Skip to main content

A Little Cultural Perspective on Traditionalism and the 'Four Points' - Part 3

+
JMJ

While he has been silent for a while, I'd like to highlight an assertion made by Fr. Greiger:

Unfortunately, it is not only the progressives who have adopted this individualistic spirit.   Even in the name of Tradition, some today speak of a pre- and post-conciliar Church, thus creating a rupture between the past and the present.   In this way, they submit everything the magisterium has to say to a test that ultimately sets the Church against itself. (source)

In this assertion Father is laying the responsibility for the 'rupture' at the feet of Traditionalists. I think it is safe to assume that he is including the SSPX in that classification.


I've already discussed and exposed how the SSPX understands the phrase 'conciliar Church', so we can lay that accusation to rest.

As noted in part 2, as well as in Dr. Lamont's review, the SSPX bases its position on an understanding of the pre-conciliar magisterium that is not its own creation, but derived faithfully from the theological understanding at the time of the magisterial pronouncements.

The SSPX is caught in a position of being forced to choose between the clear pre-conciliar magisterium and the predominantly cloudy magisterium that has issued since the Council.

Further more as noted here, the SSPX realises that the solution to this crisis will only come from Rome.  The SSPX is not setting itself up as the Magisterium of the Traditionalists.  It is simply trying to hold fast and not compromise with the storm of heresy that is ravaging the Church.

While many seem to think that they 'know' what the SSPX thinks and its motivations, the surest way is to go the source, the SSPX. Collected below is a number of articles on the relevant topics.

SSPX: Two Interpretations of Vatican 2 - Myth or Reality?
SSPX: Religious Liberty Contradicts Tradition
SSPX: Archbishop Lefebvre and Religious Liberty
SSPX: State of Necessity Part 1
SSPX: State of Necessity Part 2
SSPX: March 2001 - District Superior's Letter Fr. Violette
SSPX: Is the New Mass Legit?

While some may still be in denial of the fact that the problem starts at the top (ie The Pope) and that it is systemic throughout the Church, thereby rejecting the SSPX's response to the crisis - they overlook one key point.

The root of the SSPX's canonical irregularity comes from their adherence to the formation of priests that ran counter to the objectives of the French bishops of the era.

Have those objectives really changed?

P^3

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3

What the heck is a congregation of "Pontifical Right"

+ JMJ In a discussion with a friend the question occurred to me that I didn't actually know was is involved in being a religious order of 'pontifical right'. I had a vague notion that this meant they reported to Rome as opposed to the local diocese. I'm also aware that, according to the accounts I have heard, the Archbishop received 'praise' and the written direction to incardinate priests directly into the SSPX.  This is interesting because it implies that the SSPX priests were no longer required to incardinate in the local diocese but in the SSPX. This is something that belongs to an order of 'pontifical right'. Anyway here's some definitions: Di diritto pontificio is the Italian term for “of pontifical right” . It is given to the ecclesiastical institutions (the religious and secular institutes, societies of apostolic life) either created by the Holy See or approved by it with the formal decree, known by its Latin name, Decretu

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 mass (ie the Novus Ordo Missae

Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

+ JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R