Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 4

Author Topic: How is this SSPV position not schismatic?  (Read 1899 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ByzCat3000

How is this SSPV position not schismatic?
« on: September 22, 2020, 05:19:53 AM »
I wasn't sure how to frame the question in the OP, but basically, here's my deal.

Bob attends the Novus Ordo Mass.  He as far as he knows believes all dogmas of the Catholic Church, he believes he must believe all dogmas of the Catholic Church and to knowingly reject one would lead to his damnation.  But he is simply unaware of the problems with Vatican II.  

Bill attends the FSSP Mass.  He as far as he knows believes all dogmas of the Catholic Church, he believes he must believe all dogmas of the Catholic Church and to knowingly reject one would lead to his damnation.  But while he thinks Vatican II was written vaguely and dangerously, he doesn't believe it per se contradicts tradition if read with a "hermeneutic of continuity".  He also doesn't believe New Rite sacraments are invalid.

I mention the SSPV because I've heard Fr. Jenkins say this but... on what basis can any traditional Catholic ordination decide these people aren't Catholic, and refuse them holy communion?  How is that not schismatic?

Even if Pope Francis is an antipope and not a real Catholic, for the sake of argument, there are certainly people in "normal communion" with him that truly are in communion with Eternal Rome, despite material errors.  I'm not even getting into the una cuм question here.  I don't see how denying communion to whole swaths of Catholics doesn't constitute material schism.


The SSPX and SSPX Resistance, on the other hand, despite taking polemical stances against modernism in Rome, seem to recognize that Catholics in good standing can't be denied communion for material errors.

Fr. Jenkins (SSPV, and BTW I like listening to him and respect him, definitely don't mean this as a personal attack) has said that if someone from the FSSP came to his parish for communion he'd deny them communion.

How is that not materially schismatic?

What do you guys think?
Logged

Offline Quo vadis Domine

  • Supporter
Re: How is this SSPV position not schismatic?
« Reply #1 on: September 22, 2020, 06:02:59 AM »
Quote from: ByzCat3000 on September 22, 2020, 05:19:53 AM
I wasn't sure how to frame the question in the OP, but basically, here's my deal.

Bob attends the Novus Ordo Mass.  He as far as he knows believes all dogmas of the Catholic Church, he believes he must believe all dogmas of the Catholic Church and to knowingly reject one would lead to his damnation.  But he is simply unaware of the problems with Vatican II.  

Bill attends the FSSP Mass.  He as far as he knows believes all dogmas of the Catholic Church, he believes he must believe all dogmas of the Catholic Church and to knowingly reject one would lead to his damnation.  But while he thinks Vatican II was written vaguely and dangerously, he doesn't believe it per se contradicts tradition if read with a "hermeneutic of continuity".  He also doesn't believe New Rite sacraments are invalid.

I mention the SSPV because I've heard Fr. Jenkins say this but... on what basis can any traditional Catholic ordination decide these people aren't Catholic, and refuse them holy communion?  How is that not schismatic?

Even if Pope Francis is an antipope and not a real Catholic, for the sake of argument, there are certainly people in "normal communion" with him that truly are in communion with Eternal Rome, despite material errors.  I'm not even getting into the una cuм question here.  I don't see how denying communion to whole swaths of Catholics doesn't constitute material schism.


The SSPX and SSPX Resistance, on the other hand, despite taking polemical stances against modernism in Rome, seem to recognize that Catholics in good standing can't be denied communion for material errors.

Fr. Jenkins (SSPV, and BTW I like listening to him and respect him, definitely don't mean this as a personal attack) has said that if someone from the FSSP came to his parish for communion he'd deny them communion.

How is that not materially schismatic?

What do you guys think?


They claim that it is “the scandal” that prevents them from giving the sacraments to them. This is also true for those of us who believe that the Thuc line is valid and assist at those masses, or even masses of priests that have a loose association with the Thuc line (i.e., Father Collins). Please keep in mind that it does get rather dicey when dealing with NO sacraments that are doubtful, but they should never refuse anyone at the communion rail unless they are known public sinners or do not present themselves properly to receive our Lord.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: How is this SSPV position not schismatic?
« Reply #2 on: September 22, 2020, 06:24:58 AM »
Right.  They do not claim that such are not Catholic ... well, for the most part (and I’ll get to this later) but priests are permitted and even enjoined by Canon Law not to give Holy Communion to public sinners, those immodestly dressed, etc. in that it would cause scandal.  They rely upon this to withhold the Sacraments.  I know Fr. Jenkins very well and he does not hold that everyone in the NO is a non-Catholic.
Logged

Offline DecemRationis

  • Supporter
Re: How is this SSPV position not schismatic?
« Reply #3 on: September 22, 2020, 06:31:19 AM »
Quote from: ByzCat3000 on September 22, 2020, 05:19:53 AM
I wasn't sure how to frame the question in the OP, but basically, here's my deal.

Bob attends the Novus Ordo Mass.  He as far as he knows believes all dogmas of the Catholic Church, he believes he must believe all dogmas of the Catholic Church and to knowingly reject one would lead to his damnation.  But he is simply unaware of the problems with Vatican II.  

Bill attends the FSSP Mass.  He as far as he knows believes all dogmas of the Catholic Church, he believes he must believe all dogmas of the Catholic Church and to knowingly reject one would lead to his damnation.  But while he thinks Vatican II was written vaguely and dangerously, he doesn't believe it per se contradicts tradition if read with a "hermeneutic of continuity".  He also doesn't believe New Rite sacraments are invalid.

I mention the SSPV because I've heard Fr. Jenkins say this but... on what basis can any traditional Catholic ordination decide these people aren't Catholic, and refuse them holy communion?  How is that not schismatic?

Even if Pope Francis is an antipope and not a real Catholic, for the sake of argument, there are certainly people in "normal communion" with him that truly are in communion with Eternal Rome, despite material errors.  I'm not even getting into the una cuм question here.  I don't see how denying communion to whole swaths of Catholics doesn't constitute material schism.


The SSPX and SSPX Resistance, on the other hand, despite taking polemical stances against modernism in Rome, seem to recognize that Catholics in good standing can't be denied communion for material errors.

Fr. Jenkins (SSPV, and BTW I like listening to him and respect him, definitely don't mean this as a personal attack) has said that if someone from the FSSP came to his parish for communion he'd deny them communion.

How is that not materially schismatic?

What do you guys think?

I think you can disagree with Father Jenkins, but I have a problem calling anyone schismatic when the hierarchy legitimates (arguably, and reasonably I think) separation from it in principle because of its heresy. If there is no pope and no bishop governing, how exactly is one being schismatic? The "center of union" has become a centrifugal, not centripetal, force. Everything is breaking away.

Perhaps Father Jenkins is acting against the faith, in error, etc. But in this free fall of objects "from Rome," where is schism? One particle falling away moving too far away from another object falling away?

Perhaps we need a new definition. But I don't think schismatic fits in our reality.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: How is this SSPV position not schismatic?
« Reply #4 on: September 22, 2020, 09:59:56 AM »
Quote from: DecemRationis on September 22, 2020, 06:31:19 AM
I think you can disagree with Father Jenkins, but I have a problem calling anyone schismatic when the hierarchy legitimates (arguably, and reasonably I think) separation from it in principle because of its heresy. If there is no pope and no bishop governing, how exactly is one being schismatic? The "center of union" has become a centrifugal, not centripetal, force. Everything is breaking away.

Schism is not only in separating oneself from the Pope, but it's also considered schismatic to separate oneself from those whom the Church considers to be Catholic.  So, for instance, when the Dimonds declare as heretics outside the Church even those who believe in a Thomistic Baptism of Desire, that's schismatic, whether or not the See is vacant ... since the Church has never considered those who hold this opinion to be outside the Church.  That is my major issue with the Dimonds; I do not strongly disagree with too many of their actual theological positions, but they cross this line when they excommunicate and anathematize Catholics that the Church has never excluded from her membership.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4
« previous next »