Highlight: Where Peter Is article on Sedevacantists and the SSPX

https://wherepeteris.com/getting-it-half-right-sedes-and-sspx/

A necessary, enlightening, and quality read for all those in Latin Mass/“Traddie land.”

Pax, Julian.

Reply to Kennedy Hall's pro-apologia SSPX Articles on Serviam Ministries Part III

REBUTTAL TO KENNEDY HALL'S PRO-APOLOGIA FOR THE SSPX PART III: MY PERSPECTIVE ON THE MATTER AS A FATHER, ONE INVOLVED IN THE LATIN MASS, AND A SON OF THE CHURCH TRYING TO BE LOYAL TO HIS SPOTLESS BRIDE, ON KENNEDY'S DECISION. 

See Part 1 HERE,  and Part 2, HERE.

I have hoped to elucidate those readers here, of reasoning for NOT involving one's faith life DIRECTLY with the SSPX in this manner, and arguments to point out flaws in material provided by the SSPX, as well as their statements and those stated by pro-apologia materials, such as the articles written by Mr. Kennedy Hall.

To conclude this counter to the articles made by Mr. Kennedy, I will share my perspective on these matters and the making of such a harmful spiritual decision, as a father of a 4 month old boy, an altar server who serves the Lord in organized Latin Masses in my Archdiocese, and one man who strives his best to be loyal to Christ in his Holy Mother Church, without succumbing to radical traditionalism, also known as a heresy.

I will say that in pursuing the vocation of marriage, I took this matter seriously. I purposely enrolled in North America's largest Catholic dating site, Catholic Match, to find a solid young woman near me to seriously marry in the Sacrament of Marriage, and even to start a family with and raise all future children PROPERLY in the faith. I would not accept a woman who didn't take her Sunday Obligation with laxity, or had a past history and/or embraces mental ideologies, contrary to the doctrines of the Catholic Church. Thankfully, with much petition of prayer to St. Joseph and Christ, I was blessed with my wife of today, and now, my 4 month old son, Gianluca. Might I say in irony, she ended up being a teacher in a Catholic School board in my Archdiocese?

Further, through a good friend I met via a young adult ministry in my then local parish some 8.5 years ago, he introduced me to the Latin Mass, and eventually both of us became servers. Through serving the Lord at the altar at Masses, mainly those organized by St. Patrick's Gregorian Choir in Toronto, as well as my own personal Latin Mass serving blog, Servimus Unum Deum, I have come to appreciate and play a direct part in the Traditionalist movement in the Archdiocese. However in doing so, I have encountered the gamut of insanity of both online, and in person, commentary and material that unfortunately promotes radical traditionalism, which has stalled progress of the Latin Mass in some senses in my Archdiocese. Coupled with bullying and harassment of multiple forms (of which I have been personally targeted with,) this has made some former acquaintances of mine in serving either reduce their ministry to their home parishes, abandon traditionalism altogether and retreat to their Novus Ordo parishes, or even worse ... become adherents to the SSPX and attend only their EF masses in Toronto.

In serving the Latin Mass, one is bound to in one form or another, encounter the SSPX and some of their printed materials. I will admit that I do contain a book or two from their Angelus Press at home, and found a great resource online for the Missa Cantata/High Mass level of the Latin Mass. However, their provision and experience of doing the Latin Mass alone, is NOT enough to warrant approval of them. Let me also state that, not just from the SSPX solely, though they do emphasize this more, I became aware of the "crisis of the church." Crisis of vocations? check. Novus Ordo done not as reverently due to temptations that exist for liturgical abuses? check. Culture war? check. Gourmand, internet celebrity priest who is a textbook encyclopedia for all things Latin Mass related and emphasizes all of the above? Check, and Fr. Zuhlsdorf at WDTPRS is one of my favourite internet reads! I am not an ignoramus to all those things emphasized by Latin Mass participants and the SSPX.

Still, would I be so inclined, based on what I know and understand about the Novus Ordo and current institutional (e.g. the people, bricks and mortar and political structures,) and sociological culture of  the Catholic Church, to make the same decision as Kennedy to jump the "ship without a rudder" to  quote one Pontifical Latin Mass loving prelate, and become an SSPX adherent?  

THE ANSWER IS A RESOUNDING, "NO!" "SERVO DEUM!!!!!"

First of all, were I to abandon the Church and bring my current (and future) family outside of the Church into the SSPX, for the sake of a FORM of the Roman Rite and what is being promoted by its clergy as the "TRUE" Church, I would be causing spiritual harm to my family, and eliciting spiritual pride, akin to Satan's "non serviam" of God, in a form of spiritual rebellion. Knowing that the Novus Ordo IS a valid and licit liturgy, promulgated by the Church via Apostolic authority of then Pope Paul VI, and maintained up to current Pope Francis, and even stated explicitly by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, who in essence "freed" the Latin Mass in an IMMEDIATE ACTING LAW FOR THE ENTIRE CHURCH, A MOTU PROPRIO, I would be committing a grave violation of Church Law. I would violate a doctrinally, legal document in Summorum Pontificum article 1, and also violate the DOGMATIC constitution of Pastor Aeternus from Vatican I, believing that the Pope has NO authority in discipline and government of the Church in the finite world. I would be encouraging my family and I to become schismatics and separate themselves from the Church, though albeit my wife, my children, and my grandchildren might be less culpable in their actions as they were influenced by my decision and their new SSPX environment. Personally, I do not want to arrive at the court of Christ after death, and be sentenced to Hell because I became schismatic and left Holy Mother Church, and dragged my wife and children with me, doing what Matthew 7:9-10 describes: giving them the opposite of what is supposed to be the nourishment of Christ. I would be judged harshly with our Lord`s Divine Wrath as the spiritual head of my family for this decision upon all our souls.

Second of all, I get that we are facing ever increasing odds and forces that oppose the family and the Catholic Faith, especially the Church's children being brainwashed with anti-Christian ideologies and/or lifestyles, particularly the lifestyle du-jour, that of homosexuality and/or including multi-genderism. Sadly, the Catholic school system IS failing in that regard, even aiding as such with the establishment of Gay-Straight Alliance groups in schools, instead of general anti-bullying or ``respecting differences`` groups. I also understand, having now been a practicing Catholic adult, parish politics, and the problems that priests themselves bring to the liturgy and the ordinary faith life of the faithful, who are used as  pawns in the greater politics that is the bureaucracy of the Church hierarchy. I also am aware of the poor formation that many priests got in seminaries, which according to some sources, includes homosexual shenanigans and purposeful selection of candidates who were effeminate or gay to be ordained, removing conservative/liturgically minded candidates for priesthood. This last note was recently brought to public light, once again, in the Cardinal McCarick scandals, and cowardly via peer pressure, he has turned in his resignation to Pope Francis.

However, this is NO excuse to abandon the barque of Peter for the sake of finding a liturgical 'bomb shelter' to hide out in! There are some teachers willing to actually teach the deficient Catholic curriculum properly in their classes, such as my wife. She actually uses Church documents in her courses, such as VATICAN II documents to introduce the proper Catholic framework of the Grade 11 World Religions course, before she delves into ANY of the world religions in detail. She also attempts her very best to connect things back to the Church, regardless of the religion, and at the end of every Gr. 11 course puts a question on the final exam to purposely tie together the religions the students learnt about and the Catholic Church's teachings on other religions and/or faiths. She does NOT aim in any of her classes to slander the Catholic Faith, or make it simply another choice of faith as options in the course.

Also, because both my wife and I work, and I am not the heir of a wealthy business or enormous inheritance, I know that I will NOT be able to afford private Catholic education. Therefore, I know intuitively that I will have to FIGHT the system, and I will be ever more attentive to my son's education, both as a parent, but also in teaching him in the home. One strategy: I have amassed a personal library of works and spiritual literature to nourish my child's soul (e.g. Aquinas' Summa Theologica, 1/2 of the Ascetic Volumes of St. Alphonsus Liguori,) While I have not read front to back every book to date, nonetheless I will attempt to educate myself as much as possible, and hopefully my son as well, that he will 'seek the good' in some of what is the best, most Traditional literature I could afford.

As for the liturgical end of things, if one TRULY wants to seek out the Latin Mass, in developed countries should one have access to an automobile or public transit (or truly holy and great allies/friends,) one can seek these the EF actively and access it if they choose, whether for spiritual nourishment or to avoid liturgical abuses at a parish or Fr. Boisterous on the altar. Now, were I to have to make that decision, then NO, I would not be forsaking my family's Sunday obligation as that priest advises in his SSPX videos (10) just because there was not an EF or an SSPX EF Mass available. While the Church does not force you to endure liturgical abuse, it DOES request you, out of honouring the Lord and out of mercy for weak human fault, under obligation of sin, to fulfill your obligation. While yes, the Pontifical Council of Ecclesia Dei has stated you CAN (read, NOT MUST!) fulfill your obligation at an SSPX Mass, that does NOT mean it is your first choice to do so, particularly when there are Novus Ordo, or even parishes of other rites of the Church available to you (e.g. Byzantine/Ukrainian Catholic Rite.) Further, even if I am taking my wife and child to these Masses, such instances would support disobedience to Holy Mother Church, even if I do not sin for attendance SSPX Masses for proper reasons. Finally, as seen in the SSPX FAQ videos, it's clear that being in contact with the SSPX, including clergy who support such ideas in the FAQ videos, who could potentially preach such ideas from the pulpit or in instructional material for my family, HAVE THE POTENTIAL as per the warnings of the Church's communications, to put my family and I in harm's way of adopting a self-schismatic attitude.

Third of all, there ARE more and more ample opportunities in ordinary diocesan parishes, that are  being created and developed each year in developed/"1st world" countries such as ours in Canada, whereby the lay faithful CAN partake in, should they be enamoured with the EF if it spiritually fulfills their needs. With the ever increasing access to the EF in dioceses, the argument of the SSPX that the Church is in a liturgical crisis and that lay faithful must abandon the Church for the EF (offered by the SSPX) has gradually become eroded, especially since Benedict Emeritus XVI released Summorum Pontificum in 2007. Let us not forget also laity-led, or combined laity-clergy led organizations/choirs who are organizing Latin Masses and providing both the sacred music for the Mass as well as the servers for the liturgical portion, in parishes willing to allow a diocesan priest trained in the EF to celebrate that form of the Latin rite and to hold the Masses in their sainctuaries. The most well-known example are chapters under the Foederatio Internationalis Una Voce, whom was established after Vatican II by laity, to preserve the liturgical traditions of the Church via the Latin Mass.

As a local example, in my Archdiocese of Toronto alone, there are two major parishes that are public transit accessible, that have not only Sunday obligation Masses, but also weekday Low Masses and  even occasional, solemnity/feast day higher level Masses for the laity that they can attend. One of them, St. Lawrence the Martyr in Scarbourough, is also home to the Chaplain for the EF in our Archdiocese. The other parish, staffed by the Oratorians, is Holy Family/St Vincent de Paul, whose Sunday Obligation Masses are High or Solemn Level masses for the 11am offering.There are also at least 4 other parishes in my Archdiocese offering one of either Sunday obligation Masses (e.g. St. Patrick's in Schomberg, ON,) occasional Latin Masses on another weekday, or once a month. Should one be able to afford driving out occasionally, they can even find the Latin Mass in other (arch)dioceses of my province of Ontario, and these offerings are growing in the “peripheries” of my province of Ontario, or those of my Archdiocese. There are also the lay organizations/choirs of St. Patrick's Gregorian Choir and the Toronto Traditional Mass Society (a.k.a. Una Voce Toronto) who organize special offerings of the Latin Mass, particularly Missa Cantata and Solemnis (High and Solemn High) level Masses, in addition to the parishes that offer the Latin Mass in varying frequencies.

Further, I myself am trying to contribute the best I can to support the maintenance and growth of the  Latin Mass, whenever I can, whether this is attending a Mass in the pews, to serving offerings of the  Mass in a liturgical role as a server. I am also attempting to undergo training to become a Master of Ceremonies, so that I can assist my allies in the movement in my Archdiocese, as well as in the long run, possibly be able to assist the Church in some way of hosting another offering of the TLM, or possibly even training clergy/servers in their roles. Instead of throwing my arms up in the air to run with my family to the SSPX, I am playing an active role in the Latin Mass movement in our Archdiocese, the best I can while being a father to my newborn child, and also ensuring that my family fulfills their Sunday obligation via Sunday Mass attendance, which usually is at our local Novus Ordo parish. Occasionally, my wife will even attend the offerings of the EF I serve at, though I have yet to witness her don the mantilla my more Traditionalist friend gave her as a gift, despite my requests. She did though, bring my newborn son to the last EF mass I served in June for the Feast of the Sacred Heart.

Finally, let me end my resolve with an analogy, to understand all of the above. Imagine you are taking your family to a camping destination: A campground with supervision, maintenance staff, amenities such as a lake staffed with lifeguards, etc. You are driving your family along the road to your destination and you child diverts your attention as there is a crystal blue lake near large patches of land that look `pristine` as if man had never touched this part of God`s creation. Why, there`s even a perfectly made dock and crafted fishing boat waiting for you to go out in the deeper parts of the waters where juicy, non-mercury tainted tuna are waiting for you. At the behest of your rambunctious child, you go to investigate and naturally, your wife comes along with you.

Now, problem is that you have heard about this lake from the bait shop cashier you purchased your fresh supplies from, and a forest ranger friend of yours, who works at the campsite you frequent, who say NEVER to go on that lake, as it is not only too deep, but a large, great white shark is at the bottom. Since that lake is outside the county boundaries of the parks and recreation authority, they do not have the means legally to go in and kill the shark. Foolishly, you dismiss the cashier and your friends` warnings and take your family into the convenient fishing boat set aside for you at the dock. You decide to go out just enough that the water is not shallow anymore, and try to fish. You caught a couple of sizable minnows, but you wanted to get the ``big catch`` and go deeper. You then go out deeper and start catching small size tunas, but of course, you want the big tuna fish. Your child and wife, however, see a large shadow passing the side of the boat while you are distracted, and warn you that maybe this is not a good idea. In passing, you ignore the warnings of your family, and move deeper to the center of the lake with those big tunas. You put those small minnows, now bleeding from your fishing hook before, on the tip of your fishing hook into the depths of the water. A large shadow approaches your fishing pole and catches it ... enough to break it ... and that shadow isn`t leaving the side of the boat ... 

This analogy, of the shark in the waters as you go deeper, is exactly what the SSPX is to me. All for the sake of the Latin Mass, one immerses themselves in the ``life`` of their `apostolates` or `chapels` while their priests like the one in the video spout partially or completely false ideas about the Novus Ordo Mass and the Modern Church, all for the sake of taking you away from Holy Mother Church and into a parallel, NON-CANONICALLY VALID `church` of supposed `true Catholicism` that only they can provide, that the Novus Ordo, `modernist` ``Church`` under the modernist Pope Francis, (who IS the Vicar of Christ they claim to honour,) cannot. In a big irony of them all, here is the non-canonical SSPX, telling the lay faithful to abandon Holy Mother Church and it`s major form of the Mass, the Novus Ordo, when Traditionalists strongly believe and adhere to the adage ``Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus`` which translates to ``No Salvation Outside the Church.``
How can a society outside of the Church, canonically speaking then, provide me salvation to my wife and child? As a "T"raditionalist, I would have to thus stick to the old adage, and remain loyal to the Bride of Christ, under the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, warts and Novus Ordo and all. I will do so, as my family`s spiritual authority, so my wife and my son, will be able to obtain the fullest opportunity, of obtaining salvation, as promised through my Lord, Jesus Christ, Sovereign King.

I pray that one day, in my lifetime, Christ's hopes and wishes that we may all be united be granted, and that the Society of St. Pius X is reconciled, and heavily re-vitalized so as not to be an instrument of division, but an instrument of unity serving Holy Mother Church in obedience to the Holy Father, and in revitalization of the sacred liturgy of the Latin Rite. Amen.

Pax Tibi Christi, Julian Barkin

Reply to Kennedy Hall's pro-apologia SSPX articles on Serviam Ministries Part II

Rebuttal to Kennedy Hall`s pro-Apologia for the SSPX Part II: The Novus Ordo and the ``Crisis of Faith`` and the ``Reply to Comments`` Article

SEE PART 1, HERE. 

SECOND POSTING OF KENNEDY AND THE ``TIME OF CRISIS`` REASON TO ATTEND SSPX (aka FORSAKE THE NOVUS ORDO???)

In his second post, Kennedy chooses to address some of the specific complaints or criticisms against him, and continues to defend the SSPX, now as an adherent as he openly admits, with my emphasis added, "... my family and I have begun to attend an SSPX Chapel, and I cannot see us going back to the Novus Ordo, unless necessity requires for our Sunday Obligation ..." (1) From there Mr. Kennedy responds to two main gripes from his first post and/or the Facebook(TM) comments, but also opens up discussion to some more serious spiritual matter here, particularly the question of crisis in Faith, necessary for him to decide to become fully integrated into the life of the SSPX, and outside of the life of the Church. 

The first gripe that he responds to is that the SSPX are literally schismatic. This Mr. Kennedy is correct on, as the matter is one of specific violations of Canon Law and the actors who participated in the actions, as well as the fact that those who were part of it were validly and licitly ordained as Catholic priests, prior to being made bishops. Can participation in the society lead you to schism? Yes, as I covered this in the section on the status of the Society. 

The second gripe is that one must believe in ALL parts of the Vatican II council as infallible. This is actually incorrect as even Pope John XXIII, regarded Vatican II as a pastoral council. Where tension between the SSPX and the Vatican lies is in this regard, both under Benedict Emeritus XVI and Francis I, whether by formal negotiation or indirectly through a former secretary of the Pope’s respectively. I will say, however, in defending or countering this gripe, Kennedy used poor source material, as his quotes are taken from a site called "One Peter Five," a website with an anti-Francis and anti Novus Ordo agenda/bias in its media. 

Now, while one might think I am allowing the second blog post of Mr. Kennedy to pass, that is wrong, as between the two posts, Mr. Kennedy has brought into the open a deep and concerning issue: Forsaking the Novus Ordo and normal parish life for the SSPX under a spiritual crisis scenario. Kennedy brought this into the open in the following quote: "...  I want nothing more than to be a man of God, a saintly father to my children, and a leader in faith to my wife, and this is why the SSPX exists ...." (1) alongside this in the first post: ".... The strongest argument for the validity of the Society as a legitimate arm of the Church lies in the provisions given in Canon Law that allow for irregular actions during situations of crisis ...  if the Church really has been in crisis for some time now ... then perhaps  ... the SSPX ... were in fact a legitimate response ... to a true crisis of faith and church governance." (2)    

In this article, combined with a point in his last one on "crisis" of the Church, Kennedy uses as defenses a number of points to validate one leaving the `regular` Church for the SSPX. One example is that "... it is clear that the Latin Mass and the surrounding community is truly the breeding ground of Saints." (1) I say to this that, at least at face value (but not perhaps personal intention on Kennedy's part,) the statement displays spiritual arrogance and pride, and "bashes" the Novus Ordo, saying the atmosphere cannot produce saints. What about examples like soon to be martyr Saint, Bishop Oscar Romero, killed during a Novus Mass after preaching the homily on March 23, 1980? What about teenager St. Chiara "Luce" Badano born in 1971 after the complete changes of the Novus Ordo, whom died of cancer on October 7, 1990 at a mere 18 years old? These are but two of the hopefully growing number of saints, that have been immersed and/or had to become part of the Novus Ordo "Church culture," and hopefully the Church will canonize more to come. While I will admit I am no stranger to the weaknesses of the average parish culture of the Novus Ordo Mass, it is NOT deficient of Christ's graces and the Holy Mass. Clearly as with these (soon to be two) Saints, ordinary parish or Novus Ordo culture CAN enable some people to become saintly under the right circumstances, or dare I say, in SPITE of such circumstances.

Another argument Kennedy uses to validate one`s decision to abandon Holy Mother Church for the SSPX, is that the Latin Mass has been the formative Mass in the Roman rite for numerous saints. If the article was a general apologia for the Latin Mass, this IS a vital argument that can be used. However, did said saints decide to act outside the authority of the Church and start their own parallel `society` with a form of the Mass they felt better or more "pure/holier", like say, version 1.0 of the Tridentine Mass when Pope Pius V promulgated it in 1570? Absolutely not! Those saints were loyal sons and daughters of the Church who did not take matters in their own hands to save what they thought is the "true tradition of the Church."

BEYOND THE POSTINGS OF KENNEDY: INSCRIBED MENTALITY OF ANTIPATHY AGAINST THE NOVUS ORDO?

While not deeply touched in these two postings, with possibly obvious reason, Kennedy fails to mention one key teaching that the SSPX continues to hold: A firm antipathy towards the Novus Ordo Mass, one that violates the teachings of the Church and puts those who adhere to the SSPX's teachings in peril of their soul. 

Where is it that Catholics must at the very least acknowledge the validity and licitness of the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite/Novus Ordo under normal conditions? 

In most recent times, part of that is in the very document that allowed for freer usage of the EF again in modern times, Summorum Pontificum, promulgated as a motu proprio by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI (emphasis added:) "Art 1.  The Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI is the ordinary expression of the lex orandi (rule of prayer) of the Catholic Church of the Latin rite .... These two expressions of the Church’s lex orandi will in no way lead to a division in the Church’s lex credendi (rule of faith); for they are two usages of the one Roman rite." (3) Being motu proprio, this is immediate acting, binding law, upon the entirety of the Church, both for lay faithful and priest. 

Also, besides the Pope having infallibility in faith and morals, he also has full Papal Authority on other matters in the Church including the promulgation of liturgical rites, discipline in the Church and its government. This was promulgated in the Vatican I Dogmatic Constituion of the Church of Christ, Pastor Aeternus, paragraph 3 (also, emphases added here:) 

"Hence we teach and declare that, by the appointment of our Lord, the Roman Church possesses a superiority of ordinary power over all other Churches, and that this power of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, which is truly episcopal, is immediate; to which all, of whatever rite and dignity, both pastors and faithful, both individually and collectively, are bound, by their duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, to submit, not only in matters which belong to faith and morals, but also in those that appertain to the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world, so that the Church of Christ may be one flock under one Supreme Pastor through the preservation of unity both of communion and of profession of the same faith with the Roman Pontiff. This is the teaching of Catholic truth, from which no one can deviate without loss of faith and of salvation." (4) 

Unfortunately, the SSPX do not swear total fealty to the Holy Father, or should I say Fathers since Vatican II, given the above with regards to one key element of our common Catholic Faith: The everyday, Novus Ordo form of the Roman Rite, the Catholic Mass of today, found in most parishes worldwide. It is in their treatment of the Novus Ordo that once again, Mr Kennedy's statement of "total obedience" to the Holy Father is disingenuous and whereby, the SSPX poses great danger to the faith life of the ordinary Catholic, and hence, the possibly of becoming self-schismatic. 

While Kennedy has definitely become familiar with the SSPX website, perhaps he has stumbled upon the YouTube(TM) SSPX FAQ videos, produced likely by the USA district? The channel is "SSPX News - English" and is a series of 16 videos, 15 of them frequently asked questions about elements pertaining to the Society, including their origins, the priest's status of "jurisdiction" in the Church, etc. The host is an un-named priest of the Society, who narrates the text provided in the comments section under each video. Of the series, 3 of them involve dealing with the Novus Ordo/Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite and attendance at this form of the Mass. 

The first FAQ is Episode 7 titled "What is the Novus Ordo Missae?" The priest explains how the New Mass was some concocted scheme of Anibale Bugini, but also states of the Novus Ordo the following: "... Man has become more of the focus, not so much God. The priest and faithful father for a meal to share with one another Christ's loving presence ... vernacular languages, "Mass facing the people," and equating the laity's role with that of the priest ... the Blessed Sacrament ... is reserved away from the main altar ... many abuses have been introduced, such as lay Eucharistic Ministers, Communion in the hand, and altar girls." (5)

I'll address some of these charges briefly. In each case, it was NOT the Novus Ordo Missae itself that allowed these changes, or the charge doesn't stick well. Rather it was politics or flat out abuse by certain prelates that led to the abuses mentioned. 

To start with the charge of the man-focused liturgy, and that the Mass is a meal to share with one another in Christ's presence, I think that, even my Conference of Canadian Catholic Bishops, (of which bishops' conferences are generally deplored by Catholic faithful in the know,) in the publicly accessible General Instruction of the Roman Missal (G.I.R.M.) for the 2011/3rd edition of the Missal, would beg to differ.  Their second paragraph in the Introduction states the following: "The sacrificial nature of the Mass, solemnly defended by the Council of Trent ... was once more stated by the Second Vatican Council ... What is taught in this way by the Council is consistently expressed in the formulas of the Mass. Moreover, the doctrine which stands out ... is aptly and exactly expounded in the Eucharistic Prayers; for as in these the Priest enacts the anamnesis ..." (6) which is explained in paragraph 78(e) as, "... by which the Church, fulfilling the command that she received from Christ the Lord through the Apostles, celebrated the memorial of Christ, recalling especially his blessed Passion, glorious Resurrection and Ascention into Heaven.``(6) While we cannot control the (willful?) ignorance pf priests for NOT reading the G.I.R.M. and/or the possible brainwashing of their formation for the generations of the late 60`s to 80`s and some of the 90`s, one can certainly conclude that the Mass is NOT intended as a `celebratory meal` for the celebrant in carrying out the sacred liturgy.  

As for the other charges, these were limited or narrowed suggestions/permissions abused by the clergy at the time of the Council, and/or taken in well-meaning intention by ignorant priests from liturgical "experts" who likely themselves did not have the proper interpretation of, or even the actual documents themselves, of Vatican II. As per the abuses mentioned, they were twistings of suggestions from the Vatican II documents, but NOT the original intention for the Novus Ordo, whose true intentions are oriented particularly from Sarcosanctum Concilium. Much of this, don't forget, was in the pre-Internet era, before even laity could enact surveillance on our institutional Church and be able to decry when clerics do not follow rubrics or violate laws. For the sake of length I will not attack each claim by the unnamed priest, rather I refer you to one of Catholic Answer`s priests on retainer for answering questions from the faithful, Fr. Joseph Fessio, S.J. (Yes, a Jesuit!) in this article at https://www.catholiceducation.org/en/culture/catholic-contributions/the-mass-of-vatican-ii.html. The unnamed SSPX priest then describes the Latin Mass as the total opposite of everything about the Novus Ordo at the end of the video. The underlying message he gives is `Novus Ordo bad, Latin Mass and SSPX good.`

In the 2nd video on the Novus Ordo, titled ``Should Catholics Attend the New Mass? - Part I or II`` (7) the unnamed priest, does not necessarily lob any direct attacks on the Novus Ordo but does a good job in explaining the Sunday obligation to attend Mass. The one thing to note though, which he intentionally sets up for part II are the reasons WHY someone would be unable to attend to their Sunday Obligation. As per the text of the video these reasons are: ``• Dangerous travel conditions, an inability to travel, or even great distances.; • Poor health. ;• Preservation of a common good. • A duty of charity or another necessity, such as caring for the sick or employment for one’s livelihood.`` 

Keeping in mind distance and preservation of a common good, the priest then goes into the second part, titled ``Should Catholics Attend the New Mass? - Part II of II.`` Here is where the unnamed priest assaults the Novus Ordo in order to convince the ordinary faithful, to abandon the regular Church life and even NOT attend the Novus Ordo. Using the Ottavani Intervention, a warning from Cardinal Ottavani and other signatories of the errors that would be introduced in the 1970 edition of the Roman Missal (the 2nd edition, as there was a 1965 version of the Missal and the Mass intended by Vatican II documents,) and other statements including the excommunicated and un-reconciled leader of the SSPX, +Lefevbre (of which a quote is purposely abridged,) the priest convinces the viewer to abandon the Novus Ordo. 

What statements does the priest use? Examples are the obscuring or "... even removing from its prayers the Catholic doctrines concerning the propitiatory nature of the Mass, the sacrificial and mediatory character of the priesthood, and the dogma of the Real Presence of Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist" (8) and "... the New Mass departs from the Catholic Faith "as a whole and in its details." (8) Already in those statements, the quote I used prior from the G.I.R.M. proves the priest wrong, as the sacrificial and mediatory character IS retained in the Mass (though whether the priest acts as such in an obvious way is not under our complete control.) As for the denial of the Real Presence of the Lord Jesus, setting aside the issue of not having the tabernacle on the altar in visible sight (with exception of specific adoration chapels near the altar) which AGAIN was due to foolish liturgical "experts," all one has to do is examine the climax of the Mass in the Eucharistic Prayers, when the Body and Blood of Christ is consecrated/undergoes transubstantiation from bread and wine into the Sacred Species in the Mass. Yes, even the so called paltry and commonly over-used Eucharistic prayer II, has it mentioned TWICE in specific detail, the Body and Blood of Christ, the second time even using the word "partaking."  

Finally, after some more charges against the Ordinary Form, the un-named priest makes these horrifying statements of the Novus Ordo: ".... In itself the rite of the New Mass does not clearly express the Faith precisely on the points of doctrine denied by the Protestant heresies. In itself therefore this new rite of the Mass constitutes a danger to souls." Hence, what this illicit priest has said, is that the Church's highest form of prayer, in the MAJORITY FORM & RITE OF THE MASS OFFERED TO THE AVERAGE CATHOLIC, is detrimental to their souls, as if it were a mortal sin to go. 

This, is a sickening charge to make against Holy Mother Church, the Church Christ founded that He himself said that the Gates of Hell would never destroy in Matthew 16:18. Further, Our Lord Jesus Christ, said himself in the Gospel of Matthew, Chapter 7: 9-10 (Douay-Reims), "Or what man is there among you, of whom if his son shall ask bread, will he reach him a stone? 10 Or if he shall ask him a fish, will he reach him a serpent?" Why, would the Lord, then, via the Church he instituted for the salvation of souls, with the principal form of prayer and command to honour Him for all eternity in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, allow the creation of a Mass diabolical enough to damn the souls of the faithful? Even the un-named priest says himself in the video, "The Church cannot ask her members to endanger their Faith." (8)  

Regardless, the priest continues to tell the faithful, that if you can't get to a traditional Mass (implying, as being the source of this enlightenment in the FAQ videos, that it should be a Latin Mass offered by the SSPX,) or the priest in his preaching and opinions is a detriment to the faith, you should NOT attend, and instead stay at home and " ... sanctify Sunday by dedicating a time for prayer, alone or in the family: one could read the Mass of the day, pray the rosary, and make a spiritual communion." (8) And should one be forced into a situation to attend a Novus Ordo for a sacrament (e.g. wedding, Confirmation, funeral,) you are to attend passively. 

Oddly enough, even those who argue for the Traditional Latin Mass, are actually fighting this charge of passivity in the TLM, saying you actively participate via your "internal disposition" of prayer, uniting those to the priest at the altar involved in the eternal, bloodless re-presenation of the Lord's Sacrifice. While the priest in an odd, anti-culture type way is applying this to the Novus Ordo, he is actually encouraging passive participation in the Mass, which defeats the efforts of Latin Mass apologists, and only supports the stereotype of the passive laity at Mass, a misunderstanding that made its way into the Vatican II Council to encourage "active participation" (albeit the Popes has a different idea of this vs. the Cardinals/bishops who allowed practical mis-applications of this concept.)

NEXT: Part III: My Decision as a Father and Practicing Catholic, Involved in the Latin Mass.

Works Cited:

1. Hall, Kennedy. "Response to Comments - Some Clarity on the Society of St. Pius X" Serviam Ministries, 22 Jun 2018, https://www.serviamministries.com/blog/response-to-comments-some-clarity-on-the-society-of-st-pius-x/. Accessed 23 June 2018. 

2. Hall, Kennedy. "SSPX Sympathizer" Serviam Ministries, 13 Jun 2018,  https://www.serviamministries.com/blog/sspx-sympathizer/. Accessed 23 June 2018.

3. Pope Benedict XVI. ``Apostolic Letter Given Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum on the use of the Roman liturgy prior to the reform of 1970.`` The Vatican, 7 Jul 2007, https://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/motu_proprio/documents/hf_ben-xvi_motu-proprio_20070707_summorum-pontificum.html. Accessed 26 June 2018.

4. Pope Blessed Pius IX. "First Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of Christ, Pastor Aeternus" Catholic Planet, Translated by Manning, Cardinal Henry E.M., 18 Jul 1870, http://www.catholicplanet.org/councils/20-Pastor-Aeternus.html. Accessed 27 June 2018.

5. Name unknown. "What is the "Novus Ordo Missae"? - Episode 07 - SSPX FAQ Videos." Society of St. Pius X, 1 Apr 2015, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Pp1JAk47t0. Accessed 27 June 2018.   

6. Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops. ``The General Instruction of the Roman Missal.`` Archdiocese of London, 2011, https://dol.ca/documents/2016/11/girm.pdf. Accessed 26 June 2018. 

7. Name unknown. 22 Jul 2015. "Should Catholics Attend the New Mass? - Part I or II - Episode 14 - SSPX FAQ Series" Society of St. Pius X,. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZiuXKo0CwoM. Accessed 27 June 2018.

8.  Name unknown. 1 Aug 2015. "Should Catholics Attend the New Mass? - Part I or II - Episode 14 - SSPX FAQ Series" Society of St. Pius X, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hZrRGMs6CY. Accessed 27 June 2018.

Reply to Kennedy Hall's pro-apologia SSPX articles on Serviam Ministries Part I

Rebuttal to Kennedy Hall`s pro-Apologia for the SSPX Part I: Status of the Society and the Article ``SSPX Sympathizer``

Serviam Ministries has been serving the Catholic faithful over the last several years in the Archdiocese of Toronto. Their conferences have catered to all walks of faithful from regular parish-attending Catholics, to Traditionalists, in the choice of keynote speakers in their conferences which are held twice a year. The Serviam conferences` popularity and reputation has grown so highly, they are promoted on parish websites and bulletins.

In addition, the ministry has branched out to the needs of men with the Band of Christian Brothers (herein, BCB,) an arm of Serviam Ministries of which I am part of the Facebook group, and have been privileged to have attended, and volunteered once at, a conference for the Men's group.

Let me also disclose that Serviam's co-founder, Mr. David Gilbert and I, share common interest in the Latin Mass/Extraordinary Form (EF) of the Roman Rite, as he is an executive member of Una Voce Hamilton in that diocese, and I have been serving at the altar of the Lord for certain offerings in the Archdiocese of Toronto since October 2011. Mr. Gilbert and Serviam Ministries have also been a great assistance or promoting organized offerings of the Latin Mass, especially of my colleagues of St. Patrick's Gregorian Choir in Toronto. Rest assured without them, there would not have been the 800+ bodies in attendance for the October 2016 offering of a Missa Solemnis/SolemnHigh Mass at the Cathedral of St. Michael in Toronto, with His Eminence ThomasCardinal Collins present on the altar and as homilist.

Almost one month ago, the Serviam Ministries blog posted two blog post by Mr. Kennedy Hall, one of Serviam`s listed authors of blog articles. Kennedy is a Catholic father and school teacher in a Catholic/Separate school system (he does not identify which region's board, likely to maintain his employment,) who is debating what to do about his son's education in the faith, as he detests the approach the system takes in regard to instructing students in the Catholic faith. In looking at educational options, he has present to him a local academy run by the Society of St. Pius X.

According to his first posting on Serviam Ministries, Kennedy did his own "research" into the SSPX. He wrote an initial post approved by Serviam Ministries on June 13th titled ``SSPX Sympathizer.``  While Mr. Kennedy says in the article: ".... This article is not meant to be a propaganda piece for the SSPX, and in full disclosure, to this day I have still never been to a Mass offered in one of their Chapels ...." (1) he devoted a full posting to making a pro-apologia for the Society, rather than focusing on the differences in education between the SSPX school system and the current Catholic system, and why a father in the Catholic Church would consider the SSPX school as a necessary option, which is why I clicked on the link to this article from the BCB Facebook group in the first place.

Due to commentary on the Facebook postings in Serviam and BCB's Facebook groups, Mr. Hall was then graciously allowed a follow up on June 22, whereby he states, ".... Once again, it is not my intention to be an SSPX apologist on this blog.  That said, it is difficult for me to leave certain untruths unanswered when I am in a position to do so. In full disclosure, my family and I have begun to attend an SSPX Chapel, and I cannot see us going back to the Novus Ordo, unless necessity requires for our Sunday Obligation." (2) Again Mr. Kennedy was given an audience to address some comments from the Facebook group, but now reveals he is becoming what is called an 'adherent' of the Society, which involves being a frequent attendee of SSPX Masses, and also again issues a pro-apologia for the SSPX.

Were Mr. Hall allowed one post, I would have written it off as a gaffe, or a one-time guest post to simply state an alternative viewpoint in the Catholic Church. However, between Mr. Kennedy's spiritually troubling decision to now attend SSPX Masses with his family (and likely, will have his children attend the charter school,) and my aforementioned background, I must now address these postings, as well as the SSPX issue and the decision Kennedy has made.

My motivations are for the sake of defending Traditionalism from critics who use examples like the SSPX, bloggers, Mr. Kennedy`s articles, etc. to shun the Latin Mass and/or Catholic Traditionalism, and attack ALL traditionalists despite a vocal minority being extremists; for fellow Catholics who are part of the Serviam Ministries and BCB Facebook (TM) groups, and/or attend their conferences and can access this website; and finally to defend Holy Mother Church and be subservient to Her. 

While I will address what Mr. Kennedy got correct, other matters will need to be addressed, such as clarifying points about the situation of the SSPX and the statements of Mr Kennedy`s first article. In a follow up posting, I will also address the second of Mr. Kennedy`s postings, but also address the Sunday obligation issue and ``Crisis`` in the Church, specifically addressing the SSPX`s warnings to avoid the Novus Ordo form of the liturgy of the Roman Rite, as well as state my own reasoning also as a Catholic Father of a child (and hopefully more in future) why I would NOT make a decision such as Mr. Kennedy's as spiritual head of my household.

SITUATION OF THE SSPX RE: STATUS WITHIN THE CHURCH AND MASS ATTENDANCE

Mr. Kennedy is correct when he says that the "...  They are not in full communion ... They don’t have jurisdiction to offer mass publicly in a local diocese ... Their Masses are valid, but not necessarily licit, and the Church has said they are not in schism, yet regular attendance at their chapels can lead to a “schismatic” attitude ...." (1) This is because their leader in 1988, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, decided after a stalled period of requesting a bishop for the SSPX from the Vatican under Pope John Paul II, to consecrate more bishops for the Society in a ``crisis`` scenario.  Part of that crisis was Lefebvre’s failing health, with the fear that the Vatican would not be able to deliver to the SSPX a bishop before his death.

This act, Lefebvre did, was a violation of the Church`s governing law, Canon Law. This put the four, now three acting bishops in the Society (as +Williamson was expelled in the last few years for anti-Semitic propaganda,) as well as +Lefevbre in excommunication, and the Society made ``irregular.`` Because those bishops` priesthoods were valid as they were ordained prior to the illicit consecrations, by a bishop who was of the same, any priests they do ordain are valid priests, but since done out of disobedience to Holy Mother Church`s Canon Law, and operating outside of bishops' jurisdiction, the priests` Masses are illicit, though the Eucharist is consecrated, and any sacrament done outside of the permission of the Church is null (e.g. Confirmation.)

As for attendance at their Masses, at least Kennedy was honest enough to say what is correct, in that regular attendance at the Masses of the SSPX can lead to self-schism from Holy Mother Church. The Pontifical Commision of Ecclesia Dei (PCED,) in a formal letter in 1995, seen here (3) states as follows: ".... While it is true that the participation in the Mass and sacraments at the chapels of the Society of St. Pius X does not of itself constitute "formal adherence to the schism", such adherence can come about over a period of time as one slowly imbibes a mentality which separates itself from the magisterium of the Supreme Pontiff ...." While the overall public presentation of the SSPX seems to be improving from a public relations perspective, Rome (the Church) has NOT withdrawn or altered the communication issued in 1995 from the PCED.

As for other sacraments offered by the SSPX, since the 1988 excommunications, the Holy Fathers Emeritus Benedict XVI and Francis I, have granted the following permissions out of mercy for the current bishops and the lay faithful, under the SSPX in this order: The removal of the excommunications of +Fellay, +Galarreta, and +Tissier de Mallerais (+Williamson was included too, but has since consecrated another bishop of his own, outside of the SSPX, becoming excommunicated once again from the Church;) valid faculties to conduct the sacrament of Reconciliation; validity of marriages in the SSPX chapels, provided a) A diocesan priest officiated the marriage vows portion of the liturgy, or b) Bishops of a diocese give ``carte blanche`` permission as the Church`s ordinary judge and officers of its Canon Law, for SSPX priests to officiate the wedding vow portion of the liturgy, or in the case of the EF, the pre-Mass vows. The sacramental permissions Mr. Kennedy got right also. 

However, Kennedy is wrong in regards to something I left out above. Kennedy is wrong in saying the following: ``... they fully accept the Holy Father and his authority." (1) This is incorrect on three different fronts. The first is their general situation, and involves the Mark of the Church being "Apostolic." By being outside the scope of the authority of their local bishops, who are the Church`s ordinary guardians and teachers of doctrine, dogma, and the laws of the Church in matters ecclesiastical, they at least indirectly go against the mark of Apostolic Authority, as it is from the head of the Church in Rome, under the Holy Father, the Supreme Vicar of Christ, where the authority of the Church flows.

The second front, is that currently as of 2018, the SSPX still promotes and has published public statements and/or media, that smacks of Protestantism that defies the Holy Father, particularly Pope Francis. When Francis was brought into the seat of the Pope, the SSPX, on their USA district site (a frequent source of Kennedy's in the first post and his second,) accused Pope Francis in 2013 of heresy in blatant accusations of Modernism. (4) To start, how can they accuse the pope of Heresy when they have NO direct spiritual authority in the Church? Furthermore, to accuse the Pope of heresy violates Scripture in Matthew 16:18, whereby Christ will never allow the gates of Hell to prevail in the Church, and that includes the Dogma of Infallibility in faith and morals, proclaimed in the Vatican I council. The SSPX has NOT repealed their accusations of modernism, including the 2013 article from their website. For Kennedy to say they are in complete obedience to the Holy Father and his authority is disingenuous at best, false at its worst.

The final front is by going against the Church’s/Pope’s jurisdiction over governance of liturgical matters, particularly in the debasement of the Novus Ordo Mass as an occasion of sin. This topic will be explored in my second posting to come, alongside other matter.  

NEXT: Part II: The Novus Ordo and the``Crisis of Faith`` and the ``Reply to Comments`` Article

Works Cited:

1. Hall, Kennedy. "SSPX Sympathizer" Serviam Ministries, 13 Jun 2018,  https://www.serviamministries.com/blog/sspx-sympathizer/. Accessed 23 June 2018.

2. Hall, Kennedy. "Response to Comments - Some Clarity on the Society of St. Pius X" Serviam Ministries, 22 Jun 2018, https://www.serviamministries.com/blog/response-to-comments-some-clarity-on-the-society-of-st-pius-x/. Accessed 23 June 2018.

3. "Status of Society of St. Pius X Masses" EWTN. 29 Sept 1995, http://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/cedsspx.htm. Accessed 25 June 2018.

4. District of the Unites States of America. "Pope Francis and Modernism." Society of St. Pius X, 1 November 2013, https://sspx.org/en/news-events/news/pope-francis-and-modernism-2729. Accessed  25 June 2018.

Dangerous Tides A Swimming? Pope Francis' Mission Of Mercy and the SSPX: Silver Lining or Pandora's Box Part II?

Hello Everyone,

Now begins part II, whereby after last evening's post here, I will give you my reasoning for why Pope Francis should NOT allow the SSPX into Holy Mother Church in their current state.

We Should Not Let Them In .... Without Diligent Re-Education and Monitoring ...

Fine, yes without them the Latin Mass may have faded from existence as they were the biggest publically known "presence" for the EF in the Church, and yes, they are at least on paper not being lie-berals and such, but the real problem is their disobedient and anti-Church of Post Vatican II stance (including the Holy Father, Francis I himself.)

If Francis does let them in unchecked, I can forsee much division and they will act contrary to the Pope's wishes of ecumenism and reconciliation, causing more division and the falling away of the devout, orthodox faithful. I mean such in the following ways (word of warning: drug abuse analogies to be used to illustrate the problem. No intentional offense to people valiantly fighting the addiction of drugs/alcohol):

1. Abuse of Mercy, the Parable of the Just Judge and the Lower Lord - Do you remember in Scripture when Christ is speaking about the merciful judge and the ungrateful slave? Here's a little refresher, from the NRSV Catholic translation used in Canada:

"The Parable of the Unforgiving Servant
23 “For this reason the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his slaves. 24 When he began the reckoning, one who owed him ten thousand talents[c] was brought to him; 25 and, as he could not pay, his lord ordered him to be sold, together with his wife and children and all his possessions, and payment to be made. 26 So the slave fell on his knees before him, saying, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you everything.’ 27 And out of pity for him, the lord of that slave released him and forgave him the debt. 28 But that same slave, as he went out, came upon one of his fellow slaves who owed him a hundred denarii;[d] and seizing him by the throat, he said, ‘Pay what you owe.’ 29 Then his fellow slave fell down and pleaded with him, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you.’ 30 But he refused; then he went and threw him into prison until he would pay the debt. 31 When his fellow slaves saw what had happened, they were greatly distressed, and they went and reported to their lord all that had taken place. 32 Then his lord summoned him and said to him, ‘You wicked slave! I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me. 33 Should you not have had mercy on your fellow slave, as I had mercy on you?’ 34 And in anger his lord handed him over to be tortured until he would pay his entire debt. 35 So my heavenly Father will also do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother or sister[e] from your heart.”

While the whole servants and kings thing isn't happening in a literal sense, this does relate to the SSPX. Allowing the SSPX, whose mentality has hardened into one of anti-Papacy, anti-Church, and even at times Protestant nature, is akin to treating a person for alcohol/drug abuse, and then letting them lose in society without serious outpatient monitoring and teaching them HOW to live post-treatment. How many times have we seen this happen with our modern celebrities (e.g. Lindsay Lohan) where they then just relapse into the same drug-addicted, partying lifestyle that put them in physical, emotional, and spiritual harm from before? As for those who do not partake in modern media/entertainment, when those people do come back and relapse, they lash out in their addicition-based rage against their family due to being drug addicted all those years, or still on the drugs.

Yes, giving the person mercy is good, but like the Samaritan woman, she was told to "sin no more." Unchecked, the SSPX would be given free reign to bash the Church and the Novus Ordo Mass, all the while offering sacraments only in the Extraordinary Form, and teaching things wrong or with a damaging spirit as they normally would. Like the drug addict without outpatient care, they would still, yet with licence, lash out at: the Pope, Novus Ordo Masses like the videos mentioned in Part I, Catholics who attend the Novus Ordo only, etc. while attesting the EF as the only form of salvation in the Latin Rite. They wouldn't be able to be contested because Pope Francis "approved" them back into canonization with the Church. Mind you they could always be re-suppressed, like the Jesuits, but in this modern technological age, they would elicit a firestorm of revenge, disobedience, and division in the Church and carry our a malicious campaign to tear Her apart after said re-suppression. They would take numerous souls with them in their campaign.

It would be best .... no ... there MUST be a strict restructuring process like the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate. Here I applaud Pope Francis and those in charge of the restructuring, because without the swift correction of those malices brought about by the "EF only/SSPX "mindset" crowd in the community, they would have mentally and spiritually poisoned the novitiates, and these priests would carry out that poisonous mindset by infecting the laity who attend their Masses within their reach ... despite being canonically valid in the Church.

In addition, other young people who are more naieve or have started their journey of becoming Orthodox/Catholic Traditionalism and/or including the Latin Mass, may not have the ability to discern spiritually those in their company who are more rigid (and sinful) in their practice and thoughts of  "Traditionalism." If the SSPX Latin Masses were "OK" now to attend, and have made the Latin Mass their preferred, if not sole form of attendance in the Latin Rite, these debilitating influences in that young man or woman's life, combined with attendance at the SSPX chapels, will cause the young soul to be completely lost to the anti-Church mindset disguised as Radical Traditionalism. They would likely NEVER enter through the doors of another regular parish again, with (possible) rare exceptions for family events, that is, if the SSPX priest of the chapel does not corrupt the individual by preaching/saying that any Novus Ordo Mass puts the soul in occasion of sin. Under the same corruption or in their "happy land," that person's friends (and family, if they follow their relative,) will only support them in the hardening of their hearts, encouraging them to reject anyone, clergy or laity, who are not of their ilk or are "heterodox/heretics" according to the Radical Traditionalist and their SSPX clergy.

In summary, using one of the similar or same arguments poised by the RMTs, this would be the similar with the SSPX, albeit with one major additional problem. Here, I bring into my essay the change to the footwashing rite within the Mass on Holy Thursday. When Pope Francis legalized the foot washing of men and women in the Novus Ordo for Holy Thursday, they decried this as the legalization of disobedience to the Church." However, that change to the rite was disciplinary and did not attack the sacramental validity of a rite and/or form of the Holy Mass, promulgated by a Pope, and also the magisteruim of the Church by employing Pharisaical twists on its teachings and crude, indirect and direct attacks on the mentioned parts of Holy Mother Church. Argue as you will (organic vs. disruptive,) this is entirely NOT the same as legitimizing the SSPX unchecked, who would cause dissent from within Holy Mother Church, with a valid and legal "licence" to do so, an unintended consequence of Pope Francis' mercy.

2. The Katholic Krazies Would Be in Paradise! 
We already have it bad in the Traditional Catholic/Latin Mass scene worldwide. With lay organizations, bloggers, etc. it's clear that these (usually) Latin Mass loving extremists, already exhibit severe hatred for the Church they purport to "love" and "defend." With their calumny, slander, and detraction online and in person, they do not serve Christ and His Church, rather they serve some other master than Him. They make it bad enough for all of us who try to do it the "proper" way, in love with Mother Church, respecting her liturgical rites INCLUDING forms. These people/groups/websites give bishops and priests legitimate excuses to shy away from the Latin Mass, or prevent Ecclesia Dei requests from being fully granted (and I include in this "ghettoization" of the communities that DO get a request granted for a Latin Mass.)  

Already, based on that presence, and how they assault and belittle the Holy Father, the Novus Ordo Mass and its attendees, and the Church herself (just check my archives for postings, like this one as a sample,) these false "heroes" or "leaders" (self-appointed of course with NO actual Church authority) would now have legitimate reason to harden their hearts and souls even more, and even become more extreme with the SSPX's legitimacy. They already express their views publicly, and share in their Church hate.

In fact when I presented commentary similar to this posting on the Southern Orders post of 27/4/2016, save a couple of them, multiple commentators came out with daggers of the Devil against me, or flat out defended the SSPX as if they were not guilty of anything, for violating their golden calf (which is the SSPX,) despite me saying this would be a major mistake of Pope Francis. If anything, it reveals that upholding the First Commandment and going against the SSPX, is a greater "sin" in the RMT's books than defending Pope Francis. The moderator, Fr. Allan McDonald, could have easily dismissed my comment as ``trolling`` according to his policy in the comments section of Blogger, but clearly has NOT replied directly to my comment in chastizement or deleted it, and has allowed what has transpired to remain. If anything, he has allowed the discussion and the stabbing to ensue, possibly to demonstrate their insanity and idolization of the SSPX.

The only thing keeping them from being full radicals in liturgy, aside from their false "faith" is the fact that frequent attendance at SSPX chapels constitutes a possible (and likely self-schismatic) break from Holy Mother Church, the more you attend:

" PCED: "Catholics who frequent the chapels of the Society of St. Pius X do not incur any sin or canonical delict by doing so. However, we further refer you to what we have already stated in #4 above ...." "".... While it is true that participation in the Mass at chapels of the Society of St. Pius X does not of itself constitute "formal adherence to the schism" (cf. Ecclesia Dei 5, c), such adherence can come about over a period of time as one slowly imbibes a schismatic mentality which separates itself from the teaching of the Supreme Pontiff and the entire Catholic Church ...." (Published, PCED private correspondence with layman, and journalist, Brian Mershon for www.renewamerica.com)

If the SSPX were granted canonical validity, making their Masses licit AND VALID, using another drug/alcohol addiction analogy, this would be like giving a (non-medical) marijuana addict crack cocaine! The once user of gateway drugs would likely, (with great probability,) become so addicted and change into an extreme drug abuser! Sadly, based on what was unleashed against me in the post above, and some bloggers' sympathies out there in their incessant postings about the SSPX, the obvious interpretation is they want the perfect excuse to "jump over" and the SSPX is perceived as the "only hope" is saving the Catholic Church, especially liturgically in the Latin Mass.

Whether their reasons are wholly for the liturgy of the Latin Mass, or the whole extremist environment, or just to spite the institutional Church (read, parish pastors, institutions, individual priests, bishops, etc.,) they would get exactly what they want .... which would be catastrophic for their already damaged souls. At the very least, being in valid and licit Latin Masses approved by Holy Mother Church, keeps them in unison with Her, with a chance of salvation and Her mercy. While approving the SSPX outright might restore full abilities and sacramental privilege to the priests who hold those Masses, the environment and the untreated minds and hearts of the SSPX clergy, would make the heart of those mentioned, damaged souls, truly absent to those blessings within the EF Mass.

It would be akin to a beautiful pearl being held in a misshapen ugly clay jar, absent of all light inside. Because the of the ugliness of the clay jar surrounding the pearl, no one would come near the jar and dip their hand into the darkness to get the pearl, and it would lay there forever, forgotten, and never obtained. The blessings and graces possible in the EF Mass, would be that pearl, and the deadly sins of Pride, Anger, Envy, etc. with many additional sins, would be that darkness. The SSPX Masses, despite the Mass itself NEVER being a source of evil in itself, but because of the anti-Church and anti-Pope environment and erroneous teachings from the SSPX priests that would channel all that, would be the ugly misshapen clay jar.

Conclusion
In summary, it is already bad that these RMTs embarass Traditional Catholics or Latin Mass attendees, by associating with licit and valid liturgical environments, groups, or parishes, spewing their hatred of the "N.O Church." Giving the SSPX full approval without harsh disciplinary measures or a thorough clean up like the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, would be giving those radicals what they truly desire in their hearts: A "Church approved" excuse to hate Her and abuse her from within her own house.

Analogy: If you knew your own son or daughter was extremely, verbally and/or physically violent, like the drug abuser mentioned above, and you knew your life was in danger by letting that person in, would you allow that threat to your life in your house? You would not. You would get that person committed to a psychiatric ward or drug rehab facility if possible, to treat them. In the worst case scenario, you would call the police, even if it meant a standoff with a possibility of firearm discharge and the death of your own son/daughter.

This instance, is one occasion, where I pray and hope the Holy Father, does NOT act without consideration, or ``off the cuff`` as it were, to extend his hand fully and give them his version of mercy that he is doing in this current Papacy. If he TRULY wants to be merciful to the souls of both the clergy and attached laity of the SSPX, as well as the current flock still in "good standing" in the Church (at least on paper,) Francis will not reconcile the SSPX, instead of giving them carte-blanche freedom to pilfer and plunder souls from WITHIN Holy Mother Church.

Giving the SSPX the freedom and the personal prelature without HARSH discipline and reorganization, will spell doom for many a good soul wanting more Traditional Catholicism, and a perfect excuse for those ``corrupted`` souls to make themselves further fit for Hell as desired .... it will be the kind of disguised ``Traditionalism,`` which is truly extremism, and neo-Jansenism, leading souls off the narrow path to salvation on the right side of the road instead of the left.

END

Due to the nature of this post, judging by the reaction I received here, in prudence comments will be closed for this posting. 

Pax Tibi Christi, Julian Barkin.

Dangerous Tides A Swimming? Pope Francis' Mission Of Mercy and the SSPX: Silver Lining or Pandora's Box Part I?

Hello Everyone,

Yes it's been quiet here on S.U.D. That's mainly because of me being squeezed out between my work, and wedding preparations. Only 2 weeks to go! That doesn't leave me much time for entries. But finally, I have something for you ..... something concerning ... yet it is Latin Mass/Traditional Catholicism related.

My basis started after I read a post on the great, Fr. John Zuhlsdorf's WDTPRS blog. It was reported here on these Orthodox "Glad Trad" blogs (e.g. Southern Orders, Fr. Z), and the RMT sites that I will not hyperlink to (e.g. Rorate Caeli), with confirmation on the Vatican's major news portal (see here: http://www.news.va/en/news/press-office-confirms-pope-francis-meeting-with-ss) that Pope Francis had a meeting with the current head of the Society of St. Pius X, "Reverend" Bernard Fellay. That is as far a title I will allot to him, because he and the other "priests" of the Society of St. Pius X are NOT in communion with Holy Mother Church. Also, pastors of Christian churches can be called "Reverend" so it's not just the SSPX. Turns out the SSPX leaked that their leader, "Reverend" Bernard Fellay, had a meeting with Pope Francis.

I couldn't believe this, and it got my wheels turning, so I started to draft this in response. After multiple starts and stops, an interesting article surfaced yesterday on Southern Orders blog run by Fr. Allan J. McDonald of the diocese of Macon in the USA. He featured an article from once-Boston Globe associated CRUX news about possible reconciliation between the SSPX and the Church. I took an alternative viewpoint in the comments box, which only further proved what I am about to say, and makes this posting more prominent in terms of its timing.

Throughout his papacy, there's been interesting news about Pope Francis and who he is choosing to extend his "Mission of Mercy" to. Now, while I take a lot of what the Radicals Misrepresenting Traditionalists (RMTs) (and Catholics everywhere,) say on their armchair thrones from their domiciles or workplaces, with a heavy grain of salt, there is something that has been going on that has me deeply concerned with whom Francis is possibly bestowing "Mercy" to.

Allow me to remind you of the status of the society as to WHY they are not in communion with the Church, and why I will NOT call Fellay a bishop, despite technical or formal jargon and processes, or not. This is important because this post and its follow up in Part II, concerns the news that has been floating around, and it's highly concerning for the future of the Church.

Background as to why to be deeply concerned with the SSPX's re-entry ...

As per Benedict XVI's lifting of the censure of excommunication from Fellay and his fellow "bishops", De Mallerais, Williamson (who is now likely RE-EXCOMMUNICATED for consecrating bishops without the authority of Pope Francis and the Holy Catholic Church), and Alfonso de Galarreta, ".... As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church...."

The only absolute exception is recently, with Pope Francis' granting of temporary faculties for confession until November 20th this year for the Extraordinary Jubilee of Mercy. As for their Eucharists, those done by the SSPX ``clergy`` are ALWAYS consecrated illegally, in disobedience to Holy Mother Church, but is likely valid due to the odd canonical situation of the Society. One, however, should not play with the safety of their salvation and consume it, due to its questionable status.

The SSPX became "non-canonical" due to then Vatican II council father and founder of the SSPX, Marcel Lefevbre, and a co-consecrating bishop (who had since reconciled with Holy Mother Church,) illicitly consecrating bishops without a papal mandate from John Paul II in 1988. Regardless of whatever supposed politics between the two parties happened, the four men above, including current head Fellay, were the illegally consecrated bishops. When this happened, the SSPX (that is, its clergy) incurred the status, having NO sacramental jurisdiction in the Church, and Lefevbre, that bishop, and the four "musketeers" being excommunicated (until Benedict's intervention for the four & the co-consecrator's reconciliation.) The Sacramental jurisdiction comes from being under the authority of a bishop, even one from Rome in the Church as part of a personal prelature or missionary order (e.g. Opus Dei, Fraternal Society of St. Peter.) Sadly, Lefevbre NEVER reconciled with the Church, which is a very concerning statement for the foundation of the Society: one founded on disobedience and rebellion to Holy Mother Church.

In current day, the SSPX STILL has not reconciled with the Church. While Benedict XVI tried with negotiations in 2012, they ended in failure because once again, the SSPX refused to submit doctrinally to Holy Mother Church, and it is rumored the log in their eye, Vatican II, was to blame. The refusal was supposedly against a direct order from Benedict XVI, a condition which if not filled, would not allow them to reconcile with the Church. Currently, they operate two major "seminaries" with their major one in the birthplace where its establishment began, Econe, Switzerland, and have numerous chapels (I will NOT call them parishes, that's only reserved for those priests and communities in canonical validity with the Church) as well as private schools.

More Holier than Thou ... or how the SSPX are Protestant in the Sense of Church Hating ...

However, in existing in the world, they adhere to an education that is almost 100% how it was "pre-1962" with its strictness, teaching methods, and application of such methods in strict authority. Unfortunately, coupled with all this is the teaching to their "adherents," a twisted theology that attacks Holy Mother Church, the Novus Ordo Mass, Pope Francis, even professing incorrect teachings that are not in force in the Church. An incorrect teaching, for example, I take from a former friend now with the SSPX, who told me it was a mortal sin to eat meat on Fridays. He goes to the chapel in my archdiocese (obviously NOT under the jurisdiction of ++Collins,) and never went to their schools, so this is likely where he learnt this error. This is entirely incorrect. The current Canon Law in the Church and its Catechism, do NOT state this, nor any document in the Church's history. Furthermore, our current Canon Law of 1983, clearly states that this version of the law is in effect, not this AND/OR any other version of Canon Law, here in Section 5, subsection 1:

``Can. 5 §1. Universal or particular customs presently in force which are contrary to the prescripts of these canons and are reprobated by the canons of this Code [of Canon Law promulgated in 1983] are absolutely suppressed and are not permitted to revive in the future. Other contrary customs are also considered suppressed unless the Code expressly provides otherwise or unless they are centenary or immemorial customs which can be tolerated if, in the judgment of the ordinary, they cannot be removed due to the circumstances of places and persons.``

As to hating the Novus Ordo, I turn to these YouTube videos: " Should Catholics Attend the New Mass? - Part I or II - Episode 14 - SSPX FAQ Series." and the second part in episode 15 with the similar title. I will not link to it, so you will have to do the grunt work, but if you do, watch it with caution and concern. I am merely watching these videos for the most relevant parts to this post.

First, at 2:19-2:30, the collared cleric begins to weave the web of confusion about the necessity of avoiding the Novus Ordo to be necessary. He tells the viewer that while the Church obliges all Catholics to attend Mass, it is "according to the Human Condition" and that there are occasions that might make attendance at Mass on a Sunday "impractical." This cleric's word choice is interesting. He does not say the more appropriate "unavoidable," but rather "impractical," meaning if it doesn't fit one's routine or personal needs, it is not necessary.

While continuing on in part I, the cleric correctly addresses common reasons for dispensation from the obligation, and the parish priest's ability to dispense the obligation when the situation falls outside common reasons or scenarios.

Part II is where the conspiracy theories and the hate train begins. They set you up in part I with the "basics" which are mostly correct. However, like how the Devil twists truths or things good to bring out malicious intention and sin, likewise the SSPX does so to go into part II to say why you should reject and hate the Novus ordo.

Immediately, as RMTs are wont to do, it goes for the conspiracy theory angle, implying that Pope Paul VI was directly responsible with Annibale Bugini, to create a Protestant, heretical product: ".. under the influence of Fr. Annibale Bugnini and Pope Paul VI, both of whom wanted a liturgy that was ecumenical and would not be a “stumbling block” to Protestants. This goal was accomplished with the new liturgy by obscuring or even removing from its prayers the Catholic doctrines concerning the propitiatory nature of the Mass, the sacrificial and mediatory character of the priesthood, and the dogma of the Real Presence of Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist."

Further, the cleric goes on to say about the Novus Ordo:
"...  the New Mass departs from the Catholic Faith “as a whole and in its details .... this new liturgy has confused or destroyed the Faith of millions of Catholics since the 1970’s to the point that most churchgoers today have an erroneous understanding of the Catholic doctrine of the Mass and sometimes do not even believe in the real presence .... The Church cannot ask her members to endanger their Faith. This is the reason why Catholics are not obliged to attend the New Mass to fulfill the Sunday Precept. In fact, for those who have knowledge of its inherent problems, the New Mass is to be completely avoided, as they understand that it is also an offense to God ...."

So let's see, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the most POWERFUL form of prayer in the world, that which Christ has asked his Holy Priests to perform for all time, is a product hellbent on destroying the faithful of Millions?

There is so much fault at this explanation I'll only briefly wax over it.

First of all, I quote from Scripture from the NRSV-CE the Gospel of Luke 11:9-13:
"9 “So I say to you, Ask, and it will be given you; search, and you will find; knock, and the door will be opened for you. 10 For everyone who asks receives, and everyone who searches finds, and for everyone who knocks, the door will be opened. 11 Is there anyone among you who, if your child asks for[e] a fish, will give a snake instead of a fish? 12 Or if the child asks for an egg, will give a scorpion? 13 If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit[f] to those who ask him!”

I may be no JCD or P.hD, but I'm pretty certain that tied into the OH SO FAMOUS Matthew 16:18-19, that Christ would NEVER let the Church be destroyed by Satan, and above, would never seek to purposely poison his sheep. Think about it, if the Church, were to do so, then clearly Christ lied in establishing His One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, it would NOT be guided by the Holy Spirit, it would not bear the mark of HOLY, and at best Jesus as God made Flesh, reflecting God, would be nothing more than like the Greek Gods of old, who sometimes looked after humanity, but also sometimes had fun playing around with them, like in Oedipus Rex and other Greek tragedies.

Also fine you might go on about the whole Bugini thing and such. First, the general Church did NOT have the Internet to propagate information as quick as a button, so the majority of priests, lay leaders, etc., had to rely on whatever was taught/handed down to them. Liberal influences and people clearly got a hold of that to curb things in their favour. Secondly, the translators used dynamic equivalence, more meaning vs. literal translation in other words. That definitely screwed up the translation. Final point on the propagation of such a "malformed" product: If it was that bad, wouldn't the Church have more quickly closed up shop in multiple (arch)dioceses already, with barely a physical presence in the world today, with only Latin Mass parishes, Byzantine parishses, etc. surviving? If it was truly a product of the Devil, and we can trust our Lord to only give us truly GOOD gifts, as per His Holy Words above, wouldn't he have allowed rapid and quick destruction of those institutional parts of the Church with this new Mass to die immediately? Did he not also tell His Disciples that He would separate the wheat from the chaff, and cursed a fig tree producing no spiritual fruit to show that that which is not of God will wither and die?

Further to add, despite the calumnies of the SSPX against Holy Mother Church and the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite, it STILL brings in converts and new faithful every year, around the world, at the Holy Triduum's Saturday Easter Vigil. If this Mass was clearly poison to the lay faithful, then why does the bosom of Holy Mother Church, continue to entice people to join her? Why then, would other noted apologists and lay leaders, such as Scott Hahn, Dave Armstrong, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Jimmy Akin, Marcus Grodi, etc. who are CONVERTS, attend such a "bastardized" form of the Mass, only to spread the faith and do their absolute best to bring other people into the Church, with their apologetics and Internet websites?

Now, listen, it's one thing to analyze the Masses properly, and state what has been gained/lost from prior forms/updates. It's also one thing to state that "Form X has a temptation to allow priests to become entertainers due to versus populum and factors a, b, c, in the Church." However to imply that the form itself is defective, as this "priest" has said, even if the statement does or does not literally say so, contains in itself heresy and hate for the Church.

On a final note, as for the Pope Hate? Once Pope Francis ascended to the Seat of Peter, Fellay had calumnious words for Pope Francis that he was practicing heresy by being a modernist from a sermon he did, and put it publicly for distribution on the SSPX regional websites, also committing the grievous sin of detraction, as well as what Pope Francis has called the Devil's work: gossip.

Conclusion Part I

With this history, and a gander of what these "fine" folks will bring into the Church with regards to their vicious stances against the Novus Ordo and Pope Francis, contravening Scripture and other important facets of the Church in the process, these are the "gifts" they will bring into the Church when they come in.

So then, with these gifts in mind and their current stance on our modern Church, why should the SSPX not be receiving the gift of mercy, unchecked, in having their canonical validity and status restored in Holy Mother Church?

That, my dear friends, and enemies and their fanboys/fan-maidens (I know you are watching me,) will be for Part II, which shall be scheduled for release this evening. But before I bid you adieu, Due. to the nature of this post, judging by the reaction I received here, in prudence, comments will be closed for this posting.

Ta Ta, and Pax.

REPOST: Commentary on the Proclamations Against Banning of Laity from SSPX Worship Centers on the Internet Part 2: My Two Cents

The following is a repost due to text formatting problems between my e-mail and Blogger in creating posts.

My take on these matters

After all this, here is my take on the issue, based on my status within the Latin Mass in the archdiocese of Toronto, as well as a young adult male.

As to the canonical arguments, I say that the analysis and literal defense using canon law is logical. The consultation was proper and done correctly.

Practically speaking however, in respectful disagreement to these organizations, and any other allies of mine (or even, enemies,) I do not support the criticism outright. On the ACTION alone, not the motivations of the bishops accused, I am actually in favour of the bans of the faithful from the SSPX chapels for various reasons:

1) The message to the lay faithful that rebellion against OHCA Church is unacceptable for any reason: 
Plain and simple, the SSPX and their lay faithful are in NON-HOLY disobedience to Holy Mother Church, despite the use of a valid liturgy and following every "t"radiation with the EF liturgy and adhering to older catechisms such as Baltimore.

Such disobedience to Rome and disparaging of the Post-Vatican II popes is prideful disobedience a la Satan, "a non-Serviam," as it were. Most lay Catholics do not know of the spiritual dangers and possibility of schism that awaits them upon participating in their Pseudo-catholic life. It is essentially, Protestant (in what they do,) to quote a Latin mass priest one diocese over from us. If you are curious who, it is Fr. Paul Nicholson, though I do not support him because of associations with Radical Catholic Reactionaries (e.g. Michael Voris), despite the good and holy work he does as a priest. (Sorry, no links. search for him yourself.)

Let an analogy make more sense of what I am saying here: If I knew that there was a lake with sharks in the middle, and if I put myself in a boat on that lake, knowing the current will eventually drift me to that middle, to do so would be personally irresponsible of my life. If I was watching someone get into a boat on that same lake, knowing it would drift to the center of that lake where the sharks are, but that person did NOT know of the sharks, and there is no lifeguard already, it would be my responsibility to ensure the safety of that person and warn him, "Hey don't get in that boat! there's sharks in that lake and the currents are too strong and will draw you to where they are!" To not do so or to absolutely not care about that person would cost him his life, and I would sin by omission of not letting that person know of the sharks.

The same goes for one's spiritual salvation, and our true ``life,`` the soul. Why, for our bishops to slack off and NOT stop laypeople from drifting into those shark infested waters is gravely irresponsible and a millstone around the weakly catechized laity.

Banning the SSPX attendance to me is a valid action on its own, in that it will prevent laity from being suckered into spiritual death, foolishly hypnotized by the physical trappings of a "c" atholic life, while sinking further and further into schismatic actions, after being brainwashed by the leaders of the SSPX, and other like-minded drones of the Society who have ``drank the kool-aid`` as it were.

2) Because there are ever more increasing options for Latin Masses worldwide, making the argument that they provide what the Church is lacking, null. 
Alright, now before you turn your plowshares into implements of violence to be aimed at me, I get that not every diocese in the world has a Latin Mass, or bishops that at least look the other way when a Latin Mass is put on. However, offerings are gradually increasing of all levels of the Mass, even pontifical. Look around the traditionalist sites on the Internet, especially with this month's solemnities of All Saints/All Souls. While there needs to be an increase of more offerings in good geographical distance to the faithful, especially daily at accessible times (e.g. the evening), you CANNOT say under the Franciscan pontificate that he is killing the Latin Mass.

If that were so, he would have issued a motu proprio that would reverse Summorum Pontificum, or stacked the PCED with Liberals if he was so inclined. So while pre-Summorum Pontificum, the SSPX were the ones selling the "product" before, (the Mass of course is NOT a consumer product! But I am using a cruel business analogy to convey my idea,) the SSPX now have little to no credence to their "emergency situation" of the Catholic Faith in the liturgy anymore.

You might be inclined to argue, "well, there isn't a diocesan Latin Mass near me save a 2 hour drive. SSPX is 20 min away from me, so your a jerk Julian!" Well Trad Behaving Badly,when it comes to that argument, sorry to be blunt, but YOU ARE WRONG. You are to fulfill your obligation, whenever, wherever you can, at a Catholic Church in communion with Rome, in a valid and licit liturgical rite. If it is the choice between Fr. Liberal weenie's, fluffy bunny, Novus Ordo, a Methodist Church, and a SSPX chapel, you suffer through the banal liturgy of Fr. Liberal's Church  and offer it up to Christ. As long as major violations aren't made, and the basic conditions are met, it's a liturgy to fulfill your obligation. Also, St. Louis Jesuit tunes and a priest with "showman" like qualities in his character and preaching, are NOT valid and licit reasons to attend the SSPX liturgies.

Only in the most extreme scenario, such as this would it be acceptable to attend the SSPX for Sunday obligation: A vacation for a work-related conference in Las Vegas, and you are stuck at the cheap desert strip motel, you can't travel by car and are forced to use public transit. The next, nearest, Catholic church is 1.5 hours away by car, and it's either: the United Church, the Evangelical mega-Church, or the SSPX church. Then fine, you can go to the SSPX chapel ONLY to fulfill your obligation, NOT to consume its Eucharist (unless you are truthfully ignorant of their full situation) and participate in the livelihood of the Society. Do you get it? Extreme scenario here! This is NOT the norm for many of the Catholic faithful worldwide!!!

3) This shows that the Radical Traditionalist way, is an extreme barrier to the success of the Church's mission to evangelize, and that we must be Glad Trads in order to further the spread of the Latin Mass: 
How can I put this? Most prelates are anywhere from OK to gung ho about it. They cannot outright ban it, and realize that to do so would show outrage and reveal their true colours, resulting in a bureaucratic and public relations nightmare for the Church in the age of the Internet at the hands of the conservatives and Radical Traditionalist Catholics. However, even among more "neutral" to pro-Latin Mass clergy and bishops, one can generally agree and/or infer from even Internet coverage, they want nothing to do with the radical traditionalists who take every chance to be "chicken littles" spouting calumnies, detractions, and slanderous things in person and on-line. This includes the clergy and those in the episcopacy in the Archdiocese of Toronto, all the way up to the Vatican itself
under Pope Francis.

If there is one recurring theme in Pope Francis' homilies or fervorinos from the daily Masses it is that being a religious Pharisee is unacceptable in the Church and stifles the proclamation of the Good News. Further, I can personally attest to this, these radical traditionalists and attendees of hardened hearts, do NOTHING GOOD for promoting the Latin Mass, and only drive these prelates further to stifle it in any way possible. They might appear pious at face value, but their actions in person and their writings only garner negative attention, and paint a broad brushstroke over Traditional Catholics and Latin Mass goers as vile people.

The truth is far from it! However these self-appointed "high priests" of the movement don't care what happens to other Latin Mass goers! They continue to disparage even good Traditionalists and clergy, all for some self-imposed militant agenda. Was it not in the 2nd Letter to James that St. Paul quoted, "Faith without works is dead?" and elsewhere in the Bible, that "by their fruits you shall know them?"

So to me, should the bishops` motivations be deceitful, they should be chastized and penalized for abusing their magisterial authority in the church to cause further division. If not they have done a great service in in protecting the lay faithful. At least, it tells the general uneducated populace that "Hey! These guys are spiritual bad news! They aren't the good Trads! Stay away from them and go seek out the right Trads who are carrying the Good News of the Lord to fruition." Let us pray it`s not the former for their motivations.

If this is with good intention, then this is exactly what I want to see in my Church of mercy! I want to see prelates and laity telling these fake/hypocriticial/slanderous/pharisical, etc. Trads that your actions are contrary to the Gospel and that the Latin Mass is NOT a political football to be lobbied at both true, and perceived/false heretics, as a nuclear bomb! 

Further, as a young person, I HATE, I repeat, I HATE bullying, harassment, and disparaging attitudes and comments, from those who are, or think, they are superior to us. My generation will NOT tolerate such garbage and are not afraid to vocalize our displeasure. Some of those disgusting comments are, for example, to women, that they should not wear pants, or that they are taking away jobs in the Church from men. Online, constant accusations of heresy, sinfulness of other people up to the Holy Father, shows us that you are disgusted to be in the Church, and then why should we give you any respect or authority in return, when you lack any ability to be humble and in servitude to others?

For those of weak faith, they WILL NEVER COME OVER when you show such false example of the Catholic Faith. For those of us involved in the Latin Mass or of strong faith, I will protect my good and noble young brethen,and purposely NOT send them to your Latin Masses, or communities I know poisoned by Radical Catholic Reactionaries or sourpuss parishioners!

If you are like that with the Latin Mass, we will never come. New converts to the Latin Mass .... 0!  Good noble Catholics or the unconverted remaining where they are .... millions and counting.

Therefore, the way and the example we need to give is inherent in these actions. We must avoid acting like the disobedient SSPX and their supporters who consider them "good friends." Crediting the SSPX with keeping the Latin Mass alive, and knowing they are Catholics on paper, (though are considered Christian brethen like other non-canonical or non-communion Christians) is as much credit we should give them until the Vatican says other-wise. But go no further unlike the poor example of their R.C.R. ``friends.``

Rather ... we should act Gladly! Joyfully! In union in mind, body, and soul with the Magisterium and the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic, Roman Catholic Church! If that means not supporting Radical Traditionalist blogs, Latin Mass organizations with noted and/or known, spiritually dark influences, and going and supporting Glad Trad ones, so be it!It is better that these actions are done, than to stick one's head in the sand with the radicals, or not support the Latin Mass at all.

Conclusion

And thus ends my lengthy but needed opinion on these bans. I do like the ultimate inner message that these bans send to the average lay faithful, in protection of their souls. However, should it be true that the bishops did it in spite and not solely to protect the faithful, then they have committed errors of judgement in their part, and abused their authority, without checking the existing Church laws.

Still, I support the deeper message behind it, that it once again signals where we as a Church MUST take, and deal with, the Latin Mass, in order for it to be a fruitful part of the New Evangelization, and not a divider that splits the temple in two, wielded not by those whom are thinking with the mind of the Church. It all depends on how we approach it, and that we do not allow the sins of the Devil to take over us and corrupt the beautiful treasure, "re-furbished" to us by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI.

Keep on being Glad Trads everyone and fighting in the right ways for the Latin Mass!

Pax Tibi Christi, Julian Barkin.

PS: BLOG RULES ARE IN FULL FORCE. COMMENTS ARE OFF. DON'T ABUSE MY EMAIL.