From not-so-Catholic-friendly AP via not-so-Catholic-friendly (unless liberal) HuffPo comes this bizarre train wreck:
Saint Pius X Catholic Group Protests Kristallnacht Interfaith Memorial In Argentina, Challenging Pope Francis
BUENOS AIRES, Argentina (AP) — Ultra-traditionalist Catholics [read: SSPX… but it is far more fun and damaging to call them “ultra-traditionalists”, or even “traditionalists”, which makes them sound like Nazis. As a matter of fact, you are probably supposed to think “conservatives“.] have openly challenged Pope Francis by disrupting one of his favorite events, a ceremony that he and Jewish leaders led in the Metropolitan Cathedral each year to promote religious harmony on the anniversary of the beginning of the Holocaust. [Sigh… ]
The annual ceremony brings together Catholics, Jews and Protestants to mark Kristallnacht, the Nazi-led mob violence in 1938 when about 1,000 Jewish synagogues were burned and thousands of Jews were forced into concentration camps, launching the genocide that killed 6 million Jews.
A small group [It was a small group but they got a lot of attention from AP, didn’t they?] disrupted Tuesday night’s ceremony by shouting the rosary and the “Our Father” prayer, [Even were they speaking at a normal voice, AP would call it “shouting”.] and spreading pamphlets [“spreading” rather than “offering” makes it sound like they were infectious.] saying “followers of false gods must be kept out of the sacred temple.” [I thought we wanted followers of false gods to enter our sacred temples. No wait… Jews are followers of “false gods”?!? Ummm…]
Buenos Aires Archbishop Mario Poli, named by Francis to replace him as Argentina’s top church official, appealed for calm as others in the audience rose up to repudiate them, and the protesters were soon escorted out by police. [If they truly went into the church and disrupted the service, shame on them. In these USA that would also be a violation of civil law. They could be prosecuted. I would be tempted to press charges.]
“Let there be peace. Shalom,” Poli then said, urging everyone to take their seats for a ceremony that was also led by Rabbi Abraham Skorka, a close friend of the pope who co-wrote a book of dialogue seeking common ground between Judaism and Catholicism.
“Dear Jewish brothers, please feel at home, because that’s the way Christians want it, despite these signs of intolerance,” Poli said. “Your presence here doesn’t desecrate a temple of God. We will continue in peace this encounter that Pope Francis always promoted, valued and appreciated so much.”
The Rev. Christian Bouchacourt, the South America leader of the Society of Saint Pius X, said Wednesday that the protesters belong to his organization and that they have a right to feel outraged when rabbis preside over a ceremony in a cathedral. “I recognize the authority of the pope, but he is not infallible and in this case, does things we cannot accept,” Bouchacourt said in an interview with Radio La Red. [Sure. They have – right or wrong – a right to be outraged, and even to express their outrage. They don’t have a right to disrupt that service in that manner.]
“This wasn’t a desire to make a rebellion, [“This”, he said – pointing at a duck – “is not a duck!” And this wasn’t “rebellion”. Riiiight.] but to show our love to the Catholic Church, which was made for the Catholic faith,” Bouchacourt added. “A Mass isn’t celebrated in a synagogue, nor in a mosque. The Muslims don’t accept it. In the same way, we who are Catholics cannot accept the presence of another faith in our church.” [I think Father is confused.]
The Vatican spokesman didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment emailed by The Associated Press. [AP… eager to have something like this to write about….]
The Society of St. Pius X has no legal standing in the Catholic Church. [And liberals are all about doing things according to the book, right? And I think they do have a “legal standing”. They are baptized.] It’s a schismatic group of traditionalist Catholics [Hang on… AP doesn’t get to decide who is schismatic and who isn’t. So far there hasn’t been an official decree that the SSPX is a “schismatic group”. So, this is inaccurate.] who are attached to Latin Mass and follow the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who founded the Swiss-based society in 1969 in opposition to the modernizing reforms of the Second Vatican Council. The Vatican II meetings made a point of reaching out to Jews and people of other faiths. [I think the intent here is to paint the entire SSPX, all its members, as anti-Jewish. Also, keep in mind that the SSPX is a priestly fraternity or society. It is not a lay society. Wait. AP wants to paint all conservatives as anti-semitic or racist or… puppy-eaters.]Pope Benedict made reconciling with the society a priority, but Pope Francis has made clear he has little or no interest in courting the traditionalists. [How has he done that, exactly? Has he said something like, “I have no interest in reconciliation of the SSPX?” or “I have little interest in traditionalists” Is the writer psychic? Moreover, I thought Francis was interested in everyone. Am I wrong?] Francis has disparaged “restorationist” groups as being out of touch with today’s Catholic Church, and his decades-long friendships with Argentine Jews is a testament that he is fully a pope of the Vatican II church. [This has devolved into editorializing…. even more than it editorialized before. Furthermore, can AP name which “restorationist” groups he meant? Has Francis/Bergoglio named them?]
The same society was in the news in October when one of its Italian priests offered to celebrate the funeral of Nazi war criminal Erich Priebke after the Rome archdiocese refused to allow him a church funeral. The society’s funeral service was later called off at the last minute because protesters and Priebke’s supporters clashed outside. [See? AP is saying “SSPSers are Nazi loving Jew-haters whom the most wondefullest Pope ehvur disparages.”]
Priebke had lived in Argentina, unnoticed, for nearly 50 years after the war until he was exposed as being a Nazi SS captain by an American TV station. He was deported to Italy in 1995 to stand trial for one of the worst atrocities of the German occupation, the massacre of 335 civilians outside Rome, and was serving a life sentence under house arrest when he died in Rome at age 100. [I wonder…. Had Priebke died in Argentina even a year ago, after having asked for the last sacraments, if then-Card. Bergoglio would have refused to go to anoint him or would have refused to let him be buried. I wonder. Do you wonder? For Pope Francis, are there things that you can do in your past that forever ban you from the Catholic Church in any way? Would he have refused any sign of the compassion he is clearly demonstrating and asking to be demonstrated to everyone? I think AP would have you think so. Why? Because it is unforgivable to be a conservative or a Catholic traditionalist.]
Since this will open up onto the SSPX fever swamp again, I will switch on the comment moderation queue.
I am in no way condoning what the SSPXers did to disrupt that service. As a matter of fact, “Thanks heaps for making everything that much harder!” Some trads can be their own – and our own – worst enemies. But that is old news.
What really troubles me is how AP wrote about it. My spidey-sense suggests that this is part of a project to undermine anything “traditional” in the Church, to associate anything “traditional” with something everyone hates: Nazism.
Loading ...
Maybe nothing from the Vatican has said the SSPX is schismatic, but the vicar general of Chicago recently sent a letter to clergy here saying they are. [With all due respect to his sacred person, the VG of Chicago is not the competent authority in this matter.] There seems to be a growing consensus in that direction.
Uh yeah Father: this is definitely an attempt to undermine anyone who has any reverence for the Tradition of the Church. Otherwise they would not have started the article with the words “ultra-traditionalist Catholics”. So really it is not necessary to read the article after the first sentence.
This is lamentable on many levels.
Here is the video of the incident.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBbZf6AIS-s
It does appear that they were shouting. One member, wearing a red hat, even went up to the main sanctuary to disrupt the event. Shameful!
No, Father, I don’t think that SSPX has anything to do with the AP’s motif here. [In other words, “YES, Father, you are right.”] Rather, it is another in an ongoing series of media missives trying to create daylight between “conservative” Catholics and the Holy Father. Yesterday the insinuation was that Ab. Chaput failed to garner the votes for USCCB vice-president (a position I am confident that he did not particularly want) because he had supposedly criticized the Pope in July and bishops didn’t want to support an anti-pope prelate like that. And today we learn that traditional Catholics supposedly oppose the pope because of his ecumenism and brotherly love for the Jewish people.
Neither story is true, but both fit snugly under the narrative that Pope Francis is a courageous liberal revolutionary who refuses to be held back by reticent conservative detractors.
This ignores Chaput’s love for Pope Francis as well as the great love that the current pontiff’s two predecessors had for the Jewish people.
If only Google had existed 20 or 30 years ago, the media would know that Bl. John Paul II also faced a few traditionalist detractors.
It seems that the only thing stopping the left from making Pope Francis their own is God, the pope himself and the full bore of faithful Catholics who seem to love him very much. So how do you preserve your narrative? Write as much as you can about how scandalized those poor, regressive conservative Catholics are by the pope.
Who knew that the media were going he greatest clericalists among us?
Two thoughts.
I wonder if AP would have reported J.R.R. Tolkien for ‘disrupting’ post V2 masses by loudly giving responses in Latin (as he is reliably reported to have done by his grandson).
Depending on what the service consisted of I can see there might be an objection to a so-called ‘ecumenical’ serivce, though one shouldn’t disrupt it. I wonder though, what was the last time that this particular cathedral had a celebration of mass in the extraordinary form? (That’s not a rhetorical question – for all I know they do it every day. But somehow I doubt it.) If my surmise is correct it should be seen as strange that one can celebrate an ecumenical service of some sort but be unable to celebrate the EF.
One more thing, PRAYER AND PENANCE! Just looked at video. How sad to see such disrespect toward our Lord’s One Holy Catholic Church! Pray our Bishops and Pope will put an end to this confusion through orthodox teaching!
I think that the AP is just engaged in the standard tactic of liberal (and neocon) journalism, namely, attempt to score points against your ideological foes by smearing them as racist or anti-semitic (other sins of intolerance still take second fiddle to those two classic ones). It is the intellectual path of least resistance and fits with their consistent view that their readers are idiots.
However, in my experience (and even by looking at the fever swamp comments from SSPX-styled “traditionalists” often seen here) conspiratorial and bizarre thinking is a too common affliction for them just as regards Vatican II and the Catholic Church. I have encountered far too many who get fanatically carried away in their conspiratorial line of thought and that can extend to an anti-intellectual hatred of Jews.
I can’t believe I get to be the first one to point that the Holy Father recently encouraged Catholics in South America to make a little lio. [I believe that any serious person would suggest that this is what Pope Francis had in mind with “¡Vaya lío!”. This from the guy who suggested tongue-in-cheek that people who want the older Mass should protest outside their churches until they get it. HERE. Operative word: OUTSIDE]
This is a very well-thought out and charitable post. Many thanks, Father Z, for the honesty and accuracy.
The AP really ought to be ashamed of itself on this one, from the bias to the errors in its article. Good for folks here calling the reporter and editor out, regardless of one’s feelings (pro or con) toward the SSPX.
“I wonder…. Had Priebke died in Argentina even a year ago, after having asked for the last sacraments, if then-Card. Bergoglio would have refused to go to anoint him or would have refused to let him be buried. I wonder. ”
Respectfully, and please correct me if I am wrong, but I understood from the original press reports that Priebke had not been denied a Catholic funeral, but a public Catholic funeral, in order to avoid scandal. It was not clear if he had received the anointing, but from the fact that the funeral was permitted it seems likely that he had the last rites. Wasn’t the denial of a unlicensed funeral (but allowance of a Catholic one) the judgement of Pope Francis, as Priebke was a parishioner of his?
That should read “denial of a public funeral”.
The Pope did say we should create a mess, right? Well, they’ve got themselves a mess in Argentina.
As an aside, Christian Bouchacourt is the priest who conducts the High Mass at St. Nicolas du Chardonnet on YouTube. That video was the first time I’d ever seen a TLM.
Definitely a biased article. And definitely meant to target not the SSPX but orthodox, faithful priests in the USA where the story will be read.[Probably.] The problem with the SSPX is they make it so easy! [Yes.] It seems to me like there is a definite shift underway. I think the reforms and initiatives of Pope Benedict called many of those who were traditionally minded back into whole-hearted union with the Church. Because of Benedict, the momentum for tradition is now in the dioceses and the seminaries, not in the SSPX. So what is left in that group is a more obsessive, hardened, and often conspiratorial core. As you yourself have pointed out, this is the expected outcome of a whole generation living out of communion with Rome. There does seem to be now a sizeable group within the SSPX who are stringently antisemitic and authoritarian. Some within the SSPX seem to be waiting for a Franco to rise up and save them. At this point, I think the damage is done; I don’t think the SSPX will be able to submit to Rome and will choose schism over humility. And once you’re adrift, free from the barque of the Church, odd things start to happen. Either the SSPX will continue to shrink and radicalize, or will go the way of the so-called Old Catholics. Yes, at this point I would be comfortable betting that in 100 years the SSPX will either be “ordaining” women or bombing buildings.
Well… here we go again.
“Thanks heaps for making everything that much harder!” Exactly.
As I already knew that part of the SSPX and adherents are likely to do things like that – the other part perhaps refusing for conscience and policy’s sake but still having a favorable eye (as in “right to feel outraged”)…
my issue and the reason for writing this comment is a little detail. To wit: “followers of false gods must be kept out of the sacred temple.” I rush to say that I’m not going to open this discussion again with respect to Islam, though I stick to my opinion there.
But no one has hitherto ever accused the Jews of worshipping a false god. (Except, when they, e. g. in Old Testamental times, actually did worship a false god; you know what I mean.)
Is this, dear friends from the SSPX adherence, the time for creating that confusion in addition? Don’t we already have enough confusion, terminological and otherwise?
Christians believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
seems like in past days using force to fight false worship would have been the catholic thing to do. even fathers like st john chrysostom advocated forcefully breaking up heretical assemblies. i would assume when scandalous interfaith “worship” was going on inside the very sanctuary of a catholic church, he would advocate no less.
Dear abasham
Noted your kind acknowledgement that pre-Benedict, “the momentum for tradition” was with the SSPX. But what evidence (beyond wishful thinking?) do you have for your subsequent caricature of them? E.g. the SSPX shrinking? As far as I can see, the only even half-significant recent path away might be the anti-Fellay pro-Williamson “strict observance” crowd, but they are probably the same people whom you think are “antisemitic and authoritarian”.
Well, I guess I will be one of the SSPX’s “fever swamp”, but I hope I disappoint you.
I have been a member of a SSPX chapel for more than 20 years. Never in my parish have I heard anything anti-semitic or sedevacantist. The reasons I remain in my parish are: 1)it is the only EF Mass in my area that I am aware of; and 2) my family and I receive solid Catholic doctrine and teaching. We have had several pastors over the years, and every single one of them has exhorted us to pray for our Pope. This is not to say that they always agree with him, but they have never insulted any of our Popes, called them anti-Popes, or encouraged us to do anything but pray for him/them.
Maybe I am just extremely blessed to be a member of a “rational” SSPX parish. However, my sister and her family live in St. Mary’s, KS with a large number of SSPX priests, and I have never heard of any of them speaking in an anti-semitic way, or denigrating the Pope.
So I just want to let you know that there are many, many SSPXers (I would say the vast majority) that pray for our Pope, pray for a true reconciliation with Rome, love our Church and, yes, believe that the Jews believe in the same God we do.
Just a thought. I do believe that the SSPX made a big mistake here but as others have mentioned, it appears that many of them are becoming a bit extreme.
An additional thought though is that according the the Catholic Catechism up until Vatican II, I believe that Catholics were never to attend a non-Catholic service. According to the 1917 Code of Canon law ‘§1 It is not licit for the faithful by any manner to assist actively or have a part in the sacred [rites] of non-Catholics.’ I am not sure of what exactly this means. I know that under extreme circumstances (like a non-Catholic relatives funeral), one was allowed to attend but not take part. I am not sure of how this relates to this ‘worship service’ in the Cathedral. Personally I am uncomfortable with it. But as one fine priest told me, I need to worry about my sin, not that of others.
Following on from Imrahil’s comment, I have not tried the video (yet?), but note the last sentence of its poster’s annotation is: “Los que protestaban, repartieron mensajes en la puerta de la Catedral, que decía ‘Fuera adoradores de dioses falsos del templo santo’ “. (The poster precedes this with a list of paricipant bodies). It would be good to see a scan of the “mensajes”/”pamphlets” (with accurate translation) to see what exactly they contain, and (assuming the quotation is accurate) who and what they mean by “adoradores de dioses falsos “/“followers of false gods”. For example, do they clearly mean the Lutheran, Evangelical Methodist, Disciple of Christ and “la Iglesia Católica Apostólica Romana, la Iglesia Dinamarquesa” participants equally with the Jewish ones? Do they, for example, argue that everyone who has a false image of God is – ‘effectively’?, or ‘in very fact’? – a ‘follower of a false “god” ‘?
No mention from the AP of the crude feminazis who stormed a talk of the bishop in Germany throwing stuff on him yelling hate-filled words.
Imrahil, the idea that the Jews worship a false god isn’t exactly new to the SSPX. I first remembering hearing about it around fifteen years ago. The way it was explained to me was that since the Jews reject the Trinity, they don’t worship the true God and so their worship is directed to a false god. I don’t remember if my parents got the idea from the writings of SSPX priests or laypeople who attended SSPX chapels, but it’s been around for a while.
Yes, the AP and HuffPo aren’t exactly knowledgable nor friendly when it comes to matters Catholic or conservative (in the political sense, and since at least the HuffPo seems to be firmly onboard the abortion-is-good train, the Church is automatically seen as a right-wing enemy.)
But one starts to wonder if scandal and damage to the Church isn’t the intended consequence of such a protest, rather than ‘collateral damage’. The local SSPX must know how this will end up in the press, they have had ample examples in the trainwreck of the antisemite Williamson. [I doubt that they think it through that far.] They must know that any such ‘protest’ at a commemoration of the events leading up to the Holocaust will emphasize that aspect far far more then any complaint they might have about ‘undue’ interfaith ceremonies (besides, Jesus was a Jew, and is referred to as ‘Rabbi’ in the bible. A rabbi in the Cathedral can, ipso facto, therefore not be seen as inappropriate in any way, I’d say.)
So the SSPX is either incredibly stupid and naive (possible, but .. really that bad…?), and believes that such a protest will do any good (in their conception of the word) regarding the Church behavior in future instances (instead of forcing the Church to once more sour the relation with the SSPX, maybe even suing them, as will be the true outcome), or – second option – they are behaving like a bunch of egotistical peurile kids, who make life on other shard simply to show and maintain them being different to the rest of society, or – third option – they are simply hoping for a lot of negative (not in their minds, of course) press to appeal to those antisemites that may be attracted to it, and get the church into hot water so that in has more trouble reaching out to the rest of society. In that scenario, such a hatchet job by AP and HuffPo (and frankly, they could have been worse still) is a desriable outcome for the SSPX.
I’m wondering whether this third – and most despicable – option isn’t really the right one. The others are slowly starting to defy belief, as they would require an inmense about of stupidity on the part of the local SSPX.
The other side of the story. Found this on the SSPX website:
http://sspx.org/en/news-events/news/buenos-aires-rosary-protest-facts-2799
@ Robbie
Hi there,
High Mass at St. Nicolas du Chardonnet on YouTube. That video was the first time I’d ever seen a TLM
That is an AMAZING video, I could have wept, comparing it to my own experience of Catholicism (altar girls, school-kids as ministers of Communion, an obsession with havng the altar jam-packed with women and children at all times etc etc).
The first time I saw it, I resolved to definitely attend mass there some day.
An absolutely beautiful Mass; to be honest I wonder if the vernacular Church could hold a candle to such an event, these days – even if they tried.
Even though I find Interfaith councils completely useless and just a promoter of false peace, I don’t think that interrupting a remembrance of Krystalnacht which had no jewish catholic fusion ceremony was a good thing for the S.S.P.X.
In fact, they just made it harder for all faithful Catholics per-Vatican and Vatican II Catholics by giving the left another excuse to use the very words they have used so much, that they have lost their origin meaning. You know what I’m talking about.
If you point out that their welfare policies have crippled black families by replacing the father with government, your a racist, so shut up!
If you point out, that only three percent of abortions involve incest and rape and the majority of them involve not wanting children for any other than incest and rape, you’re a sexist, Shut up!
By the way, if you oppose,gender selected abortion (which they usually abort a girl, because she’s a girl), you’re still a sexist. So Shut UP!
I go on, but you get the picture, the left will do anything to demonize there opponents because in reality they’re losing.
Traditionalist Latin Mass attendance have become more and more popular over the recent years in catholic circles, Obama is morally broke, and the liberals in most countries are being exposed for the racist, sexist, anti free speech bullies that are.
The only problem I find, is that Pope Francis I find is unintentionally giving Heretics more ammunition to blast the faithful because of his support of ecumenism.
I only hope that this disturbing relationship between the pope and secular media doesn’t forever
So every one, Pray for the Church and pray for the pope to keep us free from sin and help us defeat our enemies both within and outside of Christ’s Church.
Deo Gratis
Equating traditionalism Catholics with Nazis and anti-Semitism is nothing new (see SPLC and Crisis Magazine), and seems to be on the increase lately among apologist bloggers. Terms like “extremist” and “radical” and “ultra” are used to paint a picture of a dangerous cult.
This SSPX incident is similar to a few years back when a Buddhist concert in a Church was interrupted with a rosary. Unfortunately, this most recent instance is too easy to paint as “Anti-Jewish” given the nature of the event. Although the timing and tactics may not have been prudent, it is nice to see Catholics taking a stand for Mortalium Animos in some way, shape or form. [That did NOT uphold Mortalium animos!]
No fan of the Society of Saint Pius X, and their tactics in this case were stupid and counterproductive BUT is the Catholic Church the One True Faith founded by Jesus Christ the second person of the most Holy Trinity and established by Him as the one and only way to salvation or is it not? It seems that the greatest crime in the Church of the last century is the fact that we Catholics ourselves in the pew and from the pulpit seem to have gone out of our way to make the Church seem (without maybe directly using these words) that the Catholic Church is just another of the many choices one can make in regard to the salvation of their soul. This is where all of the abuses in the Church from the liturgy to the sexual mores of both the laity and the clergy stem from. And ‘interfaith services’ routinely conducted by Catholic prelates do not help. Recover the sense of the uniqueness, the Truth, the mission, and the primacy of the Church in the world and these things will end. The Church is not just for us but for the entire human race.
I wouldn’t pretend that he is, but given the official way in which he said it, I’m confident that it also reflects the thinking of Cardinal George, who has been friendly in matters traditional (which hasn’t exactly made him popular with much of the presbyterate of Chicago) and is not without connections to that person whose voice ultimately matters . [I really like and respect Card. George. However, will all due respect to his sacred person, neither is he the competent authority on whether or not the SSPX is formally in schism.]
Opus Richard Williamson.
Dear Father and frieds:
We published an article (Spanish) and a full video with new images (token by us) in our blog. Included Arzobishop Poli speach:
http://www.pagina-catolica.blogspot.com.ar/2013/11/es-lo-que-el-papa-quiere.html
Let me tell you that media call us Nazis whitout any argumentation, and some catholic priest agree with such a difamation:
http://www.lanacion.com.ar/1637892-un-blog-ultraconservador-anticipaba-la-irrupcion-en-la-catedral
http://www.infonews.com/2013/11/13/sociedad-108805-quienes-son-los-ultraconservadores-que-protagonizaron-el-ataque-antisemita-en-la-catedral-ataque-en-la-catedral.php
Please, pray for us.
Regards.
I’ve not said he is either. I’m simply reporting the direction the wind is blowing in Chicago, where previous such statements I’ve seen have been couched in very careful language. This statement showed no such reservations.
Moreover, if or when such a decision is made by the competent authority, whether it is the current competent authority or a subsequent one, he is unlikely to make it in a vacuum but will likely do so in consultation with his brother bishops. If patience is running out among them, what does that portend?
[I suggest that the SSPX take that into consideration. As I have written before, one day they are going to wake up to some really bad news.]
Pingback: A Profanation Protesting Profanation » First Thoughts | A First Things Blog
Pingback: A Profanation Protesting Profanation - Hardcore Catholic