Religious Orders: SSPX

  • Thread starter Thread starter JakubMaximilian
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JakubMaximilian

Guest
Do you think that the SSPX was given due process when there order was suspended in 1975? I’ve been wondering this ever since I read about Pope Francis’ opinion on the SSPX. the Pope Francis quote was something to the effect of, “They (the SSPX) have been treated very, very unfairly…”

Please be charitable and don’t shut down other’s arguments
 
Last edited:
Archbishop Lefebvre tried to contact Pope Paul VI & PJPII. IIRC, he was in an audience with PJPII one of the Pope’s advisers told him - in front of +Lefebvre! - not to allow the TLM. +Lefebvre was shocked that an adviser would try to tell the Pope what to do. PJPII listened to the adviser and the audience was pretty much over.

Also, ++Villot was definitely against the SSPX. Depending on what sources one reads, he was either responsible or influenced the decision of the Apostolic Signatura against +Lefebvre, which was patently unjust.
 
JakubMaximilian said:
Do you think that the SSPX was given due process when there order was suspended in 1975? I’ve been wondering this ever since I read about Pope Francis’ opinion on the SSPX. the Pope Francis quote was something to the effect of, “They (the SSPX) have been treated very, very unfairly…”
Click to expand...
I have not seen this quote from the Pope, do you have a source?

As to your question, I think the SSPX has been given every chance, and many additional chances. I think the Church has treated them more than fair.
 
po18guy said:
A Saint first counseled then warned them. Called them back to communion.

They refused.

What is this fascination?
Click to expand...
Yes, and his successors have each gone to extreme lengths to try to bring them back into full communion. There is unfair treatment here, but not towards the SSPX.
 
po18guy said:
A Saint first counseled then warned them. Called them back to communion.

They refused.

What is this fascination?
Click to expand...
Indeed. Like Cardinal Müller said, even though the are not in schism de jure, they are in schism de facto.
 
He read twice the biography of Archbishop Lefebvre, and after that he said to one of our priests, ‘You know, they have treated them badly’.”
Click to expand...
It’s according to SSPX Bishop Bernard Fellay, but It’s not at all out of Character; maybe Francis is serious,(I prefer to think so) maybe he’s not, but the SSPX may be controversial, but to my knowledge no one would accuse them of entirely changing the Pope’s words
 
JakubMaximilian said:
the SSPX may be controversial, but to my knowledge no one would accuse them of entirely changing the Pope’s words
Click to expand...
Fellay states that that some SSPX priest told him that Pope Francis said that, not that he had heard it from the horse’s mouth. As for the rest, I think he is putting a rosy spin on what were probably conciliatory diplomatic platitudes and reading far too much into the Pope’s words.

Besides, since then, Fellay has stepped down as the leader of the society and has been replaced by new leadership that is far less interested in reconciling with Rome. The change of tone in the FSSPX.News site is palpable, and though it remains coy, it doesn’t betray any serious interest in accommadating Rome, either. That is a big change from Fellay’s day, and I take it as a sign that they have effectively drifted out of the Roman Catholic orbit, never to return.

And again, you can’t fault Rome, or especially any Pope. Pope Benedict put his reputation on the line and went far beyond the extra mile, and it brought him nothing but grief and embarrassment on a world-wide scale. I doubt Pope Francis is going to fall into the same trap.
 
Margaret_Ann said:
he was in an audience with PJPII one of the Pope’s advisers told him - in front of +Lefebvre! - not to allow the TLM. +Lefebvre was shocked that an adviser would try to tell the Pope what to do.
Click to expand...
Actually this reflects transparency in the Vatican. The advisor could have said something behind the archbishops back.
If I had an advisor I would want them to give me advice. Not sure why that’s a problem.
The pope did in fact allow the TLM .
 
Last edited:
The interview happened ~ 5 years before PJPII allowed the TLM.
 
You knew +Lefebvre? WOW. Please pm me - I’d love to see some of your recollections of him. (I have The Little Story of My Long Life and his biography by +de Mallerais too.)
 
Last edited:
And once again the supposedly premiere Catholic forum becomes a public repository for more anti-Catholic vitriol than any Chick tract. Congrats. 👏
 
No, I don’t think the process involved enough legitimate due process in 1975. Of course, a lot has happened since 1975.

(And you don’t by chance follow Taylor Marshall or the Gordon Bros. on Twitter, do you? 'Cause this topic is about to burn trad Twitter to the ground right now…)
 
I saw that. Very sad all this public bickering just one day after Easter. Lack of unity in the Church is very dangerous.
 
I was Archbishop Lefebrve’s Master of Ceremonies at Econe in the early '80s, my room just down the hallway from his. Some of us took delight in standing in the back of the chapel just to watch him in prayer. I’m brand new to this site and will figure out how to PM in a bit. I’m catching the next train to Sleepytown, so will follow up tomorrow. God bless!
 
David55 said:
I think part of the problem was not only that Archbishop insisted on the ancient rite of Liturgy, but that he questioned the reforms…

I think as time goes on he is being more and more vindicated; since we can see a lot of the modernism in the Church today has been as a result of not trying do something about it much earlier on.
Click to expand...
There’s 3 separate issues;
  1. The TLM
  2. Overall Vatican 2 documents and reforms
  3. Preservation of the SSPX, not as a means to an end, but as an end in itself.
Re: #1, the use of the TLM is now gradually being restored to those who wish it;

Re: #2, modernism is more recognized as a problem that happened in the RCC and other denominations after V2, not necessarily a result of V2. The solutions are coming only from those working within the Church, only from those focused on 2020 as well as the past.

Re:#3, this has taken on a momentum of its own; it became a priority. An ever increasing priority.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top