Don't Hate Me. I Am Going To A SSPX This Sunday

[Father_Tom]

Now, we all know that it only takes one deceitful post on an internet forum to scare off and mislead many souls, and to falsely accuse the SSPX as you have done above is scandalous.

And, by what burden of proof, do you determine the post to be a false accusation? At this point, it is merely an accusation. We don’t know at this point if it is true or false.

Fr. T

 

[HOPEFUL_IN_UK]

Why not give the details of this accusation? Such as the name of the chapel and those involved? I go to the SSPX and have NEVER UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES seen any thing like what you have said. Your statement not only sounds preposterous and with evil intent, but is an action of detraction and debasement made without any chance of a rebuttal from those you accuse.

Now, we all know that it only takes one deceitful post on an internet forum to scare off and mislead many souls, and to falsely accuse the SSPX as you have done above is scandalous. One should be* very careful* about what one posts, as it could justifiably be called slander.

Sadly, you will cause harm, since most people aren’t smart enough to take it upon themselves to find out the truth, it is easier for them to listen to evil posts in cyberspace. Hope you can sleep with that. You might consider just how “Catholic” your actions are.

You know, I’ve never seen liturgical dance, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. The SSPX is not under one authority. There are weird sub-sects of it, for certain.

 

[laudamus_te]

Coming to a Catholic website, espousing the misguided “virtues” of the SSPX, could be considered libelous in itself. “Slander” is a term reserved for the spoken word.

Fr. T

Could you please explain what’s libelous in espousing the virtues of the SSPX?

HOPEFUL_IN_UK:

The SSPX is not under one authority. There are weird sub-sects of it, for certain.

Do you have any proof of these “weird sub-sects”?

I am amazed at the misinformation on this forum regarding the SSPX. It is like ravenous wolves coming out for the kill whenever the SSPX is mentioned.

 

[laudamus_te]

If you adhere to the SSPX, you already ceased being Catholic, according to Moto Proprio Ecclesia Dei…

This is untrue. Even excommunication does not cause one to “cease being Catholic”. The character imparted at baptism is indelible.

 

[jmcrae]

This is untrue. Even excommunication does not cause one to “cease being Catholic”. The character imparted at baptism is indelible.

Yes it is, which is why Protestants are also our brothers and sisters (though separated) - just like they told us at Vatican II!!

As long as you remain separated from us, you, too, are among our separated brothers and sisters - borthers and sisters because of your baptism, but separated because you are not in union with St. Peter’s lawful successor, Pope Benedict XVI.

 

[bear06]

There’s some nuances here that should be noted. You can be in a family and at the same time separated from it and deprived of it’s benefits. This would basically be the same for excommunication. Once baptized in the Catholic Church one is Catholic whether they separate from that family or not. There is no re-baptism, re-confirmation, etc. upon “coming back in”. That said, when one is excommunicated one is denied all of the spiritual benefits of being “in the family” the fact that they are still part of the family. “Outside” is not necessarily a bad term to use with the SSPX although it would be more applicable to say they are “outside the bonds or society” of the Church. They lose their right to a Christian society. The SSPX is basically like the son who gets mad and mom, dad and sibling and is so stubborn that he stands outside on the porch watching his family have their Thanksgiving dinner. He’s still technically a member of the family but he’s outside of their bonds, society and has no rights of the family due to his actions.

 

[bear06]

Yes it is, which is why Protestants are also our brothers and sisters (though separated) - just like they told us at Vatican II!!

As long as you remain separated from us, you, too, are among our separated brothers and sisters - borthers and sisters because of your baptism, but separated because you are not in union with St. Peter’s lawful successor, Pope Benedict XVI.

Well, they’re not quite the same as the protestants. More like the Orthodox. The SSPX does have apostolic succession which the protestants lack.

Also, they are first generational at this point, one cannot be born into schism. If they kept going they’d probably eventually be “separated bretheren”.

 

[bear06]

Why not give the details of this accusation? Such as the name of the chapel and those involved? I go to the SSPX and have NEVER UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES seen any thing like what you have said. Your statement not only sounds preposterous and with evil intent, but is an action of detraction and debasement made without any chance of a rebuttal from those you accuse.

Now, we all know that it only takes one deceitful post on an internet forum to scare off and mislead many souls, and to falsely accuse the SSPX as you have done above is scandalous. One should be* very careful* about what one posts, as it could justifiably be called slander.

Sadly, you will cause harm, since most people aren’t smart enough to take it upon themselves to find out the truth, it is easier for them to listen to evil posts in cyberspace. Hope you can sleep with that. You might consider just how “Catholic” your actions are.

When someone calls one a liar, they might want to have a little proof first. She was quite right about the “Alleluia Man”. That does show some intimate knowledge of the SSPX. I hadn’t heard of that one before but I found it on the SSPX website.

 

[ASimpleSinner]

Well, they’re not quite the same as the protestants. More like the Orthodox. The SSPX does have apostolic succession which the protestants lack.

Also, they are first generational at this point, one cannot be born into schism. If they kept going they’d probably eventually be “separated bretheren”.

Will be?

The schism occured 20 years ago this year… SSPX followers are known - God Bless Em! - for their love of large families. Roundabouts this year and the next, the first group of 20somethings will be entering their formation programs having been raised in the SSPX environment for their entire lives.

One Transalpine Redemptorist notes:

When I recall the day of the Consecrations in 1988 there were numbers of young children playing on the grass around the canvas cathedral. Do you know, now 20 years later, most of those girls and boys will be married. The 3rd generation of 1988 Tradis is on its way: that is, a generation that does not know normal Catholic life, that has no real contact with their juridical bishops, parishes and clergy. Already there are possibly 2 generations of people who are isolated from the Catholic ‘wheat and chaff’ that makes up a diocese. This is a serious situation unless we want to become a separate Church fitted out with our own bishops, parishes and clergy. We need a reconciliation asap.

5 years on the schism will have lasted for quarter century… And children baptized after the 88 consecrations will be (if they haven’t already) be getting their own children baptized. And that is just counting the children born after the consecrations. As Father alludes to in the quote, there were already a generation of children who were todlers that had only ever been aware of the SSPX system by the time of the excommunication, and that transition point was seamless to them - at 5, 6, 7 years old, they likely did not know.

 

[laudamus_te]

The SSPX is basically like the son who gets mad and mom, dad and sibling and is so stubborn that he stands outside on the porch watching his family have their Thanksgiving dinner. He’s still technically a member of the family but he’s outside of their bonds, society and has no rights of the family due to his actions.

Good analogy. But I’d say the SSPX is like the son standing on the porch watching his family eat a Thanksgiving turkey that has been improperly cooked. He’s frantically waving at them to not eat it, lest they become gravely ill or even die. But the turkey and trimmings just look too good to that family and they can’t understand why the boy is waving at them so madly.

 

[Duke_of_Mantua]

Good analogy. But I’d say the SSPX is like the son standing on the porch watching his family eat a Thanksgiving turkey that has been improperly cooked. He’s frantically waving at them to not eat it, lest they become gravely ill or even die. But the turkey and trimmings just look too good to that family and they can’t understand why the boy is waving at them so madly.

:extrahappy:

With all the serious talk here, it’s refreshing to see some clever humor to lighten the mood and still shed light on the subject.

 

[jmcrae]

Good analogy. But I’d say the SSPX is like the son standing on the porch watching his family eat a Thanksgiving turkey that has been improperly cooked. He’s frantically waving at them to not eat it, lest they become gravely ill or even die. But the turkey and trimmings just look too good to that family and they can’t understand why the boy is waving at them so madly.

This is what all schismatic groups claim about themselves, though.

 

[laudamus_te]

This is what all schismatic groups claim about themselves, though.

How can a group be considered schismatic which has the teachings of more than 260 popes to back it up? Or do you think they were all invalidated with VII?

 

[Eilish_Maura]

Good analogy. But I’d say the SSPX is like the son standing on the porch watching his family eat a Thanksgiving turkey that has been improperly cooked. He’s frantically waving at them to not eat it, lest they become gravely ill or even die. But the turkey and trimmings just look too good to that family and they can’t understand why the boy is waving at them so madly.

If such a son came from a family of such idiots how can another trust his view of things??

 

[jmcrae]

How can a group be considered schismatic which has the teachings of more than 260 popes to back it up? Or do you think they were all invalidated with VII?

They schismated from the Church: therefore, they are in schism.

Nobody is calling them “heretics” so the fact that they believe what the Popes of the past have taught (which is a good thing - we should all believe the Popes) doesn’t even enter into it one way or the other.

 

[laudamus_te]

Recommended reading:
catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/defense/inview.htm

Just a snippet:

Do you ever feel alone and isolated?

(Archbishop Lefebvre) How can I feel alone when I am in communion with 262 popes and the whole of the Catholic faith? If you mean alone among other bishops, the answer is no. Hardly a day goes by that I (do not) receive some communication from some bishops, some priests, some laymen from different parts of the world expressing support and encouragement.

Why do they not come out publicly and support you?

(Archbishop Lefebvre) As I have mentioned previously, many feel that they want to keep their positions in order to be in a position to do something about it should the occasion arise.

 

[jmcrae]

Recommended reading:
catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/defense/inview.htm

Just a snippet:

I read through most of the interview.

It’s clear that either he misunderstood what was going on at the Vatican II Council, or that he is misrepresenting it to the interviewer. I have read the Documents of Vatican II, and there is nothing in them that is remotely like what he is portraying them as.

I am now completely satisfied that the Church did right in excommunicating him, especially since it seems as though he was promulgating these ideas publicly.

 

[laudamus_te]

They schismated from the Church: therefore, they are in schism.

“Schismated”? I’ve never heard that word before. The SSPX is not in schism.

I read through most of the interview.

You could not have possibly read the interview in that amount of time, or even most of it. And it is interesting that you, who have “read the Documents of Vatican II” (and use words like “schismated”) have a clearer understanding of them than the Bishop who was actually there, as well as having been a member of the Preparatory Commission.

 

[jmcrae]

“Schismated”? I’ve never heard that word before. The SSPX is not in schism.

You could not have possibly read the interview in that amount of time, or even most of it. And it is interesting that you, who have “read the Documents of Vatican II” (and use words like “schismated”) have a clearer understanding of them than the Bishop who was actually there, as well as having been a member of the Preparatory Commission.

Listen, I am going to remain faithful to the Catholic Church, and you can do whatever you want. You don’t need to excuse yourself to me - if you prefer the SSPX, then go ahead and prefer it, but don’t go around pretending that it’s in full communion with the Church, or that Archbishop LeFebvre had some kind of special insight that nobody else had, into what was going on at Vatican II.

There is absolutely nothing in the documents of Vatican II that even remotely promotes Modernism, or any idea that all religions are equal, etc., as Archbishop LeFebvre is accusing.

At best, he misunderstood what was going on, and left the Church over a misunderstanding. But the fact still remains that he left the Catholic Church to start up the SSPX church, to be a “holy remnant” or whatever, just like every schismatic before him.

 

[ASimpleSinner]

Good analogy. But I’d say the SSPX is like the son standing on the porch watching his family eat a Thanksgiving turkey that has been improperly cooked. He’s frantically waving at them to not eat it, lest they become gravely ill or even die. But the turkey and trimmings just look too good to that family and they can’t understand why the boy is waving at them so madly.

Lately with the talk Williams offers and more of his writings and footage of him coming to light… One is having a hard time maintaining this patina of naivete about just how generous this poor boy is.

In fact the boy is urging them not to eat an improperly cooked turkey… it would seem he has some improperly cooked fish he wants them to eat instead.

The vision of the SSPX of Catholicism and its own isolation has put them out of the Unviersal church however much of a semblence they still have to older traditions about them. Much like Greek Orthodox or Copts, they hold on to thier particular view which may be orthodox enough, but it ceases to be the case they can said to be Catholic once they break with the whole. All the other elements put together don’t make it whole.