SSPX and 'Extra Ecclesia Nulla Salus'

[bear06]

Father Z posted an article on his blog where Cardinal Hoyos says the SSPX are NOT in formal schism.

Cardinal Hoyos nor the Curia have put out a document saying that they were not in schism. Nor have they put out a document that says that that the priests of the SSPX are in schism. They have put out a document saying that the bishops and Castro Mayer all adhered publicly to the schismatic act and were thus excommuniocated and another document that says that after all of this time, the priests are likely to be in schism.

sspx.agenda.tripod.com/id57.html

Having taken account of all the juridical effects, I declare that the above-mentioned Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre, and Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta have incurred ipso facto excommunication latae sententiae reserved to the Apostolic See.

Moreover, I declare that Monsignor Antonio de Castro Mayer, Bishop emeritus of Campos, since he took part directly in the liturgical celebration as co-consecrator and adhered publicly to the schismatical act, has incurred excommunication latae sententiae as envisaged by canon 1364, paragraph 1.

The priests and faithful are warned not to support the schism of Monsignor Lefebvre, otherwise they shall incur ipso facto the very grave penalty of excommunication.

latin-mass-society.org/laitysspx.htm

Further, it is likely that these priests, after eleven years in a society whose head is now an excommunicated bishop, effectively adhere to the schism.

Of course, it’s been a lot longer than 11 years now.

 

[piouswoman]

sspx.agenda.tripod.com/id57.html

Here is the home page of the website you gave:
sspx.agenda.tripod.com/index.html

Here is the site originator:
sspx.agenda.tripod.com/id5.html

I am surprised that there are still any people left that buy into this libelous site that has an agenda quite plain to see…to blacken and smear the name of the SSPX. Notice who is behind the site…one man and his disgruntled opinion. No Catholic would go to such lengths to harm others. Pure calumny.

 

[piouswoman]

Cardinal Hoyos nor the Curia have put out a document saying that they were not in schism. Nor have they put out a document that says that that the priests of the SSPX are in schism. They have put out a document saying that the bishops and Castro Mayer all adhered publicly to the schismatic act and were thus excommuniocated and another document that says that after all of this time, the priests are likely to be in schism.

Get the facts straight here:
sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q12_sspxschismatic.htm

 

[paramedicgirl]

Cardinal Hoyos nor the Curia have put out a document saying that they were not in schism. Nor have they put out a document that says that that the priests of the SSPX are in schism. They have put out a document saying that the bishops and Castro Mayer all adhered publicly to the schismatic act and were thus excommuniocated and another document that says that after all of this time, the priests are likely to be in schism.

sspx.agenda.tripod.com/id57.html

latin-mass-society.org/laitysspx.htm

Of course, it’s been a lot longer than 11 years now.

Bear, yes, I know there is no document (as of yet). We all know the Vatican moves at glacial speed. It is significant, though, that these comments are being made, isn’t it? Perhaps a document will follow before the glaciers melt.

 

[terillmorris]

You do not state facts, you state a falsehood. Before adamantly making accusations it would do you good to read and research the history of the SSPX and the entire situation. The days of blindly following whatever comes out of your bishops mouth are gone, and those who adhere to that"schismatic" idea are guilty of papalotry, as it is the* duty* of a Catholic to refuse to follow* error*.

You obviously have no clue as to what you are talking about. They are the facts. The Pope excommunicated the Archbishop and also stated that anyone who formally adheres to the schismatic act also is excommunicated. Read John Pauls letter on the matter. You can search right here on this forum.
Only Benedict XVI can undo that decision.

 

[ProVobis]

You obviously have no clue as to what you are talking about. They are the facts. The Pope excommunicated the Archbishop and also stated that anyone who formally adheres to the schismatic act also is excommunicated. Read John Pauls letter on the matter. You can search right here on this forum.
Only Benedict XVI can undo that decision.

Ok, you’ve made your point already countless times. Care to add anything new?

 

[ProVobis]

Cardinal Hoyos nor the Curia have put out a document saying that they were not in schism. Nor have they put out a document that says that that the priests of the SSPX are in schism.

Personally, bear, I think even if the Vatican formally lifts the excommunications, there will be those who will still maintain the “schismatic position” within the order. While I realize that there are lot of good and decent priests within the order, there was one that I heard (good thing I didn’t pick up his name) will probably never agree to (re)joining the Church. Probably more.

Let’s be realistic, it’s going to be tough for the SSPX to come fully into the fold and at the same time.

 

[paramedicgirl]

Personally, bear, I think even if the Vatican formally lifts the excommunications, there will be those who will still maintain the “schismatic position” within the order. While I realize that there are lot of good and decent priests within the order, there was one that I heard (good thing I didn’t pick up his name) will probably never agree to (re)joining the Church. Probably more.

Let’s be realistic, it’s going to be a tough for the SSPX to come fully into the fold and at the same time.

You are probably right. And it goes both ways. There are priests, religious and faithful in the Roman Catholic Church today who do not follow Church teachings, in spite of being united in appearance to the Church?

 

[terillmorris]

Personally, bear, I think even if the Vatican formally lifts the excommunications, there will be those who will still maintain the “schismatic position” within the order. While I realize that there are lot of good and decent priests within the order, there was one that I heard (good thing I didn’t pick up his name) will probably never agree to (re)joining the Church. Probably more.

Let’s be realistic, it’s going to be tough for the SSPX to come fully into the fold and at the same time.

IT ISNT TOUGH!!! LEAVE THE SCHISMATIC SOCIETY AND FOLLOW THE VICAR OF CHRIST BECAUSE YOU(THEY) CAN DIE ANYTIME, AND THEY JUST MIGHT FIND THE NEXT LIFE VERY VERY HOT!!! THEY CANT SAY NO ONE WARNED THEM.

 

[piouswoman]

IT ISNT TOUGH!!! LEAVE THE SCHISMATIC SOCIETY AND FOLLOW THE VICAR OF CHRIST BECAUSE YOU(THEY) CAN DIE ANYTIME, AND THEY JUST MIGHT FIND THE NEXT LIFE VERY VERY HOT!!! THEY CANT SAY NO ONE WARNED THEM.

Oh you are just too much terillmorris! And so naive! Anyone can go around making dramatic statements in all large type! Try reading a bit and brush up on the truth! For starters…

cfnews.org/MarraPop.htm

 

[terillmorris]

Oh you are just too much terillmorris! And so naive! Anyone can go around making dramatic statements in all large type! Try reading a bit and brush up on the truth! For starters…

cfnews.org/MarraPop.htm

I have read all about your beloved disobidient Archbishop. I mean you people crack me up. The Pope told Lefebvre he would be able to consecrate his bishops , but he had to wait until the Pope (the Vicar of Christ by the way) told him when he could consecrate them. The Archbishop claims the Pope was “dragging his feet” and that the Church was in a state of emergency, so that is why he disobeyed. He thought he was preseving Catholic tradition. He decides on his own that the Church is in a state of emergency, and invokes two canons in canon law to justify it. THIS IS PROTESTANISM. DOING WHATEVER YOU WANT. YET, SOME OF YOU DEFEND HIM-----DISGRACEFUL!!!

 

[thistle]

Oh you are just too much terillmorris! And so naive! Anyone can go around making dramatic statements in all large type! Try reading a bit and brush up on the truth! For starters…

cfnews.org/MarraPop.htm

Ecclesia Dei is the document in force unless it is changed by our current pope. SSPX supporters can argue until they are blue in the face that such and such a bishop or cardinal has a different opinion but that does not change the fact that Ecclesia Dei by Pope John Paul II is still the ruling document on SSPX.

Full document can be read here:

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/motu_proprio/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio_02071988_ecclesia-dei_en.html

Relevant extracts:

1. In itself, this act was one of disobedience to the Roman Pontiff in a very grave matter and of supreme importance for the unity of the church, such as is the ordination of bishops whereby the apostolic succession is sacramentally perpetuated. Hence such disobedience - which implies in practice the rejection of the Roman primacy - constitutes a schismatic act.(3) In performing such an act, notwithstanding the formal canonical warning sent to them by the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops on 17 June last, Mons. Lefebvre and the priests Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta, have incurred the grave penalty of excommunication envisaged by ecclesiastical law.(4)

c) In the present circumstances I wish especially to make an appeal both solemn and heartfelt, paternal and fraternal, to all those who until now have been linked in various ways to the movement of Archbishop Lefebvre, that they may fulfil the grave duty of remaining united to the Vicar of Christ in the unity of the Catholic Church, and of ceasing their support in any way for that movement. Everyone should be aware that formal adherence to the schism is a grave offence against God and carries the penalty of excommunication decreed by the Church’s law.(8)

 

[piouswoman]

Ecclesia Dei is the document in force unless it is changed by our current pope. SSPX supporters can argue until they are blue in the face that such and such a bishop or cardinal has a different opinion but that does not change the fact that Ecclesia Dei by Pope John Paul II is still the ruling document on SSPX.

Full document can be read here:

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/motu_proprio/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio_02071988_ecclesia-dei_en.html

Relevant extracts:

1. In itself, this act was one of disobedience to the Roman Pontiff in a very grave matter and of supreme importance for the unity of the church, such as is the ordination of bishops whereby the apostolic succession is sacramentally perpetuated. Hence such disobedience - which implies in practice the rejection of the Roman primacy - constitutes a schismatic act.(3) In performing such an act, notwithstanding the formal canonical warning sent to them by the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops on 17 June last, Mons. Lefebvre and the priests Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta, have incurred the grave penalty of excommunication envisaged by ecclesiastical law.(4)

c) In the present circumstances I wish especially to make an appeal both solemn and heartfelt, paternal and fraternal, to all those who until now have been linked in various ways to the movement of Archbishop Lefebvre, that they may fulfil the grave duty of remaining united to the Vicar of Christ in the unity of the Catholic Church, and of ceasing their support in any way for that movement. Everyone should be aware that formal adherence to the schism is a grave offence against God and carries the penalty of excommunication decreed by the Church’s law.(8)

Again, please read:
cfnews.org/MarraPop.htm

In the meantime, enjoy the rotten fruits of Vatican II and the conciliar Church:
youtube.com/watch?v=x7KdQERbVkA&feature=related

 

[terillmorris]

Again, please read:
cfnews.org/MarraPop.htm

In the meantime, enjoy the rotten fruits of Vatican II and the conciliar Church:
youtube.com/watch?v=x7KdQERbVkA&feature=related

I read your article and it is bogus and begs the question. So what if some Popes have been disasters??? The bottom line is that the Pope is the BOSS!!!Not only on matters of faith and morlas, but also discipline. So his (Pope John Paul II) decision stands. Lefebvre is excommunicated. I mean Lefebvre was so so wrong !!! How can anyone defend this man. Never in the history of the Church do we have a Bishop, on his own, blatantly opposing and disobeying the Pope, and was deemed right. NEVER EVER!!! We have had saints disagree with the Pope and criticize the Pope, but not blatantly disobey a formal decision… NEVER, BUT YOUR BOY LEFEBVRE DID AND YOU GUYS JUST KEEP PRAISING THE DISOBIEDIENT, DISGRACEFUL, POMPUS, ARCHBISHOP!!! SHAME ON YOU!!!

 

[piouswoman]

Ecclesia Dei is the document in force unless it is changed by our current pope. SSPX supporters can argue until they are blue in the face that such and such a bishop or cardinal has a different opinion but that does not change the fact that Ecclesia Dei by Pope John Paul II is still the ruling document on SSPX.

Full document can be read here:

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/motu_proprio/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio_02071988_ecclesia-dei_en.html

Relevant extracts:

1. In itself, this act was one of disobedience to the Roman Pontiff in a very grave matter and of supreme importance for the unity of the church, such as is the ordination of bishops whereby the apostolic succession is sacramentally perpetuated. Hence such disobedience - which implies in practice the rejection of the Roman primacy - constitutes a schismatic act.(3) In performing such an act, notwithstanding the formal canonical warning sent to them by the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops on 17 June last, Mons. Lefebvre and the priests Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta, have incurred the grave penalty of excommunication envisaged by ecclesiastical law.(4)

c) In the present circumstances I wish especially to make an appeal both solemn and heartfelt, paternal and fraternal, to all those who until now have been linked in various ways to the movement of Archbishop Lefebvre, that they may fulfil the grave duty of remaining united to the Vicar of Christ in the unity of the Catholic Church, and of ceasing their support in any way for that movement. Everyone should be aware that formal adherence to the schism is a grave offence against God and carries the penalty of excommunication decreed by the Church’s law.(8)

I’ve noticed that people love to cite Ecclesia Dei of JPII…how ironic, that those who spurn TRADITION, seem to cling to their recent past like leeches! What happened to the famous “the church changes with the times” chestnut so popular with the modernists? Doesn’t it apply anymore? Suddenly Ecclesia Dei is “tradition” that cannot be challenged by those who challenge everything! Total hypocrisy. Here is a more “modern” and up to date document for all of you modernists!
summorumpontificum.net/2007/07/summorum-pontificum-english.html
as well as:
remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/archive-2007-0715-bishop_fellay_on_summorum_pontif.htm
and also:sspx.org/motu_proprio/ab_was_right.htm

 

[ProVobis]

In the meantime, enjoy the rotten fruits of Vatican II and the conciliar Church:
youtube.com/watch?v=x7KdQERbVkA&feature=related

But it’s valid and quite popular apparently. The Latin Mass can’t compete with that.

I’m still clapping and tapping my feet.

 

[ProVobis]

Suddenly Ecclesia Dei is “tradition” that cannot be challenged by those who challenge everything!

Unfortunately, some people apparently think it’s so cool for the Pope to excommunicate dying trad bishops. What can you do?

 

[piouswoman]

Never in the history of the Church do we have a Bishop, on his own, blatantly opposing and disobeying the Pope, and was deemed right. NEVER EVER!!!

You are speaking without thinking, you have been carried away in your own rantings…let it be known that disobedience happens every day…bishops such as Mahoney, disobeying the Holy Father and not being reprimanded, bishops not adhering to Summorum Pontificum: catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=11061
Bishops supporting pro-abort politicians, bishops giving communion to pro-abort politicians, bishops sanctioning gay marriage etc, etc…
Really terillmorris, you need to bone up on your traditional Catholic faith…that is, if you are indeed traditional. Stop with the wild and illogical rants.

 

[terillmorris]

You are speaking without thinking, you have been carried away in your own rantings…let it be known that disobedience happens every day…bishops such as Mahoney, disobeying the Holy Father and not being reprimanded, bishops not adhering to Summorum Pontificum: catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=11061
Bishops supporting pro-abort politicians, bishops giving communion to pro-abort politicians, bishops sanctioning gay marriage etc, etc…
Really terillmorris, you need to bone up on your traditional Catholic faith…that is, if you are indeed traditional. Stop with the wild and illogical rants.

Actually my logic is sound. i would love to debate this personally with you. I’ll call you on my dime. here is my e-mail. catholictruth1@yahoo.com.

 

[ProVobis]

You are speaking without thinking, you have been carried away in your own rantings…let it be known that disobedience happens every day…bishops such as Mahoney, disobeying the Holy Father and not being reprimanded, bishops not adhering to Summorum Pontificum: catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=11061
Bishops supporting pro-abort politicians, bishops giving communion to pro-abort politicians, bishops sanctioning gay marriage etc, etc…
Really terillmorris, you need to bone up on your traditional Catholic faith…that is, if you are indeed traditional. Stop with the wild and illogical rants.

pw, it does no good to dwell on bishops supporting pro-abort politicians, gay priests, priest abuse, etc. We know they won’t get excommunicated because they are mainstream and have dioceses to run. Suffice to say for us now is that under the Summorum Pontificum, the Pope has given the Ecclesia Dei commission the final say in dealing with TLM issues and if Cardinal Hoyos says the SSPX is not in a real schism, then it is not a real schism.

And to thistle, you are wrong on the Ecclesia Dei document. The SP supercedes it regarding all issues dealing with the TLM, or rather the EF.