Questions from someone who grew up in the SSPX

[jcrichton]

Hi!

Do you see what I’m driving at?

Having a difference of opinion or even committing personal sin/error does not make the Church culpable of Teaching heresy or of being apostate.

Say, I broke into a wealthy man’s home and stole millions from his safe; then I take some of that money and help out the needy; take some more and supported the Church’s activities… is the Church culpable of my sins or is she condoning my sins?

Clearly, the answer is no.

I would love to study with you these accusations they have against the Church so that we could both benefit from researching Church history.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[De_Maria]

Hello to everyone here.

Hi. Thanks for your questions.

I am writing with some questions that I have. First I would like to give a little background on who I am. I was raised in a family that attended the SSPX churches my entire life…

1. my first question is about the mass, I was brought up being told that the ordinary form, or as I was taught new mass, was irreverent and disrespectful…

Well, I can tell you that it isn’t true. I’m old enough that for the first few years of my life, I attended what we now call the Tridentine form of the Mass. In those days, that was the norm. And everyone was supposed to attend. But there was less reverence in that than there is in the Novus Ordu. Why?

Well, think about it. All the regular people went to that Mass. All the people that go to the Novus Ordu today, were the people that attended the Tridentine Latin Mass back then. And they didn’t understand Latin. So, they either prayed the Rosary or some other devotion that was permitted by the Church. Or they milled around and tried not to be too bored. In fact, many of them simply walked in and out of Church.

Today, only a few rebels that are on fire for whatever reason, attend the Tridentine Mass. But the Rabble. The people that Christ came for, are not there. Those are the people Christ came to save. So, the Church has to attract them and bring them in with a Liturgy that they can understand.

Again I have seen very few. Also I have read and heard of many abuses to the mass, and I think most people akcnowledge this is a problem.

I don’t. One abuse is too many. But the people shouting fire are generally people who don’t have any understanding of the Rubrics.

So my question is can anyone provide me with the case for the new mass, …

The Tridentine used to be the Novus Ordu today. Some 500 years ago, it replaced the even older local forms which were being used at the time. Those forms were very close to the Liturgy we use today.

1. my second question is about the safety of the church today.

The Church has been around 2000 years. I wouldn’t worry about it.

As a college student most of my contemporaries who were raised Catholic left the faith. However, most of my SSPX contemporaries are still practicing Catholics.

No, they’re not. They left the Church, also.

It seems to me that the church today is losing members, and that is one reason I am apprehensive to leave the society. Why is it that so many young people do not practice their religion, …

It’s because people have a fallen nature and tend to commit sins.

1. 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.

It’s complicated.

Any help or direct on towards sources would be greatly appreciated. I ask all of these. In good faith and hope you will answer with the same.

In Christ

I hope that helps.

 

[2towers]

I could not agree more. Sheppard ing the flock is a full time job. Addressing legitimacy accusations from the outside, particularly when your church is over 2000 years old is self defeating.

 

[commenter]

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.

Of course they have a right to criticize, but I think even they would admit their criticisms carry much less weight than they would if they were currently in active ministry within the Church, itself. In 1977, or even 1987, their leaders were not working in the Church itself, but could point out they had many years of training in different Catholic universities and extensive prior experience working directly in a diocese, with a bishop ordinary, alongside other religious orders. They could say they were passing this heritage on to their seminarians.

Today’s SSPX leaders and seminary teachers with few exceptions have never worked in the Church itself, have never worked in a diocese, or under a bishop-ordinary. All their religious training and experience is SSPX. Younger priests have had few teachers or superiors who ever worked in a diocese or alongside any religious order.

So each year their credibility is a little less.