Skip to main content

Reality check: Church Militant faq on the sspx

+
JMJ



I decided to go and see if Church Militant's "FAQ" on the SSPX had been updated.

First the opening barrage ...
The position of ChurchMilitant.com concerning the SSPX is that of the Holy Father, Emeritus Pope Benedict XVI, as expressed in the motu proprio Ecclesiae Unitatem, issued July 2, 2009:
In the same spirit and with the same commitment to encouraging the resolution of all fractures and divisions in the Church and to healing a wound in the ecclesial fabric that was more and more painfully felt, I wished to remit the excommunication of the four Bishops illicitly ordained by Archbishop Lefebvre. With this decision I intended to remove an impediment that might have jeopardized the opening of a door to dialogue and thereby to invite the Bishops and the "Society of St. Pius X" to rediscover the path to full communion with the Church​. As I explained in my Letter to the Catholic Bishops of last 10 March, the remission of the excommunication was a measure taken in the context of ecclesiastical discipline to free the individuals from the burden of conscience constituted by the most serious of ecclesiastical penalties. However, the doctrinal questions obviously remain and until they are clarified the Society has no canonical status in the Church and its ministers cannot legitimately exercise any ministry. (emphasis added) 
The SSPX bishops were excommunicated and their illicit consecrations defined as schismatic in the motu proprio Ecclesia Dei issued July 2, 1988. The excommunications have been lifted, but the canonical status of the SSPX remains unchanged.
There are two important points here:
1. The SSPX is not in full communion with the Church and is invited by the Church to rediscover this path.
2. The SSPX has no canonical status in the Church and its ministers cannot legitimately exercise any ministry.
Tradical: Wow, so their entire position is based on a 10 year old document. Seriously?  Much has transpired since then. We always have to ask ... what does "not full communion" mean? Is it the same as the protestants and orthodox? 
The SSPX, for all its many good qualities, does not consist of faithful Roman Catholics because communion with the Chair of Peter is a constitutive part of Roman Catholicism — something the SSPX accepts in principle but rejects in practice. The SSPX has "no canonical status," "no legitimate ministry," is "invited to rediscover the path to full communion," has no faculties from any bishop, is not part of the divinely ordained hierarchical structure of the Church, and all its priests are suspended a divinis. No individual or group can seriously claim to be Catholic and have all this true of themselves.
Tradical:  Ok, so a Catholic attends the SSPX for the Sacraments ... say confession ... and suddenly they are no longer "faithful Roman Catholics"?  Because "communion with the Chair of Peter" is somehow broken?  I guess they have jumped from "not full communion" to "schismatic". This is really old news and addressed in detail over the decades since the consecrations of 1988.  Where to start ...

First, there was no schismatic act. Changing a law to find someone guilty after the fact doesn't work in civil law and it doesn't work in canon law.    I wrote to the CDF looking for an official clarification on whether or not the SSPX is in schism and all I got back was the 'not in full communion' mantra (see article here) .  If the CDF could have stated that the SSPX was in a state of formal schism, they would have.  So "not in full communion" is a catch all for schism, heretic and ... no canoncial status.

Second, we have Pope Francis giving world wide jurisdiction to the SSPX for confession and the ability for the local ordinaries to provide jurisdiction for marriages.  This completely contradicts CMTV's statement above.  In short, if Pope Francis makes a juridical decision that doesn't break the requirements for obedience, then obedience is not optional (see this article series).
We are well aware of ongoing dialogue between the SSPX and Rome. It is to be fervently hoped that this dialogue results in a return of the SSPX to full communion with the Church, granting its bishops and clergy canonical status and the authority to exercise ministry. Reconciliation of the SSPX with the Church would be a great blessing for the Church but most especially for the SSPX. The SSPX has consistently refused the most generous and magnanimous invitations from the Church to reconcile and place itself under the authority of the Vicar of Christ, rejecting his dogmatically defined "full power of shepherding, ruling and governing the universal Church," a power "ordinary and immediate over all the churches and over each and every member of the faithful" ("The Pope Exercises Supreme Jurisdiction" [Original Italian here]).
Tradical:  Well this is interesting as the "dialogue" continues, as noted above with various concessions being made to the SSPX.  Beyond this we have to remember that the reason that the SSPX is denied a canonical status is the 'manta' (see this article).
Perhaps the SSPX fears it will be crushed by an unsympathetic hierarchy and pope. Perhaps it is justified in such fearful apprehensions. But there is precedent in the history of the Church — in the lives of the saints, in the life of Our Lord Himself — for risking or allowing oneself to be crushed by obedience. Until such time as the SSPX chooses to reconcile with the Church, ChurchMilitant.com must support the judgment of the Holy Father and the Church concerning its status.

Tradical: Well I think that a little history of CMTV's existence might serve as a useful example.  When Voris first launched his independent apostolate, it was called: Real Catholic TV.  

Here's an extract from Wikipedia:
St. Michael's Media is a 501(c)(3) organization which operates in the State of Michigan under the officially-registered assumed name of Church Militant via the website ChurchMilitant.com. Church Militant is a Catholic lay apostolate and traditional Catholic news website founded by Michael Voris. It was known as Real Catholic TV until 2012, when the Archdiocese of Detroit notified Michael Voris and Real Catholic TV that "it does not regard them as being authorized to use the word 'Catholic' to identify or promote their public activities". Mr. Voris responded by changing the name to Church Militant. While Church Militant makes use of a paywall and offers premium content to subscribers, the website's most well known feature is its free segment The Vortex, simulcast on YouTube and hosted by Voris. As of December 2018, 34 employees create videos and write content for Church Militant.
 If I remember correctly, they even relocated their operations.

So they aren't authorized to use the word "Catholic" to identify themselves.  Hence the attempt to inflict the same punishment upon the SSPX ... who by the way was founded canonically in the truest sense. Voris et al are "persecuted" and their response is to simply relocate and change their name, all in the name of exposing the truth.

Hmmmm, there are some similarities here but I guess they are lost on Voris et al.

We know why the SSPX has been persecuted and the distinction that is missed by Voris et al in citing saintly examples is simply this: What was at stake was not the Catholic Faith.  True obedience does not require us to abandon the truth, such as that the Tridentine Mass was never abrogated.

The reason why the SSPX is still in a canonical grey zone is precisely for the same reason that CMTV no longer calls itself RealCatholicTV.

The Truth.

P^3

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What is Tradition?

 + JMJ What Is Tradition? The basic premise, from my perspective, is that what was taught before cannot be contradicted by the 'present' magisterium, only deepened and expanded upon. I recall the Roman theologians called the SSPX protestants while the SSPX called them modernists.  I believe this was all surrounding the concept of Traditon. SSPX's Understanding of Tradition One accusation made against the SSPX is that they don't have a correct understanding of 'Tradition'.  This is how the SSPX understands Tradition: I finally profess that Tradition is not a dead memory, but the living transmission of the doctrine received from the Apostles. It remains living, in distinction to Revelation, which is closed. It is so both in the activity of the Magisterium of the Teaching Church and in the profession of Faith of the Church Taught, of which the sentire cum Ecclesia is the result of the teaching of the Magisterium. Tradition may be called ‘living’, not in the sense t...

SSPX.ca: What is the position of the SSPX on Vatican II???

 + JMJ With all the mis-information about the SSPX rejecting the Second Vatican Council, I thought it would be useful to publish an article that focuses on the real issues that the SSPX has identified. Update: Why Did the SSPX Consecrate Bishops? ( Neither Schismatic, Nor Disobedient link ) In the linked document the SSPX outlined the key motivation and core issues with Vatican II and the post-conciliar magisterium (see above link for full document): 4. The Society Acted Precisely Because of the State of Necessity in Which the Faith Finds Itself  In the present situation of the Church, if the Society of Saint Pius X had not carried out the consecrations of July 1st, it would have found itself facing an inevitable alternative: either to disappear gradually, or to accept, at least in fact, the new liturgy as well as the false doctrines of Vatican II and the post-council. Without the consecrations of July 1st, the Fraternity would have found itself, in a few years, without bishop...

Thoughts on: Finding Common Ground Between Rome and the SSPX

 + JMJ In the ramp up to the consecrations the noise floor in the intergnat grew to a constant din.  This was one of the few the peeped its signal over the noise. https://crisismagazine.com/opinion/finding-common-ground-between-rome-and-the-sspx The key issue is contained in this paragraph: In the lead-up to the planned July 1, 2026, episcopal consecrations,  the SSPX rejected Rome’s offer  of doctrinal dialogue on the grounds that “we both know in advance that we cannot agree doctrinally, particularly regarding the fundamental orientations adopted since the Second Vatican Council.” Fr. Pagliarani also said that his previous attempt at dialogue in 2019 was shut down by Rome because of an assumed irreconcilability. It seems that, from the Society’s perspective, and perhaps from Rome’s too, their positions are incompatible. If memory serves, Rome killed any opportunity for an open discussion by stating that Vatican II was not up for debate. So it was a still-birth and ...

Thoughts on the Thoughts of a former SSPX priest

 + JMJ Well Gary Campbell, former SSPX Priest and now laicised has posted a new article on WherePeterIs. https://wherepeteris.com/thoughts-of-a-former-sspx-priest-on-the-july-1-consecrations/ These words stuck out: Heck, they have built a five-star hotel, wine bar, and Walmart on the opposite bank of the Rubicon! They are not in danger of entering a state of schism, for they are  already  in a state of schism. I believe he doth protest too much. All the actual facts indicate that the SSPX was not in a state of schism before July 1st and an examination of the decree of excommunication highlights the either ineptitude of those in charge or a desire to leave the barn door open. The chasm between an act of disobedience and act of schism remains just what is has always been - an inconvenient barrier that person(s) in Rome seek to bridge but appear incapable of succeeding. The SSPX re-stated that they recognize the Pope as the Vicar of Christ and feel obliged by conscience...

The News is an Addiction ...

 + JMJ People seem to be mesmerised by train wrecks.   They just can't turn away as the disaster creeps forward along train tracks towards the crossing where a car, truck, bus, trailer awaits its destruction. Trads have been watching the train wreck that is this crisis of the Catholic Church for decades. The trade war between the Canada and the US has reminded me that the news is addictive.   The first time I was addicted what from 2009 to  2014 when I was closely following the Rome / SSPX discussions.  I was at work watching a live-stream as Bishop Fellay disappeared into the Vatican. The lead-up to this moment had been intense as the 'resistance' got freaked out and the cultural cracks between doctrine and conspiracy theory widened. In the decade since then other things have emerged, wars, rumours of wars, conspiracies, celebrity Catholics etc. Now we have a new addiction and its name is Trump. Lately, no matter how much I try, I find myself wonderin...