SSPX vs Sedevacantism

[giuseppeTO]

There are no Heretics here. If you think that the Charismatic renewal is heretical, then you are ignorant of Tradition.

 

[giuseppeTO]

That is to say that the Vatican will not budge ONE IOTA from its stance on Vatican 2, and that’s final, and that’s from the sovereign pontiff.

Wrong again, ex-,

The Pope himself has lamented how some of the conciliar documents have been interpreted and implemented. He will correct the areas where out-of-control bishops have used these documents to launch novelties in teaching and liturgy that would have horrified the council fathers.

That Cardinal Kasper has retired is a blessing to the entire church.

 

[maurin]

Excubitor, you made me smile. Why you responded in a personal way to a response of mine to a different poster seemed just a tad out of place.

However, it seems you are reading the signs of the times–the freeing of the Holy Mass, the lifting of the excommunications and the doctrinal talks, all at the request of the Society–as the opposite of what is actually taking place. As another poster pointed out to you earlier, when the Society’s status is restored, what will you be left with? this restoration is going to happen, and will happen, not soon enough for some of us, but will happen all the same.
And then you will be left in a similar position as our fellow poster who seemingly accuses our Pope of misperceiving the disobedience of the Society by lifting the excommunicaions. He Society has not altered their doctrinal positions, and still the Pope sits down with them, and still you defame the Society. Please desist.

Cardinal Kaspar, it was reported in the papers, stated that his greatest regret of his tenure as lead ecumenicist, is that he was unsuccessful in having a “shared Eucharist” with protestants enabled. He’s probably not your best go to guy, since all protestants reject Transubstantiation and the Real Presence. How could any Catholic dream of a shared Euchatist with those who reject revealed Truth?

 

[CWBetts]

Excubitor, you made me smile. Why you responded in a personal way to a response of mine to a different poster seemed just a tad out of place.

However, it seems you are reading the signs of the times–the freeing of the Holy Mass, the lifting of the excommunications and the doctrinal talks, all at the request of the Society–as the opposite of what is actually taking place. As another poster pointed out to you earlier, when the Society’s status is restored, what will you be left with? this restoration is going to happen, and will happen, not soon enough for some of us, but will happen all the same.
And then you will be left in a similar position as our fellow poster who seemingly accuses our Pope of misperceiving the disobedience of the Society by lifting the excommunicaions. He Society has not altered their doctrinal positions, and still the Pope sits down with them, and still you defame the Society. Please desist.

Cardinal Kaspar, it was reported in the papers, stated that his greatest regret of his tenure as lead ecumenicist, is that he was unsuccessful in having a “shared Eucharist” with protestants enabled. He’s probably not your best go to guy, since all protestants reject Transubstantiation and the Real Presence. How could any Catholic dream of a shared Euchatist with those who reject revealed Truth?

Not ALL Protestants outright reject the Real Presence, but they do have an incorrect understanding of it.

 

[excubitor]

Wrong again, ex-,

The Pope himself has lamented how some of the conciliar documents have been interpreted and implemented. He will correct the areas where out-of-control bishops have used these documents to launch novelties in teaching and liturgy that would have horrified the council fathers.

That Cardinal Kasper has retired is a blessing to the entire church.

I’m sorry, but you really have little idea do you? I’m afraid that the members of the SSPX listen to their SSPX leaders too much and don’t bother to read their web site and their official position. The Pope has many times openly admitted that the council documents were poorly interpreted and implemented. How is that the fault of the council? You are wrong. The SSPX are teaching that there are intrinsic faults with the conciliar documents.

Here is the official statement from the SSPX web site sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q6_vaticanII.htm
…**we refuse to follow **…the Rome of neo-Modernist and neo-Protestant tendencies which became clearly manifest during the Second Vatican Council and, after the Council, in all the reforms which issued from it. (Declaration of Archbishop Lefebvre

This is said after a table is produced with various statements from Vatican 2 which the SSPX claim directly contradict tradition.
Then this pearler.
""The Council itself both **encouraged liberal trends **(and its encouragement became post-conciliar Vatican policy) and departed from traditional Catholic teaching, but it has no authority for either "

Therefore the SSPX claim intrinsic errors and faults in the documents of Vatican 2, not just in their interpretation and implementation as you have suggested. How else do you explain the difficulty in reaching agreement at these meetings with the Vatican.

Mr. Peter Scott who I simply cannot bring myself to call Fr. Scott. Perhaps that is wrong I don’t know. But he has come up with this ABSOLUTE SHOCKER.

sspx.org/Catholic_FAQs/post-conciliar_church_a_new_religion.htm
“It consequently cannot be denied that Vatican II attempts to **constitute a new religion **in **radical rupture **with all of Catholic Tradition and teaching, **a new religion **whose principal purpose is to exalt the natural dignity of the human person and to bring about a “religious” unity of mankind.”

A new religion. See that? So the post-conciliar church is a NEW RELIGION according to the SSPX, and they believe that THEIR church represents the Church of Tradition. That’s out of the very mouth of the SSPX. They believe that they are a different church to our church which they regard as a neo-modernist church.

Even I don’t think that. I at least think there is still a cotton thread attaching the SSPX to the church.

 

[maurin]

Sorry ex, but you may be the one with the pooor understanding of what actually happened at the Council. Read about. Rhine flows into the Tiber is a good starting place. The great Archbishop Lefebvre was right about the time bombs in the docs of the Council. The events as they unfolded bares that out completely.

 

[CWBetts]

Sorry ex, but you may be the one with the pooor understanding of what actually happened at the Council. Read about. Rhine flows into the Tiber is a good starting place. The great Archbishop Lefebvre was right about the time bombs in the docs of the Council. The events as they unfolded bares that out completely.

“Great Archbishops” don’t openly defy the Pope and get themselves excommunicated.

 

[catharina]

One of the few virtues I do possess is patience. I can wait for the Vatican to recognize the holiness of Marcel Lefebvre. I have asked for his intercession several times and my prayers have always been answered. I will probably not be here when he is canonized but it will surely happen.

By the way, I have also asked for intercession from my pious and deceased grandmother without waiting for the Vatican to tell me that she was “holy and saintly”.

Then I can assure you that you are not observing a “traditional” life of prayer.
Perhaps, on the contrary.

 

[catharina]

One of my prayers that the Archbishop has not answered was that the heretics from Franciscan U convert back to the true faith in honor of their saintly benefactor who weeps incessantly over the hootenany they have made of the Holy Sacrifice.

+Marcel Lefebvre, pray for us.

The heaven that you imagine for St. Francis of Assisi has him weeping “incessantly.”
What a horrible and despairing image of a great and holy Saint.

 

[catharina]

There are no Heretics here. If you think that the Charismatic renewal is heretical, then you are ignorant of Tradition.

Amen.

 

[excubitor]

Excubitor, you made me smile. Why you responded in a personal way to a response of mine to a different poster seemed just a tad out of place.

I know you think the same way about me as you responded to me in like manner a few pages ago by questioning my interpretation of the Popes words.

However, it seems you are reading the signs of the times–the freeing of the Holy Mass, the lifting of the excommunications and the doctrinal talks, all at the request of the Society–as the opposite of what is actually taking place.
As another poster pointed out to you earlier, when the Society’s status is restored, what will you be left with? this restoration is going to happen, and will happen, not soon enough for some of us, but will happen all the same.

You are living in a fools paradise. The restoration WILL NOT happen. Msgr. Williamson said as much. A dialogue of the deaf he called it. It WILL NOT happen for the same reason that it DID NOT happen when JP2 made a deal with ABL for a juridical structure which would have normalised the SSPX. ABL actually SIGNED it and then CHANGED HIS MIND. Two months later he consecrated the illicit bishops.

Why did he change his mind? Because he doubted that it would protect the integrity of his society.

Here is the document HE signed.
fssp.org/en/protoc5mai.htm
What’s wrong with it? What more does Msgr. Fellay expect the Pope to do that he was not prepared to do as Cardinal in 1988? And more to the point, what has changed in the 20 years since which would likely produce a better result than was hoped for in 1988? NOTHING. In fact things are worse. The society is twice the size now. The bigger they are the harder they fall. And the fall of the SSPX if it were to reconcile with the Vatican will be twice as great today than it would have been in 1988. It will split down the middle with uncontrollable faction fighting and ugly court battles over property, just like there was in America with the SSPV. Msgr. Fellay will not want that anymore than ABL wanted it. Therefore there will be no reconciliation.

So why does the Pope bother with these futile talks? Because they do have a purpose. The Pope wants to show the semi-faithful in the SSPX who are still almost well disposed to the Pope that he is doing everything that he can to achieve a reconciliation.

Well all of this is my personal speculation to some extent, but that is my analysis of the situation although I admit that in this particular point on the negotiations I am engaging in speculation, whereas in other posts I have tried to simply relate the Popes words.

And then you will be left in a similar position as our fellow poster who seemingly accuses our Pope of misperceiving the disobedience of the Society by lifting the excommunicaions.

If the Society is not disobedient then why has the Pope restored the priestly faculties of the Bishops also? You know as well as I do that the lifting of the excommunications changed nothing. It is merely an olive branch being extended as an act of good will and reconciliation. Personally I don’t agree with it, and the fruit of it was plainly seen with the Msgr. Williamson debacle over the holocaust statements. However I never derided the Pope like some of the modernists did. I just don’t personally agree with it. In my opinion it undermines the original excommunications by JP2 which were perfectly justified. However I hasten to admit this is merely my opinion which is worth next to nothing compared to the judgements of the Pope.

He Society has not altered their doctrinal positions, and still the Pope sits down with them, and still you defame the Society. Please desist.

How have I defamed the Society. Please demonstrate where I have said any false thing about the Society. Then I will desist.

Cardinal Kaspar, it was reported in the papers, stated that his greatest regret of his tenure as lead ecumenicist, is that he was unsuccessful in having a “shared Eucharist” with protestants enabled. He’s probably not your best go to guy, since all protestants reject Transubstantiation and the Real Presence. How could any Catholic dream of a shared Euchatist with those who reject revealed Truth?

Please provide evidence that Cardinal Kaspar has said this. There are some vicious fabrications going around in traditionalist circles about what the Cardinal has said. Because you have not corroborated your statement with a citation and I can find nothing along those lines myself then I am forced to reject your statement as defamation and calumny. Please desist.

I did find on the SSPXAsia website a page entitled “Cardinals with no faith” and then a picture of Cardinal Kasper and another Cardinal. What a disgrace. Even if Cardinal Kasper has made heretical statements (which is not proven or formerly declared) they deserve the respect of a common man, and even moreso the great respect due to princes of the church by virtue of their Holy Offices, which I might add were licitly obtained from the church.

Beside. The Pope admits Cardinal Kaspar into his inner eschalon.
Are you accusing the Pope of misperceiving?

 

[giuseppeTO]

The heaven that you imagine for St. Francis of Assisi has him weeping “incessantly.”
What a horrible and despairing image of a great and holy Saint.

I guess you have never seen the weeping statue of Our Lady of La Salette.

 

[giuseppeTO]

Beside. The Pope admits Cardinal Kaspar into his inner eschalon.
Are you accusing the Pope of misperceiving?

Heaven Forbid!!! He is protected from MISPERCEIVING by Papal Infallibility of course!

 

[catharina]

The initiatives of the Pope toward the Mass is in no way an endorsement of the SSPX.

The excommunications may have been lifted but the bishops are still suspended. They have no authority to exercise any priestly function within the church. They even have no authority to teach the faithful. Their teachings cannot be relied upon by the faithful because they have no canonical status in the church.

The fact that the Pope meets with the SSPX for talks is not an endorsement of their church. If you think that, then you must think that his meetings with Jewish and Islamic religious leaders is also an endorsement of their religions.

Actually the Pope has had better success with the Anglican church. His initiative APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTION ANGLICANORUM COETIBUS was received with joy and many Anglican groups such as the TAC have actually signed the Catechism and are desiring to be in full communion with the church. The SSPX should hang their heads in shame if the TAC pips them at the post and end up being in full communion with the Pope before the SSPX are.

I haven’t judged. I have merely restated the clearly stated rulings of the Pope which he has made directly and through his Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei. That is that the SSPX have a schismatic mentality, that they have no canonical status in the church, that they are suspended from any priestly ministry, that their Masses are illicit, that their weddings and Confessions are invalid and illicit, and that Catholics are to avoid frequenting their masses.

So simple really.

 

[giuseppeTO]

Then I can assure you that you are not observing a “traditional” life of prayer.
Perhaps, on the contrary.

You are amazing! May God bless you and me both.

 

[catharina]

… I’m afraid that the members of the SSPX listen to their SSPX leaders too much and don’t bother to read their web site and their official position. The Pope has many times openly admitted that the council documents were poorly interpreted and implemented. How is that the fault of the council? You are wrong. The SSPX are teaching that there are intrinsic faults with the conciliar documents.

Here is the official statement from the SSPX web site sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q6_vaticanII.htm
…**we refuse to follow **…the Rome of neo-Modernist and neo-Protestant tendencies which became clearly manifest during the Second Vatican Council and, after the Council, in all the reforms which issued from it. (Declaration of Archbishop Lefebvre

This is said after a table is produced with various statements from Vatican 2 which the SSPX claim directly contradict tradition.
Then this pearler.
""The Council itself both **encouraged liberal trends **(and its encouragement became post-conciliar Vatican policy) and departed from traditional Catholic teaching, but it has no authority for either "

Therefore the SSPX claim intrinsic errors and faults in the documents of Vatican 2, not just in their interpretation and implementation as you have suggested. How else do you explain the difficulty in reaching agreement at these meetings with the Vatican.

Mr. Peter Scott who I simply cannot bring myself to call Fr. Scott. Perhaps that is wrong I don’t know. But he has come up with this ABSOLUTE SHOCKER.

sspx.org/Catholic_FAQs/post-conciliar_church_a_new_religion.htm
“It consequently cannot be denied that Vatican II attempts to **constitute a new religion **in **radical rupture **with all of Catholic Tradition and teaching, **a new religion **whose principal purpose is to exalt the natural dignity of the human person and to bring about a “religious” unity of mankind.”

A new religion. See that? So the post-conciliar church is a NEW RELIGION according to the SSPX, and they believe that THEIR church represents the Church of Tradition. That’s out of the very mouth of the SSPX. They believe that they are a different church to our church which they regard as a neo-modernist church.

Even I don’t think that. I at least think there is still a cotton thread attaching the SSPX to the church.

So informational from sspx that I had to see it again.
I’m still struggling to believe they are really that far gone.
Yet the quotes tell me they are that far gone.

Thank you, excubitor.

 

[excubitor]

Originally Posted by maurin
And then you will be left in a similar position as our fellow poster who seemingly accuses our Pope of misperceiving the disobedience of the Society by lifting the excommunicaions.

Heaven Forbid!!! He is protected from MISPERCEIVING by Papal Infallibility of course!

So is he misperceiving the disobedience of the Society, or the orthodoxy of Cardinal Kasper or both? And who gets to decide whether or not the Pope is misperceiving?
You? Maurin? Msgr Fellay?

Clearly from these three oracles it is clear that the SSPX have set themselves up as judges of the Popes words, deciding for themselves whether or not they shall obey them. Then at least one of these tin pot oracles makes a snide remark about papal infallibility and in so doing clearly demonstrates to us all his schismatic mentality.

 

[catharina]

I guess you have never seen the weeping statue of Our Lady of La Salette.

Then I’ll guess that you can not distinguish between a statue and a living sainted soul.

 

[catharina]

You are amazing! May God bless you and me both.

The truth is amazing, not I.

Where does Tradition teach that we are to pray to the deceased?
Rather, we are to pray for the deceased.

 

[giuseppeTO]

“Great Archbishops” don’t openly defy the Pope and get themselves excommunicated.

Blessed Mother Mary McKillop, excommunicated and now beatified, ora pro nobis.

St. Athanasius, excommunicated and now in the Communion of Saints, ora pro nobis.

St. Joan of Arc, burned at the stake as a heretic by church authorities, ora pro nobis.

St. Ignatius of Loyola, incarcerated by the Inquisition for the faith, ora pro nobis.

PS - For you Steubenville types, “ora pro nobis” is not speaking in tongues, it is Latin for “Pray For Us”.