Should I Order From Angelus Press?

[jfallaw]

I was looking for a traditional missal, with the Latin in it, so that I could practice for when I ever get to attend a TLM Mass, and I noticed an affordable one on the Angelus Press website. Now, I’m not really familiar with the SSPX, but they have an entire section on it, and many books about or by LeFebvre. All I know is the SSPX is considered heretical, so I don’t want to purchase from anyone who supports them. Should I avoid this website? Can anyone recommend where I can get good traditional missals and Baltimore catechisms without supporting the SSPX?

 

[requiemaeturnum]

I was looking for a traditional missal, with the Latin in it, so that I could practice for when I ever get to attend a TLM Mass, and I noticed an affordable one on the Angelus Press website. Now, I’m not really familiar with the SSPX, but they have an entire section on it, and many books about or by LeFebvre. All I know is the SSPX is considered heretical, so I don’t want to purchase from anyone who supports them. Should I avoid this website? Can anyone recommend where I can get good traditional missals and Baltimore catechisms without supporting the SSPX?

Be careful with your word choice. The SSPX is not heretical. We have taught nothing contrary to Sacred Tradition- in fact, we have preserved it.

If you decide to purchase or not, it would make little difference. Actually I saw a lot of Angelus Press books at a bookstore in a FSSP parish.

 

[BrendanD]

The Angelus Press missal is fine. You’ll see lots of them at any TLM, and many parishes have them for sale. Baronius Press also prints a missal if you’d still rather not buy from the SSPX.

 

[CWBetts]

Be careful with your word choice. The SSPX is not heretical. We have taught nothing contrary to Sacred Tradition- in fact, we have preserved it.

If you decide to purchase or not, it would make little difference. Actually I saw a lot of Angelus Press books at a bookstore in a FSSP parish.

They are still schismatics

 

[requiemaeturnum]

They are still schismatics

Oh really? I encourage you to look at our site and reconsider.

 

[CWBetts]

Q: I have read that the St. Pius X Society (SSPX) is anywhere from schismatic to irregular. What is the truth?

A: It is in schism. Ecclesia Dei is an apostolic letter issued by Pope John Paul II on July 2, 1988. The document provides the pontiff’s determination regarding the schismatic acts committed two days earlier by Msgr. Marcel Lefebvre and a number of associates. In the document, the Pope confirmed the existence of a schism and the consequent excommunication of those directly involved. He explained the origins of Lefebvre’s move into schism and he made a direct appeal to the faithful not to support the Lefebvrist schism. He warned that formal adherence to the Lefebvrist schism was a grave sin (i.e., a mortal one if done with adequate knowledge and deliberate consent) and that it incurs excommunication.

He instituted a commission that led to the creation of a number of Tridentine Mass groups, including the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, which was founded by former SSPX priests who refused to go into schism with Lefebvre or who returned from schism. Finally, he affirmed that, in spite of Lefebvre’s move into schism, it was still legitimate to desire to worship according to the Latin liturgical tradition. He therefore ordered a “wide and generous application” of the directives previously issued to facilitate this: “Moreover, respect must everywhere be shown for the feelings of all those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition by a wide and generous application of the directives already issued some time ago by the Apostolic See for the use of the Roman Missal according to the typical edition of 1962” (Ecclesia Dei 6c).

This is from Catholic Answers, who I do consider a reliable source

 

[requiemaeturnum]

This is from Catholic Answers, who I do consider a reliable source

This is from the official website of the FSSPX- who I consider a reliable source:

QUESTION 12
Isn’t the SOCIETY OF SAINT PIUS X schismatic?

Was Archbishop Lefebvre (along with his co-consecrator and the four bishops whom he consecrated) excommunicated also for having done a “schismatic act” (as well as for consecrating without a pontifical mandate, QUESTION 11)?

No. A first argument to that is already given (QUESTION 11,1º).

What, moreover, constitutes a schismatic act? Not the mere deed of consecrating bishops without pontifical mandate. The 1983 Code of Canon Law itself lists this offense under Title 3 (abuse of ecclesiastical powers) and not under Title 1 (offenses against religion and the unity of the Church) of its penal section (Book 6).

Nor would it be a “schismatic act” to consecrate against the express wish of the Holy Father. That could amount to disobedience at most.* But disobedience does not amount to schism; schism requires that one not recognize the authority of the pope to command; disobedience consists in not obeying a command, whilst still acknowledging the authority of the one commanding. “The child who says ‘I won’t!’ to his mother does not deny that she is his mother” (Fr. Glover, in Is Tradition Excommunicated? p. 99 [APPENDIX II]).

*(But there is no disobedience, cf. An Open Letter to Confused Catholics, pp. 129-136, [APPENDIX II]. Cf. “The act of consecrating a bishop (without the pope’s permission) is not itself a schismatic act,” Cardinal Lara, President of the Pontifical Commission for the Authentic Interpretation of Canon Law, in La Repubblica, Oct. 7, 1988)

Now, Archbishop Lefebvre always recognized the pope’s authority (proved by his consultations with Rome for a solution to the current problems) and so does the SSPX. (See, for example, its support for Pope John Paul II’s Ordinatio Sacerdotalis against women priests.)

Consecrating a bishop without pontifical mandate would be a schismatic act if one pretended to confer not just the fullness of the priesthood but also jurisdiction, a governing power over a particular flock. Only the pope, who has universal jurisdiction over the whole Church, can appoint a pastor to a flock and empower him to govern it. But Archbishop Lefebvre never presumed to confer anything but the full priestly powers of Orders, and in no way did he grant any jurisdiction (which he himself did not have personally to give).

As for the faithful, threatened by Pope John Paul II himself with excommunication if they adhere formally to the schism (Ecclesia Dei Afflicta, July 2, 1988), do they indeed incur any excommunication for going to SSPX priests for the sacraments?

Not at all. The priests of the Society are neither excommunicated nor schismatics (Is Tradition Excommunicated? pp. 1-39 [APPENDIX II]). This being so, how could any of the faithful who approach them incur these penalties? Besides:

Excommunication is a penalty for those who commit certain crimes with full moral guilt, not a contagious disease!  (Fr. Glover ibid., p. 100)

On May 1, 1991, Bishop Ferrario of Hawaii “excommunicated” certain Catholics of his diocese for attending Masses celebrated by priests of the SSPX, and receiving a bishop of the Society to confer the sacrament of Confirmation. Cardinal Ratzinger, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, overturned this decision:

From the examination of the case... it did not result that the facts referred to in the above-mentioned decree, are formal schismatic acts in the strict sense, as they do not constitute the offense of schism; and therefore the Congregation holds that the decree of May 1, 1991, lacks foundation and hence validity.  (June 28, 1993)

 

[maurin]

This is from Catholic Answers, who I do consider a reliable source

In his accompanying letter to the Bishops of the world, His Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI referred to the status of the Society as an internal matter of reconciliation within the Church.

I do consider His Holiness a source more reliable, wouldn’t you agree?

 

[bpbasilphx]

**
Quote:
Originally Posted by CWBetts View Post
They are still schismatics
Oh really? I encourage you to look at our site and reconsider.**

**Refusal to accept the new Code of 1983 and obeying only the Canons of 1917, while having having a St. Charles Borromeo commission to grant dispensations reserved by this same code to the Pope himself are unequivocal signs of being in obedience to Benedict 16, right?

However, to answer the original question, if one can order books from Orthodox, Protestant, and even secular publishers, there’s no problem with buying books from SSPX’s Angelus Press.**

 

[requiemaeturnum]

**
Quote:
Originally Posted by CWBetts View Post
They are still schismatics
Oh really? I encourage you to look at our site and reconsider.**

**Refusal to accept the new Code of 1983 and obeying only the Canons of 1917, while having having a St. Charles Borromeo commission to grant dispensations reserved by this same code to the Pope himself are unequivocal signs of being in obedience to Benedict 16, right?

**

The topic of SSPX schism heresy, etc has been killed. Stop beating the dead horse. SSPX is not schismatic nor heretical.

Maurin- its pointless quoting the Pope, I have already quoted that several times to no avail.

 

[franklinf]

This is from Catholic Answers, who I do consider a reliable source

From a 2008 PCED letter, who no offense to Catholic Answers, are a more reliable source when it comes to Church affairs:

“Up to now the Catholic Church has acted as if the situation of the Society of St. Pius X is an internal matter within the Catholic Church and not a matter of ecumenical dialogue.”

The PCED is certainly more reliable as it acts with the authority of the Church: “This Pontifical Commission does its best to transmit responses which are in full accord with the magisterium and the present canonical practices of the Catholic Church. One should accept them with docility and can act upon them with moral certainty.” We would further add that no dicastery of the Holy See will give other responses than those which we have given here."

 

[franklinf]

The topic of SSPX schism heresy, etc has been killed. Stop beating the dead horse. SSPX is not schismatic nor heretical.

Agreed, the PCED has said as much. We need to accept the Magisterium. Is the SSPX in an irregular canonical stance? Undoubtedly yes. Is it in schism? Undoubtedly not.

In regards to Angelus Press, the missals are great. I highly recommend them. I’ve seen them used in a couple different non-SSPX parishes (indult, FSSP) so they are fine.

 

[CWBetts]

I stand corrected…but allow me to remain suspicious of a group whose founder was excommunicated

 

[chrisb]

Grace and Peace,

Sure, why not? Angelus Press has done a great service keeping these Church Treasures still in print. I have many books produced from Angelus Press and I am not SSPX.

 

[Freshman88]

IMHO the Angelus press > Baronius Press missal.

Reason? Slightly bigger pages, larger text, Latin on one page, English on opposite (as opposed to splitting a single page in half, and cramping it).

I know my brother regrets buying a baronious missal, after seeing my angelus one - and I don’t blame him.

 

[maurin]

I stand corrected…but allow me to remain suspicious of a group whose founder was excommunicated

you certainly do not need anyone’s permission to remain suspicious of the Society of Saint Pius X, whose founder was excommunicated by Pope JPII, along with the 4 Bishops he Concecrated.

however, in order to serve the Truth, you may want to collect and then communicate the facts correctly.

If, or maybe better stated, when Pope Benedict XVI lifts the excommunications of the 4 Bishops, will your suspicions be put to rest?

 

[CWBetts]

you certainly do not need anyone’s permission to remain suspicious of the Society of Saint Pius X, whose founder was excommunicated by Pope JPII, along with the 4 Bishops he Concecrated.

however, in order to serve the Truth, you may want to collect and then communicate the facts correctly.

If, or maybe better stated, when Pope Benedict XVI lifts the excommunications of the 4 Bishops, will your suspicions be put to rest?

that will depend on if SSPX maintains their radical stance

 

[maurin]

that will depend on if SSPX maintains their radical stance

calling the SSPX ‘radical’ is actually quite a compliment. “Radical” comes from the Latin (the italian cognate is ‘radice’ which means root,) and is quite apropos to the Society: getting back to our Traditional Roots of Faith, Liturgy, Catechesis, pious practices and Morality.

 

[CWBetts]

And apparrently sympathetic leanings towards those misguided souls who reject the papacies of John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI

 

[maurin]

And apparrently sympathetic leanings towards those misguided souls who reject the papacies of John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI

In the service of the Truth–as a real Christian Soldier–please provide substantial support for your calumny. Or retract your statement.

Archbishop Lefebvre warned against that position as an impossibility, if we are to believe Christ.