It is currently Fri Nov 24, 2017 2:50 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
 SSPX: "Refuse Sacraments to 'Radical' Sedes" 
Author Message

Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 9:44 am
Posts: 34
New post SSPX: "Refuse Sacraments to 'Radical' Sedes"
The "schismatic neo-SSPX" position?

----------------------------

Czech Mate <Czech-Mate@juno.com> wrote: To: RomanCatholics@yahoogroups.com
From: Czech Mate <Czech-Mate@juno.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:39:00 -0600
Subject: [RomanCatholics] Fr. Peter Scott: On sedevacantists receiving sacraments from SSPX priests

Dear List Members,

Recently during a discussion on sedevacantism, a question was asked whether the SSPX, in principle, permits sedes to receive sacraments at SSPX chapels. I asked Fr. Peter Scott, SSPX, to please give us the answer to this question.

Ruth

I thank you for your message, and for your question concerning the allowing of sedevacantist persons to attend the Mass at Society chapels and to even receive the sacraments there.

There are two kinds of sedevacantists. There are those who hold this as a personal opinion. They consequently do not attack the Society of Saint Pius X, nor do they maintain that the Society priests are in schism or heresy when they pray the Mass "una cum", that is when they mention the Pope's and the local bishop's names in the Canon of the Mass. This question is entirely different to the question as to whether or not either one of these might be in material or formal heresy. Since such person are in communion with fellow Catholics, and since their opinion is but private, they have a right to attend our chapels and to receive the sacraments there. They are only restrained from doing so, if they start up a propaganda or recruiting others for their opinion, or condemning those who do not agree with their opinion.

Then there are the radical sedevacantists, who hold to their theory not as to a personal opinion, but as to a dogma of faith. They maintain that those who do not agree are in communion with a heretic and consequently heretics, which is absolutely absurd. Such persons commit a sin, usually public, against the unity of the Church, by refusing Communion with fellow Catholics. They are schismatics, and to be presumed to be formal. They are sinners, frequently public sinners, and consequently must be refused the sacraments. Such persons, however, do not generally attempt to receive the sacraments in Society chapels.

Then, there are some individuals who are somewhat in between. Some, for example, will receive the sacrament of Penance at our chapels, but refuse to assist at the Mass or receive Holy Communion. It is, objectively speaking, the height of contradiction, but again, since they are not public sinners, like the radical sedevacantists, they are generally not refused the sacraments.

I hope that this is a brief and concise answer to the question you raise. God bless.

Yours faithfully in Christ our King and Mary our Queen,

Father Peter R. Scott


Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:21 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 11:46 pm
Posts: 728
Location: Western Washington, USA
New post Re: SSPX: "Refuse Sacraments to 'Radical' Sedes"
Pax Christi !


Sacerdos posted ;
Quote:
Then there are the radical sedevacantists, who hold to their theory not as to a personal opinion, but as to a dogma of faith. They maintain that those who do not agree are in communion with a heretic and consequently heretics, which is absolutely absurd. Such persons commit a sin, usually public, against the unity of the Church, by refusing Communion with fellow Catholics. They are schismatics, and to be presumed to be formal. They are sinners, frequently public sinners, and consequently must be refused the sacraments. Such persons, however, do not generally attempt to receive the sacraments in Society chapels.


Dear Sacerdos,


Are you a radical sedevacantists?. Do you hold sedevacantism to be a dogma of the Faith i.e. it is not private opinion that the See is Vacant?

Should the SSPX attendee's be denied Holy Communion at a Sede Mass Center?

In Xto,
Vincent


Wed Jan 30, 2008 7:30 pm
Profile

Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 1:54 am
Posts: 147
New post Re: SSPX: "Refuse Sacraments to 'Radical' Sedes"
Unless I'm missing something obvious, I think Fr. Scott gives a very reasonable answer.


Wed Jan 30, 2008 10:32 pm
Profile

Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 3:38 pm
Posts: 483
New post Re: SSPX: "Refuse Sacraments to 'Radical' Sedes"
Quote:
There are two kinds of sedevacantists. There are those who hold this as a personal opinion. They consequently do not attack the Society of Saint Pius X, nor do they maintain that the Society priests are in schism or heresy when they pray the Mass "una cum", that is when they mention the Pope's and the local bishop's names in the Canon of the Mass. This question is entirely different to the question as to whether or not either one of these might be in material or formal heresy. Since such person are in communion with fellow Catholics, and since their opinion is but private, they have a right to attend our chapels and to receive the sacraments there. They are only restrained from doing so, if they start up a propaganda or recruiting others for their opinion, or condemning those who do not agree with their opinion.


I think a very mild correction may be in order regarding the use of the term "opinion" regarding those who hold the See of Peter vacant. I know that some sedevacantist clergy have even leveled this claim against us referring to us as "opinionists," so clearly Fr. Scott cannot be blamed for using this term. But is it really an accurate term for our position?

If someone robs a bank, is caught on film robbing the bank, brags to his friends about robbing the bank, is found with the cash, can we call such a man a bank robber prior to the judgment of the court? What if someone comes along and says, "well despite all of the evidence, I want to wait until there is a trial, and the judge finds him guilty before believing that this man is a bank robber." We may say, what is wrong with this man, can't he plainly see the facts. The case of sedevacantism is very similar.

As "reasonable" sedevacantists, we have had the facts of the case presented to us, and we have made a judgment prior to the judgment of the Church. We do not attack our brothers in the Faith, who have not yet made this private judgment, Catholics such as the SSPX. The SSPX are our dearest brothers in the Faith, they have fought the good fight to preserve the Faith, the Mass, and to hold the fort for all of us until better times.

So, one may ask, can a Catholic make this private determination of this fact prior to the judgment of the Church? Providentially, Mr. John Daly has researched and answered this question very brilliantly in this article: http://www.strobertbellarmine.net/judgeheresy.html

Many of us as sedevacantists wish that we would never have been put in this situation. We wish that we could be simple Catholics practicing our Faith as Catholics once did prior to this crisis in the Church. But, the fact remains that we are here now, and we see these facts, and we cannot ignore them.

What facts do we see: We see men who claim to be the pope promulgating an evil rite of Mass, questionable rites of ordination and consecration of bishops, promulgating other evil laws such as allowing non-Catholics to receive Holy Communion, doctrinal errors such as interfaith with false creeds, publicly praying with false sects, teaching error in their official capacity, etc. Even a brief skimming of the excellent book, Iota Unum should be enough to demonstrate to anyone reading it that the Pre-Vatican II Church is completely different than the Post Vatican II church. As Archbishop Lefevbre has stated, "the Conciliar Church is a schismatic church which has broken from the Catholic Church of the centuries."

We are forced to conclude that these men cannot be popes, because if they were popes, they could never have fed the flock stones rather than bread. They could never have promulgated a mass that is impious and evil. This cannot come from the Church! The Novus Ordo Missae is not holy, it is evil, and that which is not holy cannot come from the Church.

But, on the same token, we do not see any of our Catholic brothers in the Faith who have not yet identified this situation as no less Catholic. We are all one in the Mystical Body of Christ, the Church Militant. It appears that shortly before is death, Archbishop Lefevbre, was very seriously wrestling with this issue, trying to comprehend if the facts were plain enough to make this private determination prior to the judgment of the Church. The Archbishop's brilliant reasoning for this can be found here in his speech: http://www.strobertbellarmine.net/angeluslefebvre.html

The meeting of Assisi mentioned by the Archbishop did happen, many of us have determined that a legitimate pope could have never have held that meeting, among many other travesties committed by John Paul II, as clearly documented in the book "Peter, Lovest Thou Me," and other excellent documentation compiled in other books and articles demonstrating that the men who have claimed the papal office from Paul VI to our own day, were not and could not have been legtimate popes.

As Catholics, we wait for the judgment of the Church, but prior to that judgment, we determine that they are fakes, enemies of the Faith, enemies of the Holy Church, and must be avoided, and do not hold office in the Church.

On this forum, we have discussed ways in which we could once again have a true pope, that many bishops appointed by the Church still live, and have not fallen into heresy. So, we say that by holding our position, we do not abandon hope of a future election by those lawful bishops who still live and the remaining lawfully appointed Roman clergy. There will be a pope again!

I hope and pray that while the remaining flock patiently wait for God to once again send us a pope again, we do not break unity with each other. We must not allow the unity of the flock to be breached during this awful crisis.

Yours in JMJ,

Mike

_________________
Yours in JMJ,
Mike


Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:22 am
Profile

Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 3:42 am
Posts: 740
Location: Moscow, Idaho, U.S.A.
New post Re: SSPX: "Refuse Sacraments to 'Radical' Sedes"
Mike wrote:
On this forum, we have discussed ways in which we could once again have a true pope, that many bishops appointed by the Church still live, and have not fallen into heresy. So, we say that by holding our position, we do not abandon hope of a future election by those lawful bishops who still live and the remaining lawfully appointed Roman clergy. There will be a pope again!


Most of the parts I have snipped were well written. However, I would like to make something a little more clear here, if I can.

First of all, Our Lord told us several things about the Church, amongst them, "...the gates of hell will not prevail against Her...", and "...I will not leave you orphans...".

This says to me that the Church will never cease to exist somewhere in the world until the end of time, at least.

Secondly, that there are still valid Shepherds somewhere in the world at all times, and there will be such until the end of time.

Thirdly, although I most certainly agree that the available evidence strongly suggests that we have no true pope at present, this evidence is not overwhelming, nor 100% certain. If it were 100% certain, most Catholics would be sedevacantists.

In past Church history, there were several times when the true pope was in hiding or otherwise unknown by the majority of Catholics. To me, it is certainly possible that such holds true today.

Quote:
I hope and pray that while the remaining flock patiently wait for God to once again send us a pope again, we do not break unity with each other. We must not allow the unity of the flock to be breached during this awful crisis.


Agreed. This is possibly the main reason I get so terribly "execised" when I see one Catholic group deny the sacraments to another over some opinion.

_________________
Kenneth G. Gordon CinC
Moscow, Idaho
U.S.A.


Fri Feb 01, 2008 8:39 pm
Profile E-mail
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.