Poll on the current Vatican/SSPX Discussions

[giuseppeTO]

The SSPX and the Vatican began a series of bi-monthly discussions last fall concerning, ostensibly, official interpretations of some of the documents of The Second Vatican Council.

Do you believe that when the Pope stated that the SSPX currently ’ … exercises no legitimate ministry within the church…’, that he intended that the SSPX should immediately close its chapels and schools, stop ordaining priests, close down its seminaries, and all priests and laity should report to diocesan churches until a canonical structure is agreed to?

 

[corsair]

I can’t read the Holy Fathers mind but I would suspect that he would be foolish to believe that SSPX would suspend all operations while they were discussing Dogmatic issues within the church. Bishop Fellay has already said that SSPX is not going to stop what they have been doing for the last 20+ years in the hopes that some sort of reconciliation will occur. As he said, they would be no worse off tomorrow if no progress was made than they have been since 1988 or before.

 

[giuseppeTO]

I can’t read the Holy Fathers mind…

That is the point of the poll. Do we need to read his mind to assume that he means anything more then he has actually stated?

 

[excubitor]

The SSPX will never close its doors. In a hundred years they will be moaning about Vatican 2, just like the Old Catholics still moan about Vatican 1.

Something that’s interesting to observe about the Old Catholics is that they have over time dwindled away in number, they have become increasingly protestantised and now differ little from a liberal protestant sect. I understand that even ordain women and are in communion with the Anglican church. Who would ever have thought that would have been possible from a group that broke off seeking to uphold Catholic tradition.

This just shows what happens when ties are cut from the Pope.

The SSPX hang by a thread with a tenuous link to the Pope, but their mentality is definately schismatic. The Pope has to handle them with kid gloves knowing that at the drop of a hat they could storm off into open schism, to the ruination of souls.

The Pope can basically not tell Bishop Fellay to do anything. He has to negotiate and cajole him. Whatever happened to the days when the Pope was the Supreme Pontiff?

Personally I would prefer the Pope to wield his big stick and excommunicate all the priests of the SSPX who illicitly hear confessions without the approval of the local ordinary. They do this to the peril of souls. There is already a structure in place with Ecclesia Dei which the FSSP utilise. There is no need for any special canonical structures for the SSPX.

I regard it as unavoidable that eventually most if not all SSPX communities will break into full schism. They will then become the New Old Catholics and in one hundred years or less they will be a liberal protestant sect ordaining women bishops. If they think that they can do without a Supreme Pontiff who they MUST obey then they may just learn by bitter experience that they are VERY, VERY wrong. Why should they make the same mistakes made by scores of dissidents a hundred times in the past. Why not learn from history instead of repeating it.

Obey the Pope SSPX, regularise your chapels, seminaries and schools and in a hundred years time your descendants will be Catholics and not liberal protestants.

 

[giuseppeTO]

The SSPX will never close its doors. In a hundred years they will be moaning about Vatican 2, just like the Old Catholics still moan about Vatican 1.

Something that’s interesting to observe about the Old Catholics is that they have over time dwindled away in number, they have become increasingly protestantised and now differ little from a liberal protestant sect. I understand that even ordain women and are in communion with the Anglican church. Who would ever have thought that would have been possible from a group that broke off seeking to uphold Catholic tradition.

This just shows what happens when ties are cut from the Pope.

The SSPX hang by a thread with a tenuous link to the Pope, but their mentality is definately schismatic. The Pope has to handle them with kid gloves knowing that at the drop of a hat they could storm off into open schism, to the ruination of souls.

The Pope can basically not tell Bishop Fellay to do anything. He has to negotiate and cajole him. Whatever happened to the days when the Pope was the Supreme Pontiff?

Personally I would prefer the Pope to wield his big stick and excommunicate all the priests of the SSPX who illicitly hear confessions without the approval of the local ordinary. They do this to the peril of souls. There is already a structure in place with Ecclesia Dei which the FSSP utilise. There is no need for any special canonical structures for the SSPX.

I regard it as unavoidable that eventually most if not all SSPX communities will break into full schism. They will then become the New Old Catholics and in one hundred years or less they will be a liberal protestant sect ordaining women bishops. If they think that they can do without a Supreme Pontiff who they MUST obey then they may just learn by bitter experience that they are VERY, VERY wrong. Why should they make the same mistakes made by scores of dissidents a hundred times in the past. Why not learn from history instead of repeating it.

Obey the Pope SSPX, regularise your chapels, seminaries and schools and in a hundred years time your descendants will be Catholics and not liberal protestants.

Interestingly, I see more Protestant-like behavior from modern priests, bishops, and laity and see them as the ones hanging by a thread to the Pope and in danger of schism. No need to wait 100 years, your description of Old Catholics sounds a lot like modern Catholics… I think the Pope may have the same fear.

 

[ProVobis]

I voted no. I believe there’s a survival issue at stake here.

 

[Abenadar]

This is absolutely fascinating, because your post has nothing to do with reality, and everything to do with your own dislike of the SSPX and lack of charity toward them, and what you would do if you were pope.

The SSPX will never close its doors. In a hundred years they will be moaning about Vatican 2, just like the Old Catholics still moan about Vatican 1.

I guess it’s “moaning” to point out that Vatican II isn’t very clear, and the documents NEED clarification, as the SSPX has been calling for. Interestingly, the Supreme Pontiff agrees.

Something that’s interesting to observe about the Old Catholics is that they have over time dwindled away in number, they have become increasingly protestantised and now differ little from a liberal protestant sect. I understand that even ordain women and are in communion with the Anglican church. Who would ever have thought that would have been possible from a group that broke off seeking to uphold Catholic tradition.

I was under the impression that the Old Catholics failed to accept the dogma of papal infallibility…What dogmas do the SSPX deny???

This just shows what happens when ties are cut from the Pope.

Quite right. Good thing the SSPX hasn’t ever severed ties.

The SSPX hang by a thread with a tenuous link to the Pope, but their mentality is definately schismatic.

Tenuous link??? The SSPX is fully Catholic. If that’s a tenuous link, I think more priests, bishops, and cardinals “in good standing” are on even thinner ice than the SSPX. Their mentality is definitely Catholic. Down with the muddy teachings, up with clear, authentic Catholic teachings! There is no schismatic mentality within the Society (bishops and priests), and it is uncharitable for you to falsely claim there is, and to do so with such certainty. False and misleading claims can be very damaging…please consider what you are doing before you post more garbage like that.

The Pope has to handle them with kid gloves knowing that at the drop of a hat they could storm off into open schism, to the ruination of souls.

Absolutely not. The last 20 years has shown the SSPX clinging to Rome in spite of Rome turning its back on the SSPX and wanting nothing to do with it. It’s Rome that turned away from the SSPX in their time of need, not the SSPX turning from Rome. The SSPX clearly understands that they need the Church even while they have been left by the wayside…

The Pope can basically not tell Bishop Fellay to do anything. He has to negotiate and cajole him. Whatever happened to the days when the Pope was the Supreme Pontiff?

You tell me! Unlike today’s gospel of the shepherd leaving the 99 to go after the one, the SSPX has continuously been the one searching Rome out. It wasn’t until about 2007 when finally Pope Benedict started reciprocating.

Personally I would prefer the Pope to wield his big stick and excommunicate all the priests of the SSPX who illicitly hear confessions without the approval of the local ordinary.

That’s because you are heavy handed and have your own perverted sense of “justice” firmly in your mind, whereas the pope realizes that the supreme law of the Church is the salvation of souls and is willing to take the necessary steps to fix the problem, not blow the whole thing wide open to the detriment of souls.

They do this to the peril of souls. There is already a structure in place with Ecclesia Dei which the FSSP utilise. There is no need for any special canonical structures for the SSPX.

The SSPX is simply continuing what they have done since 1970, though. Since then, things have gotten even worse in the Church. Everybody (but a few with eyes “wide shut”) see that. The SSPX is fighting for its survival for the primary purpose of the salvation of souls through the traditional sacraments. The FSSP was simply JPII’s reactionary answer to his mishandling of the entire SSPX situation.

I regard it as unavoidable that eventually most if not all SSPX communities will break into full schism.

So much for the second theological virtue, to say nothing of charity…The SSPX never has been in schism, and it’s not what they want. Why would they suddenly do a 180?

They will then become the New Old Catholics and in one hundred years or less they will be a liberal protestant sect ordaining women bishops.

I, on the other hand, believe that the NO will have fallen by the wayside in 100 years, the SSPX will be regularized, and Lefebvre will be well on his way toward canonization. I won’t be alive then, but would you care to make a wager anyway?

If they think that they can do without a Supreme Pontiff who they MUST obey then they may just learn by bitter experience that they are VERY, VERY wrong.

Oh, stop being so silly and melodramatic! The SSPX is about the only group in the Church who fully understands that they need the Supreme Pontiff etc. Start preaching to all the wayward priests, bishops, and cardinals who are currently in “full communion”, not to mention the hundreds of millions of “in-name-only” Catholics out there, will ya???

Why should they make the same mistakes made by scores of dissidents a hundred times in the past. Why not learn from history instead of repeating it.

Good thinking. Let’s start by reading the Syllabus of Errors…HAHAHA.

Obey the Pope SSPX, regularise your chapels, seminaries and schools and in a hundred years time your descendants will be Catholics and not liberal protestants.

Good advice. I thank God that, thus far, there aren’t any liberal protestants in the SSPX…that’s more than I can say for the **majority **of American catholics and their priests who adore and support the current president and are, basically, liberal protestants.

 

[Abenadar]

Oh yeah, and to the original post…

Giuseppe, I think neither of us believe that the SSPX should close up shop until further notice. I really think the pope’s words are meant for the pope’s men: the SSPX has no legitimate ministry, i.e. none that is officially sanctioned by Rome. On the other hand, the SSPX has been operating all this time because of the crisis in the Church and with the idea that, while the hierarchy doesn’t supply the jurisdiction, nevertheless, ecclesia supplet. Remember the ordinations in Germany last year…The bishops of Germany petitioned the pope to do something, but the date of the ordinations came and went and the pope didn’t say a word. He clearly understands that the SSPX is still going to operate and has given his tacit approval.

 

[ljubim]

The SSPX and the Vatican began a series of bi-monthly discussions last fall concerning, ostensibly, official interpretations of some of the documents of The Second Vatican Council.

Do you believe that when the Pope stated that the SSPX currently ’ … exercises no legitimate ministry within the church…’, that he intended that the SSPX should immediately close its chapels and schools, stop ordaining priests, close down its seminaries, and all priests and laity should report to diocesan churches until a canonical structure is agreed to?

Could you post a source please? I’m not questioning the accuracy… I’d really love to know the context.

Without context, I’ll say no. It’s a trust issue… the Traditional Mass is my all, and it was the last door I knocked on before total insanity, I could find no peace of heart at local Masses. Liturgical abuse tears me to shreds inside, and God led me to the TLM out of the most loving care, and out of this initial trust my love for God has increased (and the first reason I went there was because of fleeing from what was outside, now I go because of what’s inside ). If the nearest parish was SSPX, after much research about its status or whatever we always argue about here, I probably would have ended up there.

 

[excubitor]

Interestingly, I see more Protestant-like behavior from modern priests, bishops, and laity and see them as the ones hanging by a thread to the Pope and in danger of schism. No need to wait 100 years, your description of Old Catholics sounds a lot like modern Catholics… I think the Pope may have the same fear.

Maybe so, however the one holy apostolic catholic church led on earth by the successor of Peter has the ability to recover and restore orthodoxy in its fellowship. Schismatic pseudo-catholic churches do not have this ability.

I must say, that in liberal catholicism I never hear about threats by modernist bishops that they are going to do whatever they like regardless of what the Pope says. They may still be disobedient but they don’t take their disobedience to the extreme of setting up an alternative hierarchy and giving illicit confessions, and anointing bishops against the express instructions of the Pope.

Whatever their many faults might be, at least utter rebellion is not one of them. The same cannot be said of traditionalist Catholic communities. And I’m a traditional catholic myself who attends a Latin Mass weekly.

Rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft. So says the scriptures.

 

[giuseppeTO]

I must say, that in liberal catholicism I never hear about threats by modernist bishops that they are going to do whatever they like regardless of what the Pope says.

Wow, you really have your head in the sand, my friend. They do not threaten, they merely ignore the Pope’s wishes.

They may still be disobedient …

…at least you acknowledge that.

but they don’t take their disobedience to the extreme of setting up an alternative hierarchy…

You don’t know what you are talking about. The SSPX has no hierarchy other than the one in place when it was canonically recognized in 1970.

Whatever their many faults might be, at least utter rebellion is not one of them.

Calling the Pope’s actions unfortunate and ill-advised, as they did after the lifting of the excommunications, is rebellious and displays a schismatic attitude. That is why the Pope, furious over their rebellion, had to issue a letter of rebuke.

And I’m a traditional catholic myself who attends a Latin Mass weekly.

Well, I can certainly believe you attend a Latin Mass but …

 

[giuseppeTO]

I understand that the Society does not exist within canonical structure that officially reports through the hierarchy to the Pope. It therefore, cannot claim to have a recognized ministry in the church. The Pope has clearly stated this on more than one occasion - it is a fact of the current state of affairs. He has not asked the Society to cease and desist from ordaining new priests until the matter is rectified. In My Humble Opinion, the Pope does not expect the SSPX to stop ordaining priests nor does he particularly wish them to stop, nor to close down their seminaries, nor to shut down their chapels and schools and report to the nearest diocesan church. Many detractors assume that this is what the Pope implies when he makes statements about the lack of an “approved” canonical structure. But this Pope says what he means and if he meant the Society to shut itself down, he would say so. On the contrary, I believe he wants and needs the SSPX to stay healthy with a tremendous flow of vocations, and to reintegrate them into the church hierarchy.

 

[MerryCatholic]

The SSPX and the Vatican began a series of bi-monthly discussions last fall concerning, ostensibly, official interpretations of some of the documents of The Second Vatican Council.

Do you believe that when the Pope stated that the SSPX currently ’ … exercises no legitimate ministry within the church…’, that he intended that the SSPX should immediately close its chapels and schools, stop ordaining priests, close down its seminaries, and all priests and laity should report to diocesan churches until a canonical structure is agreed to?

No.

 

[crazzeto]

I think that he intended to clarify that SSPX and it’s teachings are not to be considered legitimate Catholic teachings, a point which I believe must be made clear. The fact is the more orthodox/traidtional one becomes as a Catholic the more likely you are to start running into SSPX materials spouting off their version of Catholisism which in many cases attempts to condem the Church, as she is, as heretical. Some, may be lulled into becoming schismatic.

I think the Pontiff is merely prudently trying to guard against this, as he tried to begin a process of reconciling SSPX with holy month church.

 

[giuseppeTO]

I think that he intended to clarify that SSPX and it’s teachings are not to be considered legitimate Catholic teachings…

Hmm. I don’t know of any “SSPX teachings”. They follow what the church has always taught and have not produced a “new” teaching. What part of this has become illegitimate? Do you realize that you are suggesting that previous to the Council, the church taught error?

 

[excubitor]

I understand that the Society does not exist within canonical structure that officially reports through the hierarchy to the Pope. It therefore, cannot claim to have a recognized ministry in the church. The Pope has clearly stated this on more than one occasion - it is a fact of the current state of affairs. He has not asked the Society to cease and desist from ordaining new priests until the matter is rectified. In My Humble Opinion, the Pope does not expect the SSPX to stop ordaining priests nor does he particularly wish them to stop, nor to close down their seminaries, nor to shut down their chapels and schools and report to the nearest diocesan church. Many detractors assume that this is what the Pope implies when he makes statements about the lack of an “approved” canonical structure. But this Pope says what he means and if he meant the Society to shut itself down, he would say so. On the contrary, I believe he wants and needs the SSPX to stay healthy with a tremendous flow of vocations, and to reintegrate them into the church hierarchy.

Errr?? Is everyone missing something important here? SSPX confessions ARE NOT VALID. They do not absolve sins, therefore many catholics who have been caught up in this outfit with its schismatic element are committing sacrilege if indeed they are partaking of the blessed sacrament in a state of mortal sin. Is there anyone here who really thinks this lamentable state of affairs is what the Pope wants?

When the SSPX started it was originally just mass centres where Catholics could come to assist at a Latin Mass. Catholics still went to their local parishes for confession. Since the illicit consecrations the SSPX have taken on ever more functions that are proper to the local ordinary and have done so in direct opposition to the established hierarchy of the church. They even illicitly marry their young people. This means that the SSPX have natural marriages like protestants, their marriages are not sacramental.

Hand’s up how many here believe that the Pope thinks that is a good idea?

From what I can gather this is the canonical status of the SSPX.
Sacrament of Confession - INVALID and ILLICIT
Sacrament of Marriage - INVALID and ILLICIT
Sacrament of Baptism - VALID
Sacrament of Holy Orders - VALID but ILLICIT
Sacrament of Confirmation - INVALID and ILLICIT
Sacrament of Eucharist - VALID

Hand’s up again how many believe that the Pope is ambivalent about this and does not particularly want the SSPX to stop?

Here is a great schismatic quote from Bishop Fellay
“Rome’s failure to understand our position is such that if today we accepted their agreement, tomorrow we would have to undergo exactly the same treatment as Saint Peter’s Fraternity, which is muzzled, and being led where it does not want to go”.

How awful !!! The SSPX would have to be led by the Pope. How shocking. We can’t have that now can we. How dare the Pope assume that he can lead us?? Fighting words Bp Fellay. High fives all round after that one, I’m sure.

As recently as one year ago Pope Benedict XVI stated in Ecclesiae unitatem

“However, the doctrinal questions obviously remain and until they are clarified the Society has no canonical status in the Church and its ministers cannot legitimately exercise any ministry.”

So clearly if they have no status and are illegitimate then it follows as night follows day that they are a schismatic sect. If they were not a schismatic sect then they would have a canonical status in the church and would be able to legitimately exercise their ministry.

 

[crazzeto]

Hmm. I don’t know of any “SSPX teachings”. They follow what the church has always taught and have not produced a “new” teaching. What part of this has become illegitimate? Do you realize that you are suggesting that previous to the Council, the church taught error?

I’m making no suggestion, in fact the pope did with his very words. SSPX does in fact have teachings of their own, that is that the Pope can in fact err as well as council. This contradicts the constant teaching of the Church.

 

[giuseppeTO]

I’m making no suggestion, in fact the pope did with his very words. SSPX does in fact have teachings of their own, that is that the Pope can in fact err as well as council. This contradicts the constant teaching of the Church.

The Pope can, in fact, err. Please review the proclamations of the First Vatican Council to fully understand what we believe as Catholics regarding infallibility and when it applies and when it doesn’t.

The problem with V2 is not as much the Council or even the documents, but how they’ve been implemented and distorted into something they were never intended to be, according to folks no less than Pope Benedict himself.

 

[crazzeto]

The Pope can, in fact, err. Please review the proclamations of the First Vatican Council to fully understand what we believe as Catholics regarding infallibility and when it applies and when it doesn’t.

The problem with V2 is not as much the Council or even the documents, but how they’ve been implemented and distorted into something they were never intended to be, according to folks no less than Pope Benedict himself.

And here we go, in order to accept SSPX one must in fact deny that the Church is protected from error. Sorry, SSPX own argumentation rejects their position. If one wants to be genuninly a traditional Catholic, they should start with obedience to the Magisterium.

 

[iluvburpees]

And here we go, in order to accept SSPX one must in fact deny that the Church is protected from error.

“The Church” is not Vatican II, regardless of what many want to believe. “The Church” is not the ambiguous language and teachings stemming from Vatican II. “The Church” is not the abuses not even in the original documents of Vatican II.

“The Church” is what has been upheld for all the centuries it’s been in existence, not novel ideas that contradict previous teaching (which Benedict XVI himself has admitted at one time).

You seem to imply that the Church could not have taught error in Vatican II. That is true, the Church can never teach error. But individuals within the Church, even the popes, can, in fact, state falsehood unless they are protected by infallibility. Since Vatican II was not dogmatic and was instead pastoral, it was open to error. You seem to deny this, and if you do deny this, you make the claim that the popes and bishops can never make a mistake. This would be heresy.

Sorry, SSPX own argumentation rejects their position. If one wants to be genuninly a traditional Catholic, they should start with obedience to the Magisterium.

One is truly Catholic when he obeys the Magisterium so long as the Magisterium does not contradict Christ and his teachings. If they do, the Catholic faithul are not only allowed, but obliged, to reject their errors and cling to Tradition.

Blind obedience to the pope is not Catholic. If that were the case, then St. Paul was “Schismatic” when he rebuked St. Peter (the first and greatest of the popes).