Skip to main content

A Look Back - Voris Refuted by Bishop Schneider

+
JMJ

The SSPX has its fair share of critics and, sadly, Mr. Voris has jumped on this particular bandwagon with his normal gusto.

Here's  a repeat article - just to refresh the topic as I suspect Mr. Voris will be having conniptions during the 'Year of Mercy'.

P^3

Courtesy of SSPX.org



  • that the SSPX should be received as they are, meanwhile."
  • there is on both sides, i.e. the Holy See and the SPPX an over-evaluation and overestimation of Vatican II... [which is not] a Council isolated from all the previous Councils or a kind of super-Council."
  • the good forces in the Church [i.e., including SSPX] which want to restore the true Faith and Divine worship often fight one against the other...”
  • ...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."
  • some theological objections of the SSPX can be a constructive contribution for a more mature theological explication of certain themes, as for example the collegiality, religious liberty, the liturgical reform…"
  • 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...
  • "The current situation of the Church is similar to that of the Arian Crisis in the 4th century... little ships of several true Catholic groups [including SSPX] attacks [sic] one another, instead of make a common defense against the enemies."
In sum, the “clarification” changes absolutely nothing of what Bishop Schneider said in praise of SSPX in the original interview:
The Holy See asked me to visit the two [seminaries] of the SSPX…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. 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 the SSPX believes, worship and conducts a moral [life] as it was demanded and recognized by the Supreme Magisterium… 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 behalf of the Holy See. Otherwise the often repeated pastoral and ecumenical openness in the Church of our days will manifestly lose its credibility and the history will one day reproach to the ecclesiastical authorities of our days that they have “laid on the brothers greater burden than required (cf. Acts 15:28), which is contrary to the pastoral method of the Apostles."
Faced with a “clarification” of no use to him in his relentless campaign to persuade his followers that SSPX is “schismatic,” Voris resorts to blatantly false characterizations of the Bishop’s email, inventing affirmations the Bishop never made. Writes Voris (emphasis mine):
  • The issue with SSPX sympathizers who support schism and their attempts to portray Bishop Schnieder as supportive of their cause is that it would place His Excellency at odds with Rome itself and with the Magisterium—a claim he totally rejects."
Bishop Schneider said nothing of schism and did not “totally reject” the claim that he “supports schism” because he does not think there is any schism in the first place. Voris knows this quite well, but here he attempts to hide the truth.
  • He [Bishop Schneider] admits, as do many Catholics not supportive of schism, that there are serious problems in the Church...”
Here Voris deviously and deceptively contrasts Bishop Schneider with Catholics “supportive of schism”—meaning the SSPX—when, as he knows full well,Bishop Schneider himself is supportive of SSPX, sees no schism, and recommends that SSPX be regularized without further ado. Unable to enlist the Bishop in support of his “schism” charge, however, Voris tries to slip it into the Bishop’s “clarification” by means of a shifty innuendo.
  • For SSPX supporters to portray Bishop Schneider as an unquestioning ally is something to which His Excellency objects.”
The Bishop did not “object” to the claim that he is an “unquestioning ally” of SSPX, because no such claim is made. Voris invented the claim and the Bishop’s “objection” in order to spin the—for Voris—useless “clarification” as support for his thoroughly discredited accusation of “schism.” Sorry, Mr. Voris, but this is one duck that won’t lift from the lake. If there was anything left of CMTV’s credibility, it has vanished with this evidence of Voris’s determination to continue his petty vendetta against SSPX, which, as Bishop Schneider actually said, exhibits “a sound theological, spiritual and human reality” and the “sentire cum ecclesia” and that “this should suffice for a canonical recognition of the SSPX on behalf of the Holy See.” Say goodnight, Mr. Voris. No one but the dwindling number of the people you can still fool takes you seriously any longer.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The myth of the Hermeneutic of Continuity - Rorate Caeli

+ JMJ Interestingly the complete acceptance of the Second Vatican Council (without reservations) is required of the SSPX. Just when people are starting to wonder how it came to this! Courtesy of Rorate Caeli P^3

A Look Back: Archbishop Lefebvre’s Prophetic Address to The Remnant, 1976

 + JMJ  Looking back is important to understand why we are where we are in this crisis. Courtesy of RemnantNewsPaper  P^3 FOR THE FIRST TIME ONLINE: Archbishop Lefebvre’s Prophetic Address to The Remnant, 1976 Written by  Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre Introduction by Michael J. Matt More than forty years ago—during the disastrous reign of Pope Paul VI, the latest candidate for a Vatican-issued Halo Award, by the way—my father, Walter L. Matt, organized the first large scale public reception in the U.S. for the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. It was held at the Radisson South Hotel, Minneapolis, on Tuesday, May 12, 1976, and its stated purpose was to assist the Archbishop in gaining a stronger foothold for the Society of St. Pius X in the States during the unprecedented crisis Blessed Pope Paul had helped unleash on the Church. On that occasion Archbishop Lefebvre delivered ...

Of the Church and the Pope - Fr. Calmel O.P.

+ JMJ Once again, looking back to see if the 'Traditional Catholics' in the early days of this crisis of the Church had a sufficient view to realize the roots of the crisis. The root: The Pope Hence when the Pope is 'righted' the Church will be 'righted'. P^3 Courtesy of SSPXasia Fr. Roger Calmel, O.P. This essay by Fr. Roger Calmel, O.P. (1914-75) helps us in these difficult times to preserve our love of the Church. More than 30 years after its first publication, this article retains all its relevance, so much so that it even seems to have been written for our time, in which the crisis in the Church deepens at an unprecedented pace. This essay will help the reader to think clearly, keep the Faith, and maintain serenity in the troubled times we are navigating. “My country has hurt m e,”wrote a young poet in 1944 during the purge 1 when the head of state [Charles De Gaulle] implacably pursued the sinister job that had been in the wo...

Canonical Mission and State of Emergency - A Response to Mr. John Salza - Part B

 +  JMJ  I was trying to think of a way to map out the time course I discussed in Part A of this article.  Early this morning it came to me that this is more about obedience and duty than canon law.  As is my wont, I mapped out my thoughts (see image) to draw linkages between the core concepts. My conclusion is that, at least subjectively, Archbishop Lefebvre had sufficient information to make good decisions concerning whether or not he was obliged to obey.  I know that the Jesuits, some Sedevacantists and the priests that left over the years will not agree with my thoughts. So be it.  The core pieces of information include: Attacks against the SSPX were launched because they kept the Tridentine Mass and the pre-conciliar understanding of the Truths of the Faith. The authorities in the Church were willing to go against the laws of the Church. The same authorities encouraged the various dangers to the Faith embedded in popular interpretations of ambiguo...

Validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations - Courtesy of SSPX.org

+ JMJ In the blogosphere there are number of responses to this crisis in the Catholic Church that lead to conclusions that run counter to Catholic Doctrine and Dogmas - if taken to their logical conclusion. The validity of the New Rite of Episcopal consecrations is one such hotspot within more extreme sections of the 'traditionalist' culture. Validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations Courtesy of SSPX.org Why the new rite of episcopal consecration is valid Introduction This comprehensive study was compiled to settle a debate that has been circulating in traditional Catholic circles. Some writers have examined the new rite of episcopal consecration and concluded that it must be invalid. Since this would cause manifest problems if it were true and due to the heightened awareness of such a theory, we present a study of this question concluding that it is valid. Following the Council, in 1968 a new rite for the ordination of bishops was promulg...