If The SSPX Were Declared In Full Communion Tomorrow

[diggerdomer]

tcm22, exactly which pieces of doctrine are in question? Do you have any idea what the Pope is referring to or are you here just here doing your Pharisee thing?

tcm22 may have his/her own thoughts, but my response to this question would be to refer you to the SSPX web site where they clearly identify where they differ from the teaching of the Catholic Church’s Magisterium: sspx.org/sspxfaqs.htm

I appreciate the fact that they are so up front and honest about where they depart from and differ with the Catholic tradition and faith. I hope this same honesty will aid them in reconilication with and full communion with the Catholic Church.

 

[ProVobis]

refer you to the SSPX web site

Most websites are outdated and I doubt the Pope reads them for current official information. Last I heard he talks with Bishop Fellay for this.

I suggest you attend a Mass and speak to a SSPX priest before you pass judgement on them TODAY. Tomorrow they may change (again).

That said, if the new doctrine of the Church is such that it includes that it is proper for Catholics to divorce and remarry and be praised for it and still have funeral Masses said for them, then I think you and I would have to side with the SSPX’s doctrine, no?

 

[tcm22]

tcm22, exactly which pieces of doctrine are in question? Do you have any idea what the Pope is referring to or are you here just here doing your Pharisee thing?

I have no idea what specific doctrines His Holiness his referring to. As the successor to Peter, however, I trust that the Pope and his staff have managed to articulate the doctrinal issues to the SSPX clergy. I have sufficient faith in our Church that such statements are not just off the cuff. If you want to dismiss it as a “Pharisee thing,” then feel free (though I would reject the analogy). I’m pointing out that the severity of the issues that remain between the Church and the SSPX. Many SSPX supporters on this forum seem to feel the lifting of the excommunications has vindicated their cause. Looking at the Holy Father’s own words, that’s far from the case.

I don’t think that the doctrines to which Pope Benedict alludes to are explained in this document. I would imagine that he has explained them to the leadership of the SSPX. But I have no idea which doctrinal issues he is referring to in this letter. The fact is that it is the Holy Father that says there are doctrinal issues, no one else.

We’ll have to wait and see how it unfolds.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Exactly!

Most websites are outdated and I doubt the Pope reads them for current official information. Last I heard he talks with Bishop Fellay for this.

I suggest you attend a Mass and speak to a SSPX priest before you pass judgement on them TODAY. Tomorrow they may change (again).

That said, if the new doctrine of the Church is such that it includes that it is proper for Catholics to divorce and remarry and be praised for it and still have funeral Masses said for them, then I think you and I would have to side with the SSPX’s doctrine, no?

In light of the inflammatory statements made on the SSPX web site, it would certainly make sense to clean it up if it doesn’t represent the true and accurate stance of the Society. Are you implying their views have moderated since the website was built? A quick perusal of the website suggests some fairly recent updates have been made.

Seems to me that if the Society truly wanted to reconcile, they would make a concerted effort to clean up the public face. At best it demonstrates a poor understanding what sort of image the Society projects for itself.

 

[I_Believe]

Thanks for the clarification. I thought maybe you were referring to some fact or statement that would back up that opinion.

That’s not true, and not how the Pope explained it:

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

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/apost_letters/documents/hf_ben-xvi_apl_20090702_ecclesiae-unitatem_en.html

Right, it all pertains to the fact they are suspended.

 

[Sword_Brethren]

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 ?

I would go to Mass at SSPX if they were declared in full communion tomorrow.

 

[Kaizmom]

Well, you are implying the SSPX is sedevacantist. Your initial post is very misleading. They are not Sedes.

Please read this…
sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q15_sedevacantists.htm

If you truly want to see what the fuss is all about, follow the blogs and you will see that prominent churchmen share many of the same views as the SSPX. When they express them, they don’t use quite as harsh words as the SSPX, but they are saying the same thing in many instances.

Are you aware that the 4 SSPX Bishops have had their excommunications lifted ? Are you aware they are in Doctrinal discussions with Rome as we speak ?

Traditionally, Rome does not engage in discussions on matters of Doctrine with those that have the traits you are heaping upon the Society. Yes, they have been arrogant, and yes, at times they have spoken with a lack of prudence. But when a group has had an unjust stigma thrust upon it, they tend to get a tad upset.

One of the SSPX Bishops has said the fate of the SSPX rests with the Holy See.

Are you familiar with the SSPX Rosary Crusades ?

Again, please learn all you can before attacking these holy priests. Please start here.
vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/letters/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20090310_remissione-scomunica_en.html

When you attack the SSPX, you are indirectly hurting our Holy Father himself.

I am not implying anything- you apparently misread what MY EXPERIENCE is with the SSPX church out where I am at. I have never met anyone from SSPX expect from this church (which seems to believe what the definition of Sedes is). Yes I am aware the excommunication has been lifted, and yes, I know they are in DISCUSSIONS! I hope that they can reconsile with the church. I am not JUDGING anyone, so I don’t know where you get that idea! And Rome engages in ecumenical councils ALL the time with other faiths, in attempts to reunite the church. How do you think the Angelicans have come back to the church? I think you MISUNDERSTOOD what was being said…

 

[ProVobis]

I would go to Mass at SSPX if they were declared in full communion tomorrow.

You may need to make reservations. The closest SSPX chapel to me is usually full unless you want to sit in the balcony.

What’s sad, though, is that there are two diocesan EF’s available at the same time within 15 minutes and they need some attendance.

 

[wisdomseeker]

Because you do not see people on here who are at the most extremely liberal end of the spectrum, due to the fact that they want nothing to do with apologetics but will change Church teachings as they see fit, and any sedevacantists are quickly shown the door because their beliefs are not welcome here.

I am not an SSPX-basher, but firmly believe they could have done a lot more good if they had remained in full communion with the Church and with the Holy See instead of going off on their own to try and preserve Sacred Tradition, although the Deposit of Faith is guarded by the Holy Father, as he is successor of St. Peter, and the bishops in communion with him, as they are successors of the Apostles, so it is impossible to preserve Sacred Tradition apart from communion with the Holy Father.

It usually is the laity who support the SSPX who are more vocal these days than are the clergy of the Society. Their constant harping is that THEY are right, that Monsignor Lefebvre was right, and it was the Catholic Church and the pope and the millions of clergy and lay faithful in communion with him who were wrong. Pope Benedict XVI is trying to move towards reconciling the Society with Rome (no, not the other way around, where Rome must reunite with the Society, as the SSPX is not THE Catholic Church, else Monsignor Lefebvre and his bishops would be considered a counter-magisterium). However, what is making the negotiations difficult is that the SSPX continues to operate in disobedience to the Holy Father’s wishes; I don’t think that he was all too happy about the ordinations back in June, or the fact that Society priests still continue to grant absolution in confession, witness marriages, and grant annulments without faculties since they are still suspended a divinis.

Even though the excommunications of the four bishops were lifted, they are not yet in full communion with Rome; they also, at present, do not exercise any legitimate ministry within the bounds of the Catholic Church because of the irregularity of their status. This is not “bashing”, I am stating the facts and telling the truth, because to state anything else would be dishonest of me. I check my facts with CatholicCulture.org, because they take news relating to the Catholic Church from official Catholic sources in communion with Rome. Thus, anyone who wants to accuse me of lying, slander, or simply say that “I don’t know what I’m talking about” hasn’t a leg to stand on.

the bishops in communion with him did not do a very good job in preserving Sacred Tradition, did the?

 

[JReducation]

the bishops in communion with him did not do a very good job in preserving Sacred Tradition, did the?

I believe that Dona Nobis has hit a few nails on the head and have you. I’ll start with the one that you hit. The SSPX bishops’ communion wiht Archbishop Lefebvre did not have the desired effect. First, it proved very devisive. It placed many good people outside the Church. Some were excommunicated, hundreds of priests aer still suspended, the laity who habitually and knowingly receive the sacraments from a suspended priest, when there are other licit celebrations of the Eucharist and licit preaching of the Gospel, ae fallign into sin. You may only attend an illicit mass to fulfill your Sunday obligation, not as a show of support of a group who has no canoincal standing the Church, as if the absence of canonical standing did not bother you . If it does not bother you, then “Welcome to the wrold of moral relativisims.”

I also believe that the passage of time created a great gap between the maintream Catholic and teh SSPX Catholic. After a while people were nost simply asking and sharing why they preferred this to that. They started mud-slinging, very much in the style of the French Revolution. Too many people on both sides have lost trust of the other side. To the point that we have gotten more paper heavy than the American legal system or the IRS. Everytime you open you moth some one wants to know what document you go that from. You can no longer get a good idea by observing how things ae done in certain sectors of teh Church. Some people are even demanding that the Pope stick to quotable documents. I’m waiting to see someone comoe out with a new edition of Church Documents for Dummies.

Finally, but the most important part is that the concept of law is replacing the call to holiness. Many people, on both sides of the aisle aer convinced that if either observe the laws as they are written you will be holy. Others believe that if you treek them to fit the current culture, then people can be holy. The Jews followed the laws. How many do we venerate today? How many do we actually remember and look up to? The Protestant refformers tweeked with some law. What happened? They were unable to distinguish between disciplinary law and divine law. It became so blured that they ahve been fighting over what is truth and what is discipline since the 1500s.

Legally, the reunification between the SSPX and the Church can take place in five minutes with everyone signign a concordate. But will the laity and clergy on both sides be just as happy to sign there name, even though they have no idea what was discussed, but they want to be in communion with the Church. Are there that many courageous people? This is one of the defintions of blind faith.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[yosupman]

You may need to make reservations. The closest SSPX chapel to me is usually full unless you want to sit in the balcony.

What’s sad, though, is that there are two diocesan EF’s available at the same time within 15 minutes and they need some attendance.

Pro-vobis, where do ya live? I live in Kansas, near St. Marys, and we have the SSPX chapel, and the FSSP.

 

[yosupman]

Brother JR,

The most important reason to have talks, is that good will come from them no matter what. Our Lord knows what he is doing. A lot of SSPX’ers are comming into full communion (attending masses with priests in good standing with the bishop) every day. We don’t see it in the news, but I guarantee, I used to know a ton of SSPXers, and they all got fed up, not with the priests, but with all the parishners getting into everyone’s business. When they left the society, their businesses were boycotted, and some had to find different lines of work. But in the end, a majority of people I new in the SSPX 10 years ago, don’t attend SSPX masses. They attend the FSSP.

 

[yosupman]

the bishops in communion with him did not do a very good job in preserving Sacred Tradition, did the?

You might want to start using spell check and capitals.

 

[ProVobis]

Pro-vobis, where do ya live? I live in Kansas, near St. Marys, and we have the SSPX chapel, and the FSSP.

near Chicago. There are a number of EFs in the area, including ICR and St. John Cantius, although there is an FSSP priest in the Joliet diocese. The SSPX chapel is in Oak Park; it used to be an Presbyterian church. It would be interesting to see if Cardinal George would accept them into the diocese if and when they agree to Rome’s conditions.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I believe that Dona Nobis has hit a few nails on the head and have you. I’ll start with the one that you hit. The SSPX bishops’ communion wiht Archbishop Lefebvre did not have the desired effect. First, it proved very devisive. It placed many good people outside the Church. Some were excommunicated, hundreds of priests aer still suspended, the laity who habitually and knowingly receive the sacraments from a suspended priest, when there are other licit celebrations of the Eucharist and licit preaching of the Gospel, ae fallign into sin. You may only attend an illicit mass to fulfill your Sunday obligation, not as a show of support of a group who has no canoincal standing the Church, as if the absence of canonical standing did not bother you . If it does not bother you, then “Welcome to the wrold of moral relativisims.”

I also believe that the passage of time created a great gap between the maintream Catholic and teh SSPX Catholic. After a while people were nost simply asking and sharing why they preferred this to that. They started mud-slinging, very much in the style of the French Revolution. Too many people on both sides have lost trust of the other side. To the point that we have gotten more paper heavy than the American legal system or the IRS. Everytime you open you moth some one wants to know what document you go that from. You can no longer get a good idea by observing how things ae done in certain sectors of teh Church. Some people are even demanding that the Pope stick to quotable documents. I’m waiting to see someone comoe out with a new edition of Church Documents for Dummies.

Finally, but the most important part is that the concept of law is replacing the call to holiness. Many people, on both sides of the aisle aer convinced that if either observe the laws as they are written you will be holy. Others believe that if you treek them to fit the current culture, then people can be holy. The Jews followed the laws. How many do we venerate today? How many do we actually remember and look up to? The Protestant refformers tweeked with some law. What happened? They were unable to distinguish between disciplinary law and divine law. It became so blured that they ahve been fighting over what is truth and what is discipline since the 1500s.

Legally, the reunification between the SSPX and the Church can take place in five minutes with everyone signign a concordate. But will the laity and clergy on both sides be just as happy to sign there name, even though they have no idea what was discussed, but they want to be in communion with the Church. Are there that many courageous people? This is one of the defintions of blind faith.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Thank you, brother. i say to the SSPX, come and come quicky, trust in God, we need you in the Church. i pray that they will come to my part of the world, south. we really need a holy Church here so others may see and follow.

 

[JReducation]

Thank you, brother. i say to the SSPX, come and come quicky, trust in God, we need you in the Church. i pray that they will come to my part of the world, south. we really need a holy Church here so others may see and follow.

This would be a good thing, as long as the laity remembers that the faith is kept alive, not by the SSPX, but by the pope and the bishops in communion with him Let me explain something about reforms, because I belong to one. The Franciscans were foudned as a reform. It had such a profound impact on the Church of its time that when it came time for the pope to reign it in, because it was too large, there were people who had placed more faith in the reform than in the papacy and the bishops. As a result, many of the Franciscans had to to be excommunicated and executed to impress upon the rest that they had to submit to the papacy and the bishops.

I don’t think that we’re going to execute any SSPX members, but we don’t want more resistence and more excommunications. Let’s pray that the SSPX does make a positive contribution and at the same time bows to the authority of bishops and popes.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[ProVobis]

The Franciscans were foudned as a reform. It had such a profound impact on the Church of its time that when it came time for the pope to reign it in, because it was too large, there were people who had placed more faith in the reform than in the papacy and the bishops. As a result, many of the Franciscans had to to be excommunicated and executed to impress upon the rest that they had to submit to the papacy and the bishops.

JR, ever consider becoming a Benedictine?

 

[JReducation]

JR, ever consider becoming a Benedictine?

I did once upon a time. But I’ll take my chances now that they no longer execute us. Now, when the order gets to large the Vatican just divides it again into smaller groups. But we get to keep our heads.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[wisdomseeker]

This would be a good thing, as long as the laity remembers that the faith is kept alive, not by the SSPX, but by the pope and the bishops in communion with him Let me explain something about reforms, because I belong to one. The Franciscans were foudned as a reform. It had such a profound impact on the Church of its time that when it came time for the pope to reign it in, because it was too large, there were people who had placed more faith in the reform than in the papacy and the bishops. As a result, many of the Franciscans had to to be excommunicated and executed to impress upon the rest that they had to submit to the papacy and the bishops.

I don’t think that we’re going to execute any SSPX members, but we don’t want more resistence and more excommunications. Let’s pray that the SSPX does make a positive contribution and at the same time bows to the authority of bishops and popes.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

They should submit to the holy father and the holy must allow them to continue Worship God the way it has been. i got good news. today at the bulletin at my Parish, i read that they are offering Latin classes. big news. it is encouraging to me.

 

[JReducation]

They should submit to the holy father and the holy must allow them to continue Worship God the way it has been. i got good news. today at the bulletin at my Parish, i read that they are offering Latin classes. big news. it is encouraging to me.

I think that the Latin classes are a sign of good things to come. As for allowing the SSPX to continue to celebrate the EF, I don’t forsee any problems with that as long as they also promote the OF. This is where some groups get into trouble. They downplay the OF as lesser than the EF. That is in conflict with Summorum Pontificum which refers to both forms as one Latin Rite and equally holy and venerable.

I’m not sure about the FSSP, but I know that the Canons of St. John Cantius and the Franciscan Missionaries of the Eternal Word celebrate both forms. Of course there is a difference between them. The Caons and the Franciscans are religious, while the FSSP and the SSPX are not. Religious have to follow the constitutions. In the Franciscan constitutions you may not celebrate the EF exclusively, but only with the permission of the superior of the house at a time, day and place approved by him. I believe that the Canons have a similar ruling regarding the OF. I also heard, but cannot confirm, that the Institute of Christ the King also celebrates the OF in Latin.

My point is that if the issue boils down to the form of the Latin Rite, there are different arrangements that can prove suitable to all parties and beneficial for the Church. I don’t see the celebration of the mass an obstacle for the future. The piety of the SSPX is certainly most welcome and necessary.

As a religious and a superior, my great concern is always with the laity. The laity becomes very attached to certain ways and when Rome or other Church authorities tries to change it or reign it in, they tend to forget that the bond is not between the laity and the community (i.e. Franciscan, SSPX, Canons, Dominicans, etc), but between the faithful and the bishops and the pope. The rest of us in the middle are just that, middle men. We don’t want people to refuse the hierarchy becaues of their attachment to us and our way of doing things. We’re not the Church. We lead to the Church, big difference.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[agent_grey]

Why concerned with the Dimond brothers? They want nothing to do with the Roman Catholic Church.

Hey if you have valid communion nobody can tell you otherwise. Because you will KNOW Christ by communion and you will KNOW that you KNOW Christ by communion. The ONLY way one can KNOW Christ is by communion. If you Don’t KNOW that you KNOW Christ by communion then you should get out! RUN!!!

Only you have the answer to this question. Your children can be fed long before they will discover the Dimond brothers and when they do either they will KNOW Christ by Communion or they won’t and again if they don’t… RUN!

But think twice about whom you run to!