Questions from someone who grew up in the SSPX

  • Thread starter Thread starter Matone
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
jcrichton said:
Wait, so that’s not a Catholic site?

On the heading they claim to be defending the Catholic Faith; how can they claim to represent Catholic Values (Faith) and not be Catholic?
I actually need to know, so please include as much info as possible.
Click to expand...
If you’re referring to MHFamily, yes, they’re outside the Church. The answer to your question is very easy. Because they reject the papacy today, even if they accepted the papacy before Vatican II. In a nutshell, they believe all of us, including the SSPX are damned to eternal hellfire.
 
Thank you everyone for all of the kind advice and help. I certainly relieved many good resources to consider, and I will continue to consider all of your points. As you can probably imagine, it is a difficult decision to make to leave the community that one grew up in. I hope to be able to make the right decision. I want to follow the Catholic Church as best as I can. I hope you will keep me in your prayers. If anyone has anything additional to add please do so.
 
Point taken. However I would never suggest the Catholic Church is not the true church. I do however think that mistakes may have been made by members of the church… there is quite a bit of historical precedent for that.
 
All members of all churches make some mistakes. To err is human. I think to the degree the Church makes some mistakes - for example, by setting aside the TLM and the Rosary and other devotions - they do correct themselves later, but sometimes the correction may not happen as quickly as people would like. Which is understandable, we have finite lifespans and these things are very important to people who love them and have done them their whole life. But we must have patience and keep pushing for positive changes.
 
Where I Iive a local SSPX priest described the ordinary form as ‘evil’. He was not alone. The judgement of the SSPX founder in consecrating Bp Williamson, whose problems with understanding history and falling for conspiracy theories are well known, should give anyone cause for serious concern about the judgement and competence of the founder. Bishop Williamson was one out of four. The equivalent appointments made by the Church itself, in which an appointee has shown themselves to be so unsuitable, represent an absolutely minuscule proportion, and none that I know of are as serious misjudgement as that of the appointment of Bp Williamson.
 
Hello

So-where did the sspx gain the authority of Peter to decide these things?

Judgement of the faith based on feelings or the actions of men leads to error. This is how Protestants often operate.

One can find devout people and a great mass. The main point is the RCC traces its authority from Christ through Peter and the apostles. Christ said the gates of hell would not prevail and that he would be with us until the end.

Yes many are poorly catechised. One could argue whether that’s the fault of the church or its members.

A breakaway from that divine authority is instead the authority of men
 
Last edited:
It’s a shame that Bishop Williamson is so defiant, like many of those in the SSPX. I listen with an open mind and always think what a shame. We need devout Catholics who can teach the faith, especially the ones that are Traditionalists. We need them more than ever. They have a great understanding of Church history and doctrines, the liturgy is reverently celebrated, yet there they are, from the outside looking in watching the rest of the world pick apart the Catholic Church. Now I think from what I read Bishop Williamson is at odds with those he was once part of. What are the good fruits worth, if at the end of the day, further schism and separation is the result?
 
No you’re right. The SSPX has no infallibility. I do take issue with some of the sentiment that one could not take issue with the church if they saw members of the church, even the pope, doing things contrary to Catholic traditions. I do not think it is fair to simply say well this is the Catholic Church so nothing can be questioned. There are conditions for speaking infallibly. If you study church history, there have been errors before and immoral bishops and Popes before. I am not saying that the SSPX is definitely correct, but I do think their criticisms at the very least warrant an answer. Simply saying that they have no right to criticize does not help answer my questions very much.
 
Last edited:
See these are the kinds of things that worry me about the SSPX. I too have heard priests call the ordinary form evil, and an offense against God even. That does not sit right with me, especially since I know many devout Catholics who attend the Ordinary form of the mass. Williamson was sent packing years ago, but it does seem questionable that he was selected, although I don’t know enough about what he was like then to really judge it.
 
Last edited:
This is exactly what I meant when I said it was “borderline heretical”… not criticism of the Church or even aspects of the OF Mass (I too criticize how it is celebrated in many parishes)… but to suggest that a form of the Mass, promulgated on the Apostolic authority of a Pope (and Blessed to boot) in response to an Ecumenical Council, could be inherently evil or irreverent by its own nature? …that I would consider heretical. That goes too far.
 
Yes I agree. And depending on who you ask you will get a different answer on this. As a Catholic though who only knows the SSPX it definitely makes me extremely apprehensive to attend a ordinary form mass. I’m sure people can understand why that is the case. Simply because I am afraid of doing the wrong thing. And I don’t say that to sound pretentious.
 
Last edited:
Hi, Catholicos!

So the MHF is anti-Catholic but it claims that it represents the Catholic Church?

I’m quite removed from most things, where can I get that information, since going to their site would not provide what you’ve claimed (rejection of the Papacy)?

Thank you.

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Hi!

I fully concur. Yet, referencing errors of the past through hindsight and our present understanding is unjust and shows a determinate partiality (discrimination)–it is the way that non-Catholics (high on the scope are the Jehovah Witnesses) view Scriptures (their interpretations) and Church and secular history.

The schism between East and West came about very central elements of the Faith ('Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son) and the issue of Authority (the East refuses to acknowledge the Papacy–even when the Church fought the heresy of Arianism which the East’s Bishops supported).

I can prove through Scriptures that Jesus had a savior; the Church does not Teach that, so should I begin a movement to separate Believers from the Church because I believe that I am right about that “savior” thing?

This is what each of us have to take into consideration… did Jesus Found One Body or many bodies or did Jesus intended that when some agency was not content with how things were done they could erect a new body?

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Catholicos said:
What are the good fruits worth, if at the end of the day, further schism and separation is the result?
Click to expand...
Well said, Catholicos!

Schism and splintering of the Body of Christ cannot be attributed to the Holy Spirit.

The other Paraclete was not sent to raze the Body of Christ but to Edify it!

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Last edited:
Can you quote where the infallibility of the Church Taught error, as in heresy?

Maran atha!

Angel
 
I do understand that. But you don’t have to attend OF Masses. Like I said, you could seek out the FSSP or other EF Mass communities fully recognized by the Holy See.
 
Matone said:
. The main, criticism, and the one which holds the most water in my eyes, is that the Ordinary form of the mass, deemphasizes the sacrafice, which is what the mass is about. Other criticisms which are worrying to me, are that Protestant ministers had (name removed by moderator)ut on the formation of the mass.( I have seen this written in a few places, if it is wrong, please let me know. Also there seems to be markedly less emphasis on the real presence in the mass. Could you direct me to or give me yourself, some responses to these criticisms
Click to expand...
This article addresses some of your questions, with sympathy toward the concern about the sacrificial nature of the Mass (particularly Eucharistic Prayer II, which is the most often criticized).

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/com...duced-was-part-of-the-hermeneutic-of-rupture/
 
Matone said:
. And I do not find convincing the thought that papal authorization is all that is needed for something to be absolutely true. I know that the Pope is only infallible in certain cases. The pope never spoke infallibly on the promulgation of the Ordinary form, as far as I know. Again, I might be wrong, I am searching for answers, so let me know please if you have information I do not.
Click to expand...
This isn’t so much a matter of infallibility as it is of authority and jurisdiction.

As I understand it, the SSPX acknowledges that the Mass celebrated by the vast majority of Catholics around the world is valid in principle, but problematic in many ways. The reality that this is a valid Mass of the Church, promulgated by a Pope and accepted by every subsequent Pope, ought to put your mind at ease about attending one, even if you believe that the Latin Mass is preferable in nearly every way.
 
Matone said:
It seems to me that the church today is losing members, and that is one reason I am apprehensive to leave the society…

is the SSPX in schism? I obviously don’t not think it is, or I would have left already. Does the church consider it to be? I cannot find much that is reliable on this topic.
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church, with a billion members, cannot be compared with the tiny SSPX. The Church is growing worldwide. Even if it is not growing in some secularist countries, that is not a reason to be outside the Church. Quite the opposite.

Is the SSPX in schism? That has never been declared by the Church or the SSPX leadership. They are certainly in disobedience to the legitimate bishops of the Church. Pope St. John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict, would have bent over backward to accommodate Archbishop Lefebvre. They would have been his best friends and supporters. Instead, he heaped abuse and slander on them. He should have trembled at the very thought of how gravely sinful this was.

The SSPX is functioning as a parallel church, with its’ own (hidden) financial backers. Flee this evil. Come into full communion with Christ’s Church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top