SSPX and Conditional Ordinations vs Voris FUD

JMJ

This is a recent accusation by Mr. Voris:

Let's unpack this, shall we?

Even if true, this would not be a 'very definition of Schism'. Michael should know better. It would mean that there is doubt about either the form, matter or intention.
Accepting the authority and obedience to a higher authority are not incompatible.
Conditional ordination does not need 'quotes'. For example, there is a case where a young priest was watching his baptism video and was aghast to discover that the officiating priest seemed to invalidate the Sacrament by messing with it. He has to be conditionally baptized, confirmed and ordained.
The SSPX doesn't automatically re-ordain. There have been priests who had doubts and after an investigation are conditionally ordained privately to address the issue. There are also priests ordained in the modern rite who were not conditionally ordained.

Here's the truth from the SSPX website to remove the sting of Mr. Voris' ignorant accusations, see the link for the full explanation:

Just as the superiors take seriously their duty of guaranteeing the moral certitude of the holy orders of their priests, whether by means of conditional ordination or careful investigation (when possible), so also must priests who join the Society accept conditional ordination in case of even slight positive doubt, and so also must the faithful recognize that each case is different and accept the decision of those who alone are in a position to perform the necessary investigations.https://sspx.org/en/must-priests-who-come-tradition-be-re-ordained

P^3

Comments

The Episcopal Consecrations of 1988, 1991 and 2015 - Some Perspectives

+ JMJ In defense of the recent consecration of Fr. Faure by Bishop Williamson, some have argued that the 1991 consecration of Bishop Rangel (RIP) by the Bishops of the SSPX present an equivalent standard of action and principles. From this they conclude that the SSPX's condemnation of Bishop Williamson's action is flawed as the principles of the 1991 consecration and that of 2015 are equivalent.

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making. It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX. The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience. The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members. It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...

America Magazine: Why liturgy is not a space for self-expression

+ JMJ Introduction I subscribed to Jesuit Review America Magazine in order to improve my perspective on the crisis of the Church. At first, I found that I had a hard time reading through the articles that caught my attention. Actually, at best, I didn't get further than a few sentences. Mostly due to demands on what time I have left on this Good Earth. Then a title caught my eye in a latest article ... someone is saying that the Liturgy is not a space for self-expression. Then there's the Performative Piety? What does this mean? What is Performative Piety? I had a sense that "Performative Piety" is the practice of making external acts of piety to be seen by others and Matthew 6:1 (link) confirms this thought. Let's break down the Knox translation: Be sure you do not perform your acts of piety before men , for them to watch ; if you do that, you have no title to a reward from your Father who is in heaven. If you stopped after the first ph...

SSPXasia Timeline

+ JMJ The SSPXasia website has an excellent compilation of documents. One day I may try to fuse it with my own chronicle project. P^3 https://sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/Archbishop_Lefebvre_and_the_Vatican/Part_I/ (1987) June 29: Ordination Sermon of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre July 8: Letter of Archbishop Lefebvre to Cardinal Ratzinger July 28: Letter of Cardinal Ratzinger to Archbishop Lefebvre October 1: Letter of Archbishop Lefebvre to Cardinal Ratzinger October ...

Canonical Mission and State of Emergency - A Response to Mr. John Salza - Part B

+ JMJ I was trying to think of a way to map out the time course I discussed in Part A of this article. Early this morning it came to me that this is more about obedience and duty than canon law. As is my wont, I mapped out my thoughts (see image) to draw linkages between the core concepts. My conclusion is that, at least subjectively, Archbishop Lefebvre had sufficient information to make good decisions concerning whether or not he was obliged to obey. I know that the Jesuits, some Sedevacantists and the priests that left over the years will not agree with my thoughts. So be it. The core pieces of information include: Attacks against the SSPX were launched because they kept the Tridentine Mass and the pre-conciliar understanding of the Truths of the Faith. The authorities in the Church were willing to go against the laws of the Church. The same authorities encouraged the various dangers to the Faith embedded in popular interpretations of ambiguo...

Tradicat

Search This Blog