I just found out that Bishop Fellay of SSPX, ordained 7 men as Byzantine rite priests in Warsaw. The ordainations took place on October 27, 2007. Here is an interesting picture:
I think that Byzantine Rite priests in union with the SSPX belong to the Priestly Society of Saint Josaphat (I think that's what it is called). From what I have heard, they reject the 'de-latinization' of the Byzantine Rite churches. Anyone know if this info is correct?
In Ukraine yes, the group in union with the SSPX is in favour of Latinizations, and this puts the SSPX in conflict. This is because Latinization is the equivalent of Modernism in the Eastern Churches, and by defending Latinization in the Eastern Rites they are defending the very Modernist principles that the Society has vowed to fight.
On the other side, this is not happening in Russia, where the Eastern Rite priest who is in union with the SSPX, was originaly a Suzdalite!
They feel that the dropping of Slavonic for Ukrainian, and the de-emphasis of latin pieties (Rosaries, stations, scapulars, miraculous medals, etc) coupled with a decidedly less militant attitude about "converting the schismatics" are symptons of Greek Catholic modernism.
I have no real idea how much popular (Greek Catholic) support they enjoy versus the patronage of the Polish SSPX. I really don't know how many of their vocations are "home grown" versus Latins who are signining up to proselitize.
They seem to play on a sense of confusion or betrayal that stems from some moves by the hiearchy in Ukraine to de-Latinize a little more quickly than the faithful were prepared to do. I am not saying that they are right, or the hierarchs are wrong. But questions have been raised about the wisdom of some sudden de-Latinizations that jarred the pious sensibilities of people who would be prone to say "but that's how we have always done it!"
From what little I have heard, and the even less I actually understand they seem to feel that some of the Latinizations were organic manifestations of the unia and that attempts to de-latinize are "modernist".
They are associated in a loose sort of way with the Trans-alpine Redemptorists who are also affiliated with the SSPX - here is a part of the TAR's website:
In a really bizzare, ironic and strange twist of fate, some of the work done by the TARs and SSJK in "opposing the abandonment of traditional Church Slavonic in favour of the modern Ukrainian language in the Slavo-Byzantine liturgy of the Ukrainian Catholic Church, for the SSJK holds that the ancient, Church Slavonic is essential to stress necessary Catholic unity among all Slavic peoples, and to avoid particularist nationalism which has since a long time divided Slavic Christians" has resonated and been found admirable with some Orthodox traditionalists. Strange bedfellows indeed!
Interestingly, the TARs have become involved with the "preservation of the traditional Chaldean and Maronite" liturgies as well, with at least three or four Maronite and Chaldean-rite members who use pre-V2 forms of those liturgical rites. The irony of their pointing to modern Maronites and Chaldeans and saying "look how modernized and out of touch with their true tradition they are" and then propping up and supporting Maronites celebrating the "old rite" in fiddlebacks at Latin high altars as their "True traditions" isn't lost on me.
In Ukraine yes, the group in union with the SSPX is in favour of Latinizations, and this puts the SSPX in conflict. This is because Latinization is the equivalent of Modernism in the Eastern Churches, and by defending Latinization in the Eastern Rites they are defending the very Modernist principles that the Society has vowed to fight.
I think I understand what you are meaning to say... but you said it a little backwards. The SSJK views de-Latinization as the equivalent of Modernism, and defends Latinization as tradition.
Originally Posted by Mexican
On the other side, this is not happening in Russia, where the Eastern Rite priest who is in union with the SSPX, was originaly a Suzdalite!
I forgot about that guy... I remembered reading about him years ago - if its the same one. Which one are Suzdalites again? I loose track of some of those folks.
As though he were not interesting enough a specimen, I believe the sede-vacantist traditionalists actually netted themselves a bishop from one of the Ukrainian Orthodox groups... The SSPV maybe? I can't remember.
I've known about this Society for a while and even saw the pictures a few weeks back.
It is interesting that "inside" (sort of) the same Catholic Church, we have those who are strident in purging the Eastern Churches of latinizations, and these irregular priests.
The SSPX confuses me...all of their statements that I have read seem to be filled with contradiction. *Sigh* I pray that this unfortunate situtation will be resolved soon.
From what little I have heard, and the even less I actually understand they seem to feel that some of the Latinizations were organic manifestations of the unia and that attempts to de-latinize are "modernist".
It's really quite logical if you approach the whole thing from the point of view that Rome is the true Church and the Orthodox are schismatics. The Latinizations serve both to bind the Eastern Catholics with the Church of Rome and to distinguish them from the "schismatics."
The Slavonic language, on the other hand, can be seen as analagous (or homologous?) to the Latin language in the West.
How much impact they are actually having has yet to be seen. The fact that they have attracted a degree of attention and admiration from some Orthodox traditionalists may actually be a good thing!
In Ukraine yes, the group in union with the SSPX is in favour of Latinizations, and this puts the SSPX in conflict. This is because Latinization is the equivalent of Modernism in the Eastern Churches, and by defending Latinization in the Eastern Rites they are defending the very Modernist principles that the Society has vowed to fight.
On the other side, this is not happening in Russia, where the Eastern Rite priest who is in union with the SSPX, was originaly a Suzdalite!
What you cite as being "Modernism" is not what SSPX is fighting against. Latinizations have nothing whatsoever to do with "Modernism" as the term has been defined by the SSPX or has been defined in the writings of Popes St. Pius X.
Here is a quote from the Catholic Encyclopedia regarding the heresy of Modernism:
"In the Encyclical "Pascendi", Pius X says that modernism embraces every heresy. M. Loisy makes practically the same statement when he writes that "in reality all Catholic theology, even in its fundamental principles the general philosophy of religion, Divine law, and the laws that govern our knowledge of God, come up for judgment before this new court of assize" (Simples r�flexions, p. 24)"
The SSPX would say that modernist heretics within the Church influenced the liturgical deforms in the Roman Rite; the new liturgy relfecting Modernist principles.
Certainly, from a Catholic perspective the term "Modernism" can not be used to describe Latinization in the Eastern Churches.
The Byzantine Forum provides
message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though
discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are
those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the
Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the
www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial,
have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as
a source for official information for any Church. All posts become
property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2022 (Forum 1998-2022). All rights
reserved.
