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

Cathinfo and the 'resistance' perspective (updated with response to comment)

+ JMJ Matthew, the owner of Cathinfo - a resistance forum has posted a response to a person that indicated his reasons for continuing to go to the SSPX.

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. 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...

Mary Victrix: The Cyrpto-Lefebvrist Dodge (aka The Crypto-Lefebvrist Dodge)

+ JMJ Setting aside the spelling mistake in the title, I noticed yet another volley in the ongoing war of words between Fr. Greiger and various other people he has labelled as 'cyrpto-lefebvrists'. I also noticed that he has made some statements that are not supported by references or distort the actual positions of the SSPX. As a rule I assume that a person is of good-will and not of malicious intent. This is, after all, the Catholic approach to relations. So at this point I am assuming that Father Angelo Mary Greiger is simply operating under a confirmation bias , that he may be using to reduce any cognitive dissonance that he is experiencing. As such when I noticed some of the issues with the post were incorrect, I emailed Fr. Greiger my thought. As he has not amended the article, I post below a copy of my email. P^3

What the heck is a congregation of "Pontifical Right"

+ JMJ In a discussion with a friend the question occurred to me that I didn't actually know was is involved in being a religious order of 'pontifical right'. I had a vague notion that this meant they reported to Rome as opposed to the local diocese. I'm also aware that, according to the accounts I have heard, the Archbishop received 'praise' and the written direction to incardinate priests directly into the SSPX.  This is interesting because it implies that the SSPX priests were no longer required to incardinate in the local diocese but in the SSPX. This is something that belongs to an order of 'pontifical right'. Anyway here's some definitions: Di diritto pontificio is the Italian term for “of pontifical right” . It is given to the ecclesiastical institutions (the religious and secular institutes, societies of apostolic life) either created by the Holy See or approved by it with the formal decree, known by its Latin name, Decretu...