Castrillón satisfied with SSPX answer; SSPX will give heed to the five points

  • Thread starter Thread starter BrendanD
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Awesome, this is great news. Pray, Pray, Pray.

As usual the media wants to portray it all in a bad light, so hopefully again those articles reporting the SSPX as rejecting everything were wrong, as frequently Catholicism gets poor reporting.

The Church would benefit so much from the strength of the SSPX.

Scylla
 
As well as SSPX benefiting from full Communion with Holy Mother Church
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
 
BrendanD said:
From rorate-caeli.blogspot.com . Sounds like some excommunications will be lifted very soon.
Click to expand...
If any/all excommunications are lifted at some stage it will be interesting to read the wording of such a declaration. If they are simply lifted without a word about them having been invalid in the first place then that would mean the excommunications were valid when declared by Pope John Paul II.
 
thistle said:
If any/all excommunications are lifted at some stage it will be interesting to read the wording of such a declaration. If they are simply lifted without a word about them having been invalid in the first place then that would mean the excommunications were valid when declared by Pope John Paul II.
Click to expand...
You’re just looking for weeds. If you’re looking for “valid” or “invalid” anything, look at Pope Paul VI’s suspension of the Archbishop for insisting on saying the Old Rite. As it turns out that was “invalid” suspension as the Old Rite was shown to be never abrogated. However, I didn’t see any wording that that particular suspension was invalid.
 
thistle said:
If any/all excommunications are lifted at some stage it will be interesting to read the wording of such a declaration. If they are simply lifted without a word about them having been invalid in the first place then that would mean the excommunications were valid when declared by Pope John Paul II.
Click to expand...
I don’t think a statement one way or the other was made with the other traditionalist groups who have since been canonically regularized (Society of St. John Vianney, Transalpine Redemptorists, etc.) As far as I know at least.
 
I am not a Catholic, so I do not have a “dog in this fight” so to speak…but I genuinely and deeply respect those who defend tradition, regardless of which religious tradition we mean. This is partly because I am an Orthodox (traditional) Jew, and also because the half of my family that is Catholic has many Traditionalists among them…so I understand their issues and feelings on this.

I truly and sincerely feel that the SSPX should not trust the conciliar church. The new Catholic church has betrayed them before, and will do so again. They are better off being apart, even if it creates other issues for them.

Mark my words. If they trust their promises, they will regret it. Remember Virgil’s Aeneid, Book 2, 19 BC:

“Do not trust the horse, Trojans. Whatever it is, I fear the Greeks even when they bring gifts.”
 
Sepharad said:
I am not a Catholic, so I do not have a “dog in this fight” so to speak…but I genuinely and deeply respect those who defend tradition, regardless of which religious tradition we mean. This is partly because I am an Orthodox (traditional) Jew, and also because the half of my family that is Catholic has many Traditionalists among them…so I understand their issues and feelings on this.

I truly and sincerely feel that the SSPX should not trust the conciliar church. The new Catholic church has betrayed them before, and will do so again. They are better off being apart, even if it creates other issues for them.

Mark my words. If they trust their promises, they will regret it. Remember Virgil’s Aeneid, Book 2, 19 BC:

“Do not trust the horse, Trojans. Whatever it is, I fear the Greeks even when they bring gifts.”
Click to expand...

And look what happened to Laocoon & his two sons, later in the book 🙂 Nasty, very:​

 
Sepharad said:
I am not a Catholic, so I do not have a “dog in this fight” so to speak…but I genuinely and deeply respect those who defend tradition, regardless of which religious tradition we mean. This is partly because I am an Orthodox (traditional) Jew, and also because the half of my family that is Catholic has many Traditionalists among them…so I understand their issues and feelings on this.

I truly and sincerely feel that the SSPX should not trust the conciliar church. The new Catholic church has betrayed them before, and will do so again. They are better off being apart, even if it creates other issues for them.

Mark my words. If they trust their promises, they will regret it. Remember Virgil’s Aeneid, Book 2, 19 BC:

“Do not trust the horse, Trojans. Whatever it is, I fear the Greeks even when they bring gifts.”
Click to expand...
Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes!

Something most Latinists learned for many centuries.

Good to get an outsider’s view on the matter. Interesting that you use the term “new Catholic Church,” though. Difficult for Catholics to reconcile the old with the new. Involves many compromises, it seems.
 
thistle said:
If any/all excommunications are lifted at some stage it will be interesting to read the wording of such a declaration. If they are simply lifted without a word about them having been invalid in the first place then that would mean the excommunications were valid when declared by Pope John Paul II.
Click to expand...
Don’t think this will happen. Afterall Pope John Paul II did not declare these excommunications. They were latae sententiae excommunications. That is they came into effect because the actions of those excommunicated were spelt out in the Code of Canon Law. Specifically ordaining bishops without a papal mandate (or in the case of those ordained being ordained a bishop with out a papal mandate).
ProVobis said:
You’re just looking for weeds. If you’re looking for “valid” or “invalid” anything, look at Pope Paul VI’s suspension of the Archbishop for insisting on saying the Old Rite. As it turns out that was “invalid” suspension as the Old Rite was shown to be never abrogated. However, I didn’t see any wording that that particular suspension was invalid.
Click to expand...
Totally different. These excommunications have nothing to do with the celebration of the EF Mass. They have to do with obedience.
 
Am I the only scpetic in the bunch? Everytime I hear information leaked through unnamed sources I have to question why anyone gives credence to such articles. :confused:
 
All we can do is keep watching and praying that full Communion can be achieved.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
 
ByzCath said:
Don’t think this will happen. Afterall Pope John Paul II did not declare these excommunications. They were latae sententiae excommunications. That is they came into effect because the actions of those excommunicated were spelt out in the Code of Canon Law. Specifically ordaining bishops without a papal mandate (or in the case of those ordained being ordained a bishop with out a papal mandate).

Totally different. These excommunications have nothing to do with the celebration of the EF Mass. They have to do with obedience.
Click to expand...
This is something I keep saying over and over; the status of the sspx was not the question at hand but obedience (or more accurately, disobedience). Those excommunicated and still living simply need to appeal to the Pope to have their excommunications lifted. Of course, this would require an admission of guilt on their part and having seen the mindset of those involved I doubt that will happen.

If the excommunications are lifted as part of the regularzation process it will be by the generosity of the Pope.

I wonder, though, about Archbishop Lefebvre’s excommunication. If he died unrepentant, then what?
 
pnewton said:
Am I the only scpetic in the bunch? Everytime I hear information leaked through unnamed sources I have to question why anyone gives credence to such articles. :confused:
Click to expand...
Or just don’t give any credence to anything remotely positive regarding the SSPX? The source for this is Il Giornale, a real newspaper that’s probably way more credible than the random blogs most of the news on this situation has been coming from.
 
BrendanD said:
I think you mean you don’t give any credence to anything remotely positive regarding the SSPX.
Click to expand...
Why would you think that, Brendan? Simply because someone has misgivings about their position? Many orthodox Catholics do, you know.

Many “traditionalists” give the impression that they are awaiting the return of the SSPX as though the SSPX was some kind of Savior. The Church already HAS a Savior and she has as Her visible head His Vicar. The return of the SSPX will be to the SSPX’s good, not the Church’s, because what the SSPX possesses that is good is already the Church’s, as is the truth possessed by the Orthodox and the truths possessed by the Protestant ecclecial communities. The Church is the source of all of those things. She doesn’t need the SSPX. The SSPX needs her. That’s not being negative toward the SSPX. That’s a simple statement of ecclesiological fact.
 
BrendanD said:
Or just don’t give any credence to anything remotely positive regarding the SSPX? The source for this is Il Giornale, a real newspaper that’s probably way more credible than the random blogs most of the news on this situation has been coming from.
Click to expand...
It can be difficult, for some, to find “anything remotely positive” regarding a group who openly defies Rome, save perhaps, for the opportunity to bring them into full Communion with Rome, thus correcting their path toward Salvation.
 
JKirkLVNV said:
Why would you think that, Brendan? Simply because someone has misgivings about their position? Many orthodox Catholics do, you know.
Click to expand...
It had nothing to do with their position. I was just wondering why he questions the credibility of this particular information, but nobody questions the credibility of the negative information “leaked” from random blogs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top