Are the SSPX in schism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mikellie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
TNT said:
Thank God he didn’t send out any warning at all about joining the EO!
You Go Zakka I

Just think, in a mere 870 years, the VAT II church will be able to see its way to removing "from memory and from the midst of the Churches’ the remembrance of the excommunications which 900 years before, in 1984, had become the symbol of the schism between Rome and SSPX".

Question, if it was a good thing to wipe out this excommunication which did ABSOLUTELY nothing to healing schism, why is the same person who admitted that, and removed it, turn right around and re-institute all over AGAIN, on yet another group?:confused:

Does this church just have some dogma that they have to keep a minimum of 1 declared group excommunication on the schism Ledger?
Oh, Oh, the schism Ledger is empty,…hurry. Now where did Innocent the III put that Schismator?
Click to expand...
As usual TNT, Excellent points!👍
 
ThereCanBeOnly1 said:
As usual TNT, Excellent points!👍
Click to expand...
Yes, and as TNT points out so well: If removing the excommunication of the EO did nothing to heal the schism, then why on earth would Pope Benedict lift the SSPX excommunications? What would be the point?
 
Walking_Home said:
Well I am glad I may have raised your level of laughter. I guess you and a few others here would know more than Card. Castrillon who works directly with the Pope.
Click to expand...
Yes, certainly Card. Castrillon knows more than we do. But should we be forming our opinions on what he says in unofficial interviews? Or should we form our opinions based on the official teaching?

In one of my earlier posts, I made reference to the few years before Humanae Vitae. At that time it was widely rumored that the Church would approve artificial birth control. Was it wise for some priests to begin basing their priestly advice on the rumors, or should they have stuck with the official teaching?

I think basing your opinions on an organization on unofficial statements is not necessarily a prudent thing to do. A better course of action is to hold to the authoritative teachings, whether they remain as they are today, or change (hopefully) in the near future.
 
Sure said:
Yes, and as TNT points out so well: If removing the excommunication of the EO did nothing to heal the schism, then why on earth would Pope Benedict lift the SSPX excommunications? What would be the point?
Click to expand...
👍 👍 👍
 
Sure said:
Yes, and as TNT points out so well: If removing the excommunication of the EO did nothing to heal the schism, then why on earth would Pope Benedict lift the SSPX excommunications? What would be the point?
Click to expand...
BIG BREAK THROUGH

L’Osservatore Romano, October 17, 2007, pages 8 & 10.

"Dear SSPX Friends,
It gives me special pleasure to send you for the first time friendly and warmest greetings from the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue on the occasion of your coming joyful Season of Advent, … This is always an important time for the SSPX community and gives to each individual member a new strength for their personal, family and social existence. It matters that all of us witness to our religious beliefs with a life increasingly integrated and in conformity with the Creator’s plan, a life concerned with serving our brothers and sisters in ever increasing solidarity and fraternity with members of other traditions… In the troubled times we are passing through, religious believers have, as servants of the Almighty, a duty above all to work in favour of peace, by showing respect for the convictions of individuals and communities everywhere through freedom of religious practice. Religious freedom, which must not be reduced to mere freedom of worship, is one of the essential aspects of freedom of conscience, which is the right of every individual and a cornerstone of human rights…
"As religious believers, it is up to us all to be educators of peace… No individual in the national community should be excluded on the grounds of his or her race, religion or any other personal characteristic. Together, as members of different religious traditions, we are called to spread a teaching which honors all human creatures, a message of love between individuals and peoples… All Christians including the SSPX will work together in mutual respect for peace and for a better future for all people; it will provide an example for the young people of today to follow and imitate…
"…This is the ardent hope I share with you: that all Christians along with the SSPX continue to develop increasingly friendly and constructive relationships in order to share their specific riches, and that they will pay particular attention to the quality of the witness of their believers. Dear SSPX friends, once again I give you my warmest greetings on the occasion of your coming Advent Season and I ask the God of Peace and Mercy to give you all good health, serenity and prosperity. "

Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran
President
Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue
Archbishop Pier Luigi Celata
Secretary
 
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

wait… accidently changed Muslim to SSPX and Ramadan to Advent.
Sorry bout that.
 
hmmmm, tnt. I caught your next post, now gone:

“oops. accidentally changed muslim to spxx and ramadan to advent.”

I’m paraphrasing, can’t swear that was verbatim - but I do recognize the sarcasm. Still must ask: is that your heart’s desire that sspx be recognized (and greeted) as ‘another religion,’ as a part of inter-religious activity.

so sorry I saw your post before you (?) deleted it.
 
Here ya go!
Ya jumped the gun.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

wait… accidently changed Muslim to SSPX and Ramadan to Advent.
Sorry bout that.
 
Sure said:
Yes, and as TNT points out so well: If removing the excommunication of the EO did nothing to heal the schism, then why on earth would Pope Benedict lift the SSPX excommunications? What would be the point?
Click to expand...
V2 has already stated that separate Churches are not deprived of Salvation, without cautions. According to V2, you may be correct. And as it is the SSPX is self sustainable and growing everyday anyway.
 
TNT said:
Here ya go!
Ya jumped the gun.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

wait… accidently changed Muslim to SSPX and Ramadan to Advent.
Sorry bout that.
Click to expand...
If I jumped the gun, does that mean I caught the bullet? I was shot as an innocent bystander? Yuck. Anyway, ignoring the obvious sarcasm, would you prefer that the sspx folks receive greetings as a totally separate religion? Come on, PLEASE!
 
catharina said:
…must ask: is that your heart’s desire that sspx be recognized (and greeted) as ‘another religion,’ as a part of inter-religious activity.
Click to expand...
It is another religion from the VAT II religion. That’s what the standoff is all about according to the SSPX founder.
Read LeFebvre’s speeches.
 
TNT said:
It is another religion from the VAT II religion. That’s what the standoff is all about according to the SSPX founder.
Read LeFebvre’s speeches.
Click to expand...
I well know what the stand-off is about and I needn’t ever read Lefebvre since the man was excommunicated long before he died. He founded a society within the Church (the Catholic Church) and then he chose actions to break with the Church. As it stands sspx might be better described as a warped tradition, or eventually, as a schismatic group as long as its members decide to stay loyal to Lefebvre. That’s the only issue at hand. There is no “Vat II Church” and no “Vat II religion” unless Lefebvre invented one.
 
catharina said:
hmmmm, tnt. I caught your next post, now gone:

“oops. accidentally changed muslim to spxx and ramadan to advent.”
Click to expand...
:confused:
catharina said:
I’m paraphrasing, can’t swear that was verbatim - but I do recognize the sarcasm. Still must ask: is that your heart’s desire that sspx be recognized (and greeted) as ‘another religion,’ as a part of inter-religious activity.
Click to expand...
Ridiculous. SSPX is Catholic.
 
ThereCanBeOnly1 said:
V2 has already stated that separate Churches are not deprived of Salvation, without cautions. According to V2, you may be correct. And as it is the SSPX is self sustainable and growing everyday anyway.
Click to expand...
This is incorrect as I’ve already pointed out numerous times on this thread. Go back and read the document because that is not what it says.🙂
 
ThereCanBeOnly1 said:
V2 has already stated that separate Churches are not deprived of Salvation, without cautions. According to V2, you may be correct. And as it is the SSPX is self sustainable and growing everyday anyway.
Click to expand...
What do you mean “without cautions”?
 
Sure said:
Just an FYI…They’re both sedevacantists and don’t agree with the SSPX on numerous topics.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure this is actually correct. T, are you really a sedevacantist now or did you make some sarcastic remark someone didn’t understand?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top