Skip to main content

Bishop Robert C. Molrino of Madison and the SSPX

+
JMJ

Bishop Molrino of Madison has issued a warning concerning the SSPX (warning of Bishop Molrino).

The letter is of interest because it provides a perspective on the SSPX that misses some key points.

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.
From my perspective, they have largely succeeded.
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.
Right, His Excellency neglects to mention the persecution of those who weren't 'on board' with the new program.
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.
Here we have the question: Is working against those who are destroying the Church a valid method, even if it required in the 70's, 80's, 90's, and most of the 00's to obtain recognition that the desire for the Tridentine Mass was not schismatic?
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.
It is interesting that His Excellency states that it was a 'choice' made by the SSPX.  I guess there was a choice to not compromise the Faith, method of formation of Priests, and liturgy.  This is after all, the reason for the attacks on the SSPX and why some successfully sought for the destruction of the SSPX.
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.
Well this is a breath of fresh air.  Treat us nice and at least don't call us schismatic. Then His Excellency launches into the heart of the matter.

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.
I suspected that this would come up and I suspect that Fr. Zed will jump on this one as well.  His Excellency does give a nod to the 'supplied jurisdiction' issue and seems to have passed over one possible solution for those people seeking the Sacraments from the SSPX.

He could give them jurisdiction with the stroke of a pen.  Of course this would be a brave action ... one requiring him to reach out to the SSPX. But hey, if the Argentinians can do it ... why not the Diocese of Madison?

His excellency then makes this statement:
As interest in the Traditional Latin Mass grows, these opportunities will increase. Already, there are very few people in the Diocese of Madison who could get to an SSPX chapel on Sunday without passing by a legitimate parish in which the Traditional Latin Mass is celebrated. If you’re knowingly doing that, it’s time to take a good hard look at your motives.
Here's the link for the extraordinary form masses in madison: Madison Catholic Herald and LatinMassMadison.  Out of the 8 Churches only three list a Mass on Sunday.  The breakdown of the Mass schedules is interesting.

Church Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
St. Clement

08:15:00
08:15:00
08:15:00
St. Mary (Pine Bluff) 07:30:00





Bishop O'Connor No regularly scheduled Tridentine Masses
St. Barnabas





08:00:00
St. Mary (Merrimac)



19:00:00 (1st wk)
St. Augustine 08:00:00 06:30:00 06:30:00 12:00:00 12:00:00 06:30:00
St. Mary (Platteville)





08:00:00
St. Norbert 11:00:00 06:30:00 06:30:00 06:30:00 06:30:00 06:30:00

I must say that this Diocese is better than most you'll find in Canada. However, here we find some interesting points.

First, there is no daily Tridentine Mass said anywhere in the diocese.  So, as usual, "Trads" have to Church hop if they want to attend daily Mass. All of these parishes are 'bi-ritual', interestingly the university chapel actually had the Triduum mostly according to the 1962 rite.

That said, if I was looking for a Mass that was within the confines of canon obligation, I'm guessing that only the St. Norbert Mass would qualify as an alternative if I was further away than an hour or so.

I think Bishop Molrino could do a lot to pave the way if he just gave the SSPX jurisdiction in his Diocese. Then the problems that he is concerned with would simple vanish.

Afterall, why shun the SSPX?

P^3


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Reply to Martin Blackshaw’s FLAWED Remnant article titled: FLAWED: SSPX Advice on Abortion-tainted Vaccines

 + JMJ    An article has appeared in the Remnant (link to article) and I am afraid that there are a number of flaws in it that need to be addressed. The author, Martin Blackshaw, believes that both the Church and the SSPX are misapplying the principle of Moral Theology called 'Cooperation In Evil'.  Unfortunately, Mr. Blackshaw rests most of his arguments on citing authors that support his position, without considering the possibility that they are wrong. This highlights a key factor in this crisis: ignorance of the faith and its application . I don't am not singling out Mr. Blackshaw for this criticism, I have observed that it applies to laity and religious, superior and subject a like.  No one seems immune in this enduring crisis, myself included.  I further believe that this ignorance is why so many Catholics, both traditional and non, rely on their gut feeling or "Catholic conscience" for charting their way through this crisis of the faith.  While...

The Vatican and SSPX – An Organizational Culture Perspective

Introduction The recent and continuing interactions between the Vatican and the SSPX have been a great opportunity for prayer and reflection.  The basis for the disagreement is theological and not liturgical. As noted by Dr. Lamont (2012), the SSPX theological position on the four key controversial aspects of the Second Vatican Council are base on prior theological work that resulted from relevant magisterial pronouncements.  So it is difficult to understand the apparent rejection of the theological position of the SSPX.

Rome and the SSPX - the latest

+ JMJ Bishop Fellay gave a conference late last month and provided some more insight into the situation with Rome. There are comments on Deus Ex Machina Blog  and Hilary White has now entered the fray. What is one Catholic to think about all these opinions? What a Catholic is to think: With the Church! What does the Church think about obedience?  Virtue as it is? If there is no proximate occasion of sin and the other conditions are met, then one cannot resist the command.

Rome,the SSPX and this time of Crisis - Updated

+ JMJ Obviously there's lots of events right now. First we have the April 1st - I almost thought it was April Fools - meeting between Pope Francis and Bishop Fellay.  Nothing really news worthy as this is a natural progression as Rome appears to be considering fulfilling Archbishop Lefebvre's wish to 'accept us as we are'. Second we have the April 8th publication of what will be a verbose exhortation of the Synod of the Family. I'm willing to bet that the Pope will give with one hand (unilateral regularization of SSPX) and take with the other (ambiguous document that opens the flood gates of sin further). Much to pray for. P^3

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...