S
SusanL
Guest
Eddie, that is beautiful and I am glad of that but is he obedient to JPII?
- Status
K
Kielbasi
Guest
The cause and purpose for the existance of the SSPX is that they are of the belief that the vernacular mass and sacraments of our own day are not copasetic.
If they agreed with the assessment of the church that the novus ordo vernacular liturgies were acceptable, they not only wouldn’t be in schism, they would have no reason to exist and would disappear promptly. They wouldn’t be able to be heroes, as they wouldn’t be around.
If the SSPX didn’t exist, its impossible to say whether more of their members would have become fervent defenders, or whether they would have just become someone sitting in the pews, or if they would have become less involved.
C
Catholic29
Guest
If you provide the documentation I will believe it.
E
EddieArent
Guest
The bishops signed oaths pledging their fidelity to Rome and the Holy Father.
E
EddieArent
Guest
sspx.org/diocesan_dialogues/Lincoln_diocese2.pdf
Or my favorite from here in Florida:
fbsynod.org/Web/OffBishop/InstallERB/Pictures.html
Or my favorite from here in Florida:
fbsynod.org/Web/OffBishop/InstallERB/Pictures.html
S
SusanL
Guest
Fair enough. Stage 2.
(I need to study more).
Actually, did the Archbishop pledge his fidelity, too?
Sorry about my ignorance. I really need to learn more.
Sue
C
Catholic29
Guest
Best of all here is Pope John Paul II’s decree straight from Rome vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/motu_proprio/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio_02071988_ecclesia-dei_en.html
Or doesn’t His authority matter in this case?
D
Dr.Bombay
Guest
I assume you’re referring the the bishops of the SSPX? And if the Holy Father ordered the bishops to say a Novus Ordo Mass, in Latin…what would be the response of the bishops?
E
EddieArent
Guest
As for Archbishop Lefebvre, I believe his oath was that of St. Pius X Oath.
Honestly, I’m not going to say this issue is 100% resolved. There are problems here and there. Below is some more on the SSPX and Vatican talks to be regularized within the Church. It’s a bit old, but never the less;
rickross.com/reference/stpius/stpius5.html
On Dec. 29, 2000, Bishop Fellay and Cardinal Castrillón had another meeting, which gave rise to discussions of a possible reconciliation.
The next day, John Paul II received the superior of the St. Pius X Fraternity in his private chapel. Then, in another meeting with Cardinal Castrillón, and in the presence of the Pope’s personal secretary, Bishop Fellay approved a protocol of agreement with the Holy See.
In the three-point protocol, Bishop Fellay expressed “his will to be fully Catholic,” his recognition of John Paul II as Successor of Peter, and his willingness to be subject to the Pope’s authority. Lastly, he accepted the Second Vatican Council “although expressing difficulties on some points.” Bishop Fellay said that in returning to full communion with the Catholic Church he would maintain his struggle against modernism and the influence of Freemasonry.
…
Though you also have the SSPX’s criticism;
Bishop Fellay accuses the Pope of promoting certain mistaken forms of ecumenism that he says has a consequence: “The thousands and millions of Catholic faithful who are weakened in the faith are condemned because of these weaknesses of Rome. This is our concern.”
Unfortunitely, a deal hasn’t been made but there still are talks and for the sake of the Church let’s pray that there is regularization. The main thing dragging on it seems is the right for every priest to say the Tridentine Mass and the release of the “excommunication” status.
Honestly, I’m not going to say this issue is 100% resolved. There are problems here and there. Below is some more on the SSPX and Vatican talks to be regularized within the Church. It’s a bit old, but never the less;
rickross.com/reference/stpius/stpius5.html
On Dec. 29, 2000, Bishop Fellay and Cardinal Castrillón had another meeting, which gave rise to discussions of a possible reconciliation.
The next day, John Paul II received the superior of the St. Pius X Fraternity in his private chapel. Then, in another meeting with Cardinal Castrillón, and in the presence of the Pope’s personal secretary, Bishop Fellay approved a protocol of agreement with the Holy See.
In the three-point protocol, Bishop Fellay expressed “his will to be fully Catholic,” his recognition of John Paul II as Successor of Peter, and his willingness to be subject to the Pope’s authority. Lastly, he accepted the Second Vatican Council “although expressing difficulties on some points.” Bishop Fellay said that in returning to full communion with the Catholic Church he would maintain his struggle against modernism and the influence of Freemasonry.
…
Though you also have the SSPX’s criticism;
Bishop Fellay accuses the Pope of promoting certain mistaken forms of ecumenism that he says has a consequence: “The thousands and millions of Catholic faithful who are weakened in the faith are condemned because of these weaknesses of Rome. This is our concern.”
Unfortunitely, a deal hasn’t been made but there still are talks and for the sake of the Church let’s pray that there is regularization. The main thing dragging on it seems is the right for every priest to say the Tridentine Mass and the release of the “excommunication” status.
D
Dr.Bombay
Guest
This is where you and I agree. I hope and pray someday that the SSPX will be in full communion with the Holy Father.
C
Catholic29
Guest
Dr. Bombay:
I wholeheartedly concur.This is where you and I agree. I hope and pray someday that the SSPX will be in full communion with the Holy Father.
J
JKirkLVNV
Guest
And he was elected Pope and given the authority of the keys…WHEN?
G
gelsbern
Guest
How many of you have ever bought one of those shelves or TV carts that you put together. You know the ones I mean, the built in Korea $20 specials? You get it home, and you open the instructions, on one side it’s written in Korean and the other, it has a tranlation of Korean into English, and the english is just horrible. You spend hours on it, and maybe if you are very careful, you finally build what you set out to build or if you are unlucky you have what looks like a shelf, but there are a bunch of spare parts in your hand. It would have been a lot easier if you could have read Korean, then you would have been sure you were following the instructions properly.
Now let’s compare this to the Mass, it was written in Latin, if you follow it in Latin you can be positive that you have followed the instructions 100% and that you do indeed have a true sacrifice, but can it be said for a Mass that has a poor translation of Latin into English? Did they tranlsate the latin of “insert tab A into slot B” into “insert tab A into tighten bolt G”? If you know even high school Latin, you will see that indeed in many spots there are many inaccuracies. With those inaccuracies, is there really a sacrifice, or does it just look like one, with a bunch of spare parts laying about?
That is the question that SSPX asks and why they have their doubts.
There has been numerous books and articles written by many people about the poor translation of the Mass into English as well as the order of the instructions in the manual. I say go and read and study, satisfy your mind, if you still find you wish to blindly obey every and all edict then by all means go ahead, but remember if you take that stance you MUST obey EVERY edict handed down by Rome, not just the ones that suit you.
Now let’s compare this to the Mass, it was written in Latin, if you follow it in Latin you can be positive that you have followed the instructions 100% and that you do indeed have a true sacrifice, but can it be said for a Mass that has a poor translation of Latin into English? Did they tranlsate the latin of “insert tab A into slot B” into “insert tab A into tighten bolt G”? If you know even high school Latin, you will see that indeed in many spots there are many inaccuracies. With those inaccuracies, is there really a sacrifice, or does it just look like one, with a bunch of spare parts laying about?
That is the question that SSPX asks and why they have their doubts.
There has been numerous books and articles written by many people about the poor translation of the Mass into English as well as the order of the instructions in the manual. I say go and read and study, satisfy your mind, if you still find you wish to blindly obey every and all edict then by all means go ahead, but remember if you take that stance you MUST obey EVERY edict handed down by Rome, not just the ones that suit you.
J
JKirkLVNV
Guest
Poor argument. The Archbishop excommunicated himself by ordaining the four bishops, they excommunicated themselves by allowing him to do it, and the Pope confirmed it in Ecclesia Dei. It hasn’t been rescinded. It’s like arguing that President Bush isn’t President or that the sun doesn’t really rise in the east and set in the west, or that water isn’t wet. The truth is easily verifiable.
G
gelsbern
Guest
Under canon law, the “excommunication” is not valid, but sheeple refuse to learn about Canon law.
J
JKirkLVNV
Guest
Ecclesia Dei! Read it. Believe it.
C
Catholic29
Guest
I refer you to the link in post #** 27**
And does the Pope refuse to learn about Canon law too?
“sheeple” Puh-leeeease…
J
JKirkLVNV
Guest
No, no, Catholic 29, let us be “sheeple!” There is some precedent for the comparison (“we are His people, the sheep of His pasture”). Let’s just say “baaaahhhhh!”I refer you to the link in post #** 27**
And does the Pope refuse to learn about Canon law too?
“sheeple” Puh-leeeease…
G
gelsbern
Guest
I am not going to get into a ******* match with you, but Ecclesia Dei, which I am well familiar with, is not the Code of Canon Law.
At least read this very informative article about excommunication.
newadvent.org/cathen/05678a.htm
(edited to remove a word that could cause scandal among the uncouth)
K
Kielbasi
Guest
What I don’t get is why there wasn’t an ecclesiatic trial over the whole issue, particularly when the accused were offering reasons and excuses which might have mitigated the penalty of excommunication.
I am appreciative that the pope can rule on the overt act itself of schism, but unless the folks actually appear and are heard, how can anyone possibly come up with an idea as to the motivations or other circumstances which mitigate, which are more internal to the persons accused.
I am appreciative that the pope can rule on the overt act itself of schism, but unless the folks actually appear and are heard, how can anyone possibly come up with an idea as to the motivations or other circumstances which mitigate, which are more internal to the persons accused.
- Status