Apologetics: Help with SSPX & Dei Verbum

  • Thread starter Thread starter Frank_Roman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Frank_Roman

Guest
This may have been beter to put in the apologetics section but perhaps people in this area are more knowledgable about it.

Im doing some research in order to combat schismatic oppositions to the VII documents. There’s one (sspx argument) that is so vague I can’t figure it out. What do they have against Dei Verbum? :confused:
 
Frank Roman:
This may have been beter to put in the apologetics section
Click to expand...
You’re in the right place.
There’s one (sspx argument) that is so vague I can’t figure it out. What do they have against Dei Verbum?
Click to expand...
Heck, some folks think we ought to be using the Vulgate! You’ll need to be a *little *more specific (even if it’s vague).
 
Frank Roman:
This may have been beter to put in the apologetics section but perhaps people in this area are more knowledgable about it.

Im doing some research in order to combat schismatic oppositions to the VII documents. There’s one (sspx argument) that is so vague I can’t figure it out. What do they have against Dei Verbum? :confused:
Click to expand...
I must warn you, even when you find the evidence to combat schismatic arguments, the schismatics themselves may not believe you, they are so set in their ways.😦
 
I am going to follow this thread with interest. I have siblings in SSPX, and also siblings that go to parishes so liberal I’m not sure they are actually Catholic. I go to FSSP. I was confirmed through SSPX and my parents attended for about 5 years while I was growing up.
I think it is a technical issue, they contend it was not officially published in the correct place, and not signed properly? Not sure exactly what your question is though.
mommyjo2
 
Peace be with you!

Debating schismatics is even harder than debating Protestants, often because the items of debate tend to be a lot of very small details. I could give you my complete disproving of sedevacantism right now, but not only would that be much too long, it is still on the list of banned topics.

I would rather keep a debate with SSPX folks to these lines: either they believe in the infallibility of the pope (and they are not sedevacantists, so they do claim allegence to Benedict XVI–their website says so) or they don’t and they are heretics for denying a mandatory article of the faith. Also, whether they believe in the infallibility of Church councils, as VII was one such. They can’t have things both ways. Either they agree completely with what the Church teaches, or they are not Catholic. You are not the one who needs to defend yourself to them…they’re the schismatics.

In Christ,
Rand

P.S. Here is evidence of their ridiculous arguments: on their website they claim that a “table” is used in the novus ordo instead of an altar. Would they be willing to tell Benedict XVI that the high altar at St. Peter’s basilica is simply a table? They also claim that reception of communion under both forms is a liturgical abuse…an abuse! Absurd! They also try to say that communion is now referred to as a meal rather than a sacrifice. Funny, every mass I’ve ever been to (even a horrid Protestant-like youth mass) has made it clear that what is occuring is a sacrifice. These people are full of it.
 
Don’t believe that the SSPX are not in schism. The SSPX say that they are fully in the Church, but they are, of course, not.

😦
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top