Can anyone explain the logic behind the stance of SSPX?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ahlman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Ahlman

Guest
If the SSPX believes that the Catholic Church teaches errors while at the same time they acknowledge that Benedict XVI is a legitimate pope, aren’t they at the same time neglecting the infallibility of the Church? I thought that the biggest difference between Catholicism and protestantism was that as a protestant, you always have to be on your guard about what your Church leaders teaches, but as a Catholic you can always rest assured that the Holy Spirit guides the successor of Peter and the bishops in communion with him. The infallibility of the Church was what made me want to become a Catholic. How can you be a Catholic if you don’t believe in the infallibility of the Church?

I understand that SSPX are upset with the VII teachings about ecumenism and religious liberty, and think that the Church should stress more that you only can be sure about your salvation if you are a Roman Catholic and a full member of the Catholic Church, is that correct? But what is then really their definition of the Church and being a Catholic? What is the definition of being a Roman Catholic if not being in full communion with - and obeying - the bishop of Rome? Then it would be more consistent to reject the current pope altogether - not that I personally find that very plausible either.

As I see it, you only have these choices:

You accept Benedict XVI as a true pope and obey him - Catholic.
You choose your own pope - Various dissenter groups.
You believe there is no true pope for the moment - Not allowed to discuss on this forum.
You believe there shouldn’t be any pope at all - Protestant.

But where does SSPX really fall in?
 
Ahlman said:
But where does SSPX really fall in?
Click to expand...
I fear they have fallen into the sins of great pride and arrogance. And it has, or will ultimately, undermined all the good they may have done . . .
 
Well most Catholics do not understand their faith. A Pope is only infallible when they speak Ex-Cathedra. The Holy Spirit only protects infallible Ex-Cathedra statements from the Pope. No Pope can invent new teachings. Therefore, each Pope must continue to teach and guard the Magisterium.

Right now for the last couple of decades, Churchmen have been in contradiction with prior Popes and Magisterial teaching.

With the SSPX and modern Churchmen the question is who is right? Who is following the Magistrium of the Church?

The modern Churchmen are not following the Magisterium of the Church. They are following error.
Ecumenism, religious liberty, separation between Church and state, modern Biblical exegesis, is all condemned by the Magisterium of the Church.

The Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX has been ignored and contradicted by the modern Church.

The SSPX has tried to make it clear, there is an apostasy from the faith and the clergy are not following the Magisterium.

Most of the Catholic bishops and laity have lost the Catholic faith.
 
saint_rafael said:
Right now for the last couple of decades, Churchmen have been in contradiction with prior Popes and Magisterial teaching.

With the SSPX and modern Churchmen the question is who is right? Who is following the Magistrium of the Church?

Ecumenism, religious liberty, separation between Church and state, modern Biblical exegesis, is all condemned by the Magisterium of the Church.

The SSPX has tried to make it clear, there is an apostasy from the faith and the clergy are not following the Magisterium.

Most of the Catholic bishops and laity have lost the Catholic faith.
Click to expand...
Could you define what you mean with the “Magisterium” and “the Catholic faith”? My understanding of the Magisterium would be the bishops that gathered at the Second Vatican council and that the Catholic faith is expressed in the documents it produced, which has countinued to be taught by the later popes and bishops in communion with him.

Without hearing your definition, I can already guess that it differs from mine. If there are different opinions of what constitutes the Magisterium of the Church and what the Catholic faith really is, how are you supposed to know who is right? It was exactly this question that forced me to become a Catholic, because i realized this is just exactly why we need a pope - so that someone always have the last word in cases of different opinions. If you believe that you yourself can judge the judgement of the pope, then in my opinion that is not being Catholic but protestant.
 
This is a serious situation. Laity, like us, can only speculate on the finer points of Church doctrine.
I have read theologians that disagree if the Syllabus of Errors is infallible doctrine or not. Is Vatican II document on Religious Liberty binding doctrine or not? What is the proper interpretation of it and is the Ecumenism of the return still a teaching of the Church or not?
This will all have to be worked out before the SSPX return.
 
the pope can err on matters of discipline and administration. the liturgical debacle and the substantial changes after vatican ii are clearly the fault in part of the popes.

the sspx has a role to criticize the clergy of the church when it falls into laxity and worldliness or when it’s disciplines, even when condoned by a pope, are a bad idea. the common faithful catholic man is perfectly able to discern the good and bad fruits of the vatican.

but schism is a more henious sin then what they are justly opposed to. this is the problem and their contradiction.

obviously, disciplines such as ecumenism and the reform of the liturgy are not matters which are infallible, like doctrine and morals. we may disagree with things that the church changes because they change.
 
saint_rafael said:
Most of the Catholic bishops and laity have lost the Catholic faith.
Click to expand...
I am curious what kind of definition of Magesterium excludes the Pope, most of the bishops and laity. Yet it includes two excommunicated bishops?
 
Dee_Dee_King said:
the pope can err on matters of discipline and administration. the liturgical debacle and the substantial changes after vatican ii are clearly the fault in part of the popes.

the sspx has a role to criticize the clergy of the church when it falls into laxity and worldliness or when it’s disciplines, even when condoned by a pope, are a bad idea. the common faithful catholic man is perfectly able to discern the good and bad fruits of the vatican.

but schism is a more henious sin then what they are justly opposed to. this is the problem and their contradiction.
obviously, disciplines such as ecumenism and the reform of the liturgy are not matters which are infallible, like doctrine and morals. we may disagree with things that the church changes because they change.
Click to expand...
OK. But is Religious Liberty and Ecumenism doctrine or a policy? It just seems to me, from the outside, that there is a difference in interpretation and for whatever reason the SSPX and Rome so far cannot come to an agreement.
Pope Benedict, in my opinion, needs to take a stand. If the SSPX are wrong in their interpretation then excommunicate the entire society, laity included. If he doesn’t then I have to conclude that he believes they have a case.
Click to expand...
 
Ahlman said:
Could you define what you mean with the “Magisterium” and “the Catholic faith”? My understanding of the Magisterium would be the bishops that gathered at the Second Vatican council and that the Catholic faith is expressed in the documents it produced, which has countinued to be taught by the later popes and bishops in communion with him.
Click to expand...
Vatican II is not part of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church because it was not a dogmatic council. Vatican II produced nothing infallible and declared nothing infallible. They had no infallible dogmatic defintions and anathemas like previous councils.

Vatican II was a pastoral council, so the documents are pastoral in nature and are not binding on anyone.
 
Our_Refuge said:
I have read theologians that disagree if the Syllabus of Errors is infallible doctrine or not[QOUTE]

The Syllabus of Errors was infallible because Pope Pius IX restated what the Church had always taught in those points and matters. Pope Pius IX condemned errors that the Church had always taught against because it was part of the Magisterium.

The Syllabus of Errors is part of the ordinary Magisterium of the Church.
Click to expand...
 
“The ordinary and universal Magisterium of the Pope and the bishops in communion with him teach the faithful the truth to believe, the charity to practice, the beatitude to hope for.” CCC#2033
 
From Fisheaters under Authority:

fisheaters.com/101.html

Ordinary Magisterium:
"Ordinary infallible teaching by Pope, Bishop, or anyone with the proper authority to teach which illumines doctrine that has always been believed and accepted by the universal Church. Also called the “Universal Magisterium” or the “Constant Magisterium” and its exercise can be recognized when a teaching is one that is has been held “always and everywhere” by the Church."

To be part of the ordinary Magisterium the teaching has to be held always and everywhere.

Many of the novelties and teachings of the modern Popes after Vatican II are teachings that have not been held always. They are teachings that contradict pre-Vatican II teachings.
 
So we have two some what different definitions. One from the CCC, another from a blogger, without footnotes or reference, of course.
 
pnewton said:
So we have two some what different definitions. One from the CCC, another from a blogger, without footnotes or reference, of course.
Click to expand...
Which is precisely the problem with the CCC, as well as the documents of VII: ambiguity. Notice the ambiguity of the CCC quote, and the precise wording of the other. What the CCC does not make clear is that the “truth to believe” must be that truth which has always been taught. Is it any wonder that Catholics are losing the faith in droves?
 
pnewton said:
So we have two some what different definitions. One from the CCC, another from a blogger, without footnotes or reference, of course.
Click to expand...
Not really. From the CCC 2033 which you quoted the first part but not this:

“Thus from generation to generation, under the aegis and vigilance of the pastors, the “deposit” of Christian moral teaching has been handed on, a deposit composed of a characteristic body of rules, commandments, and virtues proceeding from faith in Christ and animated by charity.”

The “deposit” are the teachings held always and everywhere.
 
saint_rafael said:
Well most Catholics do not understand their faith. A Pope is only infallible when they speak Ex-Cathedra. The Holy Spirit only protects infallible Ex-Cathedra statements from the Pope. No Pope can invent new teachings. Therefore, each Pope must continue to teach and guard the Magisterium.

Right now for the last couple of decades, Churchmen have been in contradiction with prior Popes and Magisterial teaching.

With the SSPX and modern Churchmen the question is who is right? Who is following the Magistrium of the Church?

The** modern Churchmen **are not following the Magisterium of the Church. They are following error.
Ecumenism, religious liberty, separation between Church and state, modern Biblical exegesis, is all condemned by the Magisterium of the Church.

The Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX has been ignored and contradicted by the modern Church.

The SSPX has tried to make it clear, there is an apostasy from the faith and the clergy are not following the Magisterium.

Most of the Catholic bishops and laity have lost the Catholic faith.
Click to expand...
Your labels are not only inaccurate they smack strongly of bigotry.

Your last comment is both inaccurate and horribly offensive.
 
Spiller said:
Your labels are not only inaccurate they smack strongly of bigotry.

Your last comment is both inaccurate and horribly offensive.
Click to expand...
The Catholic Bishops protect a homosexual clergy and heretical theologians.
Look at the last decades of nonsense. They accept and promote every kind of liturgical abuse.

In the case of modern Biblical Exegesis, they have gone down the heretical road of Raymond Brown. They no longer hold the traditional Catholic view of a literal, historical, Bible that is the word of God and divine revelation.

As far as the laity, Mass attendace is 23%, Belief in the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist at 20%, divorce rate at over 50%, and contraception rate at 90%.
 
pnewton said:
Well, one could always re-write it any which way and post their own blog. BTW - World Catholic population growing
cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=40299
Click to expand...
The world’s Catholic population may be growing (not sure if it still is in relation to general world population growth, since that link you posted is several years old), but what kind of Faith do these Catholics have? Polls reveal that most Catholics are not living very Catholic lives. This is what I mean by losing the Faith. By the way, here’s another interesting link from the Vatican.
 
Ahlman said:
If you believe that you yourself can judge the judgement of the pope, then in my opinion that is not being Catholic but protestant.
Click to expand...
This is something that the vast majority of Catholics believe, except for a small percentage who feel they are in such a position to cast judgement on the Pope(s).

When they fail to recoginize their error, they are prey to irregular and schismatic groups and their teachings.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top