM, then go all the way and understand that the methods you’ve employed here are not of Jesus.
Let’s just get this clear. It is your choice to engage in hateful rhetoric while overstepping yourself, even to the point of disregarding Bishop Morlino’s advice which you openly extolled as being of Jesus that marks you, Abeca.
Take responsibility for what you do. For what you write. And for your own sins. Blaming the Church is pretty rich.
You are doing far more than, “…just stating what the Church says.” That, dear lady, is an utter cop out. You know it…. and so does everyone reading this read. Including the anonymous entourage that knows nothing more than the spew of fear mongering that is the delight of the heterodox.
Ann Malley no! Schismatic means what it means and if you take offense it is because you are feeling some form of guilt! It is your insecurity not mine! Remember that every time you go to confession with your SSPX chapel priests, it is not valid! You have not received the sacrament! This is a serious matter not to be taken lightly and could explain our division here with you! Just like those within who promote gay lifestyles, they are heretics trying to change the church!
This is nothing personal against your person, but it is to warn you and praying that you will validly receive these necessary sacraments. Also since the SSPX appear to be Catholic and people can mistaken their sacraments as valid so that is why we need to place a warning! You don’t care because your agenda here is to promote the SSPX! OK lets just get that very clear!
‘Pope urged to condemn gay unions as unnatural’
VATICAN CITY, Aug 13 – Nearly half a million Catholics have signed a petition urging Pope Francis to condemn same sex unions as unnatural and rule out allowing divorced believers who remarry to receive communion, organisers claim.
PETE and others– Do you think the Pope, and some of his faithless Cardinals (such as Cardinal Kasper) are true Catholics?? Quit picking on good Catholics, like Pilar! You follow what you want– and leave others alone! Pilar sounds like a truly devout, concerned Catholic– unlike the Pope, and his faithless Cardinals– of the disastrous October Synod! Do you even CARE about the Church’s TOTAL RUIN– in the aftermath of Vatican II?? Or do you only care what seems to be currently in “ecclesiastical fashion”– and legally “correct??” Do you now accept abortion, contraception, and gay “marriage,” in the secular world– just because the Supreme Court deems such EVILS “lawful?” What does God say??
Just because there are some heretical Cardinals/Bishops within the Church – that has nothing to do with the current official status of the SSPX – which is that the SSPX “do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church”.
Why are you so afraid of the truth, and attacking those who post the truth?
If you have contrary documentation to Pope Benedict’s official statement..
please post a link. FACTS ONLY not silly emotion – and trying to deceive others.
From good old E.W.T.N.: “Therefore, until the status of the SSPX is regularized by the Holy See, the bishops and priests of the Society remain suspended from the exercise of Holy Orders. Their celebration of the sacraments are valid but illicit, except for those sacraments requiring jurisdiction (Penance, Marriage), which are both invalid and illicit. This means that sacramental absolution by a Society priest is invalid for lack of jurisdiction, a requirement in all circumstances but the danger of death (canon 976). Similarly, lacking jurisdiction, marriages witnessed by SSPX clergy would also be invalid, for defect of the “Catholic form”, which requires witnessing by one’s bishop or proper pastor or a dispensations for other…
And yet more about Marcel from E.W.T.N.: “In 1989, Archbishop Lefebvre, now fearing that he would die and leave no one to ordain priests for the SSPX, sought an agreement with the Holy See for the lawful continuation of the Society. After reaching an agreement with Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, acting for Pope St. John Paul II, Archbishop Lefebvre broke the agreement and, in an act which was ipso facto schismatic, ordained 4 bishops without a papal mandate. This action incurred an automatic excommunication under canon 1387, confirmed a few days later by Decree of the Holy See. Twenty years later (January 2009), as part of another effort at reconciliation on the part of Rome, Pope Benedict XVI lifted these excommunications. Despite this, to…
I will add something, to the posts of Dominic. Abp. Lefebvre feared he would die, with no successors (bishops) to ordain future priests, to continue the beautiful Tridentine Mass, for the SSPX. He waited as long as he could, to obtain approval, from Ratzinger– but finally, Lefebvre felt that the Pope and Ratzinger, and others– were tragically TRICKING HIM, making him wait so very long— and perhaps, HOPING HE WOUD DIE, WHILE WAITING FOR THE APPROVAL?? He finally went ahead anyway, before death, to ordain some bishops! Otherwise, there would be no future Tridentine Mass priests! It was a heart-breakingly CRUEL situation!!
This tragic situation is historically fully documented, in both the Vatican, and in Lefebvre’s historical documents, with the SSPX. Heart-breakingly CRUEL!! Obedience for devout Churchmen– has been a tough situation, historically, when there have been situations in history, where the Church has seemed to go down the wrong path! It will be hard today, with the German bishops, and with the upcoming Synod, if things seem to go wrong! And what of the Pope and some bishops and priests, giving Holy Communion wrongfully, to those who are unrepentant– and commit Mortal Sin?? And stating this to be a good thing, for so-called “love?” A grave sacrilege!
There is no proposal to give Holy Communion to those who are unrepentant and commit Mortal Sin.
The proposal was for those who are repentant but for various reasons cannot dissolve their second marriage-illness, children, etc to follow a path of penance which would eventually allow them to receive Holy Communion again. This may involve refraining from the marital act.
Anonymous, those penitents in a second marriage who refrain from the marital act are already welcome to receive Holy Communion.
What is on the table at present is the notion that those living in an adulterous second marriage could continue this union, to include sexual relations, and still receive Holy Communion. As if Christ’s words on what constituted adultery are no longer an issue.
Read for understanding and, please, ask questions. We will all learn that way.
Anonynous– we have many famous prelates in America, who state that they DO NOT BELIEVE in refusal of Holy Communion, to anyone, especially to “Catholic” politicians, who have PUBLICLY committed grave mortal sins! “Catholic” politicians who support abortion, contraception, euthanasia, gay “marriage,” etc.etc. Did the Pope, or one of his prelates of the Vatican, give “Gov. Moonbeam,” (Gov. Jerry Brown) Holy Communion at Mass, when he went to the Vatican recently, for the Pope’s big meeting, on climate change??
Anonymous– The so-called “Catholics” in false “marriages,” unacceptable to the Church– never bothered to go to Confession, to get their lives straightened out with God, nor did they bother to go through the correct Diocesan procedures, to request annulments! They were not really committed to following Christ– and led very sloppy moral lives! Holy Communion is really only for the very few well-prepared, sincere, practicing Catholics, who take the time and trouble, to truly seek to follow Christ, daily! The rest need good instruction– if they are truly interested– and a total commitment, to follow Christ!
Ven. Abp. Fulton J. Sheen once was visited, at St. Patrick’s Cathedral, in New York, in the 1950’s— by the famous Joe DiMaggio, who wanted to marry Marilyn Monroe. Of course– Marilyn Monroe was a non-Catholic divorcee, and DiMaggio was ineligible, for a Catholic Marriage. Sheen, of course, had many similar marriage requests, to handle– some from famous people. Of course, he had to counsel DiMaggio, and tell him of the impossibility, of this tragic situation! No “loop-holes,” no way around the rules of the Church, on the Sacraments!
Anonymous– When young, Catholics need very excellent, accurate instruction and guidance, in their Faith and Morals– because it is a tragic thing, to mess up one’s life, in regards to the Church’s Sacrament of Holy Matrimony! I recall, when young, seeing this lesson, at times– in a few divorced Catholics (usually re-married, in Protestant churches) — who nevertheless, sent their children to Catholic schools, and accompanied them to Sunday Mass. They did not receive Communion, but encouraged their children to do so– and prayed to God, some making Spiritual Communions– and took their chances, with God.
I will say one more thing in reply to the post of Anonymous– I recall, when young, in pre-Vatican II days– a Catholic lady whose marriage got messed up, due to her husband’s alcoholism. She was a devout Catholic, and the divorce was a heartbreak for her! They had several children. She later fell in love with a man, and the two courted for over twenty years, but they never married! He respected her Catholic Faith! He loved her dearly, and she loved him, likewise– but her Catholic Faith came first! No more “messing up,” after her first situation! And both were happy to respect God, (and themselves!) and remain chaste!
….after reaching an agreement wherein the chosen candidates for elevation to the episcopacy were systematically and repeatedly declined by the Vatican only to protract the “process”, Archbishop Lefebvre, STILL fearing that he would die and leave no one to ordain priests for the SSPX, went forward to raise 4 candidates.
If the man didn’t fear that he would die without leaving the SSPX without a bishop, there would have been no need to seek permission to make one. Once in the proper process, the powers-that-be had a very vested interest in protracting the process in an attempt to ensure that THE ARCHBISHOP DID DIE BEFORE OBTAINING REPLACEMENT BISHOPS to protect Catholic tradition.
Again, the FSSP was promised a bishop at that…
…. time, and they are STILL WAITING.
Had Archbishop Lefebvre done as much, that is waiting, well, there would be no FSSP, no diocesan Latin Mass, no Summorum Pontifiucm, nothing but Novus Ordo and the modernist mess that is making Catholics look to run to the hills.
So thanks Dominic for bringing this up.
If Archbishop Lefebvre had desired to start a schism, he wouldn’t have asked the Pope for any permission. But we all know how long processes can take – wink, wink – kind of like the process of getting any clarity out of the Vatican.
I’m glad Archbishop Lefebvre took the hit for us. Somebody had too. And I’m grateful for his corresponding to grace to make the hard decision.
I believe the Latin Mass would have been made available much sooner if the SSPX and other groups had not rebelled and deserted the Church.
The Latin mass was being made available, lawfully, and with full jurisdiction by the SSPX back in the day, Anonymous, when the modernists took aim against the Society. Why? Because those bishops bent on modernism understood the necessity to crush the continuance of Catholic tradition.
No, Anonymous– the Latin Mass would have been suppressed for centuries, perhaps– it was hoped, by the Vatican, that it would DIE, and be FORGOTTEN, FOREVER! Relegated to history books and museums of the past, like an unwanted, outdated, antiquated form of some forgotten and useless religious practice! This is the big, ridiculous, childish, “political game,” in Rome– to suppress all of “outdated,’ “useless” Catholic Tradition, and the old Latin Mass– and embrace the modern world, thus– “aggiornamento”– exactly as the Pope and Council Fathers wanted, at Vatican II!!
This is only a part of the story, Ann Malley. First, Lefebvre was ordaining men to the priesthood over the objections of Rome. He was warned all along to stop. Did he listen? No, he did not listen.
Lots of sees go vacant for a time after a bishop dies.The Society could have elected a non-episcopal successor upon the death of Lefebvre. After all, Jesuits rarely have a bishop as their head. Same with Franciscans. Why did the SSPX require a bishop to be its head, if not to set up an anti-papacy?
The Society DID elect a non-episcopal successor upon the death of the Archbishop, Anonymous.
The Society is only recently headed by a bishop – and that by way of election. The Bishops you erroneously ascribe as some proof of establishing an anti-papacy were raised to the episcopacy for the purpose of ordaining and confirming – a necessary protection for a Society targeted specifically because it refused to compromise on that which was and still ambiguous.
Look to the fruits, Anonymous. There is no anti-papacy. There is only the consistent upholding of the fullness of Catholic teaching/formation.
That’s why Bishop Schneider is calling for an end to the fear mongering and stating the truth. There is no need to withhold…
…jurisdiction from the Society.
Not unless the real objection is to keep a lid on the formation and subsequent ordination of priests who embrace the whole of Catholic Tradition.
Look to Rome even now. The push isn’t for upholding the whole of Catholic teaching without compromise, quite the contrary. FSSP is still awaiting their own bishop. They are still marginalized. And it is NOT because Catholic Tradition is embraced, Anonymous. Quite the opposite.
So let’s not look a gift horse in the mouth or beat it with a stick for want of proper knowledge.
Societies and orders don’t “get their own bishop”.
….Anonymous, the FSSP was promised their own bishop.
I am NOT a sede vacantist!, So you who are light in the loafers, and are total air heads quit jumping to irrational conclusions.. Another point to make: often times the FSSP was told they could not have any other sacraments besides the Mass and confessions, so to be baptized or to receive the Sacrament of the Sick, they had to have it done in the Novus Ordo. The same was true with marriage. First Communion classes were also forbidden. The SSPX, like the tea party, is growing.
Pilar, don’t worry about the name-calling (“Sedesvacaaantist! Schismaaaatic! Heeeeretic!”) by a frightened feckless factless band here, one that wont engage in the facts.
It is just an effort to first, “scare you back into the fold” (=their version of “fold”), and second, if that doesn’t work, a contemptuous demonizing will ensue: “Pilar is a ‘sedesvacaaantist!’ Run for your lives!” Nothing good comes without challenge however. They did the same thing to Pope Benedict XVI:
“..Our society needs to have at least one group [i.e. the SSPX] to which no tolerance may be shown; which one can easily attack and hate. And should someone dare to approach them – in this case the Pope – he too loses any right to…
P. BXVI: “And should someone dare to approach them [the SSPX] – in this case the Pope – he too loses any right to tolerance; he too can be treated hatefully.” (Letter Mar. 10, 2009 on the Remission of the Excommunication of the 4 SSPX Bishops).
This is why we have the Noble Order of Novus Ordo/Oregon Ducks, those quacking, flapping, sedesevacaaantist-croaking Guardians of Truth — as the roof caves in on the Catholic Church.
Welcome aboard Pilar! The false charge of Sedevecantist means that you’re actually marked now for speaking the truth. Steve is absolutely right.
Did you read PETE on another thread where he insists that the Pope is allowing teaching to be mixed in with personal opinion. Perhaps we should call him out like in Invasion of the Body Snatchers as being not one of the body!!!!
Translation: They can quote the CCC, but cannot apply it consistently. But that kind of approach, especially the ridicule of false charges of (schism, Sedevecantist, etc) is promoted on CMTV. These folks go to websites like that and get indoctrinated on how to do it right! They are told they elite.
That’s why you get the blind, inconsistent…
… lock-step application of what should be Catholic reasoning.
CMTV didn’t even have the wherewithal to preset Bishop Schneider’s interview in its entirety – and they didn’t have the capacity to refrain from calling others schismatics on the blog about Bishop Merlino’s letter (this after the Bishop pointedly stated there is no schism.)
These individuals have fallen into the trap of market share and spin while being told they are being educated….doing it “right”. It’s sad. But welcome :)
Maybe you’ll have the honor of being called slime one day. I did. The kids and I will be having a hoot over that one for years to come.
Ann Malley why do you make victims out of people? Pilar is not a victim! False Charge…..a question is just for clarity…why can’t people get off their high horse and just say no I am not or yes or why do you say that, or just let them answer the question instead of you answering it for them…sometimes we can learn as to why someone comes across that way or maybe someone is in denial of it or it is just a mistaken identity, whatever the case may be.. Whatever it is…just stop adding more drama by making comments like you did!
Abeca, get off your high horse and stop pretending that what you do is for charity’s sake. If that were so, you’d do no more and no less than what Bishop Morlino states in his letter. Instead you attack individuals and call it charity. You call names and cast charges and then feign innocent questioning.
You cannot even accept the observations of His Excellency Bishop Schneider about the Society, but rather seek to sow division. It is this seeking to sow division that victimizes, Abeca. As for drama, you may want to lead by example. That way we’d know you were serious.
No need to be abusive. Please strive to be civil. And false witness is a sin.
If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other.
We never used to be this divisive until this current papacy ( coupled with a second Obama presidency, some faithless bishops and cardinals etc). I say time out and try to think of something good about each other. I like that bob one never responds to any of my posts…it saves me a lot of heart burn for one thing, and gives me lots of wiggle room, :)
…I like Dana’s signature wiggles, best of course, when she has lots of room :)
SSPX HYPOCRISY From https://sspx.agenda.tripod.com/id86.html
In the middle or late eighties the Society began complaining about the tactics of the “Conciliar Church” – a euphemism the Society uses (rather than “Catholic Church”) to indicate that somehow Christ lied and is no longer with His Church as He said He would be until the end of time (this Society attitude is heretical). The Society complained that the “Conciliars” were setting up Indult Mass locations in areas which, coincidentally, the SSPX had missions and chapels.
The Society was upset because they saw this as attempt to draw people away from the Society by tempting them with the Tridentine Rite which would now be legitimate and under Rome. They also viewed it as…
The Concise Catholic Dictionary defines “faculty” as “the grant of authority from an ecclesiastical superior to perform legally some act of jurisdiction or ceremony. The jurisdiction granted to a duly ordained priest by the bishop of the diocese validly to hear confessions.”
In truth, as Society priests do not approach the local ordinary for the faculties to hear confessions and officiate at marriages, those wanting to become involved, or, wishing to continue their association with the SSPX, need to understand that all confessions heard by Society priests, and all marriages at which they officiate are invalid. This is not a point which can be argued. All Catholics are bound by various provisions of the Code of Canon Law. All…
Thank you for posting truth, and sticking to the SSPX topic.
“….need to understand that all confessions heard by Society priests, and all marriages at which they officiate are invalid….”
Per Pope Benedict – the SSPX holds no legitimate ministry within the Catholic Church (at this time).
Your welcome PETE. Now if the holy ghost leads us to get off the subject for a worthy cause, then let it be God’s will even if we don’t understand it or see it! Always His will be done!
Thanks PETE for fighting the good fight!
From https://sspx.agenda.tripod.com/id88.htmlL Here is another thing to remember. Sr. Lucy, one of the three Fatima children, was told by the Blessed Virgin Mary that she would obtain heaven. Remember that? Now Fatima is a Church approved apparition and pre-Vatican II to boot. But Sr. Lucy partakes of the Novus Ordo Mass and sacraments. She also has voiced no support for the so-called “traditionalist” movement. So what will the Society do now? Disavow Sr. Lucy and the events of Fatima? If Sr. Lucy can work out her salvation while participating in the Novus Ordo, then, as distasteful as some may find it, so can others.
by the First Vatican Council (1870):
“If then any shall say that the Roman Pontiff has the office merely of inspection or direction, and not full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the universal Church, not only in things which belong to faith and morals, but also in those things which relate to the discipline and government of the Church spread throughout the world; or assert that he possesses merely the principal part, and not all the fullness of this supreme power; or that this power which he enjoys is not ordinary and immediate, both over each and all the Churches and over each and all the pastors of the faithful; let him be anathema” (Pastor Aeternus,).Ch. III; Denz. 1831)
These same truths are reiterated by the Second…
Fine, Abeca. Your obedience to the Church is great– but the Second Vatican Council DID seek to abandon and destroy the TRUE Roman Catholic Church— and set up a “New Church” in its place– the post-Conciliar Church! Brand new “Modern Church,” exactly as the Vatican desired! There is a big problem here– read and investigate, and you will find out what it is! The New, post-Conciliar Church rejects certain FUNDAMENTAL CATHOLIC TRUTHS!! And FORCES ITSELF on Catholic clergy and laity, worldwide! Of course– your OBEDIENCE TO CHRIST is wonderful, Abeca– but read and investigate further, and you will find yourself deeply, deeply HURT! (continued)
The Council Fathers made a COMPLETE RUPTURE with the Roman Catholic Church, and they REJECTED CERTAIN FUNDAMENTAL CATHOLIC TEACHINGS— IN FAVOR OF MODERNISM!! The Council Fathers also did the UNTHINKABLE– THEY DESTROYED THEIR SACRED TRADITION– and worst of all– THEY DESTROYED THEIR MASS!! Their new “Mass,” is NOT a natural, historically-continued and developed liturgical form, with certain little changes here and there, over the centuries. NO– it is an entirely new and CONTRIVED liturgical form, CORRUPTED liturgically and theologically, “quasi-Protestantized,” what someone like YOU (if you knew!) would call: HERESY!!
You are the heretic and schismatic.
Abeca– let me say, I am NOT TRYING TO DESTROY YOUR FAITH, nor your OBEDIENCE TO THE CHURCH, which is ADMIRABLE!! And I am NOT suggesting you should abandon your fine allegiance to the Vatican II Church, and switch to the SSPX, either!! But there are GOOD REASONS, for sincere Catholics, to examine the Second Vatican Council, and the Mass of Vatican II!! And GOOD REASONS– to investigate and examine, the motives, the reasoning and decisions, and the work– of the Council Father— Archbishop Lefebvre, and his Society of St. Pius X!!
People should study those things. Not with suspicion but to see the Holy Spirit ‘s guidance of the Church.
I do not know how long you have been reading but one of the people who post here took one of the SSPX”s pages from their website and proved how they lied about what Vatican II said.
Reading the Documents of Vatican II, is good.
Posting them as evil is heretical and schismatic, and a mortal sin.
Yes, most of the anti-V II posters on this web site, are liars.
Here are the Docs which they may not have read, or possibly do not want you to read.
Sidney you are charitable and well versed. God bless you for speaking up the truth! I agree with you because those truths are not made up by you but they are truth not opinions.
Anonymous II you can’t destroy my faith, for I gave my life to Jesus Christ, He is my Lord and savior. He owns me. So if you wish to try to scandalize me, then you will have to deal with my holy Guardian Angel and with our Lord.
I read where Pope Francis gave a homily in South America recently where he said there was no multiplication of loaves and fishes in the Gospels, and the only miracle that happened was that each person shared the lunch they had with each other. This is terrible. The miracle which Christ performed was written in all 4 Gospels, but Pope Francis seems to know more than the saintly evangelists, and the hundreds of saints who commented on this.
Was that before or after he accepted the hammer & sickle crucifix, Pilar? He’s such a busy bee buzzing about , one feels one is watching Global Catholic ping pong.
Please prove that.
Lord Jesus, Pilar is participating in slanderous gossip. Notice, she said she read where? She read, means I heard and spread slanderous gossip. Anyone can be a story teller, not all story tellers speak the truth, not all check the sources if to be true. Reminds me of reading the word of God, when Jesus was slandered too by gossip, I’m sure its a lot worst know, gossip travels faster via internet, media. St. Philip Neri warned about gossip and venomous lips. That sin needs to be acknowledged and confessed and then make public correct!ion! This gossip feeds the hatred of those who are antiV2 and it only pushes further souls away from the truth. Keep you focus on Christ! Protect yourself and live a humble simple prayerful life!…
My comment is not about what individual posters write, or how long they take to write it. My comment is that the moderator posts a 750 character rule and then does not enforce it. Take it down if its not enforced, with a decent delay before a continuing comment can be posted. [at least four hours delay].
I agree. Thanks for stating what should be “the obvious”.
yfc & Mike, if I wait four hours, my thought is gone! I can walk through a door to another room to get something and forget why I’m going there. Some of us face challenges with time and space restrictions…some of us don’t even buy green bananas, for peters sake, and you want us to count, keep time and remember a thought for hours? :( Actually, I’m counting the hours left of this presidency and papacy, as well, so I still have most of my faculties for the nonce. *stop*
Oh, Dana, I needed that. Thank you.
Counting the hours left of this papacy? What do you find so intolerable?
You can always write your thoughts and post them later.
CCD should change it’s policy for those posts which QUOTE Official Church documentation from the Vatican web site, and the Doctrine of the Faith as contained in the CCC.
We are all in need of the TRUTH, without being cut off.
Sometimes it takes longer to get a point across, so I believe 1000 characters would be more practical, or pastoral. Usually brevity is better, but not always.
AnnMalley, Bishop Morlino says plainly “All is not well with the SSPX, and my advice, my plea to the traditionally-minded faithful of the diocese is to have nothing to do with them. “
Well said this Anonymous!
Anonymous II, when you write, “The Council Fathers made a COMPLETE RUPTURE with the Roman Catholic Church, and they REJECTED CERTAIN FUNDAMENTAL CATHOLIC TEACHINGS— IN FAVOR OF MODERNISM!!” it reminds me of so many posters in here who keep saying the Second Vatican Council was ‘pastoral’ not ‘dogmatic.’
And here you are claiming it destroyed Catholic teaching – you guys really should make up your minds!!!!!
Anonymous– it takes a great deal of theological knowledge, and careful investigation, to see what I was trying to say! Those who grew up BEFORE Vatican II, could easily understand– they all were mostly well-educated, in their Catechism. Read, read, read– and ask questions, of knowledgeable people! Place the TLM Missal side-by-side with the text of the New (“Protestantized”) Mass, and go over both, with a good book, plus any Catechism– that explains the Mass thoroughly. Over 200,000 priests and bishops resigned, after Vatican II, thinking it and the New Mass to be a FRAUD, theologically— a FRAUD they COULD NOT SERVE!! IMPOSSIBLE!! FIND OUT WHY!! READ!!
Anonymos– the New Mass was NOT a continuation of the OLD MASS, with some little improvements here and there, over the centuries! NO!! It was not even a translation of the Old Mass, into the vernacular! The New Mass was a TOTALLY BRAND-NEW, hardly recognizable “Mass,” theologically incorrect– a Protestant-concocted liturgy, worse than the post-Reformation Protestant liturgies of the “Lord’s Supper!” It was also poorly-written– and it was NOT “Catholic!” A few years ago, the Church tried to improve and revise this “mess,” or “Mass!” READ, Anonymous– and discover the sad truth!
And if they (the members of SSPX) do come back, what positive aspects could they bring to the Church?
They could underline what Tradition is, but they also must become broader in their perspective because the Apostolic Tradition of the Church is not only about a few elements. The Tradition of the Church is large and wide. On the other hand, there must also be a renewal in the celebration of the liturgy because we have had a lot of abuses of the liturgy which have damaged the faith of many people.
Could they perhaps help correct some of the abuses?
That is not their task, but ours. One extreme cannot be the equivalent of the other. The extremes must be corrected by the centre.
Probably all those who attend SSPX Masses once went to Novus Ordo Masses. I got fed up with the abuses. The spineless wonder who is our bishop stood up for the 3 ringed circus which was supposed to be the Mass. To promote Renew, a man dressed up as the Energizer bunny and with a drum kept announcing RENEW. No kidding. Too many scandals, too many times leaving Mass angry etc have lead me attend Society chapels where none of this romper room madness occurs. Ave Maria Purrissima !
Jesusita you are probably one of few who have actually experienced such scandals but that means you would just have to attend another parish and take action like we are all morally obligated to do when we witness such things, its not an excuse to leave and to spread rumors that it happens in all parishes. Believe it or not, there are many holy Ordinary Form parishes! .You can also be part of the solution if you are lead, you can lead ministries in your local parish and educate them on what is proper,. Also charitably speak to the pastor. At least try. Some good friends of ours had made excuses too, they thought we worshiped Mary so they went to Calvery chapel and they never baptized their children. Their Sunday worship does not…
Comments for the article, “A word of caution about the Society of St. Pius X”, are now closed.