Someone explain again why Ecclesia Dei is ignored by friends and members of SSPX?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jehanne_Darc
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
BTW, Cardinal Mahoney is still offering his yearly circus and Cardinal Lehmann states that he doesn’t believe in the Church and nothing happens to them? Not even a warning? No eyebrow raised? If you want proof that a virtual counciliar church exists distinct from the Catholic faith…look no further.
 
The Institute of the Good Shephard’s own superior said that (the confessions and marraiges you falsely label as “invalid”) is incorrect. I’ll take Father’s word over your’s,
And the SSPX insists that the Arch and Fab Four aren’t excommunicated, but there’s a papal document (you remember those, Eddie, promulgated by the Vicar of Christ on Earth) that says otherwise. May Fr. Superior is just tired, founding his new order and all.
 
Then the bishop goes off and has “ecumenical services” in his diocese. Polska Masses too. Those “excommunications” were as valid as the case of the faithful in Hawaii.
It really doesn’t matter what Joe Blow or the Bishop of Nebraska himself goes off and does when we are discussing this issue. I do not care if he drinks his coffee with vodka wearing pink boxer shorts. (Sorry Bishop)
Just stick to the topic and see the point through. Please desist with the obfuscation. This is always the end of an argument with a friend of the SSPX. Blatant ignorant red herrings are tossed around or blank looks are given (on then net it is silence) or better yet: tears…Oh my…

Dear Bear06, Kirk et al I am sorry for doing this again, I just had to start another round of this.

One reason why I started this is that my Spiritual guide had counselled me to make sure that an SSPX friendly friend of mine is made aware that she is standing on shifting sands and that is why she is constant turmoil in her life. She can never find solidity while she refuses to rest in the arms of the Church of Christ as founded on the ROCK.

I thought I would try and be nice here, but I find I am loosing my patience. Imagine the poor girl I would confront face to face…
 
It is hard when you have loved ones in the SSPX church and they just won’t listen. You get all the “Lefebvre wasn’t REALLY excommunicated…” and the “Even if he WAS excommunicated…”

The fact of the matter is that when you attend an SSPX church you have decided to stop listening to outside influences, such as the pope, and start only listening to your own desires. This makes it very hard to reason with them on the matter.

Even desires for a good thing can be bad. Desire for a more reverant Mass is great! But going against the rules of the Catholic Church and her God-appointed earthly leader is bad.

We all need to pray for one another. We’re all sinners who make mistakes and ignore God and seek our own selfish desires. God help us all! :gopray2:

❤️
 
Even desires for a good thing can be bad. Desire for a more reverant Mass is great! But going against the rules of the Catholic Church and her God-appointed earthly leader is bad.
This is something that’s often overlooked. The devil will use what works to draw people away from the Church whether it be people’s love of Mary, love of the Mass, etc.
 
It is hard when you have loved ones in the SSPX church and they just won’t listen. You get all the “Lefebvre wasn’t REALLY excommunicated…” and the “Even if he WAS excommunicated…”

We all need to pray for one another. We’re all sinners who make mistakes and ignore God and seek our own selfish desires. God help us all! :gopray2:

❤️
Thank you I guess this should be the end of this thread. (AGAIN)

My husband has asked me to not participate anymore on these forums as he feels (rightly) it takes up too much of my time.

God Bless you all

See you in Heaven!!!
 
Quite right. But the disciplines of the Mass fall under just THAT: discipline. I assume you’re refering to Quo Primum? Pope St. Pius did not have the authority to bind future popes with regards to future disciplines, ie, the missal could not be changed or modified (subsequent popes did so, even before VII), it HAD to be in Latin (subsequent popes have allowed Mass in the vernacular even before VII), or that that particular missal could not be supressed (future popes COULD do just that, it falls within their authority).
papalencyclicals.net/Pius05/p5quopri.htm
.Furthermore, by these presents [this law], in virtue of Our Apostolic authority, We grant and concede in perpetuity that, for the chanting or reading of the Mass in any church whatsoever, this Missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment, or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used. Nor are superiors, administrators, canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious, of whatever title designated, obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us. We likewise declare and ordain that no one whosoever is forced or coerced to alter this Missal, and that this present document cannot be revoked or modified, but remain always valid and retain its full force
 
Quo Primum or any other strong languaged encyclical is not really the issue since it **in itself ** can be revoked by a future Pope or even himself as the New Mass supporters claim correctly.

However, there is a stronger force behind the TLM and that is whatever doctrine was defined clearly by the Council of Trent. Following the rules of Trent gives Catholic their clear identity and distinguishes them from the likes of Henry VIII and Martin Luther and their descendants, Carl Rahner, Hans Kung, other heretics, and all the (other) Freemasons and their cohorts.

The TLM needs no defense. It is solid Faith and God-given. It’s a true Sacrifice and most pleasing to God if it’s done according to the prescribed rubrics. We know that from Trent. No one can take away that right from those who have accepted it. Isn’t this what Ecclesia Dei is all about rather than what the Lefebrve accusers claim it is? After all, the bishops are instructed to be “generous” in granting the TLM. Where is that generosity?

On the other hand, the New Mass needs defenders because the burden is on them to prove their rite is valid and pleasing to God. So far they have made a very poor case. The proof is in the pudding, it has literally become another Tower of Babel. Several Popes have tried to make it work but haven’t been able to. Why, the New Mass hasn’t even been defined by a non-doctrinal council. What does that tell you? And exacly who inspired it? Six men who wouldn’t know Catholic theology from their own mothers? And we trust these men?

Peter is human and can make mistakes. Vatican I didn’t say otherwise. Peter denied Christ but he later changed. It is up to us to recognize too that the Church is not Peter’s or the Apostle’s but Christ’s. God is the focus, not we or your bishop or Rome. We only hope and trust and pray that Rome leads us in the right direction and soon.
 
On the other hand, the New Mass needs defenders because the burden is on them to prove their rite is valid and pleasing to God. So far they have made a very poor case. The proof is in the pudding, it has literally become another Tower of Babel. Several Popes have tried to make it work but haven’t been able to. Why, the New Mass hasn’t even been defined by a non-doctrinal council. What does that tell you? And exacly who inspired it? Six men who wouldn’t know Catholic theology from their own mothers? And we trust these men?

.
Typically arrogant and ill-informed. We’ve only YOUR opinion that “they’ve made a very poor case” (apparently millions of Catholics disagree AND, incidentally, you’ve ceased to be Catholic at all if you think the mass is INVALID, per Trent itself) and “several popes have tried to make it work, but haven’t.” That’s YOUR opinion. What’s this about a non-doctrinal council? Basic CATHOLIC understanding is that Popes are independent of councils. Both Masses were promulgated by and ON the same authority, the authority given Peter and his successors, both the Tridentine and the Pauline. As for “pleasing to God”, once again, you’re on shaky theological grounds. Last I checked, the Almighty left these matters to the ones in whom He vested HIS authority to determine what was pleasing to Him or not. There is no empirical proof that either Rite, of itself, is pleasing to God. Was God pleased to hear the old Mass in Latin offered by some awful, cynical priests in Rome who intoned,“Bread thou art and bread thou shalt remain?” No one here would make any blanket indictment of the old Mass based on its abuse, but many here are willing to condemn the Pauline Rite because an abuse OF that rite. Any rite can be abused. So how do we know both rites are pleasing to God, that they DO what they are purported to do? We’ve only the authority of the Church Herself that they BOTH are. So unless you’ve heard a Voice from Heaven informing you of something God has decided not to clue the rest of Holy Mother Church in on, I wouldn’t presume to speak for the Ancient of Days, or we’ll be asking you,“By what authority do YOU do these things?” We KNOW by what authority the Church does what she does. Finally, you’ve obviously bought into more X File conspiracy theories, as the Protestant OBSERVORS were nothing more than that, OBSERVORS. We have to make a case? We only have to make a case to defend the Mass against ill-informed Catholics who attack their own Mother, the Church. Fortunately, since most of their attacks are based on conspiracy theories such as the above, it isn’t all that hard.
 
papalencyclicals.net/Pius05/p5quopri.htm
.Furthermore, by these presents [this law], in virtue of Our Apostolic authority, We grant and concede in perpetuity that, for the chanting or reading of the Mass in any church whatsoever, this Missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment, or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used. Nor are superiors, administrators, canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious, of whatever title designated, obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us. We likewise declare and ordain that no one whosoever is forced or coerced to alter this Missal, and that this present document cannot be revoked or modified, but remain always valid and retain its full force
Uxor: The above only has the force of Church law until another Pope alters it. The Pope cannot bind his successors on matters of discipline (even before VII there were changes to the missal by the popes).
 
It is hard when you have loved ones in the SSPX church and they just won’t listen. You get all the “Lefebvre wasn’t REALLY excommunicated…” and the “Even if he WAS excommunicated…”

The fact of the matter is that when you attend an SSPX church you have decided to stop listening to outside influences, such as the pope, and start only listening to your own desires. This makes it very hard to reason with them on the matter.

Even desires for a good thing can be bad. Desire for a more reverant Mass is great! But going against the rules of the Catholic Church and her God-appointed earthly leader is bad.

We all need to pray for one another. We’re all sinners who make mistakes and ignore God and seek our own selfish desires. God help us all! :gopray2:

❤️
Good post…

People in the SSPX are in the middle of an intellectual problem. If you take many of their beliefs about Popes and the Mass and Canon Law to their logical conclusion, they should be sedevacantists, but for some reason they cannot bring themselves to admit such a thing. So, they are forced to occupy this tenuous middle ground that is very difficult to defend.

Take the status of their priests for instance:

If they believe that the Pope is the Pope (which they proclaim is true). Then they have to admit that their suspensions are valid. Therefore, even if they believe that someday the suspensions will be revoked, they still must follow them. But they don’t. They continue to operate as though they were not suspended. And each and every time they act this way, they commit a grave sin in their failure to follow the commands of Church law which even they admit is valid.

A good example to understand this better is a person who is in the process of appealing to the Church for an annulment. A person who is appealing for an annulment is still, in the eyes of the Church and in reality, married. Because the person is married, he must follow the laws that bind the actions of married people. The person is bound to act married even though he knows that, (hopefully) in the near future, the Church will proclaim that he was, in fact, never married. The SSPX priests are like a man waiting for his annulment who chooses to actively date and act as though he was not married. Just as the man has to wait for the Church to annul his marriage before acting unmarried, so should the SSPX priest wait for the Church to remove his suspension before resuming his priestly duties.

It is a very flimsy middle ground on which the SSPX attempts to dance. It seems to me that most of the SSPX priests who realize this have already left to join the approved traditional orders and institutes. Sadly, the ones who are left will probably not return to the Holy Mother Church as it seems the Church has already extended her arms as far as possible to achieve their return. But, we must pray for their return and hope that God will move their hearts.
 
Good post…
People in the SSPX are in the middle of an intellectual problem. If you take many of their beliefs about Popes and the Mass and Canon Law to their logical conclusion, they should be sedevacantists, but for some reason they cannot bring themselves to admit such a thing. So, they are forced to occupy this tenuous middle ground that is very difficult to defend.
 
I also have an indult about 45 minutes from me and an SSPX chapel 15 minutes away. I have been struggling with this as well. I would like to at least visit the SSPX once.
As a person that has been struggling with the decision to drive 45 minutes to attend an indult TLM Mass, vs. 15 minutes for a SSPX Mass, I have this to say:

I’ll probably do neither, because I have the fortune of belonging to a wonderful parish, with a conservative N.O. Mass, and the “strangest” of characters is an ex-nun who was a product of the 60’s and makes fun of the “innovations” that occurred in a lot of post-Vatican II parishes, and is thankful we don’t have them in our own parish - also, our parish church was built right before Vatican II, so our architecture isn’t disgusting either. The Crucifix behind our alter is beautiful, it is beautiful in portraying God’s sacrifice of Himself on that Cross on Calvary - I tell you, the Crucified Christ up there is so horrific it is beautiful!

If you have to suffer through a heretical Mass, I don’t know what to tell you…either move out of that diocese, change the liturgy, or, at worst, attend a SSPX Mass - I won’t look down upon you, and neither will most other concerned Catholics in your diocese.
 
I also have an indult about 45 minutes from me and an SSPX chapel 15 minutes away. I have been struggling with this as well. I would like to at least visit the SSPX once.
You have an opportunity here to show your devotion to God by not trying to take an easy way out. Every Sunday, Holy day of obligation and any other time you decide to go to Mass, you can offer up the sacrifice of the extra long drive to God. Struggling is never fun, but it can be useful! Think of the grateful souls in Purgatory you could help!

❤️
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top