Skip to main content

Overcomplicating Simple Things and Oversimplifying Complicated Things

Image
By
+
JMJ


It occurred to me that sometimes people go and make things really complicated - that should be kept simple.

For example: Dogma.

You can't be Catholic if you deny Catholic Dogma.

It is that simple.

Next example: Doctrine

If you deviate from Catholic Doctrine, then you are almost certainly on the wrong path.

Also simple.

Next example: Is the SSPX is in schism?

Well technically the opinion is that they are "not in full communion"  This however is not a simple situation as you have to look at a number of elements ... such as:


  1. What does 'not in full communion' mean.  Since V2 the Church has used this term to describe the protestants and I believe even the orthodox ... and now the SSPX.
  2. However when asked specifically if they were in a formal state of schism we get "not in full communion".  Meaning that there is a sliding scale of membership in the Catholic Church ... which is as wrong as the thought that there is a grey area between venial and mortal sin.
  3. What constitutes a schismatic act?
  4. What about canon law?
The list goes on ...


So this isn't as simple as in order to answer the question ... you have to determine the answer to a bunch of other questions:
  1. Was the SSPX warned that the canonical consequence of the episcopal consecration would be schism? Answer: Nope
  2. Does an episcopal consecration without papal authority consitute a schismatic act? Answer: Nope
  3. Did Archbishop Lefebvre intend to create a parallel church? Answer: Nope
  4. Did the Pope have a trial and declare that a schism had occurred? Answer: Nope. He said that Archbishop Lefebvre had excommunicated himself via the law.
  5. Are the Bishops of the SSPX excommunicated? Answer:  If they ever were they definitely aren't now . Of course the case can be made that Bishop Williamson is under excommunication etc.
  6. Can priests in schism offer the sacraments licitly?  Well, I don't think so ... but the SSX priests can licitly confess and marry people ...

So where possible, keep things simple if there is a central principle. Otherwise make certain that there aren't more questions that can be investigated.

P^3

Labels:

Comments

  1. UnknownAugust 20, 2019 at 6:07 PM

    Hi P^3
    Help me straighten out a friend, can you please get me the Vatican documentation saying that the Bishops were not guilty of excommunication, my friend thinks the Vatican still considered all guilty but removed the excommunication of the 4 Bishops as a sign of good will. Thanks
    A.S.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Communiqué on the Meeting between Cardinal Ladaria and Fr. Pagliarani

By
+ JMJ I suspect that the 'resistance' will be freaking out about this ... but as with the Archbishop, when Rome calls ... they go ... even if just to let them know (again) why they do what they do. Concerning the alleged 'sell-out' I have this to say: I should update the meme ... with 2017, 18 etc. The 'resistors' should stop and think a little: We are in the 18th year of the latest sell-out frenzy. So we're still waiting. Try and reconcile the 'resistance' positions with the Catholic Faith. If it doesn't objectively sync up - admit that you're wrong and take appropriate action. I have also attached some commentary from CFN. P^3 Courtesy of FSSPX.news Courtesy of Catholic Family News Communiqué on the Meeting between Cardinal Ladaria and Fr. Pagliarani November 24, 2018 By Eucharistic Crusade The Palace of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith i...
2 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

What Archbishop Lefebvre Said About the New Mass - SSPX.org

By
+ JMJ The New Mass is many things and one thing that it is is ambiguous.  While there are a few Catholic elements in the Novus Ordo, but even those are lost in the morass of protestant simulation. It truly is a case of : P^3 Courtesy of SSPX.org: What Archbishop Lefebvre said about the New Mass
Post a Comment
Read more

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

Does the SSPX 'Reject the conclusions of the Second Vatican Council'? (Updated 2026-08-03)

By
 + JMJ Update: Dr. Lamont, in a Rorate article (link) , pointed out that : It is notable that the profession does not reject any text of the Second Vatican Council, but only states that the influence of the Council promoted deviations from the faith. Catholics may hold that the influence of an ecumenical council was noxious in some respects. It is only the authoritative teachings of a council that demand their assent; they do not have to approve of all the historical results that it led to. One may, for example, reasonably hold that the definitions of papal infallibility and universal jurisdiction of the First Vatican Council led to an exaggerated and harmful conception of papal power, while accepting the definitions themselves. Further what the SSPX actually wrote (link) : I acknowledge in particular that modern errors represent a dreadful threat to the whole of the Catholic order, and that their penetration into the life of the Church, under the influence of the Second Vatican ...
Post a Comment
Read more