Resistance Schism & Heresy

Resistance Schism & Heresy - Sad but True

JMJ

I've been informed by a friend that Fr. Pfeiffer is touring Canada and today is supposed to be in Manitoba.

Therefore it is apropos that I discuss my conclusions about 'the resistance'.

First of all, I saw the following pattern of behaviour about a decade ago.

A priest:

recently ordained, is transferred about with greater frequency than the normal 3 years per 'posting',
has problems with obeying his present superior,
attempts to assert control in areas the superior had reserved for himself,
openly mocks his former superior,
seeks to ingratiate himself with various people at the SSPX Mass centre,
refuses a transfer on various grounds,
attempts to evoke pity of his support group by casting himself as subject to persecution,
attempts to take over the Mass centre and if unsuccessful,
entices or convinces people to 'split off' from the SSPX to start his own group,
eventually the character flaws dominate and the priest abandons his 'new' flock to the wolves.

The 'resistance' priests have, so far, faithfully followed this pattern and are now at the 9th step. Some are even now setting their toes upon the threshold of the 10th step; with the sede-vacantists now showing their true colours in Europe and Quebec.

At this point the Quebec 'resistance' is, I have been informed, split into a couple of groups and a number of people have returned to the SSPX as they discovered that their co-resistors were sede-vacantists. However, what will happen now to those sede-vacantists who have left? With Fr. Pfeiffer and his loose association continue to provide them the Sacraments? Will he attempt to convince them of their error ... all the while persisting in his own?

Personally, I have my doubts. Why? Because his error is contained within that of the greater error of the Sede-vacantists. In short, he is so scandalized by the actions of the hierarchy of the Church that based on his faulty understanding of Church doctrine he does not believe that the Visible Church is the Church of Christ (for a true understanding of visible see link). Here is the commonality that Fr. Pfeiffer holds with the Sede-vacantists.

In both cases it is based on error - will it blossom into full grown heresy (denial of a defide teaching) I don't know ... but looking at Fr. Pfeiffer's exposé of the Four Marks he has a very good start. Even better than Bishop Williamson who is apparently, even now, pulling back from that path.

Looking at the progress that the 'resistance' has made over the last two years. Of course I'm not talking about numbers. Their behavior is practically identical to that of the FSSP shortly after 1988, namely to draw away as many supporters of the SSPX as possible. This is not a 'proof' of the validity of their reasons (then and now) for leaving the SSPX.

No, what do we see after two years of existence: the resistance is splintering and bickering amongst themselves.

First there is the conflict between Bishop Williamson and Fr. Pfeiffer, unsurprising given Fr. Pfeiffer's apparent episcopal ambitions.

There is the Una Cum controversy in Europe (ie surprise a number of the priests in France turned out to be Sede-Vacantists). This obviously is parallel with the events in Quebec.

Fr. Girouard seems to have dropped off the internet as his last posting was in April of this year. The only links younger than April that show up in a google search are those for sending donations.

Even now some internet denizens are calling for Fr. Pfeiffer to be deposed along with his arch supporter 'Pablo the Mexican'.

This is what comes of disobedience: dissension and dissolution.

Eventually the final breakup will occur because the 'resistance' priests won't be able to agree on anything of true importance as each wants to be his own superior. So instead of having one congregation of 25 priests, they will 'have' 25 congregations with a single member.

One danger to which the 'resistor' faithful seem oblivious is the danger of schism.

There is also an old adage that a schism doesn't go very far before it trumps up a heresy to justify itself. In the case of the resistance the 'heresy' appears to revolve around the nature of the Church.

Granted that at this point Bishop Williamson seems to have realized his error, the question remains whether Fr. Pfeiffer will follow suit.

So what is the schism?

The Catholic Encyclopedia contains the following definition of schism:

Schism (from the Greek schisma, rent, division) is, in the language of theology and canon law, the rupture of ecclesiastical union and unity, i.e. either the act by which one of the faithful severs as far as in him lies the ties which bind him to the social organization of the Church and make him a member of the mystical body of Christ, or the state of dissociation or separation which is the result of that act.

The code of canon law (yes 1983 - if a person denies that this is the active law of the Church there's a deeper issue) although it is has the following:

Can. 751 Heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.

Now Fr. Pfeiffer is recommending that his followers do not attend Mass offered by the SSPX. His claim is that it represents a danger to the Faith. Objectively speaking that is little better than a conspiracy theory and for this he is pushing people to become 'home aloners'.

The emotional appeal that it has happened before is exceptionally weak. In the early days Traditionalists were either driven out or left to seek a Tridentine Mass because of a real manifest danger to their Faith, not a rumoured or theorized one proposed by the likes of Fr. Pfeiffer.

When Traditional Catholics take Fr. Pfeiffer's advice what is happening: They are shunning Catholics.

Welcome to the threshold of schism.

Fr. Pfeiffer has abandoned the Archbishop's understanding of Church doctrine and principles (one example: 'conciliar Church'), as well as the path set out by the Archbishop and the Society he founded.

That he insists that 'his' organization is carrying on the work of Archbishop Lefebvre is an absurdity.

Archbishop Lefebvre guided his actions by Catholic Principles. Fr. Pfeiffer, sadly for those who follow him, does not.

Much to pray for as this crisis continues, sadly friendships will be sundered.

P^3

PS. Apologies for a post made in haste.

"Father, Should I Attend That Mass?" Advice on Attending Non-SSPX Latin Masses

+ JMJ I see that the 'resistors' are in a tizzy because Fr. Robinson used them as an example instead of the sedevacantists. What is interesting is that you can apply the exact same reasons against going to a sede mass as that of the 'resistors'. Namely: On the other extreme are those situations where an SSPX priest knows that a certain non-SSPX traditionalist venue is a grave danger to the faith . Frankly, most, if not all, of the Resistance Masses would fall into this category. In many cases, the behavior of these priests has been and continues to be scandalous, by their (A) spirit, their (B) preaching, and their indiscriminate conferral of the (C) priesthood and (D) episcopacy. To attend a Mass with such ongoing scandals poses a serious danger to the souls of the faithful. Yep, looking at A,B,C and D the shoe fits. On this basis the "resistors" = "sedevacantists". P^3 Courtesy of SSPX.org A companion article to a recent "Questions with ...

Correcting Caricatures of the SSPX

+ JMJ Introduction First, a little background on the FSSP St. John Vianney Chapel in Mission Hill Kansas. After the 1988 consecrations and the foundation of the FSSP there was a consistent trend of Dioceses allowing the SSPX to run chapels and churches near SSPX locations. As with any 'organizational change' there were those who didn't agree with the change and no longer sought the sacraments from the SSPX. I heard from friends that in that era there was a lot of anger and tension (on both sides) between the St. Mary's SSPX and Mission Hill FSSP. Second, there have been caricatures of the SSPX position (some are evident below) in which personal opinions of SSPX priests and laity are taken as the official position or conflated with those of sedevacantists or 'resistance'. Recent Perspectives of the SSPX Position In the shadow of the consecrations a fever pitch accusations and opinions how surfaced - many of which include caricatures of the SSPX positions, of w...

SSPX: Why Is the SSPX So Criticized?

+ JMJ As long as you are ok with what happens in other Catholic Churches, Traditional Catholics will be left 'alone'. This is a paraphrase of words spoken by an Archbishop to Traditional Catholics (with a sprinkling of SSPX) who had requested the Traditional Latin Mass under Summorum Pontificum. This reflects that attitude of the Church towards anyone who takes issue with some of the ambiguities of Vatican II and the post-conciliar magisterium. If you reject the papacy but are ok with V2, the New Mass, and what Rome has stated since 1965 - then you are welcome. Question some of the more abiguous statements and ask for Rome to realise that a circle is not a square - then you are in for a world of hurt. This is where the SSPX exists and has existed from almost its very first moments. Pointing out contradictions with previous magisterium is not acceptable - under any condition. Why? Because it will cause the whole V2 house of cards to fall. I guess only when the contradic...

Stories: Early Days of Tradition Part 8 - Convention Centre Chapel

+ JMJ I came to Tradition a few years after they had bought a chapel. My wife told me of the earlier years when Fr. Normandin would come to town and Mass would be held in a room at the convention centre. He'd start by blessing the room and then proceed with Mass. This went on for a while before the one of the faithful found a small hall that would suit just fine. They pooled their money and bought the building. Then came the work as the retiree's refinished the floor, setup the sactuary. Oh, did I mention that I heard that the hall had been used by a motorcycle gang? The floor needed a lot of work. I remember seeing pictures of the founders working to make the hall into a fitting place for the Sacrifice of the Mass. That little chapel would be a refuge like many others serviced by Fr. Normandin. From Thunderbay, Ontrario to Nanaimo, British Columbia - the SSPX chapels are all the results of Fr. Normandin's missionary work in those desperate times. Without h...

How many more must die for the throne? or How to combat FUD!

+ JMJ How many more must die for the throne? (Movie Quote: Prince Caspian) The Spread of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt I've seen a lot of FUD spreading across the intergnat on various stats etc. So let's put this in context ... especially the perspective of those people in positions of authority who need to make decisions to protect the lives of their citizens. Yep, this is going to be that type of post. Like it or not the leaders of our governments have their authority from God. So, as Catholics should know, you need to have a very good reason to deliberately disobey the orders of their superiors. This is basic St. Thomas Aquinas ... so don't blame me for discussing things from a Catholic perspective. The leaders of our countries have taken action to protect the vulnerable of our countries. As much as the young and not-so-young may whine and complain - I have to ask how many more of our elderly have to die? What the armchair virologists and ec...

Tradicat

Search This Blog