SSPX & State of Necessity

[srp643]

NeelyAnn:

Regarding the “State of Necessity” and the SSPX, here is an excellent interview given in Christendom back in Dec. (?) by Bishop Fellay. It is long but very informative as to the position the SSPX is taking. It gives a lot of background info too. Like the SSPX, or not, it is always best to get your info from the horse’s mouth.

dici.org/dl/fichiers/Christendom_3.pdf

Excellent article! and I agree with your statement that it’s best to get the info directly.

 

[Ham1]

srp643:

Excellent article! and I agree with your statement that it’s best to get the info directly.

Why is it best to get information from a source that you know to be proclaiming an error??? The SSPX claims they are in union, yet we know they are suspended. So, the information they provide pertaining to their status is not correct and they are not proclaiming the truth.

For similar reasons, I don’t go to Catholics for Free Choice when I want information on the Church’s teaching on sexuality.

 

[Servus_Pio_XII]

either Greek or Latin during that time maybe using both languages in the celebration…

And it still does:

“Kyrie Eleison…Christe Eleison…Kyrie Eleison.”

 

[Sean_O_L]

NeeleyAnn wrote:

I am not sure what your point is … The link you provided has nothing to do with the direct thoughts of Bishop Fellay, or Archbishop Lefebre.

No? Well, here is just one sourced extract from the file at jloughnan.tripod.com/vacilate.htm which DOES go to the state of mind (and attitude) of Archbishop Lefebvre:

Spring 1997
Fr. Harrison referred to “members and supporters of the Society of St Pius X (having) resorted to the most convoluted hermeneutical acrobatics and bizarre conspiracy theories in order to explain away the conclusive documentary evidence” that Archbishop Lefebvre did, in fact, sign Dignitatis Humanae and Gaudium et Spes on December 7, 1965 - having “in a moment of submissiveness, subjected his own judgment to that of Peter and, added his signature to the documents, thereby sharing in their promulgation (but that) after the Council he quickly reverted to his total opposition to these documents, especially Dignitatis Humanae.” The Latin Mass , Spring 1997

Archbishop Lefebvre must have had a “senior’s moment” when he denied having signed the document! - else, he lied!!!

These interpretations hold no value, they are merely opinion, just like ALL of the post on this message board!

Inasmuch as you are posting to this site - then, you would have to agree that your opinion is also valueless? NO?

Well, I disagree; it does have value, but it is poorly informed - nay, badly formed by the SSPX propaganda machine.