Agreed.Honestly, as someone with some traditionalist sympathies, I’ve been sympathetic to the SSPX’s plight for a long time and been praying for reunion, but these latest developments are making me begin to feel like they’re nothing more than arrogant rogues trying to make Rome submit to them and not the other way around.
Yes, Fellay says he’ll discuss more with Rome, and I hope it leads to reunion, but I feel like unless we wake up one morning and read the headline “Pope Benedict XVI abrogates Mass of Paul VI and Vatican II” they’re going to refuse to submit.
Agreed, the mercy and kindness shown by our Holy Father is truly inspiring, and a model to all.
I agree 100%.
I think you have the right of it here.
I find it ironic when Bishop Fellay speaks of the non catholic spirit in the Church. I fear that this latest attempt to reconcile the SSPX may result in full schism, as Bishop Fellay seems unwilling to agree unless the Holy Father hands over the keys of Peter to him.
I dearly hope that you are wrong.
As do I. I take no pleasure at this recent turm of events. I have prayed often for reconciliation. The SSPX have a lot to offer to the Catholic Church if they would remove these barriers.
I am a traditionalist I suppose since I prefer the EF to the OF. I attend an FSSP parish that is in full, repeat, full compliance with the Pope and never, never even suggests otherwise. The SSPX that is the topic of this thread is acting in a manner that is clearly in violation of its responsibility to the Pope even going so far as challenging the Pope on doctrinal matters. In fact the FSSP was chartered by the Pope specifically to spread the celebration of the EF throughout the Church.
Don’t worry, once this is explained to the SSPX, they’ll find something else to complain about.
If not doctrine, what would the issue be?
I don’t. I know full well the difference between the FSSP and the SSPX. However, the comment I responded to made the suggestion that many traditionalists seem to carry the attitude with which SSPX handles themselves. I believe that is correct. Many does not mean all, or even most.
Novus Ordo was what the new mass was called when it came out. The SSPX did not invent the term.
The difference is in the sequence of what is requested.
Disobedience ,and the rigorist attitude that develops from attempts to justify it.
Perhaps, but the reason they exist relates to doctrine. In other words, the doctrinal problems arose first, then the disobedience.
What exactly are the doctrinal issues again?
That question deserves a thread all its own.
