E
Eric_Olsen
Guest
that and other Bishops who dont believe in the real presence, believe in female ordination and gay marriage.
- Status
H
Holly3278
Guest
I heard about this and while I don’t know much about it, I am just praying for God’s will to be done. 
C
Christus_Rex_1
Guest
Have you ever wondered why it is forbidden, and even illegal in some countries, to simply questions certain alledged “facts” about the holocaust? Here’s a clew…
zundelsite.org/english/antiprop/plaques/index.html
T
tuviskazinai
Guest
First of all, this is off-topic, though I am willing to move it elsewhere if you like.
Secondly, maybe I am dumb, but I don’t get the “clue” as to why it is forbidden. I see a bunch of big pictures of a plaque and the word “lie” half a million times (oops, sorry, I should reduce that number – a handful of times)…then I see, squirreled away at the bottom of the page, a deceptive chart that cites a bunch of sources’ varying numbers without spending even a moment asking whether those sources are credible. I’ll bet you there’s a story behind each source and that some are more reputable than others.
This site doesn’t give us anything of substance. I am not convinced of its “arguments” (if you can call them that) just because it was written in big red ink. The only thing I take from it is the insinuation that people’s attempts to publicize the scale of the Holocaust are more about “anti-German propaganda” than sincere remembrance of the dead. That, to me, is just insulting. And it’s because the only way that people can make the revisionist case is apparently by insulting people’s intelligence, that I am so worried about Mr. Williamson. (So maybe this is on topic, after all!)
Peace,
+AMDG+
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
hosemonkey;
The prodigal son, when he returned home, did so after realizing he was wrong. This isn’t the case for the SSPX members and they won’t be returning to the Church, without expecting the Church to conform to their desires.
This is whats dangerous about it.
Jim
They’re not returning to the Church, because they’ve come to a realization that they’ve been wrong, but rather, the Pope is allowing them to return, while still in error.
The prodigal son, when he returned home, did so after realizing he was wrong. This isn’t the case for the SSPX members and they won’t be returning to the Church, without expecting the Church to conform to their desires.
This is whats dangerous about it.
They’ll bring division more than anything else, unless the accept Vatican II, the Novus Ordo and that their Catholic brothers and sisters, have no desire to return to Pre-Vatican II days.
They won’t be for us, unless we reject what they reject.
Jim
H
hosemonkey
Guest
J
JReducation
Guest
We also have to wait and see the wording. The Holy Father may lift the excommunication, be leave the censure in place. Remember that he has said that they must accept certain conditions: the pontiff’s authority, the authority of Vatican II, and submit obediently to the authority of the Holy Father.
Until those conditions are met, they may remain in an irregular state. Not knowing what has been said behind closed doors, the bishops of the SSPX may have accepted those terms. Let’s wait and see.
JR
J
JReducation
Guest
Bold is mine
Yes. They are Catholic bishops… Their consecration as bishops was never in question. They have always been valid bishops and successors to the Apostles. In other words, they had Apostolic Succession. This is why it is very dangerous to leave them out there somewhere.
However, depending on what agreements are reached between them and the Holy Father, they may be suspended bishops. For example, the SSPX priests were never excommunicated, but they are suspended. The news has not said that the suspension is being lifted. The priests cannot perform valid marriages or absolve from sin while they are suspended.
We have to wait and see what the terms of the re-communication are.
Fraternally,
JR
B
bobzills
Guest
Yes. As the excommunications have been lifted, there still remain a few questions such as:Bold is mine
Yes. They are Catholic bishops… Their consecration as bishops was never in question. They have always been valid bishops and successors to the Apostles. In other words, they had Apostolic Succession. This is why it is very dangerous to leave them out there somewhere.
However, depending on what agreements are reached between them and the Holy Father, they may be suspended bishops. For example, the SSPX priests were never excommunicated, but they are suspended. The news has not said that the suspension is being lifted. The priests cannot perform valid marriages or absolve from sin while they are suspended.
We have to wait and see what the terms of the re-communication are.
Fraternally,
JR
The validity of marriages and confession at SSPX;
The view of SSPX on marriage annulments;
The excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre;
The wild statements of Bishop Williamson on conspiracy theories, 9/11, holocaust, the protocols of the elders of zion, the place of women in the Church and in society.
J
JReducation
Guest
It’s going to be very difficult to validate those marriages. Those people may have to remarry. I am not a canon lawyer. Therefore, I can’t really say how this is to be done.
Williamson’s theories are out there, but they are not really theological. They do not fall within the scope of the Church to correct, other than to tell him to knock it off.
JR
C
Cider
Guest
:extrahappy::extrahappy::extrahappy::extrahappy:
It’s a wonderful day. I’m so thrilled that this came to pass.
It’s a wonderful day. I’m so thrilled that this came to pass.
B
blossom02
Guest
Does any one know how many other SSPX bishops and priests there are?
C
Cider
Guest
AFAIK there are only the 4 Bishops, I believe their are approx 500 priests.
D
dotcomrefugee
Guest
Wow!
People are still excommunicated? I didn’t know.
People are still excommunicated? I didn’t know.
A
Adonis33
Guest
Exactly. Some people seem to think that the Holocaust is a matter of doctrine - it’s not. I disagree with his opinion - just as I disagree with his theory of 9/11. However his errant views of history are not reasons to lift the excommunications.It’s going to be very difficult to validate those marriages. Those people may have to remarry. I am not a canon lawyer. Therefore, I can’t really say how this is to be done.
Williamson’s theories are out there, but they are not really theological. They do not fall within the scope of the Church to correct, other than to tell him to knock it off.
JR
I think Pope Benedicts actions are a beautiful thing.
T
Timothysis
Guest
What makes you think that sspx priests are going to bring “new vigor and vitality to the Church?” I can guarantee that, at least, 999 out of 1000 Catholics have no idea who the sspx is,nor or they interested in their brand of Catholicism. What makes everyone believe the Pope Benedict is going to turn the keys of the Vatican over to the sspx? This action by the Holy Father was a very generous offer to the sspx to bring them back into the fold of the Church. The most interesting thing to see will be *how the sspx will respond. * There is a very wide gulf to be crossed before things are settled.
J
JReducation
Guest
We must also keep in mind that the excommunication of the bishops was lifted. The SSPX priests remain suspended. Therefore, they have no faculties to witness marriages or hear confessions. We do not know if the four bishops will remain suspended.
SSPX priests were never excommunicated. They have been suspended and the decree does not lift the suspension. It may happen, but has not.
If we look at the Transalpine Redemptorists and the Society of Christ the King there were conditions.
- The Transalpine Redemptorists had to give up their claim to being Redemptorists, because the Redemptorist Congregation would not accept them as long as they insisted in being monks and 100% EF. The argument of the Redemptorist Congregation and General Superior was a valid one. The Redemptorists are not a religious order; therefore, they cannot be monks. They are a clerical congregation. Second, the Redemptorist General Chapter accepted the Ordinary Form of the mass as proclaimed by Paul VI. They could not allow one segment of their community to dissent from what is in their consitutions or change their constitutions except by another General Chapter where the entire membership votes. The Transalpine Redemptorists had to break off from the Redemptorist family and become the Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer with their own constitution and their own major superiors. They may not interface with the other Redemptorists.
- Both the Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer and the Society of Christ the King had to accept that they would answer to the Ecclesia Dei Commission. And their leadership is subject to the authority of the Commision. They may work in any diocese where they are welcome by the bishop and approved by the Commission.
- The Commission will be the buffer between them and the local bishops and Councils of Major Religious Superiors.
On the positive side, the Sons of the Holy Redeemer and the Society of Christ the King have done wonderful missionary work in Latin America. The bishops and Major Religious Superiors have praised them for their dedication and their holiness.
This is what they bring to the table, great humility and a strong desire to serve the Church. It’s the best gift that anyone can offer God and the Church.
If the SSPX comes with that same humility and desire to serve the Church, they will be very effective and a blessing. If they continue to be obstinate about Vatican II and other points, they will always be in some kind of conflict with the hierarchy.
My take on this is that Bishop Fellay is a very holy man with a big heart. I believe him to be a humble man. Williamson comes across as a loose canon. The others I have never heard anything from them or about them.
JR
J
JReducation
Guest
We don’t know if his suspension is being lifted. His excommunication is being lifted. There is a difference. In addition, you can’t deny a validly consecrated bishop the title. You can only take away his faculties. He continues to be a successor of the Apostles, whether he is suspended or excommunicated.
JR
G
GodsGadfly
Guest
The Vatican has issued a FAQ which addresses many of the points speculated about here.
In short, the bishops are no longer excommunicated, but the bishops and priests are all suspended, so their liturgies and sacraments are still illicit.
They are “separated from the Church” but “not in schism,” whatever that means.
Now, here’s the puzzler:
normally, if a priest has his faculties suspended, he cannot offer public liturgies or sacraments. If he does, he’ll be excommunicated.
In this case, they’re being un-excommunicated (?), but they are still suspended. They are still operating their ministries.
Is this some kind of weird test of their humility? Basically, to fully comply with what the letter, and the FAQ, say, the SSPX would have to shut down all their operations and act as ordinary laity for a while.
On their website, they have some responses, and they welcome the Vatican’s invitation to dialogue.
What they say in the different documents at the above link is that Popes Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI have all said there are huge problems in the Church, and that common sense shows there are huge problems in the Church. They acknowledge that they have theological problems with the Council, which they believe to be at the root of the problems in the Church. Of course, Pope Benedict holds that the Council has been misused and misinterpreted to promote all sorts of bad agendas.
The real question will be whether the SSPX accept that the Council itself has been misinterpreted.
And exactly what their positions are remain confusing. In some palces on their website, they assert their loyalty to the Pope.
Then, in some sections of the website, they list their criticisms of Vatican II, the teachings of JPII, and even some of the teachings of B16.
Then they have this whole section that’s basically “Articles on positions that we don’t agree with at all.” Yet, unlike most websites, they don’t offer refutations of these viewpoints. It’s like, “We don’t agree with the opinions on this page, but we want you to see what they’rea ll about, just so you can decide for yourself.” That’s where they have all the sedevacantist stuff, real outright Vatican II stuff, etc.
But the main objections of the SSPX have to do with
a) Liturgy: B16 agrees with them, mostly
b) Ecumenism: B16 agrees with them, mostly
c) _Lumen Gentium), particularly the infamous “responsible parenting” passage (which, reportedly, Cardinal Ottaviani vociferously opposed on the Council floor): not sure what B16 thinks, but a lot of “loyal to the Pope” laity and priests agree with them.
Most of the arguments raised by the SSPX were also raised by Cardinal Ottaviani, who was prefect of the Holy Office/CDF during the Council itself.
In short, the bishops are no longer excommunicated, but the bishops and priests are all suspended, so their liturgies and sacraments are still illicit.
They are “separated from the Church” but “not in schism,” whatever that means.
Now, here’s the puzzler:
normally, if a priest has his faculties suspended, he cannot offer public liturgies or sacraments. If he does, he’ll be excommunicated.
In this case, they’re being un-excommunicated (?), but they are still suspended. They are still operating their ministries.
Is this some kind of weird test of their humility? Basically, to fully comply with what the letter, and the FAQ, say, the SSPX would have to shut down all their operations and act as ordinary laity for a while.
On their website, they have some responses, and they welcome the Vatican’s invitation to dialogue.
What they say in the different documents at the above link is that Popes Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI have all said there are huge problems in the Church, and that common sense shows there are huge problems in the Church. They acknowledge that they have theological problems with the Council, which they believe to be at the root of the problems in the Church. Of course, Pope Benedict holds that the Council has been misused and misinterpreted to promote all sorts of bad agendas.
The real question will be whether the SSPX accept that the Council itself has been misinterpreted.
And exactly what their positions are remain confusing. In some palces on their website, they assert their loyalty to the Pope.
Then, in some sections of the website, they list their criticisms of Vatican II, the teachings of JPII, and even some of the teachings of B16.
Then they have this whole section that’s basically “Articles on positions that we don’t agree with at all.” Yet, unlike most websites, they don’t offer refutations of these viewpoints. It’s like, “We don’t agree with the opinions on this page, but we want you to see what they’rea ll about, just so you can decide for yourself.” That’s where they have all the sedevacantist stuff, real outright Vatican II stuff, etc.
But the main objections of the SSPX have to do with
a) Liturgy: B16 agrees with them, mostly
b) Ecumenism: B16 agrees with them, mostly
c) _Lumen Gentium), particularly the infamous “responsible parenting” passage (which, reportedly, Cardinal Ottaviani vociferously opposed on the Council floor): not sure what B16 thinks, but a lot of “loyal to the Pope” laity and priests agree with them.
Most of the arguments raised by the SSPX were also raised by Cardinal Ottaviani, who was prefect of the Holy Office/CDF during the Council itself.
J
JReducation
Guest
To be in schism is to be juridically separated from the Church of Rome as are the Orthodox. It does not deny their Apostolic succession. It simple states that despite their apostolic succession, they are not in communion with Peter either in part or as a whole.
This is not necessarily always the case. A priest can be suspended, celebrate the sacraments illicitly and remain in communion with the Church. He is not excommunicated unless this is stated in the decree of suspension. Take for example a priest who gets a dispensation. He gets married, has five children a a dog. He decides to celebrate mass. He can do so validly. He is celebrating an illicit mass, but valid. Does he get excommunicated? No. The decree of dispensation simply declares that the priest must put aside his clerical state (not loose it), surrender his right to function as a priest except in cases of life and death. It does not mention excommunication nor does canon law mention it.
They can do whatever they want to do, but it is still illicit.
No they would not. They would have to petition Rome for their prelature and accept whatever conditions the Pope puts on the table before he gives them their own prelature.
In other words, the real question is whether the SSPX agrees with the Pope’s understanding of Vatican II.
The bottom line for full communion with the Church is always whether or not the group agrees to follow the Pope’s interpretations of the events and the documents of Vatican II and what came later, rather than their own interpretation. What many people, not the SSPX, but the laity, do not understand is that John Paul II and Benedict XVI are saying that Catholics do not have the choice of picking and choosing what things we take from the Pope and what we don’t, because that’s creating a second magisterium. We take everything that the Pope says or we leave it.
Fraternally,
JR
- Status