An Open Letter to the Church Renouncing My Service on I.C.E.L.

Communicantes (Newsletter of the Society of St. Pius X in Canada) ^ | October 2002 | Rev. Fr. Stephen Somerville

[ultima ratio]

What chaplain committed what felony with what altar boy? If you're going to smear the Society, let's have some concrete facts. This is the first I've ever heard of this. If you are referring, however, to the infamous Father U, then you are a liar and a fraud. He was booted out of the SSPX pronto before any incident involving his proclivities had transpired and word was passed--properly--to the Bishop of Scranton who took him in nevertheless. It was the N.O. bishop who thought the warning by the SSPX was not worth considering and who now must deal with the subsequent mess the priest created.

[ultima ratio]

You are not getting confused--you are confused. Unless you're as young as you sound. In which case your stupidity is only a matter of immaturity. When you grow up let us know.

[ultima ratio]

The timing is in God's hands. We have the faith. That's enough. It's for Rome to ponder what it's got. Whatever it is, it's not Catholicism.

[patent]

Clearly, I.C.E.L. has written a new prayer.

Even if you are convinced of the validity of the Novus Ordo, when you attend Mass in the vernacular, you are participating in a travesty of even this new service. THE PRAYERS ARE NOT THE SAME.

Rather disingenuous of you. He commented on the ICEl translation, not the Novus Ordo itself. There is a difference and you are aware of it. Critiques of ICEL are not always valid critiques of the Latin Typical edition.

For the good of your soul, ATTEND THE LATIN MASS. You are gambling with all eternity otherwise.

LOL. Your gambling with all eternity if you attend anything but the Latin Mass? Do you take yourself seriously? I hope not, but suspect otherwise.

"Conservative" Catholics (aka "neo-Catholics")

You whine about being called schismatic, and ask us to stop this, but you seem dead set on name calling your self. If you are going to do it, you have no cause to complain when we do as well. Anything else is hypocrisy.

are part of the problem, not part of the solution. They are not defending the 2000-year tradition of the Church. Instead they are institutionalizing abuses and corruptions.

So much better to schism? By the way, I’m not institutionalizing anything. I am worshiping our Lord.

Let's please dispense with all the hackneyed accusations of "schismatic" and "heretic."

Disingenuous as well, given that the article raises these very issues. In this one he seems to hint that the SSPX is not schismatic, but a year earlier he said they were:

It includes the regretfully now-schismatic Society of St. Pius X, begun by the late Archbishop Lefebvre of France. It is one million strong, with 500 priests and about four bishops. The faithful counterforce to this is the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, with over 50 priests, many vocations, and rapid growth in many countries, despite hostility by many bishops who see it as divisive.

. It seems Fr. Somerville can’t really make up his mind on this issue. He cites Ratzinger for the opinion that they aren’t, but I’ve never seen this quote. Regardless, schism is very much an issue for these people, and those labels, when accurately applied to groups like the SSPX, are important.

patent  +AMDG

[patent]

---

To: ninenot

You are not getting confused--you are confused. Unless you're as young as you sound. In which case your stupidity is only a matter of immaturity. When you grow up let us know.

122 posted on 11/30/2002 11:50 PM CST by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

---

To: Loyalist

The timing is in God's hands. We have the faith. That's enough. It's for Rome to ponder what it's got. Whatever it is, it's not Catholicism.

123 posted on 11/30/2002 11:53 PM CST by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

This is so absolutely classic that I had to highlight it again. A guy like ultima calling a guy like ninenot young and stupid. LOL And then to immediately follow it up with a claim that he has the faith, but Rome does not have it, whatever it has is not Catholicism. I’ve said it before ultima, you should just admit you are a sedevacantist, as no one else could claim that Rome is not Catholic. It necessarily follows.

Moreover, you demonstate just how catholic you are, ultima, when you hurl insults so freely as you do.

patent  +AMDG

[patent]

How long can the SSPX wait for it?

An eternity, it would appear.

At what point does the SSPX give up and decide to establish a more permanent parallel structure?

Well, they currently have their own seminaries, their own Bishops, their own convents, their own schools. It seems to me they already have established a permanent parallel structure, and do not plan on ever coming back. I don't know what else they need to establish to stay away forever.

patent  +AMDG

[Maximilian]

BTW, you may denigrate my efforts but I think it is far better to have successfully negotited those two Masses very early on than to spend thirty years braying in the wilderness in service to the dead Lefebvre.

I'm sorry if you misunderstood me -- I wasn't denigrating your efforts at all. You deserve a great deal of credit for getting authorization to hold 2 Latin Masses during the years 1969 - 1988. That's 2 more than just about anyone else in the United States, or elsewhere. I was commenting on the lack of availability of the Latin Mass, as demonstrated by your example, despite your heroic efforts. During those two decades there was the SSPX and renegade priests such as you describe. Everywhere else was a vast wasteland of felt-banner, pastel-colored 1970's Catholicism, a brand of Catholicism that killed the faith of nearly all its adherents. The number of Catholics that survived those years and limped into the 1990's was rather like the remnant of Napolean's army that limped back to Paris.

[Maximilian]

Even if you are convinced of the validity of the Novus Ordo, when you attend Mass in the vernacular, you are participating in a travesty of even this new service. THE PRAYERS ARE NOT THE SAME.

Rather disingenuous of you. He commented on the ICEl translation, not the Novus Ordo itself. There is a difference and you are aware of it. Critiques of ICEL are not always valid critiques of the Latin Typical edition.

I think if you re-read my sentence above, you will see that I WAS commenting on the ICEL translation. I said "If you ARE convinced of the validity of the Novus Ordo, you STILL must be concerned about the translation issue." When you attend the NO Mass in the vernacular, there are serious issues, some of which are highlighted by Fr. Somerville, that are in addition to the intrinsic issues related to the original Latin of the Novus Ordo.

Disingenuous as well, given that the article raises these very issues. In this one he seems to hint that the SSPX is not schismatic, but a year earlier he said they were:

As I said in my earlier reply to BlackElk, the point was whether you could deal with Fr. Somerville's criticisms without resorting to attacks upon him for so-called "heresy" and "schism." So far I see lots of personal assaults, but I don't see any reasoned defense of the Novus Ordo Mass against his testimony regarding the perfidy of the ICEL.

[ventana]

12:15 each and every Sunday right by us. Not an Opus Dei Chapel, either. Just a church with a Priest who wanted badly enough to make it happen, and got permission to offer the Mass in Latin.

v.

[livius]

Campos would be just one more Brazilian hotbed of "liberation theology" if de Castro Mayer had not had the courage to resist innovation, even when it comes from the Pope.

Very true. Something many people on this forum seem to forget is how many people who are now considered to be saints spent a great deal of time out of favor with the Pope or Holy See of their time. Some were even imprisoned or denied faculties by Church authorities, but the truth that God had spoken to them triumphed in the end. We don't know how things are going to play out in final analysis, and what might be the eventual attitude of history and even the Church itself to people who are now considered, at best, "rebellious." The people at Campos and even the SSPX have to adhere to their informed consciences, with all good will and desire for peace, but with all prayerful firmness.

If I thought the Church were an organization ruled by fiat from above (that is, from the Pope alone), I could not in good conscience continue to be a Catholic. I would have to consider all Protestant and Orthodox criticisms of the Papacy to be correct. The Church is the Body of Christ; the Body is composed, in addition to those of us alive now, of 2000 years of tradition, of the lives of those who went before. No one, including the Pope, has the right to blot out all that has gone before - although, that said, I'm not sure that all of this innovation is a product of the Pope himself, particularly as he has gotten older and perhaps less able to control some of the eager beavers (I think BlackElk memorably called them "termites") at the lower levels.

[ninenot]

Kissing THEIR holy book is not permitted.... But it is not okay for him to show deference to their faith by kissing the Koran and praying to Allah.

Are you accusing the Pope of idolatry?

My understanding of Islam's theology (such as it is) is that Islam is a heresy and Allah is our God the Father. Now Islam does NOT believe in the Trinity, which explains their blood-lust.

[ninenot]

It happened in a southwestern Milwaukee suburb. The priest was from Madison, WI. The suburban 'congregation' had hired the priest for Sunday masses, and the congregation was SSPX. Sorry, can't recall the name of the priest, nor the precise date. IT IS POSSIBLE that the priest in question was not a member of SSPX---only a 'rental' hired by the SSPX group.

[ninenot]

but I don't see any reasoned defense of the Novus Ordo Mass against his testimony regarding the perfidy of the ICEL.

Look, Max, few if any serious Catholics will defend ICEL, in any way, shape, or form. We've been handed over to ICEL for scourging, and we know it.

But ICEL's work is NOT the Mass. The NO Mass is licit and valid (given the usual circumstances) and that's all there is to it.

As to Somerville, he can thank God for the sacrament of Penance.

[ultima ratio]

Yes. The act was idolatrous. So was pouring libations in the Togo sacred forest. So were his Assisi prayer gatherings. He has also prayed in a synagogue with Jews THEIR prayer--for the coming of a different messiah. The latter, while not idolatrous, was still reprehensible. As was his allowing Indian priestesses to "exorcise" him in the middle of one of his outdoor Mass extravaganzas. The list goes on and on.

[ventana]

they would need to lay claim to the Chair of Peter.

[ultima ratio]

If the priest was hired by the congregation, then the SSPX was not involved. Actually, the facts as you present them speak for themselves. SSPX priests are never hired, they are assigned. So he could not have been a member of the Society.

[ultima ratio]

I will admit I'm not a saint and sometimes get carried away. But I'm a piker compared to you guys.

[ultima ratio]

They have usurped no jurisdictions, but merely operate as any religious order would within the Church according to the mandate which had been provided by the Vatican itself. To suggest this is a parallel church is bizarre. They issue no new doctrines, have no new liturgical practices. Everything they think and do, in fact, is precisely as the Church had always thought and practiced. This, of course, is what bugs Rome. It wants the old Church and its version of Catholicism stamped out. That is to say, it seeks to erase the Church's memory of itself.

[Loyalist]

It seems to me they already have established a permanent parallel structure, and do not plan on ever coming back. I don't know what else they need to establish to stay away forever.

I think they would need to establish a formal curial and diocesan structure, complete with congregations and tribunals, before we could conclude that. Right now, all they have is the usual setup of a religious order.

[Desdemona]

Thank you all for your answers re modernism.

One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet in this thread, and, IMO, is vitally important is the concept rampant in modernism of "dumbing down". In the last 24 hours, especially after my long talk with Grandma, I've really thought about it and, if I'm reading this right, Vatican II as it came out in the end took a good deal of challenge out of the faith. The "New" ideas (which resemble a lot of the stuff I hear coming out of protestants) are fluff. Language and music have been taken to the lowest common denominator. There's no challenge to thinking about God and how He fits into our lives. Right? At least that's how it seems.

Someone mentioned that the ideas that bred modernism (separation of God from life on earth) orginated in the late 19th century. Without supporting documents, but some factual evidence...why not the late 18th when communism was cooked up on a college campus? It just took a while for the ideas to take root.

And, BTW, according to several relatives, before Vatican II and even after, when it came to abusive priests, the boys knew who they were. They did exist and the boys looked out for each other and would not allow anyone to be alone a room with a priest known for having a taste for boys. And they didn't tell because they didn't think their parents, or anyone else, would believe them. So, that problem is not a post-Vatican II or JPII one. It's been around a while.