Another one bites the dust
What triggers the quotation of this well-worn, if abused, cliché indicating defeat? It's the knowledge that one more relative of mine has ceased to practice the Catholic faith and is now attending a non-Catholic "church." I didn't do a calculation to get an exact number of these family defectors, of those who have abandoned the faith, but it's a higher number than I'd like to admit. My reason for telling you this dark family secret is to give you that scant consolation of commiseration. These relatives of mine, only a few years ago, had been Catholics. Technically speaking, they are still Catholics: "once a Catholic, always a Catholic." However, these relatives do not regard themselves as being Catholics any longer, and this is a literal shame for me and a shame on them.
There's no greater misfortune that can befall man in this life than to be out of the true Church. It's a dogma of faith that there is no salvation outside the Church. Since there is only one Church, the one Christ founded, this amounts to saying that there's no salvation outside the Catholic Church. A dogma means a necessary teaching, one that's demanded by the very nature of the Christian faith. While interpretations of this dogma are various (and I do not intend to delve into them there), my purpose in reviewing it is to indicate how grievous a sin it is to abandon the true Church for any other.
I don't know of any family where all the relatives have kept the Catholic faith. The widespread defection is symptomatic of this age of unbelief, but it's also the result of the gross negligence of irresponsible priests, catechists and parents for failing to teach the faith, for misleading and deceiving their charges about the real meaning of the Church's teachings, or else for trivializing the liturgy by their impiety. When people are left ignorant by vacuous religious instruction or scandalized by silly, irreverent liturgies, they may at some point come to a religious consciousness and ask themselves, Can this be the true Christian religion? Upon discovering the bible and sincere Christians of some sect or other, they may easily be swayed to league up with them and depart from the Church. In such cases, culpability for leaving the Catholic Church may be mitigated, or even be entirely non-existent due to the fault of others. God knows. But one should not err on that account in believing that though they have left the true Church, that at least they now love the Lord and are better off than had they remained non-practicing Catholics. Objectively speaking, to leave the true Church is a grave evil. Subjectively one may not be accountable for this, depending on circumstances, depending on circumstances, but this does not refute the substantive evil of defection from the faith. For the faithful, it is truly a suffering to learn that someone has converted to a sect. (I speak nothing here about apostates -- those who have left Christianity for a pagan religion or a cult: this is an even worse evil.)
Today is Trinity Sunday. The dogma of the Blessed Trinity is a truth revealed to us by the Church, not by the bible alone, which does not clearly specify this dogma. And so, the dogma of the Trinity is an example of the necessity of the Catholic Church to explicate and impose its divinely revealed teachings upon, us, without which we would be doctrinally sunk, unsure about anything supernatural were we made to rely solely upon the many and diverse interpretations of the bible.
Let us cherish the true, orthodox, Catholic faith in all its fullness. Let us pray never to be unfaithful to it, trembling upon recollection of our Lord's words, "When the Son of Man comes again, will He find faith left on earth?" We, unhappy witnesses of the disintegration of the Catholic faith and of a massive defection from the Church in our time, need to pray steadily for the return of lapsed Catholics and to show them the good example of our patience and love which may, in the end, prove most convincing of all proofs of the truth of our holy faith.
Next Sunday is Corpus Christi Sunday. After the noon orchestral Mass there will be a procession (outdoors, as possible) with the Holy Sacrament and adoration of the One whom we love and revere as true God and true Man. Following the Procession, food at a nominal cost will be made available by our trusty ushers.
Fr. Perrone
Showing posts with label Schism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Schism. Show all posts
Monday, May 23, 2016
Fr. Perrone on grave implications of defecting from the true Church
Fr. Eduard Perrone, "A Pastor's Descant" [temporary link] (Assumption Grotto News, May 22, 2016):
Labels:
Apostasy,
Converts,
Decline and fall,
Doctrine,
Dogma,
Protestantism,
Reversion,
Schism,
Spirituality,
State of the Church
Saturday, August 15, 2015
For the record: "Voris obtains 'clarification' from Bishop Schneider which confirms SSPX not in 'schism'”
[Disclaimer: See Rules 7-9]
"Voris refuted by clarification from Bp. Schneider" (SSPX news & events, August 14, 2015).
"Voris refuted by clarification from Bp. Schneider" (SSPX news & events, August 14, 2015).
Thursday, February 26, 2015
Cardinal Marx declares German Church independent of Rome
"German Church President Marx: “We are not a branch of Rome and it will not be a Synod to tell us what to do here.” (Catholic Connection, February 26, 2015). Will the material schism become formal?:
[Hat tip to Nina Bryhn]
Il Foglio reports that Cardinal Marx, the head of the German bishops conference and one of the eight ‘super cardinals’ chosen by Pope Francis has declared that the Synod is irrelevant to them on the questions under debate — he doesn’t have to listen to Rome anyways.The spirit of Luther appears to be far from dead in Germany, though, let's pray, not quite as dead as the German church.Cardinal Marx’s comments follow and dovetail the comments of a “Team Bergoglio” member, Cardinal Danneels, on the same subject. Here is our unofficial translation of the central paragraph of that report:The prince of the Church has clarified that even if in teaching one remains in communion with the Church, in merely pastoral questions, “the Synod cannot prescribe in detail what we must do in Germany”. As the German paper, ilTagespost, writes, the Episcopal Conference of Germany has left the gate and does not seem to have any intention of paying any heed to the decisions of the pope which might follow. “We cannot wait until a Synod tells us how we ought to conduct ourselves on Matrimony and pastoral practice for the family”. Marx has also announced that in the next weeks there will be published a document in advance of the meeting in October, in regard to which Germany “has a certain point of view”. It is necessary, according to the judgement of the President of the Episcopal Conference, that one find “new approaches” capable of “helping and guaranteeing that the doors remain open”.You can read the entire article from the German Paper, the Tagespost, in an unofficial English translation here.
[Hat tip to Nina Bryhn]
Thursday, December 19, 2013
Against Sedevacantism
The best arguments against Sedevacantism usually come from Catholic traditionalists, and THIS, from Rad Trad (December 18, 2013), is no exception.
[Hat tip to L.S.]
[Hat tip to L.S.]
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Some useful liturgical discussion points
The following is from the Tridentine Community News insert of the July 13, 2008, church bulletin of St. Josaphat Catholic Church in Detroit, Michigan. The author, with whose permission I reproduce the article, acknowledged to me that one reader took issue with at least one of his interpretations in the article, as we shall see. I present the article not only for its helpful distinctions between validity and licitness, etc., but for the excellent discussion points it raises.
[Hat tip to A.B.]
Recent Moves Toward Unification With Rome*** The author states that a reader in whom he reposes considerable confidence cited a canon law supporting the claim that an occasional cross-diocese visiting priest (non-SSPX, of course) does not need diocesan permission to hear valid confessions.
The past several weeks have been encouraging for those of us who have been praying for various groups to be reconciled with the Holy See. The Catholic press has been detailing correspondence between Society of St. Pius X Superior Bishop Bernard Fellay and Cardinal Castrillón Hoyos of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, in which steps are being made toward regularization.
On June 26, the Transalpine Redemptorists, an independent traditionalist group of priests affiliated with the SSPX, announced its formal reconciliation with Rome.
This past week, British Anglican Bishop Andrew Burnham has asked Pope Benedict XVI for assistance in helping Anglican congregations become Catholic. He is likely seeking a method similar to the "Pastoral Provision" that Anglicans in the U.S. have employed for the same purpose (see our column of two weeks ago, available on-line at the address at the bottom of this page). [Note: subsequent developments have been reported in "That remains a problem for me..." (Rorate Caeli, July 10, 2008) and "Anglo-Catholic leader: "There's quite a strong chance that we will join the Catholic Church"" (Rorate Caeli, July 12, 2008) -- Musings ed.]
In the midst of these developments, some terminology is being thrown around that must be properly understood. In order for a priest to celebrate Mass and the sacraments in full communion with the Holy See, he must celebrate them validly and licitly.
Validity
In order for a priest to celebrate the sacraments validly:
1) He must have the proper intention. For example, he must intend to consecrate the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of our Lord.
2) There must be proper matter and form. For example, the matter of the Holy Mass according to the Latin Rite is unleavened bread and wine. The proper form is contained in the words of consecration specified in the Roman Missal, either in the original Latin or, in the case of the Ordinary Form, in the vernacular translations approved by national Bishops' Councils and ratified by the Holy See.
3) The priest must have been validly ordained by a bishop in apostolic succession. This means that the bishop, and all his predecessor bishops, must be able to trace their ordinations back to the original twelve Apostles, using valid rites of the Church.
4) In the case of the Sacraments of Penance and Matrimony, validity also requires the priest to have the approval of the local diocesan bishop to perform the ceremonies.***
It is generally agreed that the priests of the SSPX do meet criteria 1-3, but fail criterion 4. For this reason, Confessions heard by an SSPX priest are invalid. Marriages witnessed by an SSPX priest are also invalid, but may be regularized by the competent local diocesan authority.
Licitness
Apart from validity, to be in full communion with Holy Mother Church, a priest must celebrate the sacraments licitly. This means they must be done in accord with the structure and rules of the Church. Because SSPX priests establish chapels and offer the sacraments without the permission of the local diocesan bishop, their sacraments are illicit.
The situation is akin to a doctor who is practicing without a medical license. He or she might be exceptionally talented, and may even maintain contact with other "independent" physicians, but ultimately, he and his peers cannot work within the hospital and insurance networks that create order for our medical system.
Irregularity vs. Excommunication
It is sometimes said that the SSPX and its members are excommunicated. In fact, this is not the case. Only the four bishops of the SSPX are clearly excommunicated because of the gravity of their acceptance of illicit -- though valid -- Episcopal consecration. The priests and congregations of the SSPX are not automatically excommunicated. Rather, as Cardinal Castrillón has clarified on more than one occasion, they are in an irregular status. Therefore, it is appropriate to speak of the reconciliation of the SSPX with Rome as a regularization process.
At the same time, the Ecclesia Dei Commission has made it clear that attendance at an SSPX chapel is not acceptable when an Extraordinary Form Mass in full communion with Rome is available. One must not actively or passively support schism.
In contrast, Anglicans did not claim to be in communion with Rome to begin with, thus they have not been excommunicated per se. They would be entering into communion with the Church from a starting position clearly outside.
Grey Areas
Some discussions of the topics of validity and licitness can become rather contentious. Rather than foster argument, let's consider a more practical, real-world situation that can and does arise in Tridentine Mass communities.
A certain Extraordinary Form Community has a friendly relationship with its diocesan administration. The diocese has explained that all visiting priests must apply to the chancery for temporary faculties in the diocese, and the community's leaders faithfully obey this directive.
Late one Friday, the regular celebrant for the Sunday Mass cancels. The community scrambles to find a replacement, cannot find one from its own diocese, but does find one willing to travel from another diocese. The community asks the chancery for faculties for the visiting priest, but the chancery does not respond. The community invites the priest regardless out of necessity.
The visiting priest would offer Mass validly (and arguably licitly, presuming that the chancery trusted the community's judgment in seeking celebrants). But he would not be able to hear Confessions.*** The question is, would a chancery's "Oh sure, no problem" response to a request for faculties for Confession suffice? Or must the community insist on receiving a letter? If a letter is required, does the community risk becoming annoying to the chancery simply because it is trying to follow Church law? In addition to validity and licitness, we must also value prudence.
Comments? Ideas for a future column? Please em-mail tridnews[at]stjosaphatchurch[dot]org. Previous columns are available at www.stjosaphatchurch.org.
[Hat tip to A.B.]
Friday, May 04, 2007
Bill Cork UnPopes
On Sabbath, April 21 (my baby brother’s birthday), I returned to the Seventh-day Adventist faith in which I spent the first 21 years of my life through rebaptism. When I got home that day, I immediately submitted my resignation as Director of Young Adult and Campus Ministry of the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston.There is so much one wants to say but restrains himself. Impressionability and all that. But the cat is out of the bag. What's the point? Do remember Bill in your prayers.
... Farewell, St. Blog’s. I’m not going to enter into debate or discussion. I’ve been laying out theological and ecclesial issues over the past two months that were contributing factors to my loss of trust in the authority of Rome and the Catholic Magisterium. And that’s what so much of Catholic life and teaching is built on: “Trust us.” If you do, you can accept everything; if you don’t, then you must fall back on something else–the Word of God.
I took these steps with fear and trepidation. It’s humbling to be in the position of the prodigal son–and to be welcomed back with such joy as I’ve received … the fatted calf has been killed indeed.
God is good.
Of related interest:
- "Protestant reverts: Catholic dishonesty in adverstising?" Musings (March 10, 2007)
- "Apostasy (αποστασία)" Musings (December 16, 2006)
- "Welcome aboard the shipwreck: what converts don't know" Musings (December 13, 2006)
- "Lutheran converts & the ELCA 'brain drain'" Musings (July 13, 2005)
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
SSPX & schism: a detailed assessment
Brian Mershon offers a detailed and interesting analysis of recent developments in his post, "Cardinal Castrillón: SSPX not in schism" (Renew America, April 10, 2007). Very detailed and informative. The subtitle: "Catholics who attend SSPX masses not schismatic."
[Hat tip to Brian Mershon]
[Hat tip to Brian Mershon]
Labels:
Latin Mass,
Motu Proprio,
Schism,
SSPX
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)