Of Validity and Excommunication and the Insanity of the Present Time

I have some really smart readers and how blessed I am to learn from them. In fact, I appreciate and pray for all my visitors even the trolls. They are particularly helpful to my retaining my sense of humor. 

But as for my fellow well-catechized Catholics, often I'm humbled by what they share.  So today I'm offering a few recent comments that are so smart and insightful they deserve wider viewing. Thank you to all my faithful readers for your kindness and prayers.

The first comment is about Pascal's wager. You've no doubt heard of it. Pascal defended the wisdom of living and acting as if you believe in God. You have nothing to lose (unless you consider living a virtuous life instead of a licentious one a loss). When you die, if there is no God you will be none the wiser. If there is a God and you lived the virtuous life of the believer, you go to heaven to glorify God forever. On the other hand, if you lived a sinful life ignoring God's laws, you will meet the God you didn't believe in and go to hell. Isn't the wiser course obvious?

Here's how my reader applied Pascal's wager:

I am reminded of Pascal's wager with regard to belief I God. An updated version for belief in Traditional (preconciliar) Catholicism (call it Marcel's wager--they were both French) would be:

1. I believe preconciliar Catholicism is the correct path, and this is in fact true; therefore, I have potential to be saved.

2. I believe preconciliar Catholicism is the correct path, and this is in fact not true; therefore, I have potential to be saved. (According to current post conciliar ecclesial beliefs that: a. all religions are pathways to God, and b. all human souls are saved)

3. I believe preconciliar Catholicism is NOT the correct path, but it is in fact true; therefore, I cannot be saved. (Go to hell)

4. I believe preconciliar Catholicism is NOT the correct path, and it is in fact not true; therefore, I have potential to be saved (see 2a and 2b above).

Thus, a rational Catholic soul would have to believe that preconciliar Catholicism is in fact the true path to salvation as this is the only option that does not have the potential to lead to damnation.

By the way, I wanted to let you know that I truly enjoy your columns as you seem to be a very thoughtful (and temperate) individual. Thanks for all you do!! Would love to stop by your farm sometime to say hello.

The next comment made me laugh as it pointed out how ridiculous and insane the Vatican's attack on the SSPX really is. The commenter began by quoting another reader's assertions:

"Their Masses are illicit, and any attempted marriages or absolutions would be invalid." 

This makes no sense, and for many years people have been making such statements and ignoring the obvious contradiction.

If the bishops, priests, and laity affiliated with the SSPX are in schism, then their marriages and absolutions would be VALID. They would be just as valid as the sacraments administered by the schismatic Orthodox.

The Catholic Church does NOT believe that the marriages and the absolutions of the schismatic Orthodox are invalid.

The only way that marriages and absolutions lose validity is for CATHOLICS who do not follow canon law in that regard. But the comments in this section are stating that all the people involved are no longer Catholic.

So, if those people are no longer Catholic, their sacraments, all of them, are VALID, just as the sacraments, all of them, of the schismatic Orthodox are VALID, because only CATHOLICS are bound by canon law. Non-Catholics, such as the schismatic Orthodox, are not bound by canon law.

You can't have it both ways. Either the CATHOLICS who are not following canon law are still CATHOLIC (and therefore NOT excommunicated) with the ensuing marriages and absolutions being invalid OR the people involved are NOT CATHOLIC, which makes their marriages and absolutions VALID.

Which is it?

Which is it, indeed? Researching this I happened on a website that went into canon law with regard to the orthodoxy of the Eastern churches. [Source] It pointed to canon law 844 which reads in the third item:

Catholic ministers may licitly administer the sacraments of penance, Eucharist and anointing of the sick to members of the oriental churches which do not have full communion with the Catholic Church, if they ask on their own for the sacraments and are properly disposed. This holds for members of other churches, which in the judgment of the Apostolic See are in the same condition as the oriental churches as far as these sacraments are concerned. 

Really, are things crazy enough yet? I'm now not allowed to receive Communion at St. John the Baptist in Front Royal or Sacred Heart in Winchester or any other Catholic church in the diocese or country in "full Communion" with Rome? But the schismatic orthodox may? Where is the justice in that?

Let me repeat. The Vatican allows schismatics who "do not have full communion with the Catholic Church" to receive the sacraments. But the SSPX and all her members and laity, who profess loyalty to Holy Mother Church and continuously beg the pope to lend an ear, are cast into the outer darkness? It is patently ridiculous on its face.

I have no doubt at this point that the SSPX are not validly excommunicated, that all their sacraments are valid, and that, in accordance with the tenets of the faith and canon law, I am not endangering my soul by continuing to attend the chapel.  Judge my internal forum if you don't fear God Who says, "Judge not lest ye be judged." I'll happily welcome all your prayers.

So I'll be at the chapel tomorrow morning praying for the pope and the battered Bride of Christ. It will be interesting to note whether attendance shrinks with all the machinations of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the faith led by Tucho Fernandez whose faith is questionable at best. I seriously doubt it. 

I don't rejoice at being labeled excommunicate and schismatic, but neither will I put on black and mourn. I've already lost friends because I attend the SSPX and somehow I've survived. At some point people will wake up. How bad will things be in the synodal church in another five to ten years? Same sex marriages approve? Trans folks, biological women, allowed in the seminaries? Biological men consecrated as nuns? It's happened before and Bishop Burke was set to allow one to start a religious order which is why I no longer trust him as a reliable source of the faith. He says the SSPX are in schism. Ho-hum, wrong again. 

The chaos is universal in the conciliar/synodal church. The four signs of the true Church: one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic have, in many cases, been inverted. And that smells of the smoke of Satan. These days I greet much of what comes from the pope and curia in Rome with a shrug as I await the next scandal. At this point it would not surprise me to see a golden calf placed on the high altar at St. Peter's. After all, we've already seen Pachamama honored there.

God save the Church. I'm confident He will. He is her head, the pope is His vicar. Can God possibly be pleased with the present situation? His he happy that a pornographer is the chief overseer of the faith? I think I'll begin the novena to the Holy Spirit while I'm on retreat in a few weeks. And yes, it's an Ignatian retreat being offered by the SSPX. My pastor is the lead priest. I look forward to it especially five days of silence, no internet, no phone, and no nonsense.

May Jesus Christ be praised!