Jan 21 Bp Williamson column
#51
(01-23-2012, 09:52 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(01-23-2012, 01:41 AM)calicatholic Wrote: It's very convenient to say " well, we're outside of the authority of the Church, so we're immune from needing to conform to the errors".  I think the real danger is that the longer this situation exists - now a full generation - you will have Catholics who grow up in the SSPX Church who know nothing but that, and are so alienated from other Catholics that they cling to SSPX-only Masses.  This is the attitude of schism that must be avoided.  The longer it goes on the higher the chance of a split between some of the SSPX clergy and lay Catholics from the Church.  I really hope this does not happen.

You may not agree or like the changes in the Church in the last 40 years, but lay NO Catholics ARE Catholic.  It's as simple as that.  It is NOT a new religion.  To say so is to call the Pope a leader of a new religion.  There is only one Pope, and he sits in Rome, and leads the Church that the SSPX refuses to submit authority to.  It's a very fine line that could quickly take a perilous path.  I dread the day half of the SSPX becomes sedevacantist.

I can't comment on your use of the word "crisis".  You'd have to define it.  I would call the fact that some (not all) SSPX Catholics shun or mock or look down upon NO Catholics, or any non-traditional Catholics, including genuine truth seeking Catholics on CAF which happens frequently here, a crisis.  This non-charitable prideful attitude only increases the divide.  I can't blame some lay Catholics - they are just repeating the attitude given to them from the pulpit.

I know I don't have the solution, but I suspect that neither your nor Bishop Williamson does either.  But if we both act in charity and pray the Rosary maybe the solution will present itself.  It is certainly not as simple as saying "Rome we think you are wrong so we are going to choose to ignore your authority until we think you are right".  That's not the way it works.

Very well stated, Calicath. 

I used to have my son at an SSPX school. He told me about a conversation among the students where they asked, "What religion would you want to be if you couldn't be Catholic?"  At least one of them said, "Novus Ordo."

When people are raising their children to think of "Novus Ordo" as a religion - one that is not Catholic- something is very wrong.

Did I miss something? Is this something new? I think you'll find people have been saying this for the last 30 years or so, certainly the Novus Ordo can be seen as a different religion in the sense as it has been so so contaminated by modernism that it is no longer recognisable as the Catholic faith. The disrespect with which Our Eucharistic Lord is treated, the woeful understanding of the Mass and The Sacrament of Penance as well as the denial of the Social Reign of Christ effectively underline this point.

It is important to point out however that the SSPX does not claim to be 'The Church' and has emphasised that point repeatedly.
Reply
#52
(01-23-2012, 10:01 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(01-23-2012, 09:52 PM)JayneK Wrote: When people are raising their children to think of "Novus Ordo" as a religion - one that is not Catholic- something is very wrong.

Did I miss something? Is this something new? I think you'll find people have been saying this for the last 30 years or so, certainly the Novus Ordo can be seen as a different religion in the sense as it has been so so contaminated by modernism that it is no longer recognisable as the Catholic faith. The disrespect with which Our Eucharistic Lord is treated, the woeful understanding of the Mass and The Sacrament of Penance as well as the denial of the Social Reign of Christ effectively underline this point.

It is important to point out however that the SSPX does not claim to be 'The Church' and has emphasised that point repeatedly.

It is recognizable as Catholic by millions upon millions of people.  There are some who refuse to recognize it.  That does not mean it is not recognizable.

The SSPX does not officially claim to be the Church, but there are many who, by their words and actions, show this to be their belief.  And this is why people are asking questions about "schismatic attitude".  It is a huge problem and pretending it doesn't exist does not effectively address the problem.
Reply
#53
(01-23-2012, 10:43 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(01-23-2012, 10:01 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(01-23-2012, 09:52 PM)JayneK Wrote: When people are raising their children to think of "Novus Ordo" as a religion - one that is not Catholic- something is very wrong.

Did I miss something? Is this something new? I think you'll find people have been saying this for the last 30 years or so, certainly the Novus Ordo can be seen as a different religion in the sense as it has been so so contaminated by modernism that it is no longer recognisable as the Catholic faith. The disrespect with which Our Eucharistic Lord is treated, the woeful understanding of the Mass and The Sacrament of Penance as well as the denial of the Social Reign of Christ effectively underline this point.

It is important to point out however that the SSPX does not claim to be 'The Church' and has emphasised that point repeatedly.

It is recognizable as Catholic by millions upon millions of people.  There are some who refuse to recognize it.  That does not mean it is not recognizable.

The SSPX does not officially claim to be the Church, but there are many who, by their words and actions, show this to be their belief.  And this is why people are asking questions about "schismatic attitude".  It is a huge problem and pretending it doesn't exist does not effectively address the problem.

It wouldn't matter if millions of people did or didn't recognise it, that wouldn't make it any or less true. You appear to be committing what I like to call the 'Democratic' logical fallacy, namely the idea that lots of people believing something makes it true or vice versa or even more likely to be or not to be true, this is illogical something is either true or not and belief in it or lack thereof does not change this.

As for the so called huge problem, No, there are perhaps a few people who believe and others who make comments liable to be misinterpreted. People who don't like the faith like to exaggerate these comments and make a big deal out of them, they also like to invent terms like 'Schismatic attitude', 'Schismatic trajectory' and so on and forth. Ultimately these completely false accusations have been flying around for the last 40 years or so, perhaps if Rome spent more time dealing with the real schismatics i.e the eastern orthodox churches and less in playing polemics with faithful Catholics it would have reconciled them to the faith by now.

The attitude of those who make up these words is further hypocritical, in that they cause a problem, by illegally suppressing the society, persecuting priests and faithful who celebrate or attend the TLM, and those who are Orthodox and then when these people feel 'excluded' from the Church they go ' See, I told you so, they're all a bunch of schismatics!'. Such blatant hypocrisy will be severely punished by Our Lord in the next world and indeed has been in this world, the lunatic groups of priests and theologians would have died out a long time ago if the SSPX had never been kicked out of the 'formal' structure of the Church, of course however this does not bother the liberals who infest the hierarchy who love things just the way they are.
Reply
#54
Let's look at this from the other side. 

(01-23-2012, 10:43 PM)JayneK Wrote: It is recognizable as Catholic by millions upon millions of people.

You know that any Church nowadays is "recognizably Catholic" along a sliding scale. One parish doesn't look, behave or believe like another parish. 

Quote:There are some who refuse to recognize it.  That does not mean it is not recognizable.

That can easily be said about the crisis liberal dissenters (who call themselves recognizably Catholic as well) who inject a small amount of heresy into their beliefs, but since they wear a collar or don't go too far, parisioners don't "recognize" the problem.  Eventually they don't want to recognize orthodox belief or heretical belief for what it is. 

Quote: The SSPX does not officially claim to be the Church, but there are many who, by their words and actions, show this to be their belief.

Take that standard and apply it to the Holy Father and the recent Popes. Judge him by his deeds, words and actions and compare that to the "official claims."

Look at what the bishops in communion offically claim and what they actually do.  Look at the priests and look at the people in the pews.

Quote:  And this is why people are asking questions about "schismatic attitude".

The question people should be asking is why the lack of a "schismatic attitude" in the liberal parishes? Isn't the fact that they often hate the Church openly and are not considered "schismatic" in their attitude a problem?

Quote:  It is a huge problem and pretending it doesn't exist does not effectively address the problem.

If that is a huge problem, then the problem in the conciliar part of the Church dwarfs it.

When the de facto disunity of the parishes and the heirarchy is repaired regarding, what they actually believe and how they live it, then, the SSPX's much smaller problem can be dealt with automatically because the SSPX will be indistinguishable from normal parishes. 

Bishop Fellay has said to Rome: "solve your problem and we will be no problem" 

Bishop Williamson has said, "The job of the Society is to put itself out of business." 

Reply
#55
Quote:
Quote:The SSPX does not officially claim to be the Church, but there are many who, by their words and actions, show this to be their belief.

Take that standard and apply it to the Holy Father and the recent Popes. Judge him by his deeds, words and actions and compare that to the "official claims."

Look at what the bishops in communion offically claim and what they actually do.  Look at the priests and look at the people in the pews

Since this is fresh in my mind, I think a good illustration of this can be found in the thread about Fr. Rodriguez being sued.  At the end of the linked article, take a look at the comments made by some of our fellow "catholics." 

ETA:  The comments after the article linked in the thread about petitioning for Communion on the tongue provide an even more stunning example; particularly the comments by priests themselves and the references to the new theology since Vatican II.  
Reply
#56
(01-23-2012, 02:14 AM)Dragonslayer Wrote: I don't believe that is a real danger at all. I converted to SSPX Catholicism a few years ago, so have only known the "SSPX church" and only attend SSPX masses, but do not see myself as schismatic. I am a Catholic, it's just that I choose to follow traditional Catholicism. The fact that the modern majority of the Catholic Church has veered off this path is a problem it has to look at itself ,and the more I learn about the crisis in this modern church the more I think that they, the modern Catholic Church, and not the SSPX, face the bigger problems.

I don't want to put words in your mouth, but the subtle way you state your case has hints of the path I'm describing, though you don't see it that way.  Why did you say "SSPX Catholicism?  There is no such thing at "SSPX Catholicism", there is only Catholicism.  I'm assuming you didn't mean it the way you said it..  Also, "the Catholic Church has veered off this path" - I'm assuming you you mean off the path of traditionalism.  This doesn't make the "modern Catholic Church" any less Catholic.  Though you prefer to choose traditional Catholicism, those who don't are still just as Catholic as those who do.
Reply
#57
(01-23-2012, 11:48 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(01-23-2012, 10:43 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(01-23-2012, 10:01 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(01-23-2012, 09:52 PM)JayneK Wrote: When people are raising their children to think of "Novus Ordo" as a religion - one that is not Catholic- something is very wrong.

Did I miss something? Is this something new? I think you'll find people have been saying this for the last 30 years or so, certainly the Novus Ordo can be seen as a different religion in the sense as it has been so so contaminated by modernism that it is no longer recognisable as the Catholic faith. The disrespect with which Our Eucharistic Lord is treated, the woeful understanding of the Mass and The Sacrament of Penance as well as the denial of the Social Reign of Christ effectively underline this point.

It is important to point out however that the SSPX does not claim to be 'The Church' and has emphasised that point repeatedly.

It is recognizable as Catholic by millions upon millions of people.  There are some who refuse to recognize it.  That does not mean it is not recognizable.

The SSPX does not officially claim to be the Church, but there are many who, by their words and actions, show this to be their belief.  And this is why people are asking questions about "schismatic attitude".  It is a huge problem and pretending it doesn't exist does not effectively address the problem.

It wouldn't matter if millions of people did or didn't recognise it, that wouldn't make it any or less true. You appear to be committing what I like to call the 'Democratic' logical fallacy, namely the idea that lots of people believing something makes it true or vice versa or even more likely to be or not to be true, this is illogical something is either true or not and belief in it or lack thereof does not change this.

I am not committing that fallacy at all.  You have missed the point.  You made the claim that the Novus Ordo is "no longer recognisable as the Catholic faith".  While numbers are, as you say, irrelevant to truth claims, you were making a claim about recognizability.  The fact that large numbers of people recognize it is as Catholic disproves your assertion.  Now if you want to say that you personally cannot recognize it as Catholic, that is legitimate enough. 
Reply
#58
(01-24-2012, 12:02 AM)Gerard Wrote: The question people should be asking is why the lack of a "schismatic attitude" in the liberal parishes? Isn't the fact that they often hate the Church openly and are not considered "schismatic" in their attitude a problem?

They do have a schismatic attitude and it is a problem.  However I do not see how it is relevant to a discussion of the schismatic attitude that often appears in the SSPX.
Reply
#59
(01-24-2012, 01:02 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(01-24-2012, 12:02 AM)Gerard Wrote: The question people should be asking is why the lack of a "schismatic attitude" in the liberal parishes? Isn't the fact that they often hate the Church openly and are not considered "schismatic" in their attitude a problem?

They do have a schismatic attitude and it is a problem.  However I do not see how it is relevant to a discussion of the schismatic attitude that often appears in the SSPX.

Examples, and I mean specific and cited, would be interesting.
Reply
#60
(01-24-2012, 01:03 PM)Habitual_Ritual Wrote:
(01-24-2012, 01:02 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(01-24-2012, 12:02 AM)Gerard Wrote: The question people should be asking is why the lack of a "schismatic attitude" in the liberal parishes? Isn't the fact that they often hate the Church openly and are not considered "schismatic" in their attitude a problem?

They do have a schismatic attitude and it is a problem.  However I do not see how it is relevant to a discussion of the schismatic attitude that often appears in the SSPX.

Examples, and I mean specific and cited, would be interesting.

The use of terminology like "Novus Ordo religion" and "conciliar Church" assume a fragmented understanding of the Church.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)