SSPX Resistance

[MagdalenaRita]

Vatican II has the exact same teaching authority of every Ecumenical Council.

In your own quote, St. Paul VI says “but it [the Council] still provided us teaching with the authority of the ordinary Magisterium, which must be accepted with docility…”

Yes, I am not debating the validity of the Second Vatican Council. My comment was in response to this:

Both Benedict and Francis have basically said that they (SSPX) all is forgiven if they only just admit that the Pope is valid and so is Vatican II.

I can not comment on everything about Archbishop Lefefvre and every comment he ever made because I do not belong to the SSPX but according to the SSPX website they do believe that the Pope is a valid Pope, which is why there have been meetings with the Pope and the SSPX. If they were sedevacantists, those who do not believe the Pope is a valid Pope, they would not even meet with him. Also, according to their website Vatican II is a valid council, though because it did not define anything infallibly, and was called by the Popes as a pastoral council, they have issues with certain elements of Vatican II, that they see as errors.

It is a common misperception that SSPX are sedevacantists but that is what is incorrect.

In order to address a problem or an issue you must first realize what the problem is or what that person or group of people are actually thinking.

Final thought, there may be certain people who belong to the SSPX who do not believe the Pope is valid or that Vatican II is valid but that is not the belief or teachings of the SSPX as a whole. Not only that but that belief is not specific just to those maybe certain people in the SSPX. There are many Catholics post Vatican II who hold those beliefs. You can also find Novus Ordo Catholics who feel that way about the popes and Vatican II also.

God bless

 

[TMC]

Actually no, Vatican II does not have the same authority as the other councils, simply because it didn’t arrogate to itself the same authority. You can’t possibly compare a council like Nicaea, which did indeed proclaim dogma and condemn heresy, with a council that made no attempt to do either.

On what basis do you claim to limit the authority of an Ecumenical Council?

 

[MagdalenaRita]

The SSPX calls the Pope a false prophet on their website: “ * We must thus make a judgment of his words and actions inasmuch as they affect our eternal salvation, as our Savior said: “Beware of false prophets who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. By their fruits you shall know them.” (Mt. 7:15)”

This is taken out of context. You must include this from the same page:

First, there is no doubt that we believe all the dogmas of the Church, especially those concerning the office of the papacy:

First, it must be understood that it is a duty and necessity to pray for the Holy Father and his intentions[2] As St. Clement Mary Hofbauer says: “ A Christian who does not pray for the pope is like a child who does not pray for his father

Nor is it for us to judge him juridically—the pope has no superior on earth—or to declare unquestionably null all his acts.

That is why, without any rebellion, bitterness, or resentment, we pursue our work of priestly formation under the guidance of the never-changing Magisterium, convinced as we are that we cannot possibly render a greater service to the Holy Catholic Church, to the Sovereign Pontiff, and to posterity.

 

[KMG]

Lateran IV.

 

[Mi_Rose]

Novus Ordo Catholics? Who are they?

 

[Dovekin]

(1)Paul VI:General audience of Jan 12,1966:“ In view of the pastoral nature of the Council, it avoided any extraordinary statements of dogmas endowed with the note of infallibility, but it still provided us teaching with the authority of the ordinary Magisterium, which must be accepted with docility… ”

according to their website Vatican II is a valid council, though because it did not define anything infallibly, and was called by the Popes as a pastoral council, they have issues with certain elements of Vatican II, that they see as errors.

These two quotes express the current situation concisely. The “docility” demanded by one side is not evident on the other side.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

Novus Ordo Catholics? Who are they?

Vatican II is one of the most controversial councils in the Catholic church. I have been a Catholic for most of my entire life and I have heard people praise the council, hate the council, love the council, debate the council, try to figure out the council…on and on.

I have never been to an SSPX chapel, ever. I have never spoken to anyone in the SSPX. It has all been talks and debates and discussions and complaints from just plain ol’ every day Catholics, attending the local parishes.

Most all Catholics have been bothered by what is happening in the Church and with our present crisis. They are just trying to figure out what is going on and there are lots of opinions out there regarding some of the problems happening in the Church.

These two quotes express the current situation concisely. The “docility” demanded by one side is not evident on the other side.

Yes, but that was not the point of my comment. Their being “docile” about the council is not the same as stating that they believe the council is invalid.

You can not fairly address an issue if you do not fairly state what the other person believes.

 

[commenter]

honestly don’t think that the TLM was really the point, as evidenced by the continuing issue. There are much deeper issues.

I’m not sure how important the non liturgical issues were at the beginning. In any event, organizations take on a momentum of their own. What began as a means to an end becomes an end in itself. If needed, an organization can always find Deeper issues to justify it’s continuing independence.

The goal line for rejoining is not something objective, measurable and definite…

but rather vague, open to interpretation, such as “When certain passages in the Council documents are sufficiently clarified”.

 

[dochawk]

I frankly don’t see what their stumbling block is right now

The requirement that they acknowledge the OF of the Mass as valid.

Long ago SSPX was offered full regularity on the single condition that Bishop Lefebre concelebrate the OF with the pope a single time.

That was rejected.

 

[Brendan_64]

But unless they take the path of the Resistance and consecrate new bishops, they will die…

Not necessarily. Non-SSPX bishops sympathetic to them could ordain their priests.

 

[twf]

They also have doctrinal issues with the VII teaching on religious liberty.

 

[twf]

Wouldn’t that be a highly illicit act on the part of those bishops? Priests need to be ordained for a diocese or canonically recognized institute…

 

[Brendan_64]

You could be right, but I don’t think the SSPX will simply just die off, regardless of the circumstances.