Skip to main content

Ecumenism: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly (SSPX.ca)

 +
JMJ

 What should a Catholic think about ecumenism?

Well ... rationally is depends on what one means by ecumenism!

 P^3

Source: SSPX.ca

 

Ecumenism: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

During the week of January 18 – 25, Catholics are pressed to join with prayer gatherings for Christian Unity. On its website, the Archdiocese of Toronto is inviting the faithful to join with a virtual prayer service for Christian unity, that will be livestreamed because of Covid-19. Cardinal Thomas Collins, Archbishop of Toronto, will attend that service, to be held at The Salvation Army’s Agincourt Community. David Wells, General Superintendent of The Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada, will be the homilist.

This event at home is far from being isolated as, for decades, ecumenical gatherings invaded the landscape of the Modern Catholic Church. Mainstream Catholics are so used to such ecumenical gatherings up to the point to completely forget that, up to the Council Vatican II, attendance to such ecumenical gatherings was strictly forbidden to them.

Why such prohibition? Because such ecumenical gatherings give the impression that the other ‘churches’ are on the same level as the Catholic Church. Ultimately, it destroys the faith in the Catholic Church, the only True Church, out of which there is no salvation.

So, let us focus on what is Ecumenism and what we should think about it. To answer these questions, I am using notes written by a good friend of mine, father of a large family, who described in a funny way the three types of Ecumenism: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. Modernists tend to play with the meaning of words, taking a perfectly Catholic word and applying a new non-Catholic meaning to it.  As you can see, the word 'Ecumenism' has suffered the same fate.

Fr. Dominique Boulet
 

1. The Good Ecumenism

An example of the Good Ecumenism can be found in the encyclical of Pius XI - Mortalium Animos (1928) in articles 10: “So, Venerable Brethren, it is clear why this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics: for the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it. To the one true Church of Christ, we say, which is visible to all, and which is to remain, according to the will of its Author, exactly the same as He instituted it.

Similar pleas have been made by Leo XIII, Pius XII and other pontiffs up to the Second Vatican Council. In the present age of the Church, this is commonly called the "Ecumenism of return".  This is the Good.

2. The Bad Ecumenism

In the late 19th and early 20th century, a movement with the desire to achieve 'Christian Unity' was founded.  While the members of this movement were well intentioned, the organization was founded upon flawed principles.   It is these flawed principles that Pius XI condemned in Mortalium Animos, particularly since equally well-meaning Catholics were beginning to participate in the movement.  These principles were so flawed that Pius XI called them "a most grave error, by which the foundations of the Catholic faith are completely destroyed".  In short, the movement made a distinction between fundamental truths and optional truths.

As this form of Ecumenism was outside the Church of Christ, it is The Bad.
 

3. The Ugly Ecumenism

The third form of Ecumenism is, for all purposes, identical to 'The Bad'.  The key difference is that, like a virus, it has infected the Mystical Body of Christ, the "true Church of Jesus Christ, which is the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church" (Mystici Corporis - Pius XII).

Years ago, I firsthand witness the damage done by the virus of the Ugly Ecumenism. Along with a group of traditional faithful, I attended a lecture given by Professor Catherine E. Clifford on Ecumenism.  In this lecture we were provided an example of how Ecumenism currently manifests itself within the Bride of Christ.

In the first conference it was made clear that Ecumenism within the Church had shifted from "Ecumenism of return" to "Ecumenism of recognition". In the second conference, on 'Where is the Church of Christ', Prof. Clifford sounded the alarm that there has occurred a "subtle slippage ... [back] to an ecumenism of return, to one that is more ecclesial and Roman centric than the Christo centric ecumenism of recognition fostered by the Second Vatican Council."

Herein lies the problem, how can one have Christo-centric ecumenism without reference to the One, Holy, Catholic and Roman Catholic Church that Christ founded?  According to Catholic Dogma, one cannot.

This form of Ecumenism has, marred the clear face of the Church of Christ. This Ecumenism is simply, The Ugly.

From a traditional Catholic father

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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...