Any SSPX "converts" to Rome out there?

[TrueLight]

Do you mean on here? If so, I would say yes, but only to a degree. I’m sure some people have made up there mind on an issue and will not budge on their position. But that’s understandable, it’s human nature. I’m sure it goes both ways too.

No, I mean among SSPXers. The SSPX versus the rest of the Catholic community.

 

[corsair]

Why not ask the question the other way?

 

[TrueLight]

Why not ask the question the other way?

Because when you are part of a society that considers itself a remnant of a sort, that is under persecution, it is likely that there will be that mentality.

 

[Dragonslayer]

No, I mean among SSPXers. The SSPX versus the rest of the Catholic community.

There is a bit of that I suppose but I wouldn’t call it a “strong” us v them thing. A lot of SSPXer’s are critical of the NO mass, but apart from that we mix with the local community, Catholic & otherwise, without too many dramas. Some have even expressed opinions that, despite hearing that we belong to some sect or cult or something, we are actually appear quite “normal”.

But we do our own thing and the rest of the Catholic community are obviously happy to do their own thing. No animosity between groups and I am aware our priests have met and dined with the local Bishop a couple of times. A way to describe it is we agree to disagree on some matters.

 

[TrueLight]

There is a bit of that I suppose but I wouldn’t call it a “strong” us v them thing. A lot of SSPXer’s are critical of the NO mass, but apart from that we mix with the local community, Catholic & otherwise, without too many dramas. Some have even expressed opinions that, despite hearing that we belong to some sect or cult or something, we are actually appear quite “normal”.

But we do our own thing and the rest of the Catholic community are obviously happy to do their own thing. No animosity between groups and I am aware our priests have met and dined with the local Bishop a couple of times. A way to describe it is we agree to disagree on some matters.

The other day I had lunch with about 8 people from the Society after a mass and I teased them because it seemed that every other word out of their mouths were “Novus Ordo”. They laughed about it, but it was true.

 

[Dragonslayer]

The other day I had lunch with about 8 people from the Society after a mass and I teased them because it seemed that every other word out of their mouths were “Novus Ordo”. They laughed about it, but it was true.

lol…yeah I can understand that. I suppose the NO mass is one of the most visible examples of changes that have occurred since Vatican II. So yeah, a lot are critical of it.

 

[CHCatholic]

Even if that’s true (referring to Dan’s post), SSPX chapels are still off limits to Catholics.

LOL
SSPX chapels are about as off limits to Catholics as St Peter’s is.
Rome has specifically stated that Catholics are free to attend SSPX masses from the very beginning, and even more so now that the excommunications have been lifted.
Want to hear a secret too?
Rome has specifically approved SSPX confessions shockgasp*

 

[Lormar]

LOL
SSPX chapels are about as off limits to Catholics as St Peter’s is.
Rome has specifically stated that Catholics are free to attend SSPX masses from the very beginning, and even more so now that the excommunications have been lifted.
Want to hear a secret too?
Rome has specifically approved SSPX confessions shockgasp*

Can you provide some official backup for the last claim from the Vatican? I would be interested in reading it.

 

[CHCatholic]

Can you provide some official backup for the last claim from the Vatican? I would be interested in reading it.

Nothing from the vatican, but far be it from them to make such a thing public. However, straight out of Bp. Fellay’s mouth, many SSPX have referred to Rome for advice on penances for certain “major” sins, as is common practice. Rome told them the penance they provided is fine. If that isn’t approval of a sacrament, I don’t know what is.

Several African SSPX bishops had a meeting in Rome and asked a certain Cardinal whether they should enter their marriages in the parish register considering how Rome “sees them as invalid” and that certain Cardinal told them yes, definitely. Guess who that Cardinal is? I’ll give you a hint - there’s a high probability he’s wearing white right now.

 

[joanofarc2008]

Nothing from the vatican, but far be it from them to make such a thing public. However, straight out of Bp. Fellay’s mouth, many SSPX have referred to Rome for advice on penances for certain “major” sins, as is common practice. Rome told them the penance they provided is fine. If that isn’t approval of a sacrament, I don’t know what is.

Several African SSPX bishops had a meeting in Rome and asked a certain Cardinal whether they should enter their marriages in the parish register considering how Rome “sees them as invalid” and that certain Cardinal told them yes, definitely. Guess who that Cardinal is? I’ll give you a hint - there’s a high probability he’s wearing white right now.

This sounds like rumors and conjecture without supporting documentation.

 

[Alfonsus]

LOL
SSPX chapels are about as off limits to Catholics as St Peter’s is.
Rome has specifically stated that Catholics are free to attend SSPX masses from the very beginning, and even more so now that the excommunications have been lifted.
Want to hear a secret too?
Rome has specifically approved SSPX confessions shockgasp*

Then the Pope is a liar when he said that SSPX has no ministry until their canonical status is regularized?
I for one will take the Pope’s word, plain and simple.

 

[surritter]

CHCatholic obviously just joined the discussion, and needs to re-read all the previous posts. Catholics are NOT permitted to attend SSPX functions unless it is the ONLY Mass available (OF or EF). And their Confessions are not valid, from what I recall.

 

[CHCatholic]

CHCatholic obviously just joined the discussion, and needs to re-read all the previous posts. Catholics are NOT permitted to attend SSPX functions unless it is the ONLY Mass available (OF or EF). And their Confessions are not valid, from what I recall.

Quit lying. Even from the very beginning the Holy See has said Catholics are permitted to attend SSPX masses so long as they’re not doing so as a formal act of schism, in accord with Canon Law 1248. So if you have an attachment to the Old Mass, then it’s perfectly fine, regardless as to whether or not it’s the only Mass (OF or EF) available.
*
Prof. Georg was the Professor of Canon Law, Law of Church-State Relations and Canonical HIstory from 1960 to 1994 at Mainz University. He has been a well-respected priest for more than 40 years in the Archdiocese of Mainz. The Professor’s conclusions appear to be consistent with those of the Holy See as expressed in numerous public interviews and written correspondence emanating from the PCED, specifically Cardinal Castrillón and Msgr. Camille Perl, president and secretary of the commission.

The SSPX is not schismatic, because she neither rejects the subordination to the Roman Pope nor rejects the communion with the bishops (can. 751). Rather the latter reject communion with the Society.

Because the Society is not schismatic, its members are not excommunicated. Both are untrue allegations, made by those, whom the reflective mirror presented to them by the Society irritates.

**Absolutely nobody incurs any punishment by attending the masses of the Society. Of course one can fulfill one's Sunday obligation by attending a Sunday mass in a chapel or church of the Society. Whoever alleges otherwise, reveals that he merely fears concurrence.***

Nail in the coffin of your theory.

 

[joanofarc2008]

Quit lying. Even from the very beginning the Holy See has said Catholics are permitted to attend SSPX masses so long as they’re not doing so as a formal act of schism, in accord with Canon Law 1248. So if you have an attachment to the Old Mass, then it’s perfectly fine, regardless as to whether or not it’s the only Mass (OF or EF) available.
*
Prof. Georg was the Professor of Canon Law, Law of Church-State Relations and Canonical HIstory from 1960 to 1994 at Mainz University. He has been a well-respected priest for more than 40 years in the Archdiocese of Mainz. The Professor’s conclusions appear to be consistent with those of the Holy See as expressed in numerous public interviews and written correspondence emanating from the PCED, specifically Cardinal Castrillón and Msgr. Camille Perl, president and secretary of the commission.

The SSPX is not schismatic, because she neither rejects the subordination to the Roman Pope nor rejects the communion with the bishops (can. 751). Rather the latter reject communion with the Society.

Because the Society is not schismatic, its members are not excommunicated. Both are untrue allegations, made by those, whom the reflective mirror presented to them by the Society irritates.

**Absolutely nobody incurs any punishment by attending the masses of the Society. Of course one can fulfill one's Sunday obligation by attending a Sunday mass in a chapel or church of the Society. Whoever alleges otherwise, reveals that he merely fears concurrence.***

Nail in the coffin of your theory.

Again you have obviously just joined the thread where this has all been explained by people that know a bit about this subject.

 

[christosdavid]

LOL
SSPX chapels are about as off limits to Catholics as St Peter’s is.
Rome has specifically stated that Catholics are free to attend SSPX masses from the very beginning, and even more so now that the excommunications have been lifted.
Want to hear a secret too?
**Rome has specifically approved SSPX confessions *shockgasp

Do you have any link for this?

 

[Bigcat71]

I have noticed in this thread as well as others concerning the SSPX a distinct hatred for the SSPX and everything connected with it. Why? Rome doesn’t hate the SSPX and has never not once accused them of being sedevacantists. In fact Rome has constantly tried to bring the SSPX back into the full fold of the Church. Rome has never displayed such rancor towards the society as I see constantly thrown about in these threads.

After some thinking I think that I may have the answer to my own question. After the implementation of the OF as it is called now, it was virtually impossible to find an EF Mass anywhere at all, let alone one with any regularity. If you wanted to attend one you had to go to either an SSPX Chapel or try to find one of the few Diocesan Parishese nationwide that still offered it. After John Paul II issued Summorum Pontificorum, it was still extremely difficult to find one except for the SSPX Chapels. In some Dioceses they were prohibited while in others limited to one per month and in others permitted, but not at any Diocesan Church. In short if you wanted to attend an EF Mass regularly you almost had to go to an SSPX Chapel, except for certain rare areas.

It was primarily the SSPX that kept the EF alive in a time when certain forces in the Church were doing their best to stamp it out, saying it had been abrogated and doing their very best to vilify and destroy it. So in view of that I think a great deal of the hatred towards the SSPX today is primarily because they almost singlehandedly kept the EF alive thus thwarting the stated clear positions of many of the Bishops and Clergy of the times. I also think there is still a tremendous bias towards the EF by many modern day Catholics, as evidenced by some of the threads I have seen here.

If it wasn’t for the society. more than likely we wouldn’t even have the EF today. So all of you who hate the Society so much, yet claim to attend or at least tolerate the EF Mass, should maybe sit back and look at what really went on in those long ago days and say a quick prayer for the Society.

I do not agree with the fact that the late Archbishop consecrated the Bishops without permission from Rome and I think he succombed to the sin of pride in doing so. But that fact should not totally tarnish the life of a man as dedicated to the Church as he was or to induce such hatred in those who consistently post these threads vilifying the society.

 

[Melchior_1]

Rome has specifically approved SSPX confessions shockgasp*

Rome has officially and specifically said that the SSPX has no legitimate ministry within the Church.

Explain to me how this could make their confessions, which require faculties, valid.

And explain to me how you jump through hopes to defend these fellows, when if it was a group that was say more “liberal” you would be screaming.

 

[Lormar]

Rome has officially and specifically said that the SSPX has no legitimate ministry within the Church.

Explain to me how this could make their confessions, which require faculties, valid.

And explain to me how you jump through hopes to defend these fellows, when if it was a group that was say more “liberal” you would be screaming.

How true.

 

[TrueLight]

I have noticed in this thread as well as others concerning the SSPX a distinct hatred for the SSPX and everything connected with it. Why? Rome doesn’t hate the SSPX and has never not once accused them of being sedevacantists. In fact Rome has constantly tried to bring the SSPX back into the full fold of the Church. Rome has never displayed such rancor towards the society as I see constantly thrown about in these threads.

After some thinking I think that I may have the answer to my own question. After the implementation of the OF as it is called now, it was virtually impossible to find an EF Mass anywhere at all, let alone one with any regularity. If you wanted to attend one you had to go to either an SSPX Chapel or try to find one of the few Diocesan Parishese nationwide that still offered it. After John Paul II issued Summorum Pontificorum, it was still extremely difficult to find one except for the SSPX Chapels. In some Dioceses they were prohibited while in others limited to one per month and in others permitted, but not at any Diocesan Church. In short if you wanted to attend an EF Mass regularly you almost had to go to an SSPX Chapel, except for certain rare areas.

It was primarily the SSPX that kept the EF alive in a time when certain forces in the Church were doing their best to stamp it out, saying it had been abrogated and doing their very best to vilify and destroy it. So in view of that I think a great deal of the hatred towards the SSPX today is primarily because they almost singlehandedly kept the EF alive thus thwarting the stated clear positions of many of the Bishops and Clergy of the times. I also think there is still a tremendous bias towards the EF by many modern day Catholics, as evidenced by some of the threads I have seen here.

If it wasn’t for the society. more than likely we wouldn’t even have the EF today. So all of you who hate the Society so much, yet claim to attend or at least tolerate the EF Mass, should maybe sit back and look at what really went on in those long ago days and say a quick prayer for the Society.

I do not agree with the fact that the late Archbishop consecrated the Bishops without permission from Rome and I think he succombed to the sin of pride in doing so. But that fact should not totally tarnish the life of a man as dedicated to the Church as he was or to induce such hatred in those who consistently post these threads vilifying the society.

 

[Melchior_1]

So I guess the ends justify the means, right? It’s perfectly fine to have invalid confessions, illicit Masses, illicit ordinations, and flagrant disobedience so long as the ends are acceptable to those who want them.