Is sspx in schism

[commenter]

Many also do not realize what the reasons were, the crisis in the Church, that led him to continue the SSPX and that he was calling on canon law that stated what to do in an urgent situation.

There are people who do have some understanding of the situation in the early 70s. Some have understanding of the canon law issues, and perceive why, though not necessarily agree, the Archbishop felt the need to “continue” in the 1970s and 80s.

But in 2020, decisions to “continue” are made by other Leaders. Historically organizations that are founded for a purpose tend to perpetuate themselves, sometimes fanatically, finding purposes as they go along. That is a possibility that any religious organization should be aware of, and avoid.

It’s frustrating how few posts on SSPX address current justification to continue, or anything at all about the current year. Threads keep zooming back to the 70s and 80s like a magnet, and defend decisions made then, rather than now. Or they use a 1970s rationale (good or bad) as reason for acting in 2020, in a very different situation for the Church, and the World.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

There are people who do have some understanding of the situation in the early 70s. Some have understanding of the canon law issues, and perceive why, though not necessarily agree, the Archbishop felt the need to “continue” in the 1970s and 80s.

You are right, some do but not a lot. If I say SSPX to the typical Catholic in my home parish, many times they don’t know who I mean. Probably because there aren’t any around me and many Catholics, not all, but many are Sunday Catholics and don’t think about the faith too much on a regular basis. For instance, we have a three parish community. About 1000 people. We have weekly Bible studies and that averages to about 20 people. We have tried other spiritual events but few takers. Not interested. Trying to get people interested in any thing spiritual other than Sunday Mass is a chore.

Threads keep zooming back to the 70s and 80s like a magnet, and defend decisions made then , rather than now. Or they use a 1970s rationale (good or bad) as reason for acting in 2020.

From what I understand the reason for the decisions made today are based on what happened int he 60’s, 70’s and 80’s. That is pretty much true for the whole Church.

 

[commenter]

From what I understand the reason for the decisions made today are based on what happened int he 60’s, 70’s and 80’s. That is pretty much true for the whole Church.

Your point is a valid one. But I think my point has some validity too. I’m a retired social worker. I don’t comment on canon law, but have seen the natural tendency to continue organizations.

The March of Dimes is still raising money now, though Polio vaccination began (thank God) in 1955.

 

[Dovekin]

Catholic News Service has an article about a meeting between Fellay & Levada in 2012 about the doctrinal discussions between SSPX and the CDF:

“In compliance with the decision of Pope Benedict XVI,” the communique said, Bishop Fellay was given a letter signed by Cardinal Levada explaining that “the position he had expressed is not sufficient to overcome the doctrinal problems that are at the basis of the fracture between the Holy See and the society.”

This communique was a stage in the steps toward reconciliation. The rejection of the doctrinal preamble was a public rejection of “ecclesiastical governance.” I am not making any judgment about the internal forum or accusing anyone of schism or heresy, just stating what should be obvious anyone who investigates it. The SSPX would not accept the Vatican’s doctrinal statement, despite the Pope’s “full and supreme power of jurisdiction…[in matters of] discipline and governance.”

I am not saying SSPX was wrong, just that they made a public act rejecting the power that Vatican I ascribed to the Pope. I do not see how you can say SSPX accepts Vatican I while they refuse to accept the supreme power of the Pope in discipline and governance.

 

[commenter]

This “until” could cover an unlimited degree of time, with no objective way of measuring when “justice” has been served.