Author Topic: SSPX Triumphalism - SSPX Exceptionalism (Read 2526 times)

Matthew · « **on:** May 10, 2016, 01:00:07 PM »

Catholic Triumphalism is defined as: "the spirit of arrogance or pride with respect to belonging to the Church."

Exceptionalism is the perception that a society is "exceptional" (i.e., unusual or extraordinary) in some way and thus does not need to conform to normal rules or principles.

Well, I detect a serious "SSPX Triumphalism" as well as an "SSPX Exceptionalism", whereby SSPX Catholics believe the SSPX IN ITSELF is special, needed by God, or has a special protection that even the Catholic Church itself wasn't granted.

1. SSPX triumphalists are OK with a "Crisis in the Church", but they believe that God would never allow a similar crisis to befall the SSPX. (Huh?)

2. They point to the sanctity of +ABL and the providential nature of the SSPX (both true!) and take that to mean that God will ALWAYS be with the SSPX, no matter what they do. Once saved, always saved.

3. They believe that the local Bishop approving the society in the 70's (nevermind that the Church eventually suspended +ABL, and later excommunicated him) makes the SSPX "canonically erected"

4. Building on #3, they consider the SSPX on a different plane than any other Traditional group and look down on these groups, including Independent chapels. After all, none of them were "canonically erected" like they were.

5. Also building on #3, they consider themselves not just the BEST lifeboat to use during this Crisis, but the ONLY legitimate lifeboat. They believe they have a monopoly on legitimate resistance to Conciliar Modernism. If anyone else sets up uncanonical chapels or Mass locations, they are disobedient. But if the SSPX does it, "we were canonically erected in 1970 so we're special". Ditto for the consecration of bishops. 1988 was a special gift of Providence. But if any bishop outside the SSPX consecrates a bishop without the permission of Rome, they are to be condemned and regarded as a "rogue bishop".

6. On a bad day, the SSPX acts and believes as if they are the Church. And this has been going on since the 1980's. "Outside the SSPX there is no salvation". They won't say this outright of course, but the attitude is there: "It's OK to be in other groups as long as you are ignorant -- maybe God will forgive you. I'll be praying for you. But we are the One True Church."

7. I don't think +Williamson -- and certain others -- ever partook in SSPX Triumphalism. +Williamson, for example, often told his seminarians that the day the SSPX stops standing for the truth, the day it stops fighting modernism without compromise, is the day that God will cast out the SSPX like salt that has lost its savor. Once the SSPX ceases to be useful, it will be trampled underfoot by men. Furthermore, God could raise up another SSPX from the very rocks if need be. God does not need the SSPX. Even in its heyday, +Williamson supported the SSPX because it was the organized resistance to Modernism and it permitted a man (laity, priest, or bishop) to help souls, help the Church, and fight the enemy without compromise. THAT is what he (and some others) signed up for.

Others signed up to be elite, part of the winning team, etc.

For years, these two groups sat next to each other in the pews. But now we have another crisis, another chastisement, which is separating the men from the boys, and the sheep from the goats. Those who were part of the SSPX for the right reasons are now leaving to form a new Resistance to modernism, while those who attended the SSPX for aesthetics, convenience, social reasons, etc. are staying with the SSPX even as it becomes FSSP part 2.

If you want to see an example of SSPX Triumphalism in action, just read Fr. Scott's write-up about independent priests.

http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Fr-Peter-Scott-on

Matthew · « **Reply #1 on:** May 10, 2016, 01:15:23 PM »

The one "semi convincing" argument used by SSPX priests and apologists to defend their "SSPX Exceptionalism" is destroyed here:

Quote from: Raphaela

From the docuмent signed by Bishop Charriere of Fribourg founding the SSPX in 1970:

"We approve and affirm the Statutes, here joined, for a period of six years ad experimentum, which can be renewed for a similar period by tacit approval; after which the Society can be erected definitely in our diocese by the competent Roman Congregation..."

Even though the attempt to suppress the Society in 1975 was illegitimate and invalid, and it continued by tacit approval for another six years from 1976, it definitely came to an end in 1982, as it was not erected in Fribourg by a Roman Congregation. So there's no way Fr Scott can describe it as "correctly and canonically established". In the beginning yes, but not after 1982.

The continued existence of the SSPX as a pious union depends on there being a state of emergency in the Church, otherwise they are just independent priests who form a private group and are no different canonically from the individual independent priests. So these independent priests can use the same argument from a state of emergency to justify their apostolates.

Matthew · « **Reply #2 on:** May 10, 2016, 01:36:04 PM »

I remember back in the 1980's, Thomas A. Nelson had this to say about the SSPX: "They are totally without compromise, they're very serious, but they think they're the Church."

He didn't seem to have any criticisms about their doctrine. In fact, he highly praised their uncompromising stance.

He didn't hate them or anything; in fact he was willing to foot the bill for me to go to St. Mary's, KS to attend their school. I now shudder at the near-miss that happened there. I can only imagine how different my life would have been, and I suspect it wouldn't have been for the better. Fortunately, I wasn't very adventurous at age 12, and BOTH my parents were too emotional to ship their only son off to a Traditional Catholic boarding school several states away.

Perhaps it's merciful in a way that God has allowed the SSPX to openly fall. Perhaps it had grown too big for its britches. Back before the SSPX fell into the whirlpool of "regularization", Catholics like myself would bask in its large structure, professional nature, and commanding presence all over the world. There was so much good being done, we overlooked the nascent cult elements such as SSPX Exceptionalism. We justified it as being a natural result of so many good fruits.

Even I brushed aside this capital flaw, this Achilles' heel.

But when you have a worldwide famous ship, the largest there is, and the captain goes on record saying, "Even God couldn't sink this ship", then things don't usually end well. You're just asking for a fall. In the case of the Titanic, a single iceberg in the wrong place at the wrong time did the job.

God has ways of dealing with such hubris.

"He who exalts himself shall be humbled."

Croixalist · « **Reply #3 on:** May 10, 2016, 01:51:30 PM »

Suffice to say, if you got this far without learning how to discern a good-willed priest from a charlatan, you're due for a rude awakening! The problems usually come in when you're faced with having to support any particular group. The hallmark of this collapse has been centered around the spiritual authorities, the priests, the bishops and the Pope.

The SSPX isn't completely defunct, nor is the mainstream Church. Archbishop Lefebvre wasn't trying to lead a splinter group nor is Bishop Williamson doing so now. All the sacrifices, all the persecutions, all the internecine struggles we went through and continue to experience can't be pinned on any one person or group. Every time you think someone has it all figured out, then you get VII, then you get the excommunications, then you get the magic mercy happy time, then you get Pfieffer's merry band of mercenaries. We keep going in circles like this. Just keep your heads on straight because if the mainstream Church wasn't immune, and the SSPX wasn't immune, and the Resistance isn't immune, who is?

When our leaders aren't actively abusing their power, they're passively refusing to legitimately exercise it for the good of the Church. There's almost so much traction can we possibly expect to get.

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #4 on:** May 10, 2016, 02:06:57 PM »

Agree 1000%, Matthew! Unfortunately, most people are followers these days and instead of using their brains, they get lazy and follow 'group think'.

On a humorous note, if +Fellay wants to raise $ for the new seminary, all he has to do is make hats which say "Make the Church Great Again" and he'd sell out in 5 minutes.

The similarities in rhetoric used by Trump and +Fellay are striking, if you think about it.

Matthew · « **Reply #5 on:** May 10, 2016, 02:46:09 PM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis

On a humorous note, if +Fellay wants to raise $ for the new seminary, all he has to do is make hats which say "Make the Church Great Again" and he'd sell out in 5 minutes.

The similarities in rhetoric used by Trump and +Fellay are striking, if you think about it.

Both use psychology and politics (empty rhetoric) to appeal to the lowest common denominator in their audience. Both talk out of both sides of their mouth, so everyone can cling to some sentence or two and say, "See? He still speaks for me!"

And both are completely full of themselves. Come on now, Trump supporters, admit it. Isn't that what you mean when you admit to his "weaknesses" or "faults"? You can't just ignore how much of an arrogant blowhard Trump is, even if you believe he's the best thing for America right now.

Bishop Fellay is a bit more refined, sure, but even he has issues with humility. He thinks he is going to convert the Church with his great SSPX once he gets approved by the Roman authorities. He thinks he is going to succeed where +Lefebvre failed. That certainly isn't humility, I'll tell you that much!

Last Tradhican · « **Reply #6 on:** May 10, 2016, 04:28:54 PM »

Quote from: Croixalist

Just keep your heads on straight because if the mainstream Church wasn't immune, and the SSPX wasn't immune, and the Resistance isn't immune, who is?

“Father, we should not wait ... for a call to come from Rome, to do penance. Nor should we wait for the call to penance to come from our bishops in our diocese nor from the religious . It is necessary for each one of us to begin to reform himself spiritually. Each person must not only save his own soul but also all the souls that God has placed on our path. “(Sr. Lucia of Fatima)

In other words, do not expect any help from the pope, our diocese bishops, religious, (the SSPX) as was done before 1957. We are each on our own. If you have the gift of a valid priest & sacraments, thank God. If that priest is a drag, unfriendly, a bad sermonist....., be content with what you have. The possibility exists that 99%+ of Catholics do not even have a valid priest.

Charlotte NC Bill · « **Reply #7 on:** May 10, 2016, 09:23:15 PM »

Quite frankly; the crisis in the SSPX has separated the actual militant traditional Catholics from the Americanist, quasi-Masonic, shameless Jєω butt kissers. 13 yrs. ago on LI a woman ( we'll call her Marge ) sat at my table after Mass. Her FIRST question, before she even knew my name was: " what do you think about Bishop Williamson?" She and her husband hate him. I said I loved him. She told me " there was a conference here not long ago. The priest was giving a talk ( on Catholic Social Doctrine ) and he said, ' the average American believes this...but we as Catholics believe this..' And I'll tell you, if I had been there I would have called the FBI on those people...."
I heard this from this ignoramus and was dumb-founded....I couldn't believe it, at first I thought she was being farcical...then I realized, no: she really is that stone-cold stupid...And it's these people who have caused most of the problems in the SSPX...they complain about things they shouldn't and really are the trouble-makers. :reporter:

Matthew · « **Reply #8 on:** May 10, 2016, 09:52:52 PM »

Quote from: Charlotte NC Bill

Quite frankly; the crisis in the SSPX has separated the actual militant traditional Catholics from the Americanist, quasi-Masonic, shameless Jєω butt kissers. 13 yrs. ago on LI a woman ( we'll call her Marge ) sat at my table after Mass. Her FIRST question, before she even knew my name was: " what do you think about Bishop Williamson?" She and her husband hate him. I said I loved him. She told me " there was a conference here not long ago. The priest was giving a talk ( on Catholic Social Doctrine ) and he said, ' the average American believes this...but we as Catholics believe this..' And I'll tell you, if I had been there I would have called the FBI on those people...."
I heard this from this ignoramus and was dumb-founded....I couldn't believe it, at first I thought she was being farcical...then I realized, no: she really is that stone-cold stupid...And it's these people who have caused most of the problems in the SSPX...they complain about things they shouldn't and really are the trouble-makers. :reporter:

Wow -- it would be an honor to be this woman's enemy. I sincerely hope she doesn't like me either! If she liked me, I'd have to be a liberal Americanist.

wallflower · « **Reply #9 on:** May 11, 2016, 08:15:38 AM »

I am trying to sort this out in my mind a little bit because this is a criticism of the SSPX that isn't new. Many people have said this for a long time and often with resentment and sour grapes. Where there is smoke there is fire so I do think and have seen that there is a grain of truth to it, but I also think many people exaggerate this claim in an effort to smear the SSPX and it's faithful.

The recent claims that the SSPX cannot fall are quite disturbing and seem to validate the accusations of "triumphalism and exceptionalism". But I think many people simply haven't thought it through to realize what they are saying. If push came to shove they would admit to its silliness, both in the fact that the SSPX is not infallible and that many others are saved outside the SSPX. At least I fervently hope so. I can't think of many that I know personally who would be dogmatic about it.

What we are seeing is hope and loyalty. Perhaps misguided hope and loyalty but hope and loyalty nonetheless. The truth is that the SSPX so far has provided the safest haven that many could find. It has provided as close to a traditional Catholic experience as any of us could have. It represents the closest we'll ever see of the Church as She ought to be even if it isn't actually the Church. For that reason the trust and loyalty run deep and strong. This is human nature, we depend heavily on good leadership, whether we like to admit it or not. The modern world wants to paint it as a weakness but we know that hierarchy is the normal state of things, the way God made us. So if we can't depend on the Pope, naturally eyes will turn to the SSPX. After years of doing so myself, (and I still do so for some things), I'd feel awfully hypocritical for criticizing people for looking to the SSPX for answers now.

Fr Scott's article was published in 2010 so we know it isn't leveled specifically against the Resistance priests. We don't know what he thinks of them specifically. Yet we are reacting and taking it as personally as if he had written it yesterday with the Resistance in mind. Do we actually know what he would say if someone asked him about attending Fr. Zendejas' Mass?

Even if there are problems with his article I do not blame him for having warned people away from independent priests in general. If we are using the SSPX as a reference for what the Church ought to be, then it makes sense that we seek their advice on independent priests outside the Society. It's exactly what I did before current events and if I met an independent priest who wasn't Resistance, I'd likely still ask and try to find a point of reference. I don't think there is anything wrong with that. It's one on the steps necessary to make sure we are not getting a Mr. Tethrerow. But it's advice, so it can be taken or left.

The claim that only they have supplied jurisdiction is probably the most problematic point. But even with that, it doesn't seem that they take that literally since they work with independents themselves. So it seems that the article was written as general advice and meant to make people think twice and ask for guidance. With the Mr Tetherows and Morans running around I do believe it is better to err towards caution too.

Croixalist · « **Reply #10 on:** May 11, 2016, 08:33:34 AM »

Quote from: Last Tradhican

In other words, do not expect any help from the pope, our diocese bishops, religious, (the SSPX) as was done before 1957. We are each on our own. If you have the gift of a valid priest & sacraments, thank God. If that priest is a drag, unfriendly, a bad sermonist....., be content with what you have. The possibility exists that 99%+ of Catholics do not even have a valid priest.

Heh, I'm a bit more optimistic about the amount of valid priests out there, but good traditional priests are worth far more than their weight in gold no matter how uncharismatic they may be.

Quote from: Matthew

Quote from: Pax Vobis

On a humorous note, if +Fellay wants to raise $ for the new seminary, all he has to do is make hats which say "Make the Church Great Again" and he'd sell out in 5 minutes.

The similarities in rhetoric used by Trump and +Fellay are striking, if you think about it.

Both use psychology and politics (empty rhetoric) to appeal to the lowest common denominator in their audience. Both talk out of both sides of their mouth, so everyone can cling to some sentence or two and say, "See? He still speaks for me!"

And both are completely full of themselves. Come on now, Trump supporters, admit it. Isn't that what you mean when you admit to his "weaknesses" or "faults"? You can't just ignore how much of an arrogant blowhard Trump is, even if you believe he's the best thing for America right now.

Bishop Fellay is a bit more refined, sure, but even he has issues with humility. He thinks he is going to convert the Church with his great SSPX once he gets approved by the Roman authorities. He thinks he is going to succeed where +Lefebvre failed. That certainly isn't humility, I'll tell you that much!

Brave man trying to compare the Great Uncatholic Blowhard to Bishop Fellay! Watch your back for the Trumpeteers and the Trump-bearers.

:shocked:

Bishop Fellay, if he honestly believes what he is saying, comes off to me as someone who is playing with forces completely out of his control. Like a young boy who sneaks off to play with his new chemistry set unsupervised, or like a married man with kids sneaking off to the casino with his last paycheck. There's a possibility that somehow someway, this apparent scheme backfires on the perpetrators and it doesn't eventually (if not immediately) lead to the disaster we've seen happen before under these circuмstances.

In the event he is every bit as untrustworthy as he comes off as, let God grant him an early retirement from the Society and from the planet for that matter!

Quote from: Croixalist

There's almost so much traction can we possibly expect to get.

There's only so much sleep deprivation I can possibly expect to hide when writing on these forums.

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #11 on:** May 11, 2016, 08:59:10 AM »

Croixalist,

Quote

trying to compare the Great Uncatholic Blowhard to Bishop Fellay!

That's why I prefaced my comparison with "on a humorous note", even though there is nothing humorous about +Fellay selling out. But both Fellay and Trump use nostalgia and a 'save the day' psychology to keep their supporters engaged.

Quote

Bishop Fellay, if he honestly believes what he is saying,

This is debatable, but I see +Fellay's intentions as anything but honest.

Franciscan Solitary · « **Reply #12 on:** May 11, 2016, 12:35:27 PM »

What is the opposite of Roman Catholic Triumphalism? False ecuмenism and its accompanying Americanism. So if Catholics reject the prevailing false ecuмenism with its Americanism, then they will embrace that which prevents such ecuмenism and false pride, namely our very own family heirloom Roman Triumphalism. What is Rome without her Roman Triumphs? Carthage perhaps, or something too much like the late and not so great American Republic of unpleasant memory.

Neo-Liberal Communist America is the incarnation of failure and human misery whereas Catholic Rome is the incarnation of victory and divine glory. Best for Catholics to firmly embrace Eternal Rome and put as much distance between us and the abysmally wretched American Republic as possible!

What is meant when the enemies of Christ condemn Roman Catholic Triumphalism? They mean the Kingship of Christ and nothing other than that. They are too deceitful to condemn the Kingship of Christ outright and must slyly substitute another name for His Divine Kingship over His own Creation.

Only fairly dense hypocrites will confuse Roman Catholic Triumphalism with false pride of self. Those who embrace the Triumphs of Eternal Rome will very quickly discover that they have taken the straight and narrow road of the Holy Cross and will have their every weakness and limitation promptly delineated to them in the most vividly brilliant colours. The boundless holy pride of confidence in God is the surest way to learn the truths of boundless humility and total lack of confidence regarding oneself and every Roman Catholic can rest assured that this will always and swiftly prove to be the case. Triumphalism about God and the Kingship of Christ and lowly humility about oneself are the two sides of one and the same divine Roman Catholic reality.

Our Holy Roman Church and Empire are always divine and infallible and for that very reason Roman Catholics gladly accept Roman discipline and regard any delusions of personal infallibility with hearty Roman laughter. Therefore the apostate Bishop Fellay may well be an ass and a fool, but he is emphatically no disciplined Roman Catholic soldier of Christ.

Red America and her apostate Novus Ordo Anti-Church must be regarded only with the utmost holy hatred and contempt. Every American Roman Catholic should rue the day that our fellow miserable Americans and our abominable anti-Roman and hideously Carthage-like Republic saw the light of day. For American Catholics such as ourselves this is the true test of personal humility and the genuine rejection of false pride of self. We should throw ourselves on the mercy of the Good God and beg forgiveness from the Blessed Virgin for being something so uniquely and incomparably disgusting as Americans.

American Triumphalism, not Roman Catholic Triumphalism, is the actual terrible curse of these Apocalyptic End Times into which the Good Lord has in His infintie wisdom chosen to locate us.

We Americans more than deserve Donald Trump.

Gerard from FE · « **Reply #13 on:** May 14, 2016, 01:12:55 PM »

Quote from: Franciscan Solitary

What is the opposite of Roman Catholic Triumphalism? False ecuмenism and its accompanying Americanism.

I don't agree with that. I think the opposite of both False Ecuмenism and Roman Catholic Triumphalism is Catholic Magnanimity.

Quote

What is meant when the enemies of Christ condemn Roman Catholic Triumphalism? They mean the Kingship of Christ and nothing other than that. They are too deceitful to condemn the Kingship of Christ outright and must slyly substitute another name for His Divine Kingship over His own Creation.

They are actually more clever than that. They take an actual problem within the Catholic faithful and tie a doctrine to it.

If there is an undeserved haughtiness among Catholics because they have the grace of being in the one, true Church, the lack of compassion towards non-Catholics and the overblown sense of entitlement among themselves creates a real negative attribute, but instead of blaming the attitude on a failing of the people, the blame is shifted to the Kingship of Christ and the unicity of the Church which is treated as the cause of the haughtiness, not the spiritual pride of the people.

Quote

Only fairly dense hypocrites will confuse Roman Catholic Triumphalism with false pride of self. Those who embrace the Triumphs of Eternal Rome will very quickly discover that they have taken the straight and narrow road of the Holy Cross and will have their every weakness and limitation promptly delineated to them in the most vividly brilliant colours.

I think a distinction needs to be made between "Triumphs" and "Triumphalism"

Members of a team who win a championships are the ones who Triumph. The beer-swilling band wagon jumpers who share the name of the city or town and gloat about their victories or shout, "We're number 1" are Triumphalist.

Muhammed Ali was "triumphalist" in his victories with his shouts of "I am the Greatesst." vs. Floyd Patterson or Rocky Marciano or Joe Louis who were gracious in victory.

Quote

The boundless holy pride of confidence in God is the surest way to learn the truths of boundless humility and total lack of confidence regarding oneself and every Roman Catholic can rest assured that this will always and swiftly prove to be the case. Triumphalism about God and the Kingship of Christ and lowly humility about oneself are the two sides of one and the same divine Roman Catholic reality.

The truth is anything "boundless" is an attribute of God alone. It's good sounding rhetoric but it's not real. Humility cannot be boundless because it is by definition a real assessment of one's bounded position. You can only be so good at it, like eating cereal. The challenge is to develop and maintain it.

Quote

Our Holy Roman Church and Empire are always divine and infallible and for that very reason Roman Catholics gladly accept Roman discipline and regard any delusions of personal infallibility with hearty Roman laughter. Therefore the apostate Bishop Fellay may well be an ass and a fool, but he is emphatically no disciplined Roman Catholic soldier of Christ.

The Catholic Church is not Divine. God is Divine. It is a Divine Institution and a Human institution. It is not always infallible, only under specific conditions. It is indefectible, not impeccable.

Quote

Red America and her apostate Novus Ordo Anti-Church must be regarded only with the utmost holy hatred and contempt. Every American Roman Catholic should rue the day that our fellow miserable Americans and our abominable anti-Roman and hideously Carthage-like Republic saw the light of day. For American Catholics such as ourselves this is the true test of personal humility and the genuine rejection of false pride of self. We should throw ourselves on the mercy of the Good God and beg forgiveness from the Blessed Virgin for being something so uniquely and incomparably disgusting as Americans.

What Pope has commanded us to do this thing?

Quote

American Triumphalism, not Roman Catholic Triumphalism, is the actual terrible curse of these Apocalyptic End Times into which the Good Lord has in His infintie wisdom chosen to locate us.

More likely they are both terrible sins we commit. To be weighed against the good that we can do in the situations we are in. God places us where we are for how long we are in order to get to Heaven, I doubt He is surprised or thwarted in His will by circuмstances of government.

Quote

We Americans more than deserve Donald Trump.

God can work through flawed vessels quite well. Trump may be a lifeline albeit a weak one, but it may be enough for a reversal to begin. If not, so be it.