Is SSPX in schism and are its adherents excommunicated?

[VivatJesus]

An objective opinion? And are you putting yourself in that category?

BTW, nice of you to pass right by consumedconverts refuting of your “Pope rehabilitates Luther” post. I suppose that if you admit that you’re wrong then it’s possible that the sspx is wrong, too, so best to just ignore things. I wonder where you stand on the Kennnedy assassination

Umm, yeah, I am. You see, because believe it or not, I was an arrogant, SSPX-bashing NeoCatholic just like you are now…eventually, though, I got sick of doing all the mental gymnastics necessary to reconcile Vatican II/Novus Ordo teaching with traditional Catholic teaching; if you but study Church writings and teachings written and published before the Council, it doesn’t take long before one notices a discrepancy. Also, I read a lot of objective histories of the Second Vatican Council (ones that weren’t written by Trads) such as The Rhine Flows Into the Tiber. Of course, I suppose in a way I was always a closet Traditionalists…things like John Paul II inviting pagans to pray at Assisi and suggesting that God doesn’t send anyone to Hell at all eek: !) troubled me.

Oh, and about the “Pope Rehabilitates Luther”, I posted an article from a leading newspaper about that, didn’t I? So no, I didn’t “bypass” it at all :tsktsk: LOL…as if I base my entire objections to the Novus Ordo religion on that one thing anyway.

And what about the Kennedy assassination? I am tickled that NeoCatholics try to paint Traditionalists like we’re all crazy conspiracy theorists who should be ignored…to us, you guys look crazy because you insist on ignoring the obvious. People like you guys (the NeoCatholic “CAF”/EWTN types) are a TINY minority in the universal Church, yet you are the only ones who insist that there was no change in teaching from Vatican II…the liberals celebrate the changes, the traditionalists lament them…you guys just pretend nothing happened.

I just chuckle at your arrogance and holier-than-thou attitudes like “We are TOTALLY OBEDIENT Catholics :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown2: :bowdown2: , not like those schismatic SSPXers!” and ponder to myself, How did I EVER take people like this seriously?? You really remind me of the story about the Emperor’s New Clothes, the way you ignore the Crisis in the Church and explain away any questionable, un-Catholic statements or behavior on the part of our post-Conciliar pontiffs. Keep on sticking your fingers in your ears, and your heads in the sand, while mindlessly chanting to yourselves, The Emperor’s clothes are beautiful! How dare you say the Emperor’s clothes are anything but beautiful!!…in the meantime, some of us Catholics (traditionalists) aim a little higher and are busy keeping the Faith, and trying to save souls in the process.

 

[VivatJesus]

Vivat, I’ve posed this question to others but haven’t ever gotten a straight answer.

The SSPX have had their faculties to hear confession suspended. In Catholic Theology (pre-Councilar and post-Councilar), the Priest derives the ability to absolve sin only from his Bishop or the legitimate head of his Religious Order. The Successor of Peter himself declared their faculties suspended.

You might as well confess to an Episcopal Vicar as an SSPX Priest. He can do no more for you.

Does not that terrify you?

Or, like another SSPX supporter, do you confess to a regular Diocesan Priest, just in case?

Please…you need to read some Canon Law! The SSPX has what is known as “supplied jurisdiction”.

 

[VivatJesus]

The SSPX supporters I’ve conversed with don’t believe Jews have even the possibility of Salvation. I don’t understand why you find that appealing.

Maybe he finds it appealing that SSPX supporters don’t believe that eternal truths (such as that of “Outside the Church is no salvation”) can change on a whim, as you seem to believe? Really, “Convert”, some of us actually have more respect for people who stick to their beliefs, even if they disagree with us, than those who change their beliefs to sound more appeasing to others.

 

[preV2tradcath]

About post 81, all I can say is thank you, VivatJesus. Excellent post.

 

[Timothysis]

Please…you need to read some Canon Law! The SSPX has what is known as “supplied jurisdiction”.

You are either misinformed or downright dishonest.

In regards to your post #81, it is obvious that you do not believe in the Catholic Church. Oh, you believe in a “Catholic Church,” one of your own design that says the things you want it to say but not the true Catholic Church. Honestly, it doesn’t matter to me in the least. Your rant speaks volumes of the “we know better than that heretic Pope” crowd.

Have fun in your little world. Nighty-nite.

 

[VivatJesus]

You’re welcome!
You know, I’m only 22 myself–and it seems Traditionalism is gaining grounds among the younger generation, because they realize what they have been deprived of all of these years. Have you noticed though that a lot of these militantly NeoCatholic anti-SSPX crusaders are either:
(1) Converts from Protestantism who were lulled into the Church via pop apologetic organizations like Catholic Answers and EWTN programs;
[the sort of organizations who paint a rosy picture of the current situation in the Church and “defend” the Church by taking the “it isn’t as bad as it sounds” approach, a good example of this is NeoCatholic pop apologists who say things like “we don’t pray to Mary, we just ask her to pray for us” (Actually we DO pray to Mary!)]
(2) People who are reverts from Protestantism and were never active Catholics before they reverted (weren’t catechized either in the Novus Ordo or in the true Catholic faith and therefore can’t tell the difference).

All one really has to do is study pre-Vatican II sources and then one will see the change; one can hardly expect people who only read post-Vatican II stuff like the writings of John Paul “the Great” and the new Catechism of the Catholic Church–which quotes Vatican II and John Paul II himself incessantly and barely uses any pre-Vatican II references–to know better, since they have no clue of what the Church was like before Vatican II.

The average run-of-the-mill Novus Ordo Catholic who is old enough to remember Vatican II thinks that Church teaching has changed (for the better) and doesn’t have a problem with it. Hence, 90% of Catholics have no problem with artificial contraception, because they think if the Church can change her teachings so abruptly (not that the Church can ever really change) about so many other things that used to be considered important, what’s the big deal if they disregard the Church’s teachings in areas which have remained the same?

 

[VivatJesus]

You are either misinformed or downright dishonest.

In regards to your post #81, it is obvious that you do not believe in the Catholic Church. Oh, you believe in a “Catholic Church,” one of your own design that says the things you want it to say but not the true Catholic Church. Honestly, it doesn’t matter to me in the least. Your rant speaks volumes of the “we know better than that heretic Pope” crowd.

Have fun in your little world. Nighty-nite.

Are you suggesting that a Pope can never be wrong? Obviously you have an erroneous, exaggerated notion of papal infallibility. Study your Baltimore Catechism!

 

[bear06]

what kinds of things do you guys at the local Novus Ordo parish talk about after the celebration? Probably not about Catholic things…after all, less than 1/4 of Novus Ordians even believe in the Real Presence, much less Catholic moral teachings such as contraception…

Uh, you’re lumping. Methinks that you’d have an issue with me saying something like “All traditionalists are snobs”. Do you really believe that only traditionalists are interested in Catholic things or that they are the only ones who believe in the Real Presence? While there are plenty of crazy Catholics out there, there are probably about as many “Novus Ordians” as Traditionalist that live the Faith with their hearts and minds. They know it, they understand it and they live it. They certainly shouldn’t be classified as stupid Catholics which is essentially what you’re intimating.

 

[bear06]

Please…you need to read some Canon Law! The SSPX has what is known as “supplied jurisdiction”.

Supplied jurisdiction to what? Hear confessions in cases of death? Supplied jurisdiction if the penitent doesn’t know they are suspened priests? Absolutely. They have the same supplied jurisdiction as any other priest. Other than that, they lack jurisdiction and the Vatican has said so. What canon exactly are you quoting?

 

[bear06]

Are you suggesting that a Pope can never be wrong? Obviously you have an erroneous, exaggerated notion of papal infallibility. Study your Baltimore Catechism!

It’s nice to see that some things never change. The same canard is told again and again. How about you point to where it was said the the Pope can never err? Nobody here has said that. I think you might actually want to read up on infallibility. There is quite a mistaken notion that unless it’s spoken ex cathedra it’s not infallible. This is not Catholic teaching and never has been.

newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm

 

[bobzills]

You are either misinformed or downright dishonest. .

It looks to me like there is supplied jurisdiction under certain circumstances and that it can be applied to a marriage perforemd at the SSPX. For example:
Ea tantum matrimonia valida sunt, quae contrahuntur coram loci Ordinario aut parocho vel diacono ab alterutro delegato qui assistant, necnon coram duobus testibus, secundum tamen regulas expressas in canonibus qui sequuntur, et salvis exceptionibus de quibus in cann. 144, 1112, #1, 1116 et 1127, ## 2-3.(New Code Canon 1108)

 

[bear06]

It looks to me like there is supplied jurisdiction under certain circumstances and that it can be applied to a marriage perforemd at the SSPX. For example:
Ea tantum matrimonia valida sunt, quae contrahuntur coram loci Ordinario aut parocho vel diacono ab alterutro delegato qui assistant, necnon coram duobus testibus, secundum tamen regulas expressas in canonibus qui sequuntur, et salvis exceptionibus de quibus in cann. 144, 1112, #1, 1116 et 1127, ## 2-3.(New Code Canon 1108)

What instances would you be talking about?

The local ordinary is the person who gives the faculty needed to validly witness a marriage. This is why the Vatican issued this:

Concretely this means that the Masses offered by the priests of the Society of St. Pius X are valid, but illicit i.e, contrary to Canon Law. The Sacraments of Penance and Matrimony however, require that the priest enjoys the faculties of the diocese or has proper delegation. Since that is not the case with these priests, these sacraments are invalid. It remains true, however, that, if the faithful are genuinely ignorant that the priests of the Society of St. Pius X do not have the proper faculty to absolve, the Church supplied these faculties so that the sacrament was valid (cf. Code of Canon Law c.144).

latin-mass-society.org/laitysspx.htm

Note that no emergency jurisdiction is mentioned in the case of marriage, just confession.

 

[ethelzguy]

Oh, and by the way, coffee and donuts after Mass at our SSPX chapel is always stimulating!..Great, intelligent, and interesting conversations with like-minded Catholics…what kinds of things do you guys at the local Novus Ordo parish talk about after the celebration? Probably not about Catholic things…after all, less than 1/4 of Novus Ordians even believe in the Real Presence, much less Catholic moral teachings such as contraception…

What a ridiculous statement. Remind me again, why I should be excited about a possible return of the SSPX?

First, the traditionlists say we shouldn’t talk in church, and to save it for coffee and donuts…now you’re saying that discussion “not about Catholic things” at coffee and donuts is something to be sneered at.

Also, please document your assertion that “less that 1/4 of Novus Ordians even believe in the Real Presence”.

Your obsession with denigrating those who attend the NO Mass is obvious.

 

[consumedconvert]

You’re welcome!
You know, I’m only 22 myself…

Ah, that’s the problem.

 

[Sepharad]

Ah, that’s the problem.

Would you still say that to him if he agreed with your position? I’m 49 years old but I hate seeing people’s views belittled simply because they are young!

 

[consumedconvert]

Would you still say that to him if he agreed with your position? I’m 49 years old but I hate seeing people’s views belittled simply because they are young!

I’m only a few years his senior myself. Yet when I was his age a few years back, I was probably just as snarky. Twenty-two year old males think they know everything, especially about religion–I certainly did. It takes getting married and, sometimes, having a kid to prove to one that one doesn’t know much at all…

When I think back on how snarky I was when I was twenty-two, and how I thought I knew more than all my elders put together, I say “Doh!”

 

[ethelzguy]

You’re welcome!
You know, I’m only 22 myself–and it seems Traditionalism is gaining grounds among the younger generation, because they realize what they have been deprived of all of these years.

If you’re “only 22”, how can you possibly know what you “have been deprived of all these years”? Vatican II took place in the 60’s.

 

[ethelzguy]

Ah, that’s the problem.

“Wisdom comes from the realization that you know nothing”.

 

[ethelzguy]

I’m only a few years his senior myself. Yet when I was his age a few years back, I was probably just as snarky. Twenty-two year old males think they know everything, especially about religion–I certainly did. It takes getting married and, sometimes, having a kid to prove to one that one doesn’t know much at all…

When I think back on how snarky I was when I was twenty-two, and how I thought I knew more than all my elders put together, I say “Doh!”

It is beginning to appear, that several of our young, know-it-all posters may not be as “into” traditional Catholicism, as they are into rebellion. Taking on the Church of their parents, boastfully showing them “the error of their ways”…rather typical.

If only the rest of us could return to our youth, when we knew everything.

 

[Sepharad]

If you’re “only 22”, how can you possibly know what you “have been deprived of all these years”? Vatican II took place in the 60’s.

Because I have family members in the SSPX, I’ve been heavily exposed to the plight of Traditionalist Catholics, and many of my older family members did experience the “changes” firsthand. They in turn tell the younger generation what it was like “before Vatican II”. My older family members (most of whom left the church after the “changes” and only returned when a SSPX Mass was available to them), often told me about the things they recalled of the pre-V2 church. And yes, I realize that was the church that was much more likely to hate Jews, but the externals I found very beautiful and still do. And I saw how shattered many of that generation felt when it was ripped from under them.

What I find amazing in my reading about the TC movement is that MANY if not most of the active members are young! We have the same thing going on in Orthodox Judaism…the young are seizing and holding onto the Traditions that the older generation often threw away. I see this as a GOOD sign for the coming generation, regardless of what religion we’re talking about.

As Tevye said in Fiddler on the Roof, our religious traditions are what tell us who and what we are, and what God expects us to do.