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

Count Capponi - RIP

+ JMJ I had heard of Count Capponi over the years and was happy to hear a voice crying in the wilderness. I suspect that his conscience was clearer than many. This part of the article caught my attention: Capponi defended the right of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre to continue his work without the label “schismatic,” which term Capponi rejected, saying: “You cannot apply the standards of the new code of canon law and the mentality of the old code. According to the new code, Lefebvre could do what he did with a Catholic intention, and he did what he did in ‘sincerity’ and invoked the ‘state of emergency’ argument, which the new code permits. You might not like the new code, but it’s what governs the Church.” I know a few people who tried to stir up a fuss when the SSPX cited the New Code in one of the documents with Rome. Yet, the truth is what it is --- the New Code was promulgated by a reigning Pope and flawed as it is ... there are some benefits to its liberality. ...

Is it sinful to attend the Novus Ordo (New Mass) - Is it Sinful to Not Attend the Novus Ordo on Sunday?

+ JMJ A non-SSPX Catholic is upset over the SSPX statements on not attending the Novus Ordo Missae. Ladies and gentlemen, what the SSPX, or at least its website editor, is advocating is a mortal sin against the Third Commandment. Unless the priest deviates from the language of the Sacramentary, the consecration, and thus the rest of Mass is to be considered valid. No one may elect not to attend Mass simply because abuses are occurring therein. Might I suggest that such absenteeism is its own abuse? The Third Commandment binds under mortal sin. Father So-And-So from the SSPX has no authority whatsoever to excuse attendance at Mass, be that Mass ever so unpalatable. Source:Restore DC Catholicism Well, this is interesting. First why does the SSPX issue this statement? Because it is sinful to put your faith in danger by attending a protestant service. It is likewise dangerous to put your faith in danger by attending a protestantized ma...

Those who return to the past are not outside the Church - Rorate Caeli

+ JMJ I had been thinking about putting together a post explaining some of the history of how the SSPX has arrived at its current position. Now I see that Rorate has posted a translated editorial that shows the roots of the SSPX principles. In reading these words, I see patterns and themes that were put forward by Archbishop Lefebvre decades ago. Perhaps his sight was clearer than most. P^3

Fr. Burfitt on Fr. Pfeiffer's Attempted Consecration

+ JMJ Amidst the shadows cast by the publication of Traditionis Custodes, I am working on a map of the 'resistance' splinters to put their reaction in contrast with that of the SSPX. In the midst of this, I just came across Fr. Burfitt letter on the attempted consecration. Breaking it down (see below) items 2 and 3 are key. Just as the consecrating bishop is 'doubtful', even if he hadn't muffed the first attempt, Fr. Pfeiffer remain doubtful and therefore this impacts those men is attempts to 'ordain'. There were rumours that Fr. Pfeiffer was seeking episcopal consecration for years as he cast about for various bishops (also doubtful) to help him achieve this goal. I wonder how he convinced the 'doubtful' bishop to provide (twice) the doubtful consecration. What a mess! This creates a danger to the souls of his followers and wonder where it will end. Will he go full sede and have himself 'elected' pontiff as others have done before him...

SSPX Transfers

+ JMJ Eponymous flow posted the following list of transfers etc. Source: http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2020/04/castling-of-leadership-at-sspx.html The departures Bishop Bernard Fellay, the third Superior General until 2018, leaves the General House in Menzingen and moves to the Seminary of St. Thomas Aquinas in the USA. Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, suffering from ill health, is being referred to the Seminary of St. Pius X in Ecene as a retreat. Fr. Christian Thouvenot, until now Secretary General of the General House, becomes a professor at the seminary in Ecene. Fr. Franz Schmidberger, until now Rector at the Seminary of the Heart of Jesus in Zaitzkofen, moves to the district of Germany. Fr. Jürgen Wegner, until now district superior of the DISTRICT USA, moves to the district of Austria. Fr. Philippe Brunet, until now Superior of the Autonomous House of Spain-Portugal, becomes professor at the Seminary U.L.F. and co-saviour of La Reja in...

Tradicat

Search This Blog