If The SSPX Were Declared In Full Communion Tomorrow

[Kaizmom]

What group will be be bashing next ?

With all of the groups out there who are true dangers to the souls of Roman Catholics, why do we focus on the group closest to being in full communion ?

Why do the SSPX bashers ignore the Dimond brothers and Call To Action ? Those are the groups that can poison the souls of our children.

Fess up please. To those who constantly see the need to point out the SSPX clergy are suspended for now, what makes the SSPX such a danger to you ?

It’s reported that Cardinal Hoyos may spend some time in Econe after he retires. I suppose we should get busy writing letters to him "warning " him about those terrible SSPX clergy ?

The problem I have with the SSPX is this…that they teach and try to convert other Catholics to their way of thinking, that the Popes are invalid, that the last true Pope was several decades ago, that Vatican 2 was just a ploy to please the prodestants and that the Roman Catholic church is in schism from itself. My step daughter goes to an SSPX church, and is looking at becoming a sister for that organization. She has confused her younger brother and sister to such an extent, that they really don’t want anything to do with the Catholic Church at all! That is the problem with the SSPX. If you love the traditional mass, and all that goes with it, look up the Fraternity of St. Peter. They are an order in FULL COMMUNION with Rome and the Holy See and they are dedicated to keeping alive the Latin Mass!

 

[pnewton]

The problem I have with the SSPX is this…that they teach and try to convert other Catholics to their way of thinking, that the Popes are invalid, that the last true Pope was several decades ago

The SSPX has upheld the validity of the papacy and the current line of popes. In fact, that was an issue of division with them and the SSPV. Now respect for the Holy Father and the office of the papacy is a whole other matter. I have seen both Popes called heretic, coward, stupid and many other things here by SSPX members. And yes, I get rather irrate to any group that insults my family like they have.

 

[Onegin]

The SSPX has upheld the validity of the papacy and the current line of popes. In fact, that was an issue of division with them and the SSPV. Now respect for the Holy Father and the office of the papacy is a whole other matter. I have seen both Popes called heretic, coward, stupid and many other things here by SSPX members. And yes, I get rather irrate to any group that insults my family like they have.

Agreed with the distinction. However, within the “mainstream” Catholic circles, I have also seen the Pope ridiculed, the Real Presence denied, etc etc. Generally offensive stuff.

I don’t believe that it is an accepted or encouraged practice of the SSPX Priests to disrespect the Papacy. As for what the members do - well, that’s a problem with every parish, SSPX or not. Hopefully the Priest corrects that error but I don’t think it’s a valid reason for criticizing the organization as a whole.

 

[pnewton]

Agreed with the distinction. However, within the “mainstream” Catholic circles, I have also seen the Pope ridiculed, the Real Presence denied, etc etc. Generally offensive stuff.

Maybe you have seen it, but I have not noticed any Catholics here showing the disdain for the papacy that I have seen in the SSPX (and this has been going on for five years).

 

[Onegin]

Maybe you have seen it, but I have not noticed any Catholics here showing the disdain for the papacy that I have seen in the SSPX (and this has been going on for five years).

I wasn’t speaking of CAF, no. The most common one that I can think of is hearing mainstream Catholic aquaintances questioning the judgment/wisdom/sanity of the Pope for not allowing birth control. The wilder ones will extend this to women priests but that’s only a small minority.

My point is that it doesn’t matter what a few crazy people are blathering about. Most Priests at most Churches (including the SSPX) are not advocating disrespect for the Pope. Let’s pray for the people who are engaging in this kind of disrespect and move on without passing judgment on the group as a whole.

 

[I_Believe]

The problem I have with the SSPX is this…that they teach and try to convert other Catholics to their way of thinking, that the Popes are invalid, that the last true Pope was several decades ago, that Vatican 2 was just a ploy to please the prodestants and that the Roman Catholic church is in schism from itself. My step daughter goes to an SSPX church, and is looking at becoming a sister for that organization. She has confused her younger brother and sister to such an extent, that they really don’t want anything to do with the Catholic Church at all! That is the problem with the SSPX. If you love the traditional mass, and all that goes with it, look up the Fraternity of St. Peter. They are an order in FULL COMMUNION with Rome and the Holy See and they are dedicated to keeping alive the Latin Mass!

You have just described Sedes, which the SSPX are not.

“Not to oppose error is to approve it, and not to defend truth is to suppress it, and indeed to neglect to confound evil men, when we can do it, is no less a sin than to encourage them.”

• Pope St. Felix III

“What if some novel contagion seek to infect the whole Church, and not merely a small portion of it? Then he will take care to cling to antiquity, which cannot now be led astray by any novel deceit.” -St. Vincent of Lerins († 445)

“Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ.” - St. Athanasius, AD 373

“It is granted to few to recognize the true Church amid the darkness of so many schisms and heresies, and to fewer still so to love the truth which they have seen as to fly to its embrace.” -St. Robert Bellarmine

“Indeed, the true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries, nor innovators: they are traditionalists.”

• Pope St. Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique

I think your step daughter is worried for their souls. Those Saints throughout the centuries were not speaking of the majority rolling with the flow. Those who have fought for Tradition have always walked a narrow road.

 

[I_Believe]

Why does no one have a comment on the letter ?

 

[I_Believe]

Agreed with the distinction. However, within the “mainstream” Catholic circles, I have also seen the Pope ridiculed, the Real Presence denied, etc etc. Generally offensive stuff. .

Exactly. It’s all right there in the letter no one wants to read. Or comment on if they did. The Truth hurts.

 

[Ghoti]

When was the last time a Pope had to defend himself to his own Bishops ?

Humanae Vitae?*

 

[tcm22]

Agreed with the distinction. However, within the “mainstream” Catholic circles, I have also seen the Pope ridiculed, the Real Presence denied, etc etc. Generally offensive stuff.

I don’t believe that it is an accepted or encouraged practice of the SSPX Priests to disrespect the Papacy. As for what the members do - well, that’s a problem with every parish, SSPX or not. Hopefully the Priest corrects that error but I don’t think it’s a valid reason for criticizing the organization as a whole.

Any self-proclaimed Catholic, whether “mainstream” or SSPX, who rejects basic Church doctrine harms the Church and limits the ability to preach Christ’s Gospel here on earth. denial of the Real Presence is just plain wrong. That such beliefs exist in “mainstream” Catholics does nothing to excuse the conduct or stance of the SSPX. It merely puts them at odds with Church teaching. Fellow travelers, if you will.

Unfortunately, whether SSPX Priests are accepted or encouraged to disrespect the Papacy is almost a moot point. That they continue to administer sacraments despite having no faculties certainly doesn’t promote unity in the Church or obedience to the Holy Father. To deny the Apostolic authority of the Pope and his Bishops is the height of disrespect.

 

[pnewton]

Why does no one have a comment on the letter ?

Perhaps some people missed it as it was not in the OP. I did comment on it in post 9.

FYI - I read it months ago when it came out.

 

[TMC]

What group will be be bashing next ?

With all of the groups out there who are true dangers to the souls of Roman Catholics, why do we focus on the group closest to being in full communion ?

Why do the SSPX bashers ignore the Dimond brothers and Call To Action ? Those are the groups that can poison the souls of our children.

Fess up please. To those who constantly see the need to point out the SSPX clergy are suspended for now, what makes the SSPX such a danger to you ?

It’s reported that Cardinal Hoyos may spend some time in Econe after he retires. I suppose we should get busy writing letters to him "warning " him about those terrible SSPX clergy ?

First, I don’t know that people spend a lot of time on SSPX. They are often the focus of this forum because its a forum about the traditionalist movement.

Second, I don’t know why you say that the SSPX is the “group closest to being in full communion.” Closest as compared to who? For example, I think that Call to Action is in more or less the same position as the SSPX.

But to answer your real question, the reason why some people, including me, have a hard time with SSPX is that among all those groups, SSPX is the only one that is disingenuous about its teachings and positions. Call to Action does not deny that it advocates things that go against current Church teaching. Hans Kung was mentioned on this thread. He admits he dissents from Church teaching. When he was stripped of the authority to teach Catholic theology he didn’t pretend to still have that authority.

But the SSPX tells people that what they teach is what the Church teaches, even though they know its not true. That is a real problem, and creates a real danger of confusing people. They claim the authority to ordain bishops and priests, despite not having that authority. That puts them in the same category as Old Catholics, not Call to Action.

If the SSPX were to reform their ways and come back into full communion tomorrow, I would rejoice. I would also be very surprised. I believe that all or most will eventually return, but it probably not be all at once, and probably take some time.

 

[Onegin]

But the SSPX tells people that what they teach is what the Church teaches, even though they know its not true.

I get your reservations about the whole licitness/jurisdiction issue but this statement confounds me. I’m not aware of any issues where the SSPX diverges with Catholic doctrine.

Could you quickly provide a couple of examples as this is one of the statements I often see but never really have heard clarified.

 

[Onegin]

Any self-proclaimed Catholic, whether “mainstream” or SSPX, who rejects basic Church doctrine harms the Church and limits the ability to preach Christ’s Gospel here on earth.

I agree.

denial of the Real Presence is just plain wrong. That such beliefs exist in “mainstream” Catholics does nothing to excuse the conduct or stance of the SSPX. It merely puts them at odds with Church teaching. Fellow travelers, if you will.

I was addressing the argument regarding disrespecting the Pope, not the “conduct of the SSPX” as regards to the status of their faculties to administer the sacraments.

Unfortunately, whether SSPX Priests are accepted or encouraged to disrespect the Papacy is almost a moot point. That they continue to administer sacraments despite having no faculties certainly doesn’t promote unity in the Church or obedience to the Holy Father. To deny the Apostolic authority of the Pope and his Bishops is the height of disrespect.

I don’t think it’s a moot point. You cite unity in the Church but the Church has had enough problems with unity from those that were faithful to the Vatican II changes. As for obedience to the Holy Father, I’d encourage you to take a look at much of what is being done in local dioceses today. If you live in an extremely “progressive” one like I do, very little of what is done and changed is with permission from Rome (much less the local bishop). Not very unitive either, I suppose.

Ultimately, “unity” is one of those terms that people use when they’re frustrated because a group isn’t doing what they want it to. Not much about the Catholic Church in the last 40+ years has been unitive.

Singling out the SSPX for particular criticism is what is a moot point.At this point in our Church’s history, we should be focusing on the threats from without.Rather than taking the “faculties” of the priests and using that as a springboard to shun the Soceity as a whole, I think we should look at the big picture. Rome and the SSPX have been making concerted efforts at reconcilation, so don’t you think that we, as laypeople, can at least make the same effort?

 

[ProVobis]

Any self-proclaimed Catholic, whether “mainstream” or SSPX, who rejects basic Church doctrine harms the Church and limits the ability to preach Christ’s Gospel here on earth. denial of the Real Presence is just plain wrong. That such beliefs exist in “mainstream” Catholics does nothing to excuse the conduct or stance of the SSPX. It merely puts them at odds with Church teaching.

So if the SSPX deserve not to be in full communion, shouldn’t the mainstream in your example also deserve not be in full communion? This is the subject of this thread, after all.

 

[RosaryCrusader]

To the OP:

If the SSPX makes an ‘agreement’ with Rome Jimmy Akin (and a lot of Catholic Answers staff) would be out of a job.

 

[diggerdomer]

I’m not aware of any issues where the SSPX diverges with Catholic doctrine. .

The SSPX is very up-front about them: sspx.org/sspxfaqs.htm (e.g. see questions 5-8, 14)

 

[tcm22]

So if the SSPX deserve not to be in full communion, shouldn’t the mainstream in your example also deserve not be in full communion? This is the subject of this thread, after all.

To answer your question…yes. Unfortunately, the SSPX is an organized group led by ordained clergy who knowingly and willingly defied Papal authority despite several opportunities to refrain.

There existence of self-proclaimed Catholics who reject aspects of Church teaching they don’t agree with is nothing new. The difference here is that they don’t claim to be the “true” Catholics.

No one…individuals, or groups…who publicly defy and undermine Church teachings should be considered in full communion. That’s really my whole point.

 

[I_Believe]

Perhaps some people missed it as it was not in the OP. I did comment on it in post 9.

FYI - I read it months ago when it came out.

fair enough, here it is again for those who have not read it.

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/letters/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20090310_remissione-scomunica_en.html

 

[Onegin]

The SSPX is very up-front about them: sspx.org/sspxfaqs.htm (e.g. see questions 5-8, 14)

Right. And what Catholic doctrine are they denying/diverging from? Either I’m really stupid or there’s not actually any issues of doctrine listed there.