SSPX Marriages and Sundry

JMJ

As the 'distance' between Rome and the SSPX lessens, peoples assumptions are going to be tested.

Why? Because, in this conflict (read: Fog of War), the guiding principles have become obscured or lost.

If decisions are made upon unvalidated assumptions, independent of principles, then mistakes will be made.

An example of a mistake is the letter written in La Chardonnet and signed by 7 priests. In this letter they took it upon themselves to put forth their opinions (it was also read from the pulpit), that could be interpreted as being at odds with that of their superiors.

So, here we hit disobedience again.

Here's the key points from the final paragraph that gives us a hint of the underlying issues.

Personal Prelature ... was supposed to recognize us as we are, and to maintain our independence vis-à-vis the local Ordinaries.
First decisions taken consist in unjustly submitting our marriages to these very Ordinaries
Tomorrow the opening of any new Houses will have to meet their approval

Looking at the first and third point we have the 'independence' from the local ordinaries assumption. What we want it to mean and what it can mean are two different things. I prefer to look at what it can mean.

The geographic delegation of authority is Apostolic. This means you need to be very careful when dealing with it, otherwise we could become little modernists in altering the constitution of the Church.

Changing Church doctrine because of our sentiments or distrust of the persons in places of authority is not a good principle, let alone a Catholic one.

Now to address point 2 and a specific aspect of point 3.

It may be an element of FUD, but it seems that they are hinting at a couple of things, but not being specific.

The core element can be summed up as decisions taken to (in their opinion) unjustly submit SSPX marriages and the opening of new priories to the Ordinaries.

In the both cases they are touching upon submission to an authority that is based in Apostolic tradition.

That is strike one.

In the case of marriages, it is necessary that the local ordinaries are made aware of marriages (and perhaps baptisms, deaths) within their dioceses. This is not submission, this is common Church practice.

That is strike two.

Then there is the underlying issue, the implication that the Superiors are doing something wrong. This would their opinion, however they did not provide any evidence in this case - only inuendo. Invoking the FUD principle is a sure sign that they are dealing out opinions that are based on conjecture.

That is strike three.

So what should we do?

Understand the principles - obedience is good place to start
Study the Faith and seek to understand it in context. Don't proof-text.
Pray. A solid Spiritual Life is essential to attaining and maintaining a Godly perspective on this crisis.

P^3

Comments

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.

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...

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

Tradicat

Search This Blog