Blogger Priest

Having read Kevin Wells appeal to a SSPX priest to join the Novus Ordo Church out of a desire to care for souls, I penned the following reflection. He spoke from the heart but I suspect his cry will either go unanswered or be rebuked.

First, we need to appreciate that designations like traditionalist Catholics and Novus Ordo Catholics lack real substance. One is a Catholic or not, nothing more. There is the living Catholic Church under the Pope, and then there are those who are outside of it.  We might debate the extent that a Protestant is affiliated with Catholicism through baptism and shared elements of the faith; but no Lutheran, Methodist or Presbyterian would regard himself as in any way a Catholic by extension. Nevertheless, the SSPX tries to make this argument because if they admit formal separation from the See of Peter then their house of cards comes tumbling down. They would either have to go the route of the sedevacantist breakaway churches and appoint their own Pope or to adopt the stance of conciliarism and shared communion as manifest between Orthodox autocephalous churches.

Second, the failure of any reconciliation rests squarely with the SSPX. They would arrogantly usurp for themselves an authority that belongs exclusively to the Holy See. Their path to reconciliation and regularization would be as follows:

• The Pope would have to renounce Vatican II, especially teachings about ecumenism, religious liberty, freedom of conscience, and the inherent dignity of persons.
• All liturgical changes would have to be repealed.
• There would have to be a massive number of excommunications and expulsions to purge the Church.  
• Indeed, all new ecclesial initiatives would be revoked, including the permission for the Divine Mercy devotion as it was suspect and forbidden prior to Vatican II.

Such was never going to happen. Despite posturing, reunion with the SSPX was never in the picture. Despite high hopes for individual clergy, it is unlikely, except for maybe a few seeking incorporation into the Fraternity of St. Peter. 

The fact that a priest cares for souls is the bottom line and should not be regarded as something exceptional. But this movement of the will and heart must also be in sync with a proper understanding of the truth by the mind. Otherwise, any fruits will be seriously inhibited or even blocked. A Protestant minister might be on fire to save others from perdition and to foster a saving faith relationship with Jesus. But he has neither the Mass rendered by priests nor the absolution given to these same ministers of Christ’s reconciliation. His efforts may bear some small fruit, but they are handicapped by his own deficiencies.

Many in the traditionalist camp would stamp such a Protestant minister and his flock as likely damned for being outside the boundaries of the visible Catholic Church. Opposed to religious liberty, they would like to erase the public non-Catholic churches and schools. Indeed, they eye with suspicion the Novus Ordo liturgy as dangerous and the orders of its priests as suspect. They renounce by “association” the larger Church for its ecumenism toward so-called “separated brethren.” They subscribe to a methodology of fear— risk no change, stay separate or risk going to hell— distrust the Pope, avoid Protestant contamination, and oppose the world.

If a traditionalist priest disavows the priesthood and ministry of priests in the juridical Church under the Holy Father, then why would he be concerned about his fatigue and making “the good fight”? As far as he is concerned, despite the many protestations to the contrary, the Novus Ordo priest is not his brother but the enemy. Note that the SSPX tells its lay participants that it would be better to miss Mass entirely than to attend a Novus Ordo liturgy. The living Church in union with Pope Leo XIV would regard this attitude as blasphemous. The SSPX clergyman with this sentiment might desire to save souls but despite all the trappings of tradition, he has become what he most detests, a Protestant. The ancient faith and the efficacy of the liturgy may still be fortuitous to believers, but not because of the rebel priest but despite his failings. Wherever we find the Pope, we find the Catholic Church. This is the quandary around which the traditionalists must dance. They acknowledge the validity of the Pope in theory, but in practice his authority over them is rejected.  What is the old saying about a duck? Well, right now it is quacking away!  

The true Church must courageously engage the world in the time and place where she finds herself. Confident in the charism of indefectibility, she must not retreat from the world like the SSPX. The living Church applies social teachings to the world as it is (not as it was). She acknowledges the organic development of doctrine from seeds planted in the Gospel. Saving revelation has ended with the apostle John, however teachings are not stagnant but grow in our understanding. However, the SSPX goes further in the wrong direction, rejecting (in practice if not in principle) the current Pope as the chief lawgiver and rejecting the historical fact that each successor of Peter is the living and breathing embodiment of the Roman rite. The way he says Mass is the way the rest of the Western Church says Mass. We follow living popes, not dead ones.

The charge of Modernism targeted against the post-Vatican II Church is particularly upsetting and wrong-headed. Modernism came into existence by priests who regularly celebrated the Traditional Latin Mass. Fr. Alfred Loisy even acknowledged that the rubrics of the old Mass allowed him to robotically celebrate the liturgy daily out of habit long after he had stopped believing. Further, it troubles me that anyone would caricature the Novus Ordo Mass as leaving the flock starving. It is the unbloody or clean re-presentation of the sacrifice on Calvary. It is a sacrifice that honors God and makes propitiation or satisfaction for sin. The Eucharist is the substance of the real body and blood of the risen Christ, whole and complete, given as our saving food. Accidentals have changed and no liturgy is perfect. But the substance remains. The Church saw revolutions, heresy and Mass defections before, even when the rituals of sacrifice were untouched.  The problem is not the Mass but a secular world that is increasingly hostile to people of faith.  While the Lord gave us the great commission, too many have allowed themselves to be converted by the atheistic and materialistic hedonism of our times. For all we know, the current situation might have been worse without Vatican II.  But about this, we cannot know for sure.  We live in an age where there is much dissent from the left and right. Violence against the Church from the right is somewhat surprising, but perhaps more perilous than that on the left or from progressives. But neither side can stand any attempted middle-course. That is what defines the post-conciliar Church. This tension needs to end. An ancient motto from the 17^th century comes to mind, quoted by Pope St. John XXIII in his 1959 encyclical Ad Petri Cathedram, “In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity.”

Filed under: Uncategorized | Tagged: Bible, Catholic, christianity, Faith, Jesus, novus-ordo, sspx, traditional-latin-mass, vatican-ii |