SSPX??

[Mumbles140]

Moreover, the SSPX has always been an internal matter of the church. If they were in schism it wouldn’t be an “internal” thing. You see things in black and white when many things aren’t.

This argument was made earlier and it doesn’t seem to sit right either. I understand the point you are trying to make, but using the word ‘internal’ isn’t justification that SOME of the members of SSPX put themselves in schism by committing schismatic acts.

However, it could just as easily (and maybe even more likely) apply to the notion that we are all committed to the OTF, passed down from Christ to Peter and the Apostolic Succession. It is an ‘internal matter’ because SSPX is Catholic–they did not break off and form a new religion. A schism doesn’t have to be permanent, as was the case with the Great Schism in the 11th Century or the Reformation and formation of the Church of England.

At the end of the day, a schism is a rift, a divide, a fracture. Whatever word you want to use to describe the situation of SSPX, but the whole ‘internal matter means its not a schism’ argument doesn’t seem to hold water

 

[tcm22]

In schism vs schismatic acts…seems to me it’s almost beside the point. Whatever the the specific legal status of the Levebrve and the illicitly ordained Bishops is probably important at some level, but however that particular hair gets split, there can really be no disagreement that they were all in ex-communicated for their acts, were in open conflict with the Magisterium, and have not been fully reconciled to the Church.

Until that happens, faithful Catholics need to avoid the whole mess. It’s a tragedy for our Church. Whatever the merits of the SSPX critique of VII, it’s a perfect example of “throwing the baby out with the bathwater.”

As I understand it, the SSPX position was taken against the insidious influence of “progressives” and “modernists” who foisted the OF onto those not as knowing and faithful. Unfortunately, by staking out positions outside the bounds of the Church (hence the excommunications…not much to debate there, though I’m sure some will) they lost any legitimacy to influence things accordingly. Reading the FAQ at the SSPX website doesn’t suggest much effort by the SSPX to reconcile there “schismatic” views with those of the Church. This amazed me…

If the Novus Ordo Missae is not truly Catholic, then it cannot oblige for one’s Sunday obligation. Many Catholics who do assist at it are unaware of its all pervasive degree of serious innovation and are exempt from guilt. However, any Catholic who is aware of its harm, does not have the right to participate. He could only then assist at it by a mere physical presence without positively taking part in it, and then and for major family reasons (weddings, funerals, etc).

So it seems the SSPX is smarter and more insightful the the Holy Father, his staff, and those Bishops who continue to support the OF…at least as they see it. I suspect Martin Luther is madly cheering from the depths of Hell…

In my estimation, any return to traditional elements by the Church has been by those who remained in the fold. There certainly has been a long tradition of “schismatic acts” throughout the history of the Church. While I doubt that’s the tradition our SSPX friends advocate, I suspect that’s how history will define it.

 

[iluvburpees]

As I understand it, the SSPX position was taken against the insidious influence of “progressives” and “modernists” who foisted the OF onto those not as knowing and faithful. Unfortunately, by staking out positions outside the bounds of the Church (hence the excommunications…not much to debate there, though I’m sure some will) they lost any legitimacy to influence things accordingly. Reading the FAQ at the SSPX website doesn’t suggest much effort by the SSPX to reconcile there “schismatic” views with those of the Church. This amazed me…

So it seems the SSPX is smarter and more insightful the the Holy Father, his staff, and those Bishops who continue to support the OF…at least as they see it.

When the Holy Father, his staff, and those Bishops who continue to support the OF celebrate the mess of a “mass” called the Novus Ordo, then we can safely say that the SSPX, which adheres to the mass of all time, is right. I recently went to a Novus Ordo “mass” for a funeral, and it was a horror to behold. It was almost indistinguishable from a Protestant service.

I have a great respect for the pope and all priests, but when the pope is wrong, he’s wrong.

I suspect Martin Luther is madly cheering from the depths of Hell…

After the SSPX was “excommunicated” and the new “mass” was put in place, he probably was.

 

[diggerdomer]

Also, in regard to the first statement, schism formally declared versus schismatic acts…Don’t you think that JPII would have been precise enough to differentiate between the two?

No, because my point is that there is no appreciable difference, so JPII was adequately precise.

 

[diggerdomer]

When the Holy Father, his staff, and those Bishops who continue to support the OF celebrate the mess of a “mass” called the Novus Ordo,.

You are of course referring to ALL Catholic Bishops; they all support the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite… You are saying all Catholic Bishops are wrong?

 

[tcm22]

When the Holy Father, his staff, and those Bishops who continue to support the OF celebrate the mess of a “mass” called the Novus Ordo, then we can safely say that the SSPX, which adheres to the mass of all time, is right.

I have a great respect for the pope and all priests, but when the pope is wrong, he’s wrong.

After the SSPX was “excommunicated” and the new “mass” was put in place, he probably was.

On what authority do you judge the Pope and the Bishops or decree the OF a “mess”? You put the interpretation of an excommunicated Archbishop above that of the Magisterium?

Unfortunately for those who hold your opinion, Christ instituted an Apostolic Church. The Pope has the authority to institute changes to the Mass and it’s been done many times across the centuries. That you don’t personally agree with those changes is clear, but there is a right and wrong answer here firmly rooted in Catholic Doctrine.

Are you suggesting the nominal leader of the SSPX is the rightful heir to the throne of Peter? If you state that SSPX doctrine supersedes that of the Church, then that is exactly what you are saying.

 

[iluvburpees]

You are of course referring to ALL Catholic Bishops; they all support the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite… You are saying all Catholic Bishops are wrong?

No.

 

[Timothysis]

You are of course referring to ALL Catholic Bishops; they all support the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite… You are saying all Catholic Bishops are wrong?

Of course he is. Isn’t it obvious, that the so called “traditionalist” mindset is rooted in arrogance and a lack of humility? These past few days have really been an eye opener for me. We found that some so-called “traditionalists” do not even attend Mass on Sundays, since it does not fit in with their personal preference. How they justify this attitude is beyond me, but I’ve found that the initial respect that I had for those who cling to the “traditional” mindset has dissipated when I started to read their thoughts and opinions on everything from how the Mass is said to putting themselves above the authority of the Pope and the magesterium of the Church. The irony is that they are the ones who judge and condemn the rest of the Church. I’ve always considered myself a “traditional” Catholic, in that I support the Church, the bishops and the Pope. If this “traditional” mindset of arrogance and disobedience is what a real “traditionalist” is, then I am glad to be a “modernist,” or “liberal” Catholic.

 

[iluvburpees]

On what authority do you judge the Pope and the Bishops or decree the OF a “mess”? You put the interpretation of an excommunicated Archbishop above that of the Magisterium?

I am not judging them, and perhaps I didn’t state it correctly. I do not say that the pope is a heretic, or that he is in sin, or anything similar. However, when the pope tells us to do things contrary to what God would want, one cannot in good conscience obey.

Unfortunately for those who hold your opinion, Christ instituted an Apostolic Church. The Pope has the authority to institute changes to the Mass and it’s been done many times across the centuries. That you don’t personally agree with those changes is clear, but there is a right and wrong answer here firmly rooted in Catholic Doctrine.

He has no authority to change it in such a way as to make it displeasing to God, which the Novus Ordo certainly is. The Protestants have no problem with the New “Mass”. What does that tell you?

Are you suggesting the nominal leader of the SSPX is the rightful heir to the throne of Peter?

Did I ever say that?

If you state that SSPX doctrine supersedes that of the Church, then that is exactly what you are saying.

SSPX doctrine doesn’t supersede that of the Church because its doctrine IS that of the Church; that is, the Church before all the errors crept in.

 

[iluvburpees]

Of course he is. Isn’t it obvious, that the so called “traditionalist” mindset is rooted in arrogance and a lack of humility? These past few days have really been an eye opener for me. We found that some so-called “traditionalists” do not even attend Mass on Sundays, since it does not fit in with their personal preference. How they justify this attitude is beyond me, but I’ve found that the initial respect that I had for those who cling to the “traditional” mindset has dissipated when I started to read their thoughts and opinions on everything from how the Mass is said to putting themselves above the authority of the Pope and the magesterium of the Church. The irony is that they are the ones who judge and condemn the rest of the Church. I’ve always considered myself a “traditional” Catholic, in that I support the Church, the bishops and the Pope. If this “traditional” mindset of arrogance and disobedience is what a real “traditionalist” is, then I am glad to be a “modernist,” or “liberal” Catholic.

“Arrogance and lack of humility?” Are we arrogant because we reject the errors of Vatican II? Are we arrogant because we hold dear to the Mass celebrated by some of the greatest saints of the Church? Are we arrogant and proud because we “profess filial devotion and loyalty to Pope Benedict XVI, the Successor of Saint Peter and the Vicar of Christ,” and because “the priests of the SSPX pray for the intentions of the Holy Father and the welfare of the local Ordinary at every Mass they celebrate”?

It seems that most people who slam the SSPX don’t even look at the events around the “excommunications” in '88. Archbishop Lefebvre was a very holy man, and without him, we wouldn’t have the beautiful Latin mass anymore. I am so grateful for him.

 

[Timothysis]

“Arrogance and lack of humility?” Are we arrogant because we reject the errors of Vatican II? Are we arrogant because we hold dear to the Mass celebrated by some of the greatest saints of the Church? Are we arrogant and proud because we “profess filial devotion and loyalty to Pope Benedict XVI, the Successor of Saint Peter and the Vicar of Christ,” and because “the priests of the SSPX pray for the intentions of the Holy Father and the welfare of the local Ordinary at every Mass they celebrate”?

I have a great respect for the pope and all priests, but when the pope is wrong, he’s wrong.

If this isn’t arrogance, then please show me a real example.

We’ve heard this song and dance before. If attending Masses that are unlawful according to Canon law by priests who are suspended and have no faculties to exercise a ministry that Pope Benedict has said does not even exist is ok with you, then fine. But don’t try and justify it by telling us how “wrong” the popes and bishops are. There’s a word for people with attitudes like that; it’s called “protestant.”

 

[iluvburpees]

If this isn’t arrogance, then please show me a real example.

We’ve heard this song and dance before. If attending Masses that are unlawful according to Canon law by priests who are suspended and have no faculties to exercise a ministry that Pope Benedict has said does not even exist is ok with you, then fine. But don’t try and justify it by telling us how “wrong” the popes and bishops are. There’s a word for people with attitudes like that; it’s called “protestant.”

From the following site: catholicapologetics.info/modernproblems/newmass/marks.html:

*In 1969, Max Thurian, an important Protestant theologian who helped found the ecumenical Taize monastery in France, made this statement: “It is now theologically possible for Protestants to use the same Mass as Catholics.”
*

Also, look at this: catholicapologetics.info/modernproblems/newmass/marks.html

#18: *Because six Protestant ministers collaborated in making up the New Mass: George, Jasper, Shepherd, Kunneth, Smith and Thurian. *

Who’s Protestant?

 

[Timothysis]

From the following site: catholicapologetics.info/modernproblems/newmass/marks.html:

*In 1969, Max Thurian, an important Protestant theologian who helped found the ecumenical Taize monastery in France, made this statement: “It is now theologically possible for Protestants to use the same Mass as Catholics.”
*

Also, look at this: catholicapologetics.info/modernproblems/newmass/marks.html

#18: *Because six Protestant ministers collaborated in making up the New Mass: George, Jasper, Shepherd, Kunneth, Smith and Thurian. *

Who’s Protestant?

Back at ya:"On July 4, 1976, the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship unequivocally declared: “The Protestant observers did not participate in the composition of the texts of the new Missal.” (Documentation Catholique #58, 1976, page 649). "

So, should I believe you, or the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship?

 

[Lainey63]

“Arrogance and lack of humility?” Are we arrogant because we reject the errors of Vatican II? Are we arrogant because we hold dear to the Mass celebrated by some of the greatest saints of the Church? Are we arrogant and proud because we “profess filial devotion and loyalty to Pope Benedict XVI, the Successor of Saint Peter and the Vicar of Christ,” and because “the priests of the SSPX pray for the intentions of the Holy Father and the welfare of the local Ordinary at every Mass they celebrate”?

It seems that most people who slam the SSPX don’t even look at the events around the “excommunications” in '88. Archbishop Lefebvre was a very holy man, and without him, we wouldn’t have the beautiful Latin mass anymore. I am so grateful for him.

I noticed that many SSPX cannot stay in the present day situation. Following the words of the Holy Father, SSPX cannot confer the sacraments…confession, marriage, baptism, yet the Mass is valid but illicit. Have the SSPX priests followed these guidelines that the Pope has stated? No one has answered that question.
Seems to me any question or debate results in an SSPX member taking the focus off the actions of the SSPX and put it on everyone else. I do that when I try to justify my actions…especially when I’m wrong…take the focus off me. They do have so much knowledge about documents, dogmas & this & that, but they have seem to forsaken the Truth and the virtues of God. From what I have observed everything the SSPX accuses Catholics of they themselves are guilty of. Perhaps that is why they protest so much. But really we are all sinners here and we are all supposed to be fighting the same enemy. Jesus Christ left the keys to Peter and his successors…But if It they refuse to acknowledge and follow what the Pope says it appears that some won’t even read what the Holy Father has to say…how can they say they are faithful to the Pope. Most of this stuff is basic Catechism…if you have to deny yourself all these sacraments & graces, then maybe God is trying to tell you something. If all the Apologetics & information you read are from sources that are NOT in union with Rome…whether it be to the left or the right there is no way you can be open to the truth.

 

[Timothysis]

From what I have observed everything the SSPX accuses Catholics of they themselves are guilty of.

 

[tcm22]

I am not judging them, and perhaps I didn’t state it correctly. I do not say that the pope is a heretic, or that he is in sin, or anything similar. However, when the pope tells us to do things contrary to what God would want, one cannot in good conscience obey.

He has no authority to change it in such a way as to make it displeasing to God, which the Novus Ordo certainly is. The Protestants have no problem with the New “Mass”. What does that tell you?

Did I ever say that?

SSPX doctrine doesn’t supersede that of the Church because its doctrine IS that of the Church; that is, the Church before all the errors crept in.

And you are able to discern the will of God independent of the Church? You are the one claiming the Church is too much like the Protestants yet can’t see that your whole approach is straight from Martin Luther’s playbook. You have put yourself in a position to determine what constitutes what’s pleasing to God apart from his Church.

The fact that you reject the Pope’s authority in favor of the teachings of an excommunicated AB implies that God speaks through the latter and not the former. You inherently challenge the authority of the Holy Father to lead the Church on earth.

Your assertion regarding SSPX doctrine is, in my estimation anyway, heretical. It’s no different from the multitude of other splinter groups over the centuries who thought they had a better grasp of Truth than the Church.

I’ll ask the same question we ask the Protestants: On whose authority do you assert your positions? As a Catholic, our faith requires us to defer to the teachings of the Church.

You have decided you are smarter than the Magisterium and know the will of God better than that of the leaders of the Apostolic Church instituted by Christ. What hubris!

 

[Abenadar]

Many of the posts that are less favorable to the SSPX and its attendees are quite right when they quote certain facts…From the standpoint of Rome these are the facts, and SSPX people understand that. SSPX people also understand, however, the idea of supplied jurisdiction, among other things. SSPX people believe there is a serious crisis in the Church today (I know serious SSPX-“dislikers” who happen to agree about a crisis), and that we have recourse to God when the Church perpetuates said crisis. It’s not pride, but prudence, which makes certain of us revert back to the things that are both still valid, and unquestionably Catholic (unlike many interpretations of the Catholic Church since VII which have been offered as “valid” and “licit” interpretations for unsuspecting people).

Just because you don’t consider the Church to be in a serious crisis doesn’t mean that it’s not there, particularly when the crisis is so well documented. Even if the pope himself proclaims that there is no crisis…Well, that’s his opinion and he’s entitled to it. I’m entitled to my opinion as well, and all I have to do is look around at the state of the Mass, the state of Catholicism, and the state of individual Catholics around the world. For instance, it has been clearly demonstrated that a vast number of practicing “Catholics” don’t believe that Christ is present on the altar. It has been clearly demonstrated that a vast number of self-proclaimed Catholics directly violate Church teaching in one way or another (birth control, Mass attendance, etc.).

I happen to believe that there’s a crisis.

 

[Abenadar]

The fact that you reject the Pope’s authority in favor of the teachings of an excommunicated AB implies that God speaks through the latter and not the former. You inherently challenge the authority of the Holy Father to lead the Church on earth.

Not so. SSPX people cling to clear, unmuddied tradition spanning 260 popes and almost 2000 years, and that’s what Lefebvre did. He didn’t set up his own teaching authority, he simply practiced and believed as others did throughout the Church’s history without playing with new concepts, known as VII’s “spirit”, which have proved to be confusing. He chose the solid rock foundation over the current beach we’re experiencing. If VII wasn’t confusing, there would be no need for Rome to hold doctrinal talks with the SSPX, now would there?

Your assertion regarding SSPX doctrine is, in my estimation anyway, heretical. It’s no different from the multitude of other splinter groups over the centuries who thought they had a better grasp of Truth than the Church.

The SSPX simply quotes the Church. There is no “SSPX doctrine”, other than Catholic Doctrine, which is what the SSPX believes and teaches without changing one iota.

I’ll ask the same question we ask the Protestants: On whose authority do you assert your positions? As a Catholic, our faith requires us to defer to the teachings of the Church.

Which is exactly what the SSPX does. Notice how they don’t assert their own opinions, they simply quote church documents to make their points. They rely on the voice of the Church, rather than their own. You asked “on whose authority?” and the answer is on the authority of the Catholic Church and her unchanging teachings.

You have decided you are smarter than the Magisterium and know the will of God better than that of the leaders of the Apostolic Church instituted by Christ. What hubris!

So you say. What calumny!

 

[iluvburpees]

Abenadar, your replies are outstanding. You explained the SSPX better than I could. Thank you for tearing apart the anti-SSPX individuals’ attacks.

 

[iluvburpees]

The SSPX simply quotes the Church. There is no “SSPX doctrine”, other than Catholic Doctrine, which is what the SSPX believes and teaches without changing one iota.

Truth.