I'm from Jerusalem (Israel) and are new here

[AnneAnne]

Hello,

I’m new here and would like to be in touch with people that know Mons. Marcel Lefebvre organization or at least are close to his ideas.

Thank you and Pax Cristi.
A.

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

Hello,

I’m new here and would like to be in touch with people that know Mons. Marcel Lefebvre organization or at least are close to his ideas.

Thank you and Pax Cristi.
A.

I’ve been associated with the SSX for the past 10 years. Feel free to send me an e-mail or ask any questions here publicly.

 

[CatholicNick]

Hello,

I’m new here and would like to be in touch with people that know Mons. Marcel Lefebvre organization or at least are close to his ideas.

Thank you and Pax Cristi.
A.

I don’t understand where you are coming from in your question, but I must inform you of the SSPX’s questionable Canonical status within the church.

Therefore I would think it unwise to get involved.

 

[puzzleannie]

Hello,

I’m new here and would like to be in touch with people that know Mons. Marcel Lefebvre organization or at least are close to his ideas.

Thank you and Pax Cristi.
A.

the particular schism represented by his ideas is a banned topic on this forum. This is a Catholic forum, and the forums that relate to Catholic doctrine and practice, are just that, expounding orthodox Catholic doctrine and practice. You would have to find another website for discussion of such heresy.

not trying to be harsh on a new member, just pointing you to the stickies with forum rules, and to the articles on the CA homepage, which should give you a very good idea of the orientation of this website and those who run it.

 

[demerzel85]

I don’t understand where you are coming from in your question, but I must inform you of the SSPX’s questionable Canonical status within the church.

Therefore I would think it unwise to get involved.

With the Summorum Pontificum, the ground is shifting

 

[Walking_Home]

the particular schism represented by his ideas is a banned topic on this forum. This is a Catholic forum, and the forums that relate to Catholic doctrine and practice, are just that, expounding orthodox Catholic doctrine and practice. You would have to find another website for discussion of such heresy.

not trying to be harsh on a new member, just pointing you to the stickies with forum rules, and to the articles on the CA homepage, which should give you a very good idea of the orientation of this website and those who run it.

---

Did I miss the document where Rome states the SSPX is not Catholic and are heretics.

 

[Titus]

---

Did I miss the document where Rome states the SSPX is not Catholic and **are **heretics.

You missed the post which reminded readers that this is a banned topic. Come on, you knew that saying that was just provocative. Refer to CA documents on the SSPX. And please improve your grammar, because it is important here (difference between organisation and individuals).

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

You missed the post which reminded readers that this is a banned topic. Come on, you knew that saying that was just provocative. Refer to CA documents on the SSPX. And please improve your grammar, because it is important here (difference between organisation and individuals).

I’m curious, is it also banned to discuss the truly schismatic and heretica Eastern Orthodox church? They explicitly reject the office of the Pope and many defined doctrines. Thus, they are truly heretical and schismatic.

The SSPX, on the other hand, accepts all defined dogmas of the Church (even the politically incorrect ones), and accepts the authority of the Pope. They just refuse to go along with any errors that have become mainstream. For example, they would not blindly go along with the mistranslation of “pro multis”, nor would they follow blindly when the impression was given that the Old Mass was abrogated and needed an indult. The SSPX is being proven right over and over again by Rome, and discussing them is forbidden? We should be purchasing all of their books and thanking them for holding fast to Tradition during the past 40 years of confusion.

How could it be that discussion of a truly heretical and schismatic group, such as the Eastern Orthodox, is allowed, and not the SSPX?

You would think peoples eyes would begin to open. Maybe that rule will change soon.

 

[Titus]

I’m curious, is it also banned to discuss the truly schismatic and heretica Eastern Orthodox church? They explicitly reject the office of the Pope and many defined doctrines. Thus, they are truly heretical and schismatic.

The SSPX, on the other hand, accepts all defined dogmas of the Church (even the politically incorrect ones), and accepts the authority of the Pope. They just refuse to go along with any errors that have become mainstream. For example, they would not blindly go along with the mistranslation of “pro multis”, nor would they follow blindly when the impression was given that the Old Mass was abrogated and needed an indult. The SSPX is being proven right over and over again by Rome, and discussing them is forbidden? We should be purchasing all of their books and thanking them for holding fast to Tradition during the past 40 years of confusion.

How could it be that discussion of a truly heretical and schismatic group, such as the Eastern Orthodox, is allowed, and not the SSPX?

You would think peoples eyes would begin to open. Maybe that rule will change soon.

Catholic Answers makes the rules. I don’t know why you’re raising that here instead of with the moderators directly, if you feel you’re right.

And the only fair result, if you are proven right, would be a ban of both. Which is not what you want at all, is it?

The SSPX’s leaders are schismatics and excommunicates. Roma locuta est. But once again, that topic is banned. (Catholic Answers locuta est).

 

[Walking_Home]

You missed the post which reminded readers that this is a banned topic. Come on, you knew that saying that was just provocative. Refer to CA documents on the SSPX. And please improve your grammar, because it is important here (difference between organisation and individuals).

---

Just what post made the SSPX a banned topic. It is not the following from the sticky at the top of this forum. Now --if someone is throwing around words such as heresy etc. in reference to the SSPX—this person should be able to provide where Rome considers the SSPX in this manner.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=127816

Quote=Jean Anthony
Please, when you start a thread make sure it contains a reference to why it should be in the Traditional Catholicism forum. This forum is quite topic specific, so if you don’t want your threads moved to other forums please indicate why it should be in the TC forum (unless it deals directly with the following topics: the Traditional Latin Mass, the Indult, SSPX, sedevacantism). Thank you, everyone.

 

[Scotty_PGH]

the particular schism represented by his ideas is a banned topic on this forum. This is a Catholic forum, and the forums that relate to Catholic doctrine and practice, are just that, expounding orthodox Catholic doctrine and practice. You would have to find another website for discussion of such heresy.

not trying to be harsh on a new member, just pointing you to the stickies with forum rules, and to the articles on the CA homepage, which should give you a very good idea of the orientation of this website and those who run it.

You should be ashamed of yourself calling the SSPX heretics. You are either malevolent or grossly misinformed. Lutherans are heretics, Anglicans are heretics, the Arch-Druid of Canterbury is a heretic. The bishops of the SSPX are validly ordained bishops of the Catholic Church with a canonically irregular status.

 

[Aramis]

You should be ashamed of yourself calling the SSPX heretics. You are either malevolent or grossly misinformed. Lutherans are heretics, Anglicans are heretics, the Arch-Druid of Canterbury is a heretic. The bishops of the SSPX are validly ordained bishops of the Catholic Church with a canonically irregular status.

Sorry, but the Then Superior General of the SSPX was excommunicated in the Moto Proprio Ecclesia Dei, as was the man later elected to be the Superior General.

3. In itself, this act was one of disobedience to the Roman Pontiff in a very grave matter and of supreme importance for the unity of the church, such as is the ordination of bishops whereby the apostolic succession is sacramentally perpetuated. Hence such disobedience - which implies in practice the rejection of the Roman primacy - constitutes a schismatic act.(3) In performing such an act, notwithstanding the formal canonical warning sent to them by the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops on 17 June last, Mons. Lefebvre and the priests Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta, have incurred the grave penalty of excommunication envisaged by ecclesiastical law.(4)

So they are not accepting the canon law of the church, which says that you can’t elect someone who’se been excommunicated to hold office in any order or religious society approved by the Vatican.

The preists (who are, technically, the membership of the SSPX), therefore have shown a grave disobedience to Canon Law by both Electing the excommunicated Bernard Fellay as Superior General, and in not rejecting the organization whence he took over as Sup.Gen.

That’s NOT heresy; justification of so doing could be. It is Schismaticism and Disobedience.

 

[Jean_Anthony]

With apologies to the original poster, this thread is closed.