Skip to main content

SSPX Marriages and Sundry

Image
By
+
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.
  1.  Personal Prelature ... was supposed to recognize us as we are, and to maintain our independence vis-à-vis the local Ordinaries.
  2. First decisions taken consist in unjustly submitting our marriages to these very Ordinaries
  3. 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?


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

P^3







Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Rome,the SSPX and this time of Crisis - Updated

By
+ 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
30 comments
Read more

A Reply to Martin Blackshaw’s FLAWED Remnant article titled: FLAWED: SSPX Advice on Abortion-tainted Vaccines

By
 + 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...
25 comments
Read more

Rorate-Caeli URGENT: Pope tells Italian Bishops he plans to abolish the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum

By
 + JMJ  Now THIS is probably the most important news item in the last two years - yes I place this above the pandemic. I'm only surprised by how long it took for this to surface during this pontificate. I hope and pray that it is false or that if it comes to pass that somehow some good will arise out of the ashes of Summorum Pontificum. P^3  Courtesy of Rorate-Caeli URGENT: Pope tells Italian Bishops he plans to abolish the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum (Updated) Update (May 26): Rorate's additional sources in Rome have confirmed this Wednesday that Francis has indeed a text on Summorum Pontificum lined up, which has been developed for months, but what is not known at this point is if the text is just about a more limited take on the Summorum application questionnaire (first revealed by us in the spring of 2020) or about an overhaul of Summorum Pontificum in general: drafts could be dealing with both matters. It is also not impossible for a text to come ou...
9 comments
Read more

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

By
+ 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...
16 comments
Read more

The Vatican and SSPX – An Organizational Culture Perspective

By
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.
17 comments
Read more