Fssp/icksp/sspx

[godisgood77]

Can you cite a Vatican source which states that the SSPX are not Catholic?

Last I knew the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei was a legitimate Vatican source.

 

[Denise1957]

Last I knew the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei was a legitimate Vatican source.

The was nothing in the quote you provided about the SSPX not being Catholic. Can you please point out where this is stated?

 

[eightydeuce82]

Last I knew the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei was a legitimate Vatican source.

Google search is not the Vatican and im guessing you are not going to provide an official source so we will discard your opinion as just that,

 

[godisgood77]

Google search is not the Vatican and im guessing you are not going to provide an official source so we will discard your opinion as just that,

No one was suggesting that a google search is the Vatican. As was obvious, the reference to a simple web search was to point out that there is a glut of material clearly stating that the SSPX has no status in the Church and that its ministers exercise no valid ministry. With that said, if you have no status in the Catholic Church, you can not be Catholic. There are many, many statements to that effect, but here is a link to the Vatican on the subject:

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_commissions/ecclsdei/documents/rc_com_ecclsdei_pro_20051996_en.html

See the point #1 where it references helping regularize those communities that are not recognized by the Church.

I would ask that you point to any official statements indicating that the SSPX is indeed Catholic or I’ll be able to simply discard your opinion as just that.

I believe we should all pray that these run away groups return to the Church.

 

[ProVobis]

and that its ministers exercise no valid ministry.

But they can still function as laity.

 

[godisgood77]

But they can still function as laity.

See the previous post where Ecclesia Dei indicates that there are no lay members of the SSPX. They would need to return to the Church in order to be lay members.

 

[commenter]

See the previous post where Ecclesia Dei indicates that there are no lay members of the SSPX. They would need to return to the Church in order to be lay members.

Is the SSPX “Catholic Church” for the laity attached?

• Babies are baptized; children identify as Catholics (just as many Protestants identify as “Catholics”). But not in any Catholic parish or diocese. Even if the children are told “you are Catholic” that doesn’t balance out the heavy criticism of the Catholic Church.
• There is no SSPX pastor. There are priests, but they are not under any bishop-ordinary. In other words there is much less support, guidance or correction for any priest who happens to come to their chapel.
• The laity are split off from their own bishop. They don’t benefit from local direction and guidance from a successor to the apostles in their home city.
• The laity are isolated from their diocese. Even in a liberal diocese, there are always some parishes, some diocesan ministries, some religious orders, some Catholic institutions offering orthodox teaching and support, evangelism and service to the poor, youth ministry, etc.
• I am active in prolife and religious liberty movements in my diocese. The SSPX favors prolife, but I have never met anyone from that chapel involved in the larger regional, or national, efforts. They are mostly absent from unified Catholic Action, so emphasized by St. Pius X.
• Yes, SSPX does have some ministries, but the isolation and climate of suspicion to the dioceses means SSPX laity are isolated from 100 times as many opportunities to “grow up Catholic” and develop as Catholic families, and Catholic citizens.

 

[Denise1957]

See the previous post where Ecclesia Dei indicates that there are no lay members of the SSPX. They would need to return to the Church in order to be lay members.

Lay members of what, exactly? Pretty much everyone knows that the laity who attend SSPX chapels are not members of the SSPX.

 

[godisgood77]

Lay members of what, exactly? Pretty much everyone knows that the laity who attend SSPX chapels are not members of the SSPX.

The statement made by Ecclesia Dei was pointing out that there can be no lay members of the SSPX because the SSPX has not status in the Catholic Church.

 

[ProVobis]

See the previous post where Ecclesia Dei indicates that there are no lay members of the SSPX. They would need to return to the Church in order to be lay members.

AFAIK, the priests are suspended but must still follow Canon Law, which, by the way is intended only for Catholics.

And I didn’t say the FSSX priests WERE lay members.

 

[Denise1957]

The statement made by Ecclesia Dei was pointing out that there can be no lay members of the SSPX because the SSPX has not status in the Catholic Church.

Actually, the SSPX was not set up to have lay persons as members in the first place. I don’t think that it has anything to do with the status of the SSPX. And what does this have to do with your belief that the SSPX are not Catholic? The FSSP also do not have lay members. They have a confraternity which supports the FSSP with prayers, but they are not members of the FSSP. Both the SSPX and FSSP were designed mainly for the training up of priests to offer the traditional sacraments. That’s their charism.

I still see no evidence that the Vatican believes that the SSPX, either lay adherents or clergy, are not Catholic. We already know that the status of the SSPX is an irregular one. But if the Vatican believes that the SSPX is not Catholic, then why are lay persons allowed to fulfill their Sunday obligation at an SSPX chapel (according to Ecclesia Dei)? Surely the Vatican would not allow a Sunday obligation to be fulfilled at a non-Catholic Mass, right?

 

[godisgood77]

Actually, the SSPX was not set up to have lay persons as members in the first place. I don’t think that it has anything to do with the status of the SSPX. And what does this have to do with your belief that the SSPX are not Catholic? The FSSP also do not have lay members. They have a confraternity which supports the FSSP with prayers, but they are not members of the FSSP. Both the SSPX and FSSP were designed mainly for the training up of priests to offer the traditional sacraments. That’s their charism.

I still see no evidence that the Vatican believes that the SSPX, either lay adherents or clergy, are not Catholic. We already know that the status of the SSPX is an irregular one. But if the Vatican believes that the SSPX is not Catholic, then why are lay persons allowed to fulfill their Sunday obligation at an SSPX chapel (according to Ecclesia Dei)? Surely the Vatican would not allow a Sunday obligation to be fulfilled at a non-Catholic Mass, right?

I’m sorry to have engaged in this debate… it is not helping anyone to draw closer to God and his Church. I’m engaging in exactly the type of small minded nitpicking that I loath so much… for that I apologize… I’ll bow out.

Pax,
Dan

 

[Denise1957]

I’m sorry to have engaged in this debate… it is not helping anyone to draw closer to God and his Church. I’m engaging in exactly the type of small minded nitpicking that I loath so much… for that I apologize… I’ll bow out.

Pax,
Dan

I’m sorry that you see this debate as being small-minded nitpicking. I don’t see it as such at all. There are definite problems with the SSPX, but IMO, it’s not right to accuse them of not being Catholic. That is going beyond even what the Vatican, the CDF, and Ecclesia Dei has said about them. Despite the problems with the SSPX, I think that we should at least be as charitable and honest toward them as the Vatican would be. The CDF has said that the issues between the SSPX and Rome are an internal matter. We need to have hope that the situation will one day be resolved.

 

[commenter]

AFAIK, the priests are suspended but must still follow Canon Law, which, by the way is intended only for Catholics.

No one denies the individual priests, and lay non-members attached to SSPX, are Catholic.
Priests in SSPX choose to follow parts of Canon Law to the extent they agree with it. But obviously they are not following other parts of Canon Law, in terms of relation to their ordinary, and illicit ministry activities. Laity are not “members” of SSPX. However, some laity identify with it very strongly as their main, or only, source of religious guidance. This is much different from laity who identify with ministries of FSSP, Franciscans, etc.

Post 107 describes the biggest impact of SSPX on some of the lay non-members attached - isolation.

 

[ProVobis]

Laity are not “members” of SSPX. However, some laity identify with it very strongly as their main, or only, source of religious guidance. This is much different from laity who identify with ministries of FSSP, Franciscans, etc.

Yes, some do and some don’t. What’s your point?

 

[commenter]

Yes, some do and some don’t. What’s your point?

You are right, we can’t generalize about all SSPX-attached laity. But for some of them, isolation (post 107) seems to be an issue, thinking especially about families with children. Laity who are in parishes or other ministries of other religious orders tend to be also involved on occasion with other parishes, diocesan ministries, Catholic Family Life programs, K of C, Magnificat, diocesan TLM, regional prayer groups, city wide youth apostolates, and other clergy, besides the religious order they support. In my diocese, besides laity in parishes run by religious orders, we have Catholics from Eastern Churches, Military and Anglican Ordinariates, and Opus Dei, involved, in a unified way, in the regional prolife effort and religious liberty.

This is not to criticize what the local SSPX chapel is doing internally, just an observation (isolation), in terms of families.

 

[ProVobis]

Laity who are in parishes or other ministries of other religious orders tend to be also involved on occasion with other parishes…

Maybe, but in this neck of the woods, I find much more “isolationism” within those parishes which are split between the Spanish Mass folks and the English Mass folks.

Point is that it doesn’t take too much effort to find some kind of division these days with any diocese, parish, liturgy, religious order, etc. What good comes from doing that?

 

[Denise1957]

Post 107 describes the biggest impact of SSPX on some of the lay non-members attached - isolation.

I didn’t read post #107 until now. I do agree that being isolated from the diocese and ordinary is not a good thing. That’s one of the issues that I had with the SSPX, and why I feel I can’t go back to the SSPX.

But at the parish level (an SSPX chapel isn’t really a parish of course) the SSPX chapel that I attended was the most friendly, welcoming, and tight-knit bunch of Catholics that I have ever experienced. If only the diocesan parishes that I have attended, and now attend, were as such!

 

[white_sheep]

Having read their publications, the SSPX seem quite anti-Catholic to me.

 

[commenter]

Having read their publications, the SSPX seem quite anti-Catholic to me.

Calling them anti-Catholic encourages SSPX readers to hold onto SSPX, which tells them constantly they need SSPX to defend their rights.

They say they are responding to: ambiguous Vatican II documents that imprudently opened the door to heresy and liturgical abuses; and arbitrary decisions by popes and bishops that restrict them, and only them. But their real unspoken goal seems to be more about maintaining the organizational structure, permanently, than about the 1960s.

They do (or did) have a point. Not now. What amazes me when I read their publications or summaries of their conferences, etc, is how **little ** the SSPX criticize Obama, Planned Parenthood, CNN, the secular universities, etc. They regard 80% of the threat to Christianity as coming from the leaders of the Catholic Church!

At this point, the struggle is no longer about the TLM, it’s about the SSPX organization, which is a goal in itself. The SSPX organization is warning people don’t go back to your diocese, unless the whole SSPX organization is accepted, as a whole, with all its political rights intact, to protect you; that without us, you will be at the mercy of the treacherous bishops. They keep projecting ahead “another 6 months it may be clearer, don’t cave in yet, or all our progress will be lost”; so people keep postponing the “swim to Rome”.

So, calling SSPX anti-Catholic does not benefit of people attached to SSPX.