Sspx new alternatives in communion with rome

  • Thread starter Thread starter down_under
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

down_under

Guest
How has the moto propreo changed the debate. I would like to imagine in that wonderful imaginary world I live in that there no longer is a sspx and that we are all back in communion with rome. However, since many sspx never admitted they are isa schismatic sect this is probably unlikely. I understand the argument only the bishops and priests are in schism. and the latiey were strongly advised to not attend there services. so my question is. Now that you have, it could be argued, most if not all of what you wanted. Why stay away from the church of christ? Why continue to go to schismatic bishops when you can now get the ancient rite at your own church? How well is the pope’s letter being recieved? Or for many of the sspx is it simply to little to late. You have left and thrown your hate in the schismatics and so that is where you will stay.

I ask these questions because I do not know the answers. Nor am I all angry or emotional about it. I would sincerely like to know.
 
Not an apologetics issue and therefore moved to Traditional Catholicism.
MF
 
HI Down,

sspx has problems WITH THE COUNCIL. I think their troubles are far from over.

Verbum
 
Even if there was a reconciliation (and I think there will be, maybe not all, but at least most), there would still be an SSPX IN the Church. There was before the schism.
 
From RORATE CÆLI:

"In the current issue of Italian news weekly Panorama, Ignazio Ingrao confirms some news we had already reported here:

“…-(3) the probability that the excommunications of the Bishops involved in the consecrations of June 30, 1988, in Ecône, Switzerland * may soon be lifted.”*
 
I recall reading an SSPX response that was critical of the Moto Proprio.
 
I had hoped sspx would have better recieved the moto propreo. I understand that is serveral cases the opening of the old rite has cured the schism entirely. perhaps that is not the best language to describe this mutual problem we have as catholics, but I am not comming up with any better at the moment. It seems we could use a lot of healing as a church in this regard. The fact that sspx sees a real problem of disregard for christ in the church, regardless how there reaction to the problem was problematic in and of itself, does not help us bring this schism to a close. Perhaps however we will see as time goes on that many feel the moto propreo is what they were looking for in the sspx.
 
I don’t think it’s going to happen anytime soon. The Holy Father is not going to just say, “oh yeah, we don’t care about papal mandate anymore, the excommunications are lifted.” The only way they’ll get back is if they admit they were wrong and ask forgiveness. I don’t think Fellay and crew are ever going to get to that point. But I hope I’m wrong.
 
Some people attended SSPX churches simply because they wanted the traditional latin mass. For them, the greater availablity of the TLM will solve their problem and they will return (and are currently returning) to full communion with Rome. However, the official viewpoint of the SSPX involves a lot more than just the TLM. They have problems with the documents of Vatican II and policies such as ecuminism which the moto proprio does not resolve. Therefore, even if excommunications are lifted, the SSPX will have problems with a full communion with the Rome.
 
The ironic thing is that Archbishop Lefebvre signed all of the documents of Vatican II.
 
Woodstock said:
I recall reading an SSPX response that was critical of the Moto Proprio.
Click to expand...
Not as much as many of the bishops “in good standing.”
The ironic thing is that Archbishop Lefebvre signed all of the documents of Vatican II.
Click to expand...
But the “spirit” of Vatican II made all those who signed in good faith look foolish. The Pontiff himself is critical of the New Mass and Vatican II.
I had hoped sspx would have better recieved the moto propreo.
Click to expand...
How do you know they didn’t? The SSPX Masses are continuing to fluourish and that is why they continue to be creating more and more controversy. Can it be that the other orders are jealous of the apparent success of the SSPX? Or is it that the SSPX know how to do it right? Or both?
 
BobP123 said:
But the “spirit” of Vatican II made all those who signed in good faith look foolish.
Click to expand...
So the council isn’t the problem; it’s what they did after it. That should make things a lot easier.
 
There is no “spirit of Vatican II.” This so-called spirit should be called the “spirit of liberalism, heresy, and dissent.”

Most of the things that came about after Vatican II were not called for in the Council documents. Vatican II will one day be vindicated and a true implementation of the Council will be started.

Vatican II is wrongly blamed for a lot of things because the liberals use it to justify anything and everything.

The only problem that I have with Vatican II is that it can be ambiguous. However, an official explanation of some passages will clear things up.
 
Woodstock said:
So the council isn’t the problem; it’s what they did after it. That should make things a lot easier.
Click to expand...
I don’t understand what you mean by making things a lot easier. Where did the Council make things easier for those who suffered with all its changes? How about all those who lost their faith completely? They felt they really had nowhere to turn to anymore.
 
Sure said:
I don’t think it’s going to happen anytime soon. The Holy Father is not going to just say, “oh yeah, we don’t care about papal mandate anymore, the excommunications are lifted.” The only way they’ll get back is if they admit they were wrong and ask forgiveness. I don’t think Fellay and crew are ever going to get to that point. But I hope I’m wrong.
Click to expand...
Well—the Pope is not bound by your biased opinion–therefore he can at anytime lift the excommunications.
 
I don’t think it’s going to happen anytime soon.
Click to expand...
To some extent, I agree with you. Why? Because I don’t feel as if it will accomplish much to “reconcile fully” right now. Especially to make it public. It may only create more bitterness, if anything. It appears that the SSPX bishops have been and are now in a very influential position and are quite content, perhaps arrogantly, to keep it that way.

In any case, we are asked to keep their matter internal so maybe we should just go on with our lives and let them squable. If by attending an SSPX Mass, you feel you will develop a schismatic mindset, then simply stay away. Otherwise if you really want to attend a TLM for a “genuine spiritual advantage”, then know that you have Canon Law on your side. And that’s true for any Catholic rite.
 
down_under said:
I would like to imagine in that wonderful imaginary world I live in that there no longer is a sspx and that we are all back in communion with rome.
Click to expand...
Woodstock said:
So the council isn’t the problem; it’s what they did after it. That should make things a lot easier.
Click to expand...
BobP123 said:
I don’t understand what you mean by making things a lot easier.
Click to expand...
The poster asked if the moto proprio was well received by the SSPX and if it was enough to bring people who go to the SSPX back into the Church. Someone said Vat II is the problem. Someone said Archbishop Lefebvre signed Vat II. You said it wasn’t Vat II that was the problem but how people responded. I went back to the thread topic and said that should make bringing the SSPX back into the Church easier than if the problem was Vat II.
 
The way I understand it, the SSPX seeks the excommunications to be lifted before entering into discussions regarding doctrine.

So, the lifting of the excommunications itself will not bring them back into communion immediately.

Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong about this 😉
 
I_Believe said:
The way I understand it, the SSPX seeks the excommunications to be lifted before entering into discussions regarding doctrine.

So, the lifting of the excommunications itself will not bring them back into communion immediately.

Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong about this 😉
Click to expand...
Sounds like you’re nitpicking a little here. Besides, the matter was supposed to be internal so I’d leave it that way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top