Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

"We Are Embarrassed" (Cardinal O'Malley on the SSPX)
WITL ^ | January 31, 2009 | Rocco Palmo

Posted on 01/31/2009 3:13:02 PM PST by NYer

Long a key voice in Catholic-Jewish relations, Cardinal Sean O'Malley OFM Cap. of Boston issued a response to the week's events late last night:
The Vatican announced this week that the Holy Father has lifted the excommunications of four bishops of the Society of St. Pius X. I was pleased with the news which shows, once again, the Holy Father’s concern for unity and reconciliation in the Church....

[The Pope's] outreach to the communities who follow these bishops is just one more manifestation of his ardent desire to bring these people (which some estimate to be as many as 1.5 million) back into the fold. We know that these are generally people who practice their faith and try to live a Christian life seriously but, unfortunately, I believe that they have been misled by their leadership.

Of course, lifting the excommunications was a first step; it does not regularize these bishops or the Society of St. Pius X, but it opens the way for a dialogue. This step was in response to a letter in which they professed their desire for full participation in the life of the Church.

It was tragic that one of the four bishops, Bishop Richard Williamson, had made outrageous statements about the Holocaust and about the September 11 attacks on the United States. It certainly raises questions as to the caliber of the leadership that the Society has. Additionally, as terrible as the comments were, it underscores the importance for the Holy Father to have increasing influence over those communities.

We are very sorry that the people in the Jewish community have been so pained and outraged by Bishop Williamson’s statements. I think the Holy Father’s statements and those of Cardinal Walter Kasper, chairman of the Pontifical Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews, have been very clear to dissociate the Catholic Church from those kinds of sentiments. I was pleased that the head of the Society of St. Pius X, Bishop Bernard Fellay, also repudiated the statements of Bishop Williamson.

It is very important for us to always remember the Holocaust so that such an atrocity could never take place again. I recall the words of the Holy Father this week: “May the Shoah be for everyone an admonition against oblivion, negation and reductionism, because violence against a single human being is violence against all.”
Meanwhile, the US bishops' lead ecumenists have likewise gone public:
“It has been very hurtful to our Jewish partners,” said Father James Massa, executive director of U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Secretariat of Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs. “They’ve been calling us for answers for what this means. The mood is very tense.”...

“Bishop Williamson’s disgraceful remarks ... indicate his contempt for those who oppose his advocacy of Holocaust denial,” said Rabbi Gary Greenebaum, the American Jewish Committee’s U.S. director of interreligious affairs.

“While we appreciate that Pope Benedict has again declared his support for the Jewish people and his rejection of Holocaust denial,” he continued, “we fear that the Vatican’s decision to invite (Bishop) Williamson back into the Catholic Church will give legitimacy to these outrageous lies and suggest toleration of those who perpetuate them.

“Doubtless, this will contribute to the deterioration of the excellent relations between Jews and the Catholic Church,” the rabbi said in a statement.

The entire ordeal has created a lot of confusion, Father Massa told Catholic News Service Jan. 29.

There is a difference between the lifting of excommunication and being in full communion with the Catholic Church, he said.

“Removing excommunication doesn’t mean they are fully reconciled as priests and bishops of the Catholic Church,” Father Massa said. “Like any other Catholic, they can go to Mass and receive holy Communion, but they cannot perform the sacrament themselves as fully recognized ministers of the church.”...

“In no way am I excusing (Bishop) Williamson,” Rabbi Bradley Hirschfield, president of the National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership, said in a Jan. 26 blog.

“But I am willing to entertain that however much pain his reinstatement might cause relative to this issue,” he said, “it may not be the only basis upon which the pope should make his decision, nor should it govern the future of church-Jewish relations, as some have already suggested/threatened it will.”

Though Jewish-Catholic relations in the U.S. may be strained at the moment, Archbishop Wilton D. Gregory of Atlanta, chairman of the USCCB’s Committee for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs, said the foundation is solid and he is confident they will forge ahead with friendships intact.

“We (Catholics) are embarrassed during this episode, like when a family member has said a shameful thing,” Archbishop Gregory told CNS Jan. 30.

“We’ll have to take those steps necessary to let them know we value those (Catholic-Jewish) relationships, as well as our bond, love and unity with our Jewish counterparts,” he said, “and that we don’t in any way indent to step aside from our great tradition of friendship in this country.”

The archbishop noted he was to speak at an upcoming Jewish event in his city that he already had on his calendar, and he planned to take that opportunity to assure the Jewish community he will do whatever he can to reinforce Catholic-Jewish relations.

“That is what many bishops in America will have to do – to take that opportunity to let them know of our esteem, and strengthen our relations,” he said. “The vehicles are there. We need to use them. We need to show our Jewish friends our desire to continue to move forward.”

It is important now for the Catholic hierarchy to explain theological and canonical distinctions to their Jewish partners, and assure them of the church’s commitment to Jewish-Catholic dialogue based on Vatican II, Father Massa said.

“We are expressing our profound dissatisfaction with the egregiously offensive comments of Bishop Williamson,” he said. “It is unacceptable for a bishop who seeks to be in communion with the Catholic Church to deny the historical fact of the Shoah.”


TOPICS: Catholic; Current Events; Theology; Worship
KEYWORDS: judeochristian; rabbis; sspx; vatican

1 posted on 01/31/2009 3:13:03 PM PST by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Salvation; narses; SMEDLEYBUTLER; redhead; Notwithstanding; nickcarraway; Romulus; ...

Ping!


2 posted on 01/31/2009 3:13:48 PM PST by NYer ("Run from places of sin as from a plague." - St. John Climacus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

There were some surprisingly rational responses and comments in there.


3 posted on 01/31/2009 3:19:15 PM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NYer
It certainly raises questions as to the caliber of the leadership that the Society has.

And that remark, in turn, raises questions about the good treatment a regularized Society of St. Pius X might expect to receive in the Archdiocese of Boston.

4 posted on 01/31/2009 3:24:47 PM PST by cmj328 (Filibuster FOCA or lose reelection)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cmj328

“It certainly raises questions as to the caliber of the leadership that the Society has.

And that remark, in turn, raises questions about the good treatment a regularized Society of St. Pius X might expect to receive in the Archdiocese of Boston. “

Perhaps he should be just as concerned about the “caliber of the leadership” provided by pervert protecting bishops, such as Mahony, Moreno, O’Brien and all the others.


5 posted on 01/31/2009 3:31:53 PM PST by rogator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cmj328; rogator
And that remark, in turn, raises questions about the good treatment a regularized Society of St. Pius X might expect to receive in the Archdiocese of Boston.

Would either of you care to post the 'teachings' of the sspx on the documents of Vatican Council II? We would all be interested in gaining a deeper understanding of what has been taught to sspx members over the past 40 years.

6 posted on 01/31/2009 4:05:30 PM PST by NYer ("Run from places of sin as from a plague." - St. John Climacus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cmj328

You wrote:

“And that remark, in turn, raises questions about the good treatment a regularized Society of St. Pius X might expect to receive in the Archdiocese of Boston.”

Not really. It and when the SSPX is regularized it will still have a great deal of freedom from the local bishop and will be protected by the Ecclesia Dei commission. The greatest problem the SSPXers have are themselves and their leadership.


7 posted on 01/31/2009 4:32:50 PM PST by vladimir998 (Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ. St. Jerome)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Oh, dear. This is turning into quite a fuddle, isn’t it?


8 posted on 01/31/2009 5:11:05 PM PST by Tax-chick (I will not be silenced.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NYer

I guess nobody cares how offended I am that over 70% of the U.S. Jewish community voted for an American hating, Israel hating, Iran loving, socialist for president. Perhaps I’m less concerned about the holocaust than the coming catastrophe of a nuclear armed Iran. After Nov 4th, I must say couldn’t care less how they feel about Pope Benedict XVI.


9 posted on 01/31/2009 5:33:35 PM PST by ALPAPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

I am not an SSPXer, so I have had no first hand knowlege of “the ‘teachings’ of the sspx on the documents of Vatican Council II”.

That said, the parishs in which I have lived for most of the last forty-five years taught me that the documents of Vatican II had:
Outlawed Latin;
Required Communion rails to be removed;
Required standing for Communion;
Required the priest to “face the people” during Mass;
Recommended/required that Traditional Hymns/organ music be discarded in favor of modern contemporary music with guitars, tambourines and pianos;
Required “grip and grin” sessions before and during Mass;
Recommended Communion in the hand;
Recommended that people not kneel at Mass;
Allowed liturgical dancers (or liturgical movement, whatever that is, I am afraid to ask);
and other things too numerous to mention, but you get the idea.

All of these things are BOLD FACED LIES by clerics in communion with their bishops who are in communion with Rome.
And this guy (O’Malley)has the gall to disparage the “caliber of the leadership” of the SSPX folks?


10 posted on 01/31/2009 7:16:50 PM PST by rogator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: rogator

Very well said. I’m also not an SSPXer, but I can’t believe that the Archbishop of Boston has the chutzpah to knock them. His archdiocese has been in free fall for decades (closed churches, closed schools, dwindling vocations, etc.), so one should certainly question that “caliber of leadership” Boston’s Catholics have had, as well. He’s upset that Williamson is a member in good standing of the SSPX? Well, I’m upset that the Kennedys and other pro-abortion politicians of their ilk are members in good standing of the Archdiocese of Boston.


11 posted on 01/31/2009 7:26:41 PM PST by irishjuggler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: NYer

The whack-jobs in the SSPX need to have a bright light shone upon them so they’ll either retract their statements, or shut up completely.

That said, I wish our bishops were similarly embarrassed when their brethren go off the reservation on the far left.


12 posted on 01/31/2009 9:18:02 PM PST by Antoninus (Obama: "Lucravi." -- Conservatives: "Vae victis.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: irishjuggler
He’s upset that Williamson is a member in good standing of the SSPX? Well, I’m upset that the Kennedys and other pro-abortion politicians of their ilk are members in good standing of the Archdiocese of Boston.

That's it in a nutshell. And that's the precise reason why the SSPX should never have ostracized in the first place. How can these folks be excommunicated when overt rebels and heretics (the Bidens, Pelosis, and Kennedy's of this world) are suffered to remain in communion? It's a double standard that can not stand.
13 posted on 01/31/2009 9:22:07 PM PST by Antoninus (Obama: "Lucravi." -- Conservatives: "Vae victis.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NYer
"We are very sorry that the people in the Jewish community have been so pained and outraged by Bishop Williamson’s statements."

Honestly! Give me a break. LOL. I think they are smarter than than that, they know nonsense when they hear it.

This goes to show how much detatchment is necessary from the utter seriousness with which we take oureselves.

14 posted on 01/31/2009 9:29:26 PM PST by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

They had plenty of forgiveness for chickenhawks.


15 posted on 01/31/2009 9:54:55 PM PST by steve8714 (How do you know your tattoo doesn't read "I love Mangina" in Chinese?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
In addition to Bishop Williamson's revisionist views on the Holocaust and Vatican II, he also doesn't like The Sound of Music! From a letter by Bishop Williamson written in 1997 on the SSPX website:

. . . But enter now the villains! Firstly a glamorous Baroness previously engaged to be married to the Captain, who schemes to get Julie Andrews out of the way, back to the Convent (but didn't you know, "The path of true love never did run smooth"?). Secondly, villain of villains, a - a - a NAZI! (Original sin? - never heard of it! Isn't all sin Nazi sin?) . . . .

Shiny white wedding dress (of course), wedding bells all over the place and a lovely ceremony (of course), to be spoiled only by the brutal re-appearance of the nasty Nazi - the Captain must report for duty to the Third Reich!

The family tries to sneak away. The nasty Nazi spots them, so now they all break out into singing Edelweiss. The nasty Nazi is foiled when the family escape to the convent (where else?), but drama rolls as the nasty Nazis close in on the convent. (But didn't you know, "Life is not just a bed of roses"?) The Captain is heroic (of course), but the dastardly villains are only foiled for good when their car is incapacitated by the nuns turned into mechanics (of course), and the last shots show the "family" climbing a mountain path to get out of the Third Reich, amidst hills which are once more - go on, don't tell me you couldn't guess! -- "alive with the sound of music". How truly heart -warming. . . .

As for cleanness, many films may be worse than the Sound of Music, but stop and think - are youth, physical attractiveness and being in love the essence of marriage? Can you imagine this Julie Andrews staying with the Captain if "the romance went out of their marriage"? Would she not divorce him and grab his children from him to be her toys? Such romance is not actually pornographic but it is virtually so, in other words all the elements of pornography are there, just waiting to break out. One remembers the media sensation when a few years later Julie Andrews appeared topless in another film. That was no sensation, just a natural development for one rolling canine female.

As for being a family film, by glorifying that romance which is essentially self-centred, The Sound of Music puts selfishness in the place of selflessness between husband and wife, and by putting friendliness and fun in the place of authority and rules, it invites disorder between parents and children. This is a new model family which in short order will be no family at all, its liberated members flying off in all different directions. . .


16 posted on 01/31/2009 10:18:25 PM PST by DeepThought42 (He who dares, wins.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ALPAPilot

You have a point there, ALPA. It’s not only Jews, just about everybody seems to feel entitled to react with outrage if the Pope or a Catholic leader says something they don’t like. Hey, it’s not THEIR religion. Imagine if the same amount of press coverage were given to the anti-Catholic jokes, smears on sacred Catholic beliefs, and nasty comments against the Holy Father, and even Mary and Jesus, on a daily basis. We could hardly have room for anything else in the news. Imagine if Catholics freaked out every time someone made a comment that did not concur with their view of history or reality. It’s so commonplace and socially acceptable, in the news, in literature, in pop music, that only the most egregious insults get a response, and then usually only from The Catholic League, an independent organization, not a bishop or Vatican official. The bishops jumping on Pelosi and Biden for their unique interpretations of Catholic theology was a very rare exception, but there’s enough of that garbage happening it could be a daily occurrence.


17 posted on 01/31/2009 10:35:36 PM PST by baa39 (Mater Dei, ora pro nobis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: DeepThought42

He obviously does not realize that the “Sound of Music” is a TRUE story!


18 posted on 01/31/2009 10:38:27 PM PST by baa39 (Mater Dei, ora pro nobis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: baa39
Like many movies based on history, history is perverted. Most, if not all, of the things that Bishop Williamson refers to in the Sound of Music seem to be deviations from history.
http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2005/winter/von-trapps.html
19 posted on 01/31/2009 11:05:32 PM PST by Hieronymus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: baa39

Actually, he does note that is based on a true story early in the letter. I posted only a portion of his comments, as the letter is rather long. You can read it by clicking on the link.


20 posted on 01/31/2009 11:23:34 PM PST by DeepThought42 (He who dares, wins.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: DeepThought42; baa39
Thanks for pointing again to the link. He not only notes that it is historically based, but notes that Hollywood is likely corrupted:

It would be interesting to read the original book by the real-life governess, Maria von Trapp, to see just how far Hollywood departed from reality in the film starring Julie Andrews and Christopher Plummer. However, we need not know the original to see what Hollywood has done!

In fact, the Bishop might have made a much stronger case by noting how the film did depart from reality&mdas. I haven't read Family on Wheels, but have read Maria (the prequel) a few years back, and that, along with the Bishop's comments, was enough to make me dig around on the net and find the information that I tried to link to in post 18 www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2005/winter/von-trapps.html .

As it stands, the film is good when compared with what passes for entertainment now days, but the Bishop does seem to have valid points in that history is altered for the sake of promoting an agenda, and the more one is aware of the history, the more the agenda is apparent. The Catholic children's author Hilda van Stockum, who was a friend of the Von Trapps, walked out of the Sound of Music because of the way it had altered things (I have this from one of Mrs. van Stockum’s granddaughters). In fairness, I ought to add, that, while friends, Mrs. van Stockum found Mrs. Von Trapp to be rather cantankerous (the link also notes the trait) and apparently found Julie Andrews to be the thing hardest to stomach.

Another instance of Hollywood making what passes for a decent movie that actually tilts social mores left is Yours, Mine, and Ours—which I really liked in the original form until I read the book upon which it is based, Who Gets the Last Drumstick? Thanks to this evening, I suspect that I will read Family on Wheels and never want to see the Sound of Music again.

21 posted on 02/01/2009 12:47:00 AM PST by Hieronymus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Hieronymus

While we can debate how Hollywood portrays historical events (given that movies don’t run in real time, and in The Sound of Music’s case the vista of the Alps is much better than the reality of leaving by train, as film is a visual medium), I think the most offensive part of the Bishop’s letter is his trite dismissal of the Nazi reigime as merely “nasty.” But given his denial of the Holocaust we shouldn’t expect anything less, I guess.

Anyone who gets their history from film or television deserves to get an F on their exam. After seeing a fact-based film, for example, the first thing I do when I get home is to do more research to fill in the gaps.

I couldn’t watch a film on TV with my dad that featured railroading—he worked for the Southern Pacific for 30 years, and would point out the flaws in every scene.


22 posted on 02/01/2009 12:56:46 AM PST by DeepThought42 (He who dares, wins.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: NYer
I have no affiliation or correspondence with the SSPX and no care to repeat their teachings, or copy and paste their web site.

Regardless of what they may have said, I would think a Catholic should take far greater offense at what some other "separated brethren" may have been taught about the Immaculate Conception and the role of the Papacy, let alone the sacramental validity of the Roman Canon, than at anyone who might criticize some aspect of some document of Vatican II.

But that's just me. Perhaps you sing hymns related to teachings from Inter Mirifica at the Masses you attend?

23 posted on 02/01/2009 3:13:55 AM PST by cmj328 (Filibuster FOCA or lose reelection)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: DeepThought42
I would tend to extend your comments on getting history from film or television to television news, newspapers, and popular magazines. At an early age, my father told me that most reporting in Viet Nam consisted of reporters sitting in bars talking to each other and soldiers. I used to think that this was a low standard of reporting, but am beginning to think that it would be quite high by today's standards. The present controversy of Bishop Williamson is a good example.

From what I understand, the Bishop does not deny the holocaust per se, but holds two positions contrary to the historically orthodox position (1) that the six million figure normally used for Jewish deaths is unduly high (I have seen one post stating that he holds that this is off by a full order of magnitude) and (2) that gas chambers were not the method used for execution, at least for the Jews. However, short of seeing the unedited footage of the original interview, the only way Bishop Williamson has to demonstrate his views are more moderate than they are portrayed is to speak again on the issue—but if they deviate at all from historical orthodoxy, they will be misconstrued in the same way.

No serious follower of Archbishop Lefebvre would deny the existence of the death camps, as the Archbishop's own father, a strong monarchist, died in one in 1944 after having been sent there for his work for the French resistance. (Discoverable by reading the first paragraph after the two paragraph summary of the Archbishop's bio on wikipedia). Of course, while this is a somewhat relevant fact, I think I've seen it pointed out once in perhaps 500 posts I've seen on the topic. That Bishop Williamson believes that at least hundreds of thousands of Jews died in concentration camps is something that most posters on various forums (and reporters) seem to miss.

24 posted on 02/01/2009 3:53:13 AM PST by Hieronymus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Hieronymus
It would be interesting to read the original book by the real-life governess, Maria von Trapp, to see just how far Hollywood departed from reality in the film

Most of the changes from history were made in the Broadway musical, starring Mary Martin and Theodore Bikel, which naturally had fewer outdoor scenes.

25 posted on 02/01/2009 4:00:07 AM PST by Lucius Cornelius Sulla (All of this has happened before and it will happen again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: rogator; irishjuggler
That said, the parishs in which I have lived for most of the last forty-five years taught me that the documents of Vatican II had: Outlawed Latin;

Having lived through the same experience, I can truly empathize with your comments. At no time, however, do I ever recall a pastor teaching this from the pulpit. They simply implemented the changes, some more rapidly than others, over the span of several decades. Like most catholics, I never questioned it until I arrived in this forum and someone challenged me to read the documents of VCII. What you and I have experienced is an interpretation of those documents. They were written to address the needs of catholics worldwide - not just in the US.

None of this has anything to do with the SSPX whose founder chose to dissent with the Council and the authority of the pope. That is the crux of the problem. One might rightly be appreciative to the sspx for retaining the TLM but not their dissent.

26 posted on 02/01/2009 5:45:44 AM PST by NYer ("Run from places of sin as from a plague." - St. John Climacus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: NYer

That said, the parishs in which I have lived for most of the last forty-five years taught me that the documents of Vatican II had: Outlawed Latin;
Having lived through the same experience, I can truly empathize with your comments. At no time, however, do I ever recall a pastor teaching this from the pulpit.


I have, though perhaps in not so many words.

Some U.S. dioceses did in fact outlaw latin, beginning with Baltimore in ‘64 or ‘65. (There was a period for phasing out, but it was fairly quick.)


27 posted on 02/01/2009 6:27:58 AM PST by Hieronymus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: NYer

You asked me the question and I answered you.
Not all teaching comes from the pulpit.
Those of us who value Tradition and the Latin Mass owe the SSPX folks big time.


28 posted on 02/01/2009 7:24:58 AM PST by rogator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: cmj328
I disagree. Bishop Williamson did not go so far as call for the Canonization of Adolf Hitler [/sarcasm off], but his comments make people wonder what type of people lead SSPX.

There are members of SSPX that have been for years saying that Pope John Paul II was the Anti-Christ, along with Pope Benedict. These are a few radical elements in the SSPX group. But the schism has hurt the society.

In terms of history, the Tridentine Rite did cause trouble in India. When the Portuguese arrived after the English, they were able to bring the Saint Thomas Christians in communion with the Roman Catholic Church.

These Saint Thomas Christians of Kerelya province in India had 7 Churches established one of Jesus' original twelve apostles.

Since the time of Christ (or rather the time that the Apostle Thomas the doubter converted them), these people said Mass in the vernacular of the people. They did have a Mar Thomas (Syrian Bishop) sent to them around the 4th or 5th Centuries after one of the early Church Councils.

Enforcing the Tridentine Rite (the rite used by SSPX) caused schism with these Christians of India in around the year 1500. I believe two of the original 7 churches broke away with Rome and are still part of the Syro-Malobar Church (spelling/accuracy?).

To base your religion just on the Tridentine Rite is wrong. To base your religion on precepts and beliefs that prevent liberal, bad influences in the church is good.

There is both good and bad in SSPX just as there is both good and bad in the Vatican II movement. Vatican II has allowed errors to enter the Church, which is why SSPX is popular.

SSPX has good, solid seminaries. I assure you will not hear rock 'n roll, rap music, and other nonsense in the SSPX seminaries which has been going on in American seminaries since the 1960s.

There are things Rome can learn from SSPX. And there are probably things that SSPX can pick up from Rome and other traditional elements of the Church.

One example of good done by SSPX is that vestments that were going to be discarded by Saint Patrick's Cathedral in New York was picked up by the tiny SSPX community in Saint Marys, Kansas. Many of the vestments were handstiched by nuns pre-Vatican II and are beautiful vestments.

Jumping to the conclusion that the Archdiocese of Boston will be unfair to this group is not wrong in my opinion.

The English Bishop who made such terrible comments about the Holocaust is the one who has given SSPX the black eye -- not the Archdiocese of Boston.

In Atlanta, the SSPX church was advertising that it was a Catholic Church. During the time of the schism, they were just the SSPX and outside the Catholic Church, so that was false advertising with the Phone Company. Even though I had family members in St Marys, Kansas, I complained to the Phone Company about this advertising.

It could advertise as a former Catholic Church group that performs the Tridentine Rite for Mass...

At that time, the Archdiocese of Atlanta had established a Tridentine rite only Parish -- Saint Francis de Sales.

The SSPX Church actually rented space in a hotel for its Sunday Services and it went by the name of Saint Michaels...

29 posted on 02/01/2009 9:22:31 AM PST by topher (Let us return to old-fashioned morality - morality that has stood the test of time...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: baa39
He obviously does not realize that the “Sound of Music” is a TRUE story!

Adding the phrase based on a true story is more accurate.

There are some chilling tales about Nazi Germany, but it is not like it was in the movie... The movie changes the timeline to fit a movie versus what happened in the true story. The book would explain that better than I can.

The Von Trapp family did not have to escape from Germany, as shown in the film. They basically just immigrated to America, but had trouble getting permission to permanently stay in America.

Maria Von Trapp wrote a book about her experience.

Story of the Trapp Family Singers [Hardcover]

1981

By Maria Augusta Von Trapp

ISBN-10 : 0397000189

ISBN-13 : 9780397000180

Publisher : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

There is also a paperback version of the book published in 1957.

30 posted on 02/01/2009 9:36:05 AM PST by topher (Let us return to old-fashioned morality - morality that has stood the test of time...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: rogator; Hieronymus
Not all teaching comes from the pulpit.

Agreed. But neither of you answered my question. Did you ever read the documents from Second Vatican Council?

31 posted on 02/01/2009 1:06:52 PM PST by NYer ("Run from places of sin as from a plague." - St. John Climacus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: NYer

You hadn’t asked me. I’ve read all 16 multiple times,and incorporated lumen gentium, sacrosanctum concilium, and dei verbum into courses multiple times. pardon caps—am holding baby.


32 posted on 02/01/2009 3:36:42 PM PST by Hieronymus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: NYer

That isn’t the question you asked me.
But now that you are asking, I read these documents when they became more readily available (in the mid-’70s).
I was hotter than a firecracker when I found out what they REALLY said.


33 posted on 02/01/2009 4:23:26 PM PST by rogator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: topher
Jumping to the conclusion that the Archdiocese of Boston will be unfair to this group is not wrong in my opinion.

Then why spend almost 20 paragraphs beating up strawmen under the false headline "I disagree"?

34 posted on 02/01/2009 5:16:52 PM PST by cmj328 (Filibuster FOCA or lose reelection)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ALPAPilot

“I guess nobody cares how offended I am that over 70% of the U.S. Jewish community voted for an American hating, Israel hating, Iran loving, socialist for president. Perhaps I’m less concerned about the holocaust than the coming catastrophe of a nuclear armed Iran. After Nov 4th, I must say couldn’t care less how they feel about Pope Benedict XVI.”

You are generalizing. There are more Jews in the world than just those in America. There is all of Israel, and believe me, they know better than anyone how precarious their situation is over there surrounded by the Arab countries that want them exterminated. Who do you think will be the first affected by the coming catastrophe of a nuclear armed Iran. That’s right, Israel. It would be their second holocaust. So, because there are a bunch of leftist Jews in this country whose ideology trumps their loyalties to Israel and their religious roots, that does not abrogate the threat to Israel’s very existence. Israeli Jews are not disemodied American leftist Jews. And what the SSPX’er jerk Bishop said about the Jews was unconscionable and impossible to justify by any Catholic.


35 posted on 02/01/2009 7:16:03 PM PST by flaglady47 (Four years of captivity, no relief in sight)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: flaglady47

1. The Pope ex-ex-communicated a bishop. No Catholic is justifying the Bishop’s comments. It allows the bishop (necessarily a sinner) access to the sacraments (including reconciliation). He may need them more than most.

2. I haven’t heard outrage from any Jewish community over the election of Obama.

3. Those Jewish leaders feigning offense at Pope Benedict and being silent about the Obama administration should be ignored.

4. The MSM never misses an opportunity to throw dirt at the Vatican, they could very well have manufactured this “outrage.”


36 posted on 02/01/2009 8:19:34 PM PST by ALPAPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: topher; NYer
Since the time of Christ (or rather the time that the Apostle Thomas the doubter converted them), these people said Mass in the vernacular of the people. ... Enforcing the Tridentine Rite (the rite used by SSPX) caused schism with these Christians of India in around the year 1500.

When the Mass was standardized after the Council of Trent, all Rites that at that time had been celebrated for more than 200 years were able to continue. So, if the Catholic Churches in India had had their own Rite, they would have been able to continue using it.

37 posted on 02/01/2009 9:27:08 PM PST by ELS (Vivat Benedictus XVI!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: NYer
whose founder chose to dissent with the Council and the authority of the pope

Look, do you support the Holy Father's project to unexcommunicate the four bishops and reunite with the SSPX, or do you dissent from it like Hans Kung?

38 posted on 02/02/2009 3:12:25 AM PST by cmj328 (Filibuster FOCA or lose reelection)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: rogator

Archbishop O’Malley has every right and, indeed, a duty to question the caliber of leadership of the SSPX because the Society has spent the last 40 years rejecting the legitimacy and teachings of an ecumenical council. While modernists have clearly mischaracterized the Second Vatican Council and used it as an excuse to advance their own agenda in the Church, that does NOT excuse the SSPX from its own sins. The fact that Bishop Williamson denies the reality of the Holocaust, which is a historical fact, means that he’s either ignorant (which I doubt) or anti-Semitic. Either way, I would question the theological competence as well as the integrity of someone who refuses to believe the truth.


39 posted on 02/02/2009 5:02:51 AM PST by steadfastconservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: topher
One of the von Trapps -- it was either Maria or one of the daughters -- said of the movie, "It's a nice story, but it's not our story."
40 posted on 02/02/2009 9:12:25 AM PST by Campion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: cmj328
The SSPX is a complex issue.

Twenty paragraphs are necessary to give some insight into what the Archdiocese of Boston and other Dioceses/Archdioceses face with healing the wounds.

Patience, humility and time are needed to get SSPX and the Roman Catholic Church working better together again.

One small example is that SSPX wants Archbishop Lefebre canonized a saint (or would like to promote the effort).

The problem with that is that it was a very willful act of disobiedence on this person's part that caused the schism...

It is just a complex issue...

41 posted on 02/02/2009 12:23:13 PM PST by topher (Let us return to old-fashioned morality - morality that has stood the test of time...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: DeepThought42

He is exactly right on the Sound of Music: it is a sugary story of happy airheaded frivolity trumping Catholic virtues of faith and fortitude. It is inoffensive now after we have Disney Film rolling teenager softporn stories by the dozen, but at the root of it is cheap self-centered romanticism pioneered by movies like the Sound of Music.


42 posted on 02/02/2009 12:39:08 PM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Hieronymus
?Rhw 300,000 figure is Holocaust denial. It is an attempt to say that there was no attempted genocide.
Stop excusing scum just because you agree with some of their criticisms of church liberalism. You do yourself and your cause harm.
43 posted on 02/02/2009 8:45:07 PM PST by rmlew (The loyal opposition to a regime dedicated to overthrowing the Constitution are accomplices.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ALPAPilot
I haven't heard outrage about the 47% of CHURCHGOING Cat'licks (including many in my family) who voted for Obama.

Gotta love those solidly conservative Catholic states like Rhode Island, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Jersey! ;-)

Please, tend your own garden before you start casting aspersions.

44 posted on 02/02/2009 8:48:17 PM PST by Clemenza (Red is the Color of Virility, Blue is the Color of Impotence)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: rmlew
I comment so little on Free Republic that I doubt that I have much of a cause to harm.
I would say that Bishop Williamson is an extremely frank man who does not always know when it would be prudent to be silent either because he may be in over his head or because he is going to do more harm than good. These are traits virtually never seen in a Bishop—for reasons that Bishop Williamson makes obvious, if one follows him in detail—his views depart from the societal norm not only with regards to the number of Jews killed in the Holocaust and the value of the Sound of Music, but in a great many other areas. He is on the record for so many strange things that if he held that Hitler was not attempting genocide, I expect that he would be on the record for that as well. If he is on the record that there is no genocide, bringing a relevant quotation forward would be more useful than calling him scum.
45 posted on 02/03/2009 12:38:15 AM PST by Hieronymus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

There’s been considerable outrage lately about so called liberal catholics voting for democrats. Nancy Pelosi was taken to task by numerous bishops for her idiocy.

I usually tell people if they can be a pro-choice catholic, I can be a meat eating vegetarian.

I’m not casting aspersions on any one. I’m just defending Pope Benedict from the onslaught of idiocy in the media and other liberal circles.


46 posted on 02/03/2009 4:17:07 AM PST by ALPAPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Campion

Maria von Trapp was in the movie as an extra...


47 posted on 02/03/2009 5:12:09 PM PST by topher (Let us return to old-fashioned morality - morality that has stood the test of time...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: ELS
I will not doubt what you are saying about other rites continuing their rites for two hundred years.

But the folks who went to India may have not had a clear understanding of all the rules of the Tridentine Rite.

It was a Papal delegation or a Vatican delegation with Apostolic Annunico. Probably just some Portuguese priests trying to re-unite Catholics who have not been in contact almost since the first century.

Think of the communication problems we have in the 20th and 21st centuries, and we have all sorts of technology to aid us.

For communication in those times, it took months for news of things to reach one end of Europe to the other.

Let alone correct news going from India to Portugal to the Vatican.

48 posted on 02/03/2009 5:17:18 PM PST by topher (Let us return to old-fashioned morality - morality that has stood the test of time...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: ELS
It is my mistake that the Tridentine Rite was not in existence yet when the Portuguese came into contact with the Saint Thomas Christians of Kerelya.

Council of Trent took place in 1563.

The arrival of the Portuguese was in 1498 -- a few years after Columbus discovered America -- the West Indies, other parts of America -- on his four voyages of discovery.

A good (and much more accurate link) on the Saint Thomas Christians and the contact with the West in 1498 is the following:

Profiles of the Eastern churches: The Syro-Malabar Catholic Church (by Michael J.L. La Civita)

This is an article by:

CNEWA -- A Papal Agency for Humanitarian and Pastoral support.

This article explains the "POLITICS" of what happened...

49 posted on 02/03/2009 5:35:42 PM PST by topher (Let us return to old-fashioned morality - morality that has stood the test of time...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson