SSPX Could Return This Week - Agreement With Rome Near

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dauphin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
No but that is the point the Vatican recoginses that the excommunication was not even valid. Therefore they are saying he did nothing wrong!
I will say it once again. The Archbishop was excommunicated because of his DISOBEDIENCE in ordaining bishops without a papal mandate. The controversy over the status of the sspx is irrelevant. Even if their status was regularized today it doesn’t change the fact that he ignored a papal warning from Pope John Paul II himself stating that if he proceeded he would incur the penalty of excommunication and he died without seeking the pardon of the Pope, as mandated by Canon Law.

If (and that’s a BIG if) Pope Benedict were to remove the excommunication, it would be the result of his generosity in the matter. Canon Law is on the side of the Pope. The Vatican has never “recognized” that the excommunications were not valid.
 
No but that is the point the Vatican recoginses that the excommunication was not even valid. Therefore they are saying he did nothing wrong!
Can you provide an authoritative citation for this assertion? (Not an SSPX source.)
 
They did not have to SAY it. They just made it no longer available and followed what their Bishop locally told them. This was to not use the TLM, or do you think that each and every priest in the USA came to the same conclusion at the same time in history with out being told. I might be old, but even I don’t believe in this being a coincidence.
Local politics: Our bishops have always listened to us.

I am in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, and for years, we have had three churches in the area, two in the Archdiocese and one across the river in Jersey that have the old Latin Mass. I go once or twice a month and it is incredibly beautiful. The one in Jersey has high mass every Sunday. What a treat that is. On Palm Sunday we have the traditional procession and blessing of the palms outside the Church and on Corupus Christi, we have the procession which rivals the processions still going on in Europe.
As Tip O’Neill said: “All politics is local.”
 
Local politics: Our bishops have always listened to us.

I am in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, and for years, we have had three churches in the area, two in the Archdiocese and one across the river in Jersey that have the old Latin Mass. I go once or twice a month and it is incredibly beautiful. The one in Jersey has high mass every Sunday. What a treat that is. On Palm Sunday we have the traditional procession and blessing of the palms outside the Church and on Corupus Christi, we have the procession which rivals the processions still going on in Europe.
As Tip O’Neill said: “All politics is local.”
I actually live right near the one on Crosskeys Rd in Berlin, NJ (Mater Ecclesiae, right?) Years ago it was run by Most Holy Family Monastery (an offshoot group), but they sold the bldg to the Archdiocese of Camden and moved to upstate NY.

In Philly there is a TLM at Our Lady of Consolation in Tacony (NE Philly), and the SSPX mass in Eddystone.

Are there others? The friends I have in the pro-life movement go to the one in Tacony., though one guy sometimes goes to one in Pauslboro, NJ too.
 
The other Church that has TLM is in Norristown. I think it is St. Patrick’s. I go to the one in Tacony. I am going to try the one in Eddystone, which is 15 minutes from my home, On another note, I had been hoping that the Polish National Church (St. Valentine’s in N.E. Philadelphia) would return, but I think that is a lost cause. Although, when JPII came to Philly years ago, they turned out in force on Allegheny Avenue (St. Adalbert’s) when the Pope came that way. I know one of the parishoners and she says that many of the PNC congregants are marrying into the Roman Catholic Church and not many new parishoners. 🙂
 
The other Church that has TLM is in Norristown. I think it is St. Patrick’s. I go to the one in Tacony. I am going to try the one in Eddystone, which is 15 minutes from my home, On another note, I had been hoping that the Polish National Church (St. Valentine’s in N.E. Philadelphia) would return, but I think that is a lost cause. Although, when JPII came to Philly years ago, they turned out in force on Allegheny Avenue (St. Adalbert’s) when the Pope came that way. I know one of the parishoners and she says that many of the PNC congregants are marrying into the Roman Catholic Church and not many new parishoners. 🙂
Well, since they are Old Catholics who formed after Vatican I (due to the papal infallibility issue in 1870, was it?), I doubt there are many ppl around who would still care about an issue like that!

Though they might be attractive to people seeking a more liturgical form of worship, but sans having to believe in Papal infallibility.
 
Funny, that’s how I feel about Novus Ordo neoconservatives - “But Rome says altar girls/communion in hand/EMHCs/other nonsense is allowed!” And, of course, people who say that Archbishop Lefebvre (without whom the traditional Mass would only be in the hands of sedevacantists, and lost from the Church forever) is in hell, because according to strict reading of Cannon Law received excommunication. Or that people who go to SSPX priests for confession aren’t really absolved for their sins and are therefore going to hell. You know, things like that.
It is those in the SSPX who are clinging to rules from the past that are no longer what the Church teaches, like the pharisees who clung to the rules of their past after Christ came and they were no longer necessary. I don’t think anyone here would condemn Archbishop Lefebvre, he could have repented of his wrong in the last moments before his death, only God knows. And, no one should say that if a person goes to confession to a SSPX priest and has the belief that the confession is valid, that the confession is invalid. It is the SSPX who say that the NO is invalid, and so all who go to the NO are stupid because they are going to invalid masses. I have had the opportunity to travel allot, and during those travels my family has always made sure that we make Sunday mass, well, in Florida especially we have come across some bad masses, but there were no other masses within a two hour drive, and we tried our hardest to find a good mass, so our Sunday obligation was fulfilled. After all of those irreverent masses, my father would go and confront the priest and choir directors and if they did not receive correction well, he wrote to the bishop. But we were following Rome’s orders to attend mass and to attend a mass in union with Rome. We were not following the rules of men about what language the mass should be said in, but rather the rules of God that say Sunday is a holy day, and that Peter is the supreme authority on earth. We follow the rules of God, while the SSPX clings to the rules and comforts of the rules of men.
Those in the SSPX are not evil, they have simply blindfolded themselves, and when we try to remove the blindfold, they keep their eyes closed. Part of it is that the priests brainwash them, because the priests were brainwashed in seminary. My godfather was a priest in the SSPX, he left and came back, and he said that in seminary they were shown VatII documents that were not approved, and they were shown these docs as though they were the official VatII docs and they were not shown the final official draft of Vat II. That is not what led to him returning to the Church, but it seems very important to me. It shows that the SSPX can’t fight against the real VatII doc, so they show faulty ones instead and send their priests out spewing hatred of VatII, but all they know of it is the false docs they were shown.

Yes, we trads do not like the altar girls, yes we don’t like EMHE (but here in Vegas they are necessary), yes we don’t like the music, yes we don’t like the modern churches, yes we don’t like the sister Mary-Miss-Her-Habits, yes we don’t like the ill formed and ill taught priests, but we are in the Church trying to help fix the problems. Can’t you see that this is the only way that is right? Can’t you see that sitting outside and mocking those of us who are trying to fight the good fight, is only hurting the Church to which you still claim to belong? Can’t you see that there is work to be done and we need all the workers we can get? Why then do you sit and laugh and wait for us to serve you instead of helping us and then we can all serve eachother? The Pope can’t do this alone, it takes everyone working together to build the Church back up, help don’t hinder.

HOPEFUL_IN_UK,
Thanks for the complements, I will pray that you find some like-minded Catholic families with kids your children’s ages. When I was about ten, we visited Scotland and when we were there, we noticed how anti-large family they were. We were literally told at some hotels that said they had a Vacancy that they wouldn’t allow more than two children per family. Ireland, they were of the opinion that the more the merrier and in England they had the same opinion as the Scotts. It must be hard to live there. Thanks for reminding us to be thankful. We in the US are facing a bad presidential election and we need to be reminded of all that we have.
My family has been blessed because God gave me two brothers and three sisters, so we have eachother for support. Also, we moved allot when I was young, so we were even closer to eachother because we didn’t have time to make many friends, and we were homeschooled, so we didn’t meet up with the wrong sort of kids. We became very secure with only having eachother around and only having eachother for support. I am thankful for this. God allowed me to have this childhood, and I now know that it is only important what God thinks, friends come and go, but God is the only constant. Even family is inconsistent, as my parent’s families have shown, but hopefully, my brothers and sisters and parents and I will be close for our entire lives, because of our unique upbringing. God is good.
 
Margarite,

I am not a SSPX member, but I support them. I myself go to the TLM in my diocese.

The SSPX are not schismatic and are inside the Catholic Church.
Cardinal Hoyos has made that clear in so many interviews.

Some SSPX members have no sensitivity, understanding or tact, but they hold the tradtional Catholic faith and traditional cultural Christian beliefs. They believe in the authority of the Popes and are loyal to Pope Benedict.

Traditional Catholicism includes traditional Catholics in the SSPX and traditional Catholics who belong to parishes of the diocese, along with the FSSP and ICK.
 
Funny, that’s how I feel about Novus Ordo neoconservatives - “But Rome says altar girls/communion in hand/EMHCs/**other nonsense **is allowed!”
So when did you become qualified to declare that what comes out of Rome is “other nonsense”? :rolleyes:

And, we wonder why a return of the SSPX is unlikely?
 
So when did you become qualified to declare that what comes out of Rome is “other nonsense”? :rolleyes:

And, we wonder why a return of the SSPX is unlikely?
Not everything that comes out of Rome is nonsense of course. However, some of what has happened since Vatican II is disturbing to some people, and it does not look like Rome has acted strongly to prevent it.
 
The SSPX are not schismatic and are inside the Catholic Church.
Cardinal Hoyos has made that clear in so many interviews.
FYI - This would need to be a new thread. For the sake of those who have not followed this topic before, not all agree with rafael on this. The apologicist here have stated there is a schism. It is a debatable issue. Even whether Hoyos made a statement like is claimed is debatable.
 
FYI - This would need to be a new thread. For the sake of those who have not followed this topic before, not all agree with rafael on this. The apologicist here have stated there is a schism. It is a debatable issue. Even whether Hoyos made a statement like is claimed is debatable.
Cardinal Hoyos said that they weren’t “exactly” in schism. Saint rafael knows this, but keeps stating the opposite.
 
Cardinal Hoyos said that they weren’t “exactly” in schism. Saint rafael knows this, but keeps stating the opposite.
Cardinal Hoyos’ exact statement is that they are not really in schism or heresy.. Yet, some here like calling them schismatics and heretics anyway-- despite that the president of Ecclesia Dei, an appointee of the Pope himself, has explained that the term is “irregular standing”, not schism.
40.png
pnewton:
It is a debatable issue. Even whether Hoyos made a statement like is claimed is debatable.
If anyone claims that Hoyos did not make that statement, they are calling EWTN liars. It is EWTN that published that interview.
40.png
Margarite:
I don’t think anyone here would condemn Archbishop Lefebvre, he could have repented of his wrong in the last moments before his death, only God knows.
Unfortunately, there was someone in another thread here claiming that Archbishop Lefebvre died in mortal sin and was definitively sentenced to hell because of the excommunication.
It is the SSPX who say that the NO is invalid, and so all who go to the NO are stupid because they are going to invalid masses.
The SSPX don’t say that all Novus Ordo Masses are invalid. They have an article on their website explaining that they don’t like the NO, but that they believe it is celebrated validly. They even published a tract defending the new rite of episcopal ordination against those that claim it’s invalid. We won’t get any closer to reconciliation by misrepresenting their beliefs.
 
The whole Rome-SSPX deal is for regularization. They are irregular. They have an irregular canonical situation and not any formal schism.

Cardinal Hoyos has stated that they are not in a formal schism.

Timothysis points out that Hoyos said that they are not “exactly” in schism.

SSPX are irregular but inside the Church. Cardinal Hoyos has stated that.

For Modern Churchmen confusion, ambiguity, doubletalk, and talking out of both sides of the mouth is the norm for them.
Nothing blunt comes out of Rome anymore.
 
If anyone claims that Hoyos did not make that statement, they are calling EWTN liars. It is EWTN that published that interview.
.
Do not presume to put words in my mouth. First EWTN is not a person and can not lie. Second, there are many others things that can explain why I disagree. I will not debate something so off topic in this thread. Unlike theSSPX, I believe in trying to follow rules that I agree to abide by. I only mentioned it so that others will know it is debatable. If you can not figure out why disagreement is possible, then I will leave it for others who can see alternatives.
 
The whole Rome-SSPX deal is for regularization. They are irregular. They have an irregular canonical situation and not any formal schism.

Cardinal Hoyos has stated that they are not in a formal schism.

Timothysis points out that Hoyos said that they are not “exactly” in schism.

SSPX are irregular but inside the Church. Cardinal Hoyos has stated that.

For Modern Churchmen confusion, ambiguity, doubletalk, and talking out of both sides of the mouth is the norm for them.
Nothing blunt comes out of Rome anymore.
You are wrong because Cardinal Hoyes is wrong. Pope John Paul II declared them to be in schism in the Ecclesia Dei document and that is the only valid declaration and it has not been revoked. The only one who can change it is Pope Benedict XVI. It is irrelevant what a particular cardinal or bishop might say because that it simply their opinion.
 
Do not presume to put words in my mouth. First EWTN is not a person and can not lie. Second, there are many others things that can explain why I disagree. I will not debate something so off topic in this thread. Unlike theSSPX, I believe in trying to follow rules that I agree to abide by. I only mentioned it so that others will know it is debatable. If you can not figure out why disagreement is possible, then I will leave it for others who can see alternatives.
That quote is very relevant to this thread-- it is a Papally-appointed Bishop stating that SSPX are not in schism. I’m just wondering why you claim that its authenticity is debatable. If Hoyos didn’t make that statement, then EWTN fabricated a quote from Bishop, which I highly doubt.
 
You are wrong because Cardinal Hoyes is wrong. Pope John Paul II declared them to be in schism in the Ecclesia Dei document and that is the only valid declaration and it has not been revoked. The only one who can change it is Pope Benedict XVI. It is irrelevant what a particular cardinal or bishop might say because that it simply their opinion.
Pope John Paul II is dead and his actions were unjust. Archbishop Lefebvre had a valid doctrinal case in that there was a state of necessity because the Church is in crisis.

Cardinal Hoyos stated the the four ex-communications affected only four men.

It is up to Pope Benedict to do the right thing, right the previous wrong, and lift the ex-communications.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top