If a cardinal of the Catholic Church is willing to be blessed by a female Methodist minister in order to promote ecumenism and I have no problem with this:
Then why in the name of God and all that is holy doesn't the same cardinal or any cardinal attend Mass with a bishop of the SSPX in choir dress and at least receive his blessing at Mass and more importantly receive Holy Communion from his hands? I'd have no problem with that! The only thing preventing the Holy Communion reception is a silly canonical interdict that could be easily lifted for that ecumenical celebration!
First a disclaimer from me. I am a person who thinks it is very important to be on the same page as our Holy Father and local bishops as it concerns ecumenism and interfaith relations. In my 34 years as a priest I have participated in a variety of ecumenical and interfaith initiatives and endeavors. I see the greatest area of our common interest and collaboration not so much in worshiping and praying together although that occurs sometimes and usually annually in interfaith and ecumenical services at Thanksgiving and the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity in which we are currently celebrating, but in common good works. Pope Francis like is predecessor will celebrate Solemn Vespers in an ecumenical way on January 25th at the Basilica of St. Paul Outside the Walls in Roma. But our ecumenical and interfaith relations should be more so in collaborating in providing services for the poor and dispossessed and advocating for social justice and the right to life.
Here in the south most rank and file Catholics attend weddings and funerals during the year of their Protestant and Jewish friends and thus pray with them in that forum and Protestants frequently come to our funerals and weddings and do the same. And as in my family, Protestants are welcomed into our families through marriage. So there is plenty of grassroots ecumenism which is far more important than attending highfaluting conferences and workshops with academics who bloviate about it endlessly.
But my point is that if we as Catholics are willing to have ecumenical relations with Protestants and more importantly with the Eastern Orthodox and we are willing to dialogue in Interfaith ways and even pray together in those forums, how much more should we be ecumenical with our Catholic brothers and sisters who tend toward schism with the pope and bishops in union with him both on the left and the right?
For example, the SSPX has far more in common with their Roman Catholic brothers and sisters, including the pope and bishops than a female ordained Methodist minister. Yet Cardinal O'Malley allows a female minister in the Methodist Church whose denomination rejects the Sacrament of Holy Orders and thus has invalid Sacraments of Confirmation and Holy Eucharist and completely reject the Sacraments of Penance and Anointing of the Sick and are quite open to redefining marriage which they do not view as a Sacrament to include homosexual unions, to place unblessed water on his head to remind him of the lowest common denominator he shares with her and her denomination. Should we glory in the lowest common denominator when we don't really share that much more together after Baptism in terms of what most Protestants reject of the vast majority of ecumenical councils and even of Vatican II and also their rejection of the Sacraments of Penance and Anointing of the Sick and what the Church actually believes about Holy Communion, not to mention the authority of Catholic bishops including the Bishop of Rome?
On the other hand the SSPX deny none of these Sacraments or the moral teachings of the Church in any way whatsoever. They are on the same page with us. But like their Protestant counterparts they question the authority of the Pope and local bishops in union with the successor of Saint Peter when it comes to some aspects of Vatican II as it concerns ecumenism, interfaith relations and dialogue with the secular world to include agnostics and atheists. For the most part they reject the Second Vatican Councils document on religious freedom. They also reject the aberrations of the post-Vatican II revision of the 1962 Roman Missal and the liturgical confusion and disunity this has caused in the Universal Church. I don't believe though they they reject the post-Vatican II Mass as outright invalid though.
So in the name of God and all that is holy, our beloved Pope Emeritus Pope Benedict XVI tried mightily hard to reestablish full communion with the FSPX who have far more in common with being in full communion with the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Faith than the Methodists do only to be rebuffed by them on certain points that Pope Benedict demanded in order for them to be regularized in the Church and to be completely reconciled to the Roman Pontiff and the bishops in union with him.
Nonetheless, from an ecumenical point of view, should not Cardinal O'Malley and other bishops reach out to the FSPX at least once a year and actually celebrate Mass with them as the celebrant of the 1962 Missal since this is permitted? Or shouldn't Cardinal O'Malley attend an FSPX Mass and participate in choir and there recieve Holy Communion at the hands of an FSPX priest?
And if that isn't possible due to some canonical red tape and unnecessary rules that prevent it, how about simply celebrate together Vespers and Solemn Benediction of the Most Blessed Sacrament? How much more ecumenical can you get with that?
Of course if one follows my logic to its conclusion, this ecumenical magnanimity on the part of Catholic bishops and cardinals extended to the SSPX could also be extended to the actual schismatics on the progressive heterodox, heretical left where the feigned "ordination" of women as priests and bishops have occurred. Is there anything different about that compared to a female Methodist minister blessing Cardinal O'Malley?