 |
| Source |
I came across an article by the
Reverend Father Paul Nicholson today which was commenting on the recent events
in Oklahoma City concerning the devil worshipers [???] and the response to
their insanity and blasphemy. Now I don’t claim to be infallible or a
theologian by any means but there are a couple things that stuck out like a
sore thumb in the article and need to be corrected.
First saying that a Mass offered by
a Society Priest is a greater evil than the mockery of a black mass is an
unfortunate, and over-the-top exaggeration.
Catholics, in good faith, can assist at their [SSPX] masses and not come
under the condemnation of any code of law or binding issue put forth by the
church. People constantly write to Fr. Z
on this matter, and (having done his due diligence on the matter) he again and
again relates that there is no restriction (aside from intention against the
Holy Father) on going to the SSPX for Mass.
Now perhaps Fr. Nicholson holds the
view that the SSPX are in Schism.
Assuming that he might be ignorant on the point, let us look at the relevant
issue. If they are indeed schismatics
then their confessions and marriage are valid just as the Eastern Orthodox and
Orientals retain their sacramental jurisdictions. Often the same people that say the SSPX are
schismatic are the ones that deny they have jurisdiction to offer confession
and marriage to people assisting at their chaples. You can't have it both ways… either they are
schismatics or they are not. And
according to many in the Vatican that are familiar with the situation, and have
personally been involved with the reconciliation process, the Society is not
formally schismatic or materially so by any means.
On the charge that they are “Catholic
Protestants”, I cannot shake my head enough.
This is the same rhetoric that made me stop holding Vericast with any
validity when Tim Haines and Wilson Oreuella made the exact same mistakes in
the broadcasts again and again, and when corrected continued to propagate the
calumny. First, Protestants are heretics, Father, can you name one position
that the SSPX takes that that is heretical?
Just name one. Second, there is
no such thing as a Catholic Protestant, which is the same logic that give us
the Pro Choice Catholic.
The article by Father, which you
can read in its entirety HERE
(and increase his stats because it’s petty at this point) is probably put together
in good faith with well-meaning intentions. I don’t claim to know his
intention, but objectively these attacks are sins against charity, calumny and
slanders that are below this good priest.
I do have a theory that when the SSPX decided against the personal
prelature in 2012 many people saw it as a personal attack and used scapegoating
to attack the SSPX without asking for the why?
What do you want the SSPX to hold to, to sign to in order that they be reconciled? What do they hold to that is not
Catholic? Have you any clue as to why
they lost their status to begin with (I gave a sneak peak just a few days ago
in my Ten Days of Davies piece on Lefebvre)?
Please, I beg of you knock it off
with the rhetoric and pray for the Pope and the Society that they may come to
an agreement that will benefit the Church as a whole.
A couple articles you might be
interested in reading are as follows:
Rene Girard’s Mimetic Theory and
the Scapegoat: HERE
Understanding the Vatican
Statement: “SSPX already is in ‘Full Communion’, but in a State of ‘Imperfect
Reconciliation’: HERE
Lefebvrianism: HERE
