Just in case you suspected that the SSPX was going to compromise ... Was Early Church Tolerant of Divorce

JMJ

While the head of the CDF issues unofficial statements in 'response' to the Cardinal's dubia - the SSPX promotes the Truth.

Funny that.

My belief is that when the SSPX is granted a no-compromise, Accept Us As We Are, "regularization" , something will have dramatically changed in Rome.

Even if we can't see it.

After all, we're edging into the 17th year of the Rome / SSPX discussions and upto 2012 Rome was consistent in its Mantra: Accept the Council, Accept the New Mass, Accept the Post-Conciliar Magisterium ... etc.

The SSPX has stated clearly - nope - not going to compromise.

Rome is the ones who are slowly shifting and vacillating on their mantra.

Me thinks this is a good thing!!!

P^3

Courtesy of SSPX.org

Many argue falsely that following Christ's example of mercy, Penance and Eucharist should not be denied to the divorced & remarried.

The Example of Christ

Objection

The Gospels relate that during His life on earth, Christ accepted to eat with sinners (Matt. 9:11), allowed a sinful woman to approach Him during a meal (Luke 7:37), and conversed with the Samaritan woman who was living with a man who was not her husband (John 4:9,18,27). Now refusing the sacraments to the divorced and remarried amounts to keeping them away from Christ who “will have all men to be saved” (I Tim. 2:4). In keeping with the saying sacramenta propter homines, it would be right to facilitate access to the sacraments for all men, including the divorced and remarried.

Answer

The objective of Christ’s contacts with sinners in the Gospel was to call them to conversion (Matt. 9:12-13), to forgive their sins (Luke 7:47-48) and to establish the cult in spirit and in truth (John 4:23). While Jesus did not condemn the adulteress, He did bid her to sin no more (John 8:11), for “adulterers shall not possess the kingdom of God” (I Cor. 6:9).

The sacraments were instituted for men, but they must receive them with the required dispositions: repentance for sins for the sacraments of the dead1 - including penance – and the state of grace for the sacraments of the living – including the Eucharist. If the divorced and remarried persons do not intend to renounce carnal commerce, they lack these dispositions and the sacraments of the Eucharist and penance cannot be administered to them without a sacrilege.

St. Paul preaching the Gospels - Raphael (courtesy Restored Traditions)

St. Paul’s Reproaches to the Corinthians

Objection

St. Paul reproached the Corinthians for their faults against charity in their fraternal agapes, where “one indeed is hungry and another is drunk” (I Cor. 11:21). Now the present discipline maintains the obligation for all faithful to sanctify the Lord’s day by assisting at Mass, but excludes some of them – in particular the divorced and remarried – from communion. This lack of charity is in urgent need of a remedy.

Answer

Christ instituted the sacrament of the Eucharist and taught the precept of fraternal charity during the Last Supper. That is why the early Church kept the habit of combining the celebration of the sacred mysteries with fraternal agapes. In his reproaches to the Corinthians, St. Paul clearly distinguished between those who go against fraternal charity during these agapes (I Cor. 11:18-22) and those who communicate with the wrong dispositions during the liturgy (I Cor. 11:27-29).

While the Church orders all the faithful to assist at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass every Sunday1, she places them under no obligation to receive communion every time. All the faithful are called to unite themselves to the sacrifice of Calvary renewed sacramentally on the altars: some to free themselves of the chains of mortal sin, others to continue to progress in the life of charity. But, without prejudice for the frequent communion encouraged by the Church2, only the faithful in the state of grace can receive the sacrament of the Eucharist fruitfully.

In a previous article, we explained how Church teaching about the conditions for Confession and Communion comes from Christ and the Apostles. They are consequent with the life of charity, God’s life given to us through Baptism, and the promise of eternal beatitude.

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

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.

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...

If Pope Francis is bad - what about Pope St. John Paul II et al?

+ JMJ So here we are on the apparent cusp of yet another post conciliar Papal canonization. This time we have Pope's John-Paul I and Paul VI canonizations to 'look forward' to. This follows, obviously, on the heels of Pope St. John Paul II's canonization? So the first question that I usually encounter is: How is it possible, keeping in mind the doctrine on infallibility of canonizations (note doctrine not dogma), that Pope St. John Paul II is a Saint? First, what does it mean??? According to the doctrine of dogmatic facts - it is the universal opinion of Theologians that canonizations are infallible. It means that they enjoy the beatific vision. ... that's it. That is the doctrine and it is at the level of universal opinion of theologians. It is called a 'dogmatic fact'. That they made mistakes is obvious. That the miracles seem to not be very miraculous is also a bit of an issue. Here's something to consider: The rush that surrou...

Tradicat

Search This Blog