Skip to main content

CMTV's Response to Bishop Schneider

+
JMJ

I figured that CMTV would have a 'response' to the responses to Bishop Schneider's interview.

Here's what I found on suscipedomine:



Church_Militant_Moderator:
I deleted your and other similar posts because a) a link to the full interview is already provided in the article, and b) what you wanted to post gives a distorted understanding both of what Bishop Schneider said and what he meant. We don't wish discussion of this article to be distracted in a direction that is both inaccurate and misleading.

Also, there is a perception that what Bishop Schneider said about the SSPX is at odds what CM has said and, since we have so much respect for Bishop Schneider, how do we reconcile the perceived contradictions?

Here is how someone raised this point earlier, followed by our response:

"So... when the SSPX is finally "canonically recognized", without changing anything they believe... what will Church Militant do to save face?"
In our FAQ on the Society http://www.churchmilitant.com/... we say:

"We are well aware of ongoing dialog between the SSPX and Rome. It is to be fervently hoped that these dialogs result in a return of the SSPX to full communion with the Church, granting their bishops and clergy canonical status and the authority to exercise ministry. Reconciliation of the SSPX with the Church would be a great blessing for the Church but most especially for the SSPX. "

Read the whole thing at the link.

Exactly what, in our FAQ or in any of our reporting on the Society, is contradicted by anything said by Bishop Schneider in his interview?
We have focused almost exclusively on the canonical status of the Society (or complete lack thereof) and its consequences, issues not addressed specifically by Bishop Schneider but clearly assumed. He chose to emphasize the positives that reconciliation of the Society with the Church would bring. We agree with all of that (see above), and always have. If and when the Society reconciles with the Church, no one will celebrate more than CM.

What "face" would we have to save when the Society reconciles if reconciliation is what both we and Bishop Schneider hope will occur?
The Society may not have to change anything they believe ("come as they are"), but they do have to choose to submit to the authority of the Vicar of Christ, accepting his dogmatically defined “full power of shepherding, ruling and governing the universal Church,” a power "ordinary and immediate over all the churches and over each and every member of the faithful". This requires more than hanging pictures of the Pope in the sacristy and praying for him.

If the Society believes that it can reconcile with the Church without submitting to the Roman Pontiff, then that is one belief that would have to change for reconciliation to happen. In that important respect, the Society cannot "come as they are." And Bishop Schneider agrees with that.

We have followed up with Bishop Schneider directly for clarification of what he said in his interview. He agrees that some of what he has said is being misinterpreted and misunderstood, and has given us permission to provide the necessary clarifications.

In light of all this, posting quotes that Bishop Schneider himself agrees are being misunderstood serves no good purpose.
Clarification of Bishop Schneider's remarks on the SSPX is forthcoming.

CMTV Article / comments
Just can't wait for the clarification. I suspect that they will provide leading questions in order to get the answers formed according to their pre-conceived notions.

Canonically, refusal of submission to the Vicar of Christ is schism, assuming that CMTV knows what they're talking about (no promises on this one) they are again calling the SSPX 'schismatic'.  The only thing is that the SSPX isn't schismatic, it is merely 'not in full communion' although that label has been dropped for a year or so now replaced by 'reconciliation' as the SSPX is obviously neither Heretical nor Schismatic.

Really, the problem is that the SSPX is simply following pre-conciliar magisterium that is of a higher theological note.  It is not a question of submission, but capitulation on those points (Four Points) of CLEAR pre-conciliar magisterium.  If they capitulate then they will be going against their consciences and admitting that for 50 years everything has been 'ok'.

Here's what the CDF responded to the following question / response, please note that the response did NOT state that the SSPX are in a state of formal schism.












































So please note that the SSPX is not in a state of 'formal schism' - it is merely 'not in full communion' - perhaps (since they are neither schismatic nor heretical) they are merely not canonically regular. As my American friends would say: Duh!

The real problem with CMTV et al is, I believe,  that they have a sedevacantist understanding of what constitutes 'submission to the Vicar of Christ'.  It is a blind 'submission' no matter what the Pope says or does.  This is reflected in their last statement:
If the Society believes that it can reconcile with the Church without submitting to the Roman Pontiff, then that is one belief that would have to change for reconciliation to happen. In that important respect, the Society cannot "come as they are." And Bishop Schneider agrees with that.
CMTV's cultural assumption is a dangerous one.

CMTV will not criticise the Pope's words on communion for those who have abandoned their spouse from their marriage and are living in concubinage with a 'partner'.  To do so, is some how 'refusing submission to the Pope'. Note They say they fear that that would cause more harm than the Pope's own words / actions.

CMTV simply doens't understand what true obedience is and therefore we hear crickets when the Popes says or does something that undermines Church Teaching.

Imagine CMTV's frustration as the Pope blissfully trashes this or that Truth of the Faith.

So instead of speaking the truth they lash out at anyone that does not agree with their POV.  Be they liberal or traditional.

Pray for them, because eventually they are going to be painted into a corner.

P^3

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

"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...