Rorate Caeli

Could we at least get some consistency?

Yes, we know, Father Lombardi confirmed: the Fraternity's (FSSPX/SSPX - Society's) ordinations are "illegitimate", its priests "do not exercise legitimate ministry". Yes, we know that loving and caring ambiguities, long used in any reference to non-Catholics or non-Christians suddenly disappear when certain "groups" are mentioned - one cannot but cheer the sudden and temporary return to "pre-Conciliar" terseness, certainty, and proclamation of authority.

Which is why we are absolutely certain that, in the past 50 years, absolutely no act of anyone who cannot exercise "legitimate ministry" within the Catholic Church, including Protestant, Eastern Orthodox, or Old-Catholic "ministers", has been allowed in any property in the possession of the Diocese of Ghent, Flanders (Belgium) - the Diocese would not act so inconsistently when first allowing, out of common courtesy, then denying the celebration of a First Mass/New Mass by a new priest of the  Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X (FSSPX / SSPX), Father Matthias De Clercq, in the parish church of Merelbeke, in his native region (source: Mysterium Fidei - in Dutch).
____________________

Further south, in the Diocese of Clermont-Ferrand, in the Auvergne (France), in a ceremony at the brand new Grand Mosque of Clermont-Ferrand, "the Muslim community returned the keys to the Chapel located at rue Sainte Claire, facing the church of Saint-Eutrope, that had been placed at their disposal since 1977 by Bishop Dardel and the Congregation of the Sisters of Saint Joseph. ... The Muslims expressed their gratitude for having been given a place of worship in the city, not having at the time the means to finance one. The Grand Mosque of Clermont was built afterwards... and has been open to the faithful since early 2010." [Source: Diocese, via Perepiscopus.]

41 comments:

Sixupman said...

I taxed Fr. Lombardi on [almost] this very point and I feel he has modified his position. Fair play, he did not avoid the issue and replied with promptness, notwithstanding he was getting ready for a trip away.

Sixupman said...

Note also my comment on the "Christian Unity" entry.

Level playing fields, you must be joking!

Sixupman said...

Please cancel reference to Fr. Lombardi, it was a priest who repeated the Lombardi claim. A Vatican guy, I will llok it up, Being a Jesuit, Lombardi will not chnage his spots.

Apologies.

New Catholic said...

??? No, it was Father Lombardi, as reported by Radio Vaticana - check down the main page of the blog.

Anonymous said...

Just one more example of the duplicity by which the modernists treat traditionalists is the denial of permission for a FSSPX priest to celebrate his first Mass in a supposedly Catholic Church in his home territory. And we are being asked to trust them? You've got to be kidding. We are going from the sublime to the ridiculous, folks.

Let there be no doubt about the fact that the Modernists would like very much to bury us and without ostensible jurisdiction and faculties they would like the rest of the Catholic world to join in their campaign. I call on His Holiness to stop this nonsense immediately by papal edict. This is far too serious a matter to delay Justice any longer.

LtCol Paul E. Haley, USAF(Ret)

Anonymous said...

Europe is being handed over to the Mohamadeans by the Church how scary is that? And not even by the sword as in centuries past, yet we deny the S.S.P.X. the right to hold Masses and they are CATHOLICS!!

Anonymous said...

This is slightly off topic, but I have a question that no one has ever given a clear answer on. If one of my relatives is being ordained as a SSPX Priest, can I attend the ordination? Is there really harm in attending that Mass?

Anonymous said...

"I call on His Holiness to stop this nonsense immediately by papal edict."

Papal edict? Are you kidding? Even if the pope wanted to do something about it, which he doesn't, he holds no power whatsoever to do so...

Anonymous said...

"can I attend the ordination? Is there really harm in attending that Mass?"

No there would be no problem with that as the SSPX are Catholic, and as such the Mass would be Catholic.

Excuse my asking, but why would you think there is anything wrong with attending?

Dan said...

The Pope "holds no power whatsoever" to end this historic injustice? Surely, Anon, you don't mean that.

The Holy Father has IMMENSE powers....if he would ever get off the mark and begin to use them. We've got to put to rest, at long last, this tired old chestnut that the Pope is "a prisoner in the Vatican" which is meant, and has meant, to excuse the inaction of weak Popes. That canard has been used for centuries. It didn't fly then and it doesn't fly now.

By all means do recognize the fact that any Pope is up against a Modernist Mafia of diabolical power but do not fall into the trap of thinking he has to just sit there and take it.

He doesn't.

Anonymous said...

RE: Attending SSPX ordination.

In another website, there is a post about a 'gay mass (mess)' in Boston. Do you think it is a valid Mass?

I attend either Independent, diocesan, or FSSP Traditional Masses (the Society is not around), but- in an age in which the Church is infested by homosexuals and heretics- how can you wonder if there is anything illegal/immoral/illicit about a SSPX ordination?

Does the SSPX teach any novelty? No. The Vatican only demands obedient from the SSPX, no one else. That is a fact. Why?

If it wasn't for Archbishop Lefevbre and the SSPX, Tradition would be dead!

shane said...

No there's nothing wrong with attending an SSPX Mass. Even if they actually were in schism it wouldn't make much difference. After all the Church allows us to attend Protestant and non-Christian services in certain circumstances.

Anonymous said...

The church of VAC II doublespeak!

LeonG said...

Consistency is a word that liberal modernists hate because it is associated with the Magesterium of The Church. They prefer nebulousness, ambiguity and equivocation. This is why they talk so much and exploit words to create many significations behind which they weave ideological diversity; liturgical anarchy and pastoral chaos. These contain many of the hallmarks of freemasonry which is monthly assuming greater and greater control of the modernist post-conciliar church. Anyone who doubts this factor has completely missed the point.

LeonG said...

Anon Said

"If it wasn't for Archbishop Lefevbre and the SSPX, Tradition would be dead!"

Apart from a few independent traditinal Catholics like Fr Gommar de Pauw, you are correct.

Jonvilas said...

Anonymous 17:01, the problem is that you give all credits to a man, not God. Because it is up to God to decide, whether the Tradition is to be or would have been dead. Another problem is that it appears as if FSSPX still looking for any more or less credible arguments how not to reach a deal with the present pope. This argumentation is still abundant in various articles by FSSPX priests. Another tricky issue is that they are as if claiming to be the only true catholics. The facts presented in this post by Rorate are terrible. They demosntrate what influence the present day sarumans are still holding in the Church. However, we all pretty well know that canonical status of FSSPX is unresolved and, therefore, the modernists still have prety good juridical arguments to deny the FSSPX the legal celebration of the Sacraments in our churches.

Rodg said...

Dan,
While you rightfully and commendably refute one canard, you seem to perpetuate another with the juxtaposition of the pope and the modernist mafia.

Why can't the most recent popes simply be more moderate members of the same group? Who put the mafia in power to begin with?

Here's a quote for you:
“The Church of our day has become particularly conscious of this
truth; and it was in the light of this truth that the Church
succeeded, during the Second Vatican Council, in redefining her
own nature.”

Redefining her own nature? Guess who said that? Hint: it wasn't Curran or Kung.

PW said...

The picture at the home page shows just the lantern of a beautiful dome. Would you please identify the Church. It is reminiscent of Sacre Coeur in Paris. Thank you.

New Catholic said...

You noticed it, PW!.... We have just identified it in the latest post: it is the Church of the Sacramentines (Parish Church of the Most Holy Sacrament), in Santiago, Chile, with the Andes in winter in the background.

Anonymous said...

Speaking of canards and old chestnuts that need to be laid to rest ... here's one:

"If it wasn't for Archbishop Lefevbre and the SSPX, Tradition would be dead!"

Anonymous said...

"Speaking of canards and old chestnuts that need to be laid to rest ... here's one:

"If it wasn't for Archbishop Lefevbre and the SSPX, Tradition would be dead!"

Its more like "If it wasn't for the Catholic Church, Tradition would be dead."
The FSSPX went a long way in preserving the TLM but they did not preserve Tradition.
Only the Church does this.

Danny

Anonymous said...

The Vicar of Christ is not impotent; he has immense powers to bind and to loose. To infer otherwise, would be a huge mistake and would give to the modernists power and sway that they should not have. Beside this, he has the incredible intercessory power of the Virgin Mary, Mother of God, should he choose to invoke it. Let us hope that he will do so and soon for the clock is ticking.

LtCol Paul E. Haley, USAF(Ret)

Anonymous said...

@ Joinvilas and Danny:

Obviously, the Archbishop work was successful thanks to Our Lord Jesus Christ. And I do not meant to say that the SSPX has replacement the Church. I did not think that I had to go into that much detail.

Ecclesia Dei would not exist if it wasn't for the SSPX 'defiance.' Can we agree on that?

Anonymous said...

Priests from the Chinese Patriotic Association (a pro-abortion communist group) have been ministering in Catholic parishes in the United States for quite some time. This is a fact acknowledged by the U.S. bishops. What horrible hypocrisy exists in the Church today.

- DJR

Jack said...

\\In another website, there is a post about a 'gay mass (mess)' in Boston. Do you think it is a valid Mass?\\

If celebrated according to the rubrics and official texts, yes.

And because this would be a valid mass, those who participate in it without repentance MAY be doing so to their own condemnation.

\\I attend either Independent, diocesan, or FSSP Traditional Masses (the Society is not around), but- in an age in which the Church is infested by homosexuals and heretics- how can you wonder if there is anything illegal/immoral/illicit about a SSPX ordination?\\

The personal sin of the priest does not affect the validity of the sacraments he celebrates, or diminish the grace given to those who receive them with the proper spiritual dispositions. To say otherwise would be the Donatist heresy. (Though again, a priest in serious sin may celebrate mass to his own condemnation.)

I would avoid independent chapels, as they are under the authority of NO bishop. The Church is episcopal in polity, not congregational.

Anonymous said...

"...the modernists still have prety good juridical arguments to deny the FSSPX the legal celebration of the Sacraments in our churches."

Then why has the Society been permitted to offer Masses at Catholic basilicas?

Examples:

-- On August, 15, 2000 A.D., then-excommunicated Bishop Fellay offered Mass at the Basilica of Saint Mary Major.

-- Father Marcus Jasny (SSPX) offered Mass at Saint Peter's Basilica.

-- In 2008, the Society's four then-excommunicated Bishops were permitted to offer Mass at the Sanctuary of Lourdes.

Tom

Johannes said...

I cannot believe almost all of the comments centered on the SSPX. This, to me, is largely what is wrong with the SSPX.

A bishop and some nuns gave a Christian chapel to Muslims until they could build them a masjid - is no one consumed? Men and women came together daily to pray "he does not beget nor is he begotten" (Surah al-Ikhlas is recited toward the end of every salaat) on grounds consecrated in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit - consecrated to the worship of the One and Only Living and True God.

Why has this bishop not been excommunicated? Toowoomba is pale placed along side this. Loquacious Portuguese bishops for women's ordination is nothing. And since nineteen seventy - three bishops of Rome have done what? And the bishops of France - there must have been some opposition at some time.

I cannot believe this happened. In Clermont! Clermont defaced! The Christian heart of the Auvergne in the Merovingian period! Place of the victory of the holy martyr Ivlianvs. How many holy bishops you produced! Birth-place of Gregory of Tours. Now they have erected a large (grande) pagan temple upon you. We toppled pagan temples and erected churches and monasteries on the conquered site. Now our bishops build them their temples and give them God's churches until they have finished.

France is a disgrace, France is disgusting, France is weak, France is not Christian and must have no Christians on the whole of it's face - for this to have happened.

Vestigiorvm sancti Martini immemor et indignvm.

Anonymous said...

@ Jack:

Instead of avoiding 'Independent' priests, I definitely avoid priests (and bishops and cardinals) that can only offer jurisdiction (or rubrics) and nothing else.

Priests like Fr. Perez in So Cal and Msgr. Ruscitto in the Central Valley have done a lot for the faithful and should never be 'avoided.'

Donatism? The USCCB blatantly disregards the Pope and mingles with abortionists, heretics, and ignores all sorts of liturgical abuses. Apostasy is a more appropriate name for our present situation.

I obviously cannot judge the validity of the sacraments taking place in these absurd 'gay masses.' My comment was basically to point it out that the SSPX does not teach anything that contradicts Catholic teaching. And, therefore, one cannot have any concern about attending ordination of SSPX priests.

In most NO masses (and nuptial and funeral masses), however, you can see plenty that should give you pause.

Joe B said...

True, God or the church had other options for saving tradition, but God mainly used the Holy Archbishop and SSPX, for which the church owes them and God a great thanks. Instead, they're getting ...

Some fine day.

Anonymous said...

"Instead, they're getting ..."

What exactly are the SSPX getting? They have what they want. It is a comfortable situation and that is why the persist in it. The lack of jurisdiction is continually glossed over by comparisons with the most heinous examples of modernism that exist in the Church (as if that had any relevance to the SSPX's lack of jurisdiction).

How many times must we hear about the SSPX saving the planet? A few postings ago there was some ridiculous discussion degrading the "silence" of the FSSP versus the great "outspokenness" of the SSPX. Another canard. If God needed the SSPX, it was only until 1988. Not now.

Jack said...

\\Instead of avoiding 'Independent' priests, I definitely avoid priests (and bishops and cardinals) that can only offer jurisdiction (or rubrics) and nothing else.\\

Yet, independent priests can offer only rubrics.

So did the Donatists.

Jack said...

\\I obviously cannot judge the validity of the sacraments taking place in these absurd 'gay masses.'\\

Then why did you ask if this were a valid mass? You would not have asked the question had you not had some doubts, which meant you were doing the very thing you claimed you did NOT do.

G. said...

"If celebrated according to the rubrics and official texts, yes."--Jack

The same would be true of a black mass, would it not?

Anonymous said...

Wow! To compare priests that, in some cases, were forced out (or invited to retire) of their dioceses with a heresy.

What a ridiculous statement...

John McFarland said...

Dear Anonymous 14:29,

You say:

"The [SSPX's] lack of jurisdiction is continually glossed over by comparisons with the most heinous examples of modernism that exist in the Church (as if that had any relevance to the SSPX's lack of jurisdiction)."

Glossed over? The SSPX and its allies have killed a lot of trees over the years in explaining supplied jurisdiction to thick-headed American legal positivists. See the latest in the July issue of the Angelus.

Comparisons with heinous examples? The heinous examples are why jurisdiction is supplied.

Or do you think that the Lord our God's answer to those crying to Heaven over the virtual impossibility of the average Catholic's obtaining unadulaterated doctrine and sacraments from the Teaching Church in his diocese is: tough luck, the law is the law, give them my regards in Hell?

The salvation of souls is the highest law, and any law that contradicts that law is, insofar as it contradicts that law, a nullity.

Joe B said...

What exactly are the SSPX getting? Exactly what you've shown - emotional sarcasm. Save the planet?

"If" God needed them until 1988, you owe them great thanks. Make up your mind. (Of course He didn't, they just cooperated with Him, for which they have my gratitude.)

Anonymous said...

To the brave anonymous 7/12 @14:29:

There is no need of the SSPX after 1988. Are you serious? What religious order sanctioned by Rome asked the Holy Father to lift the restrictions against the Old Mass? There were none. Which order sanctioned by Rome was able to dicuss the problems of Vatican II with the continuity of Tradition? Same answer. Which order sanctioned by Rome presented the Holy Father with millions of prayers for the Consecration of Russia to our Lady? Same answer.

A.M. LaPietra

LeonG said...

On the contrary Aonoymous Said, which ever one you are this time, it is not a "canard".
Sacred Tradition depends directly for its existence on the TLM because it is the perfect embodiment of Roman Catholicism that equates favourably , objectively speaking, the lex orandi with the lex credendi. As Padre Pio the great priest saint of our times told us - the earth would exist more easily without the sun than it could without The Holy Mass (in Latin). This is why Our Blessed Lord instituted The Holy Mass because He knew that the future of The Faith depended on it.

Jack said...

\\"If celebrated according to the rubrics and official texts, yes."--Jack

The same would be true of a black mass, would it not?\\

No, it would not, because such an act does not intend to do as the Church does.

Basic catechism should tell you that.

**Sacred Tradition depends directly for its existence on the TLM because it is the perfect embodiment of Roman Catholicism that equates favourably , objectively speaking, the lex orandi with the lex credendi.**

I suppose the Eastern Catholic Liturgies are merely fluff?

Or the ancient Western non-Roman liturgies such as the Mozarabic or Bragan?

LeonG said...

"I suppose the Eastern Catholic Liturgies are merely fluff?"

Poor Jack - when I talk about the TLM I am pertfectly aware that I am concerned only with the Western Rite Latin Church & so are those familiar with the tone of my comments thereon. I have nothing to say about the other rites although I do sometimes practice or listen to their chants. I enjoy the Ambrosian chants too. I am a Roman Rite Latin Catholic to the core nonetheless.

Anonymous said...

Wait, the Muslims gave something back?

That's a first.