Pax tecum!
Here is the entire papal document (Ecclesia Dei)which will tell you everything.
The problem isn’t so much about theological issues as it is about obedience and discipline. Bishiop Lefbvre (sp?) illicitly ordained several bishops.Sounds like they are adhering to everything the pre vatican II church practiced and taught. So if it was good enough to get those people to heaven shouldn’t it still be good enough?
I understand what you are saying, But as far as the people attending the church who may not know much better are their sacraments valid? Or ar they going to hell like the people who were excommunicated?The problem isn’t so much about theological issues as it is about obedience and discipline. Bishiop Lefbvre (sp?) illicitly ordained several bishops.
While I am very sympathetic to the SSPX I do believe that until another Pope comes along and decides that they aren’t in schism…in schism they shall be.
SSPX sacraments are valid but illicit.I understand what you are saying, But as far as the people attending the church who may not know much better are their sacraments valid? Or ar they going to hell like the people who were excommunicated?
Lack of obedience.How can adhering to Church teaching of centuries now be construed illicit?
So you are publicly stating that you know better than Pope John Paul II.I attend an SPPX chapel and am not convinced that Bishop Levebre acted incorrectly at all
Mostly the ceremonies of such chapels are pre Vatican 2 because it is felt that the Council caused such a dense pall of fog to descend upon the Church it is best to stand still until the fog lifts ( I hope that makes sense?)
Having been around since before Vatican 2 and up to now, the changes were insiduously infentessimal but creeping nevertheless more and more.
How can adhering to Church teaching of centuries now be construed illicit?
Did God fail to protect His Church from this “devilish” council?So you are publicly stating that you know better than Pope John Paul II.
If you are referring to Vatican II it was not as you suggest and this had nothing at all to do with SSPX going into schism. No doctrines were changed that SSPX rejected. Their schismatic act was the result of disobedience to the Pope.Did God fail to protect His Church from this “devilish” council?
I’m just curious… What made them disobey the Pope? What did the Pope ask of them that they willfully disobeyed the Pope?If you are referring to Vatican II it was not as you suggest and this had nothing at all to do with SSPX going into schism. No doctrines were changed that SSPX rejected. Their schismatic act was the result of disobedience to the Pope.
I am on your side, man. Just a question for those whom are pro-sspx.If you are referring to Vatican II it was not as you suggest and this had nothing at all to do with SSPX going into schism. No doctrines were changed that SSPX rejected. Their schismatic act was the result of disobedience to the Pope.
This would be like saying that those who practiced the forms of the faith that were restricted at Trent would still be just in illicit practice after Trent. While this issue is more complicated than that it is an adequate analogy.Sounds like they are adhering to everything the pre vatican II church practiced and taught. So if it was good enough to get those people to heaven shouldn’t it still be good enough?
If they are in authentic ignorance than they are not in “formal adherence” to the Society which is the disposition necessary for the formal juridical actions taken by the Holy See.I understand what you are saying, But as far as the people attending the church who may not know much better are their sacraments valid? Or ar they going to hell like the people who were excommunicated?
On the contrary St. Augustine says that it is better to act under obedience.I attend an SPPX chapel and am not convinced that Bishop Levebre acted incorrectly at all
Mostly the ceremonies of such chapels are pre Vatican 2 because it is felt that the Council caused such a dense pall of fog to descend upon the Church it is best to stand still until the fog lifts ( I hope that makes sense?)
Having been around since before Vatican 2 and up to now, the changes were insiduously infentessimal but creeping nevertheless more and more.
How can adhering to Church teaching of centuries now be construed illicit?
All their sacraments are valid but illicit except Confession and Matrimony which are illicit and invalid.SSPX sacraments are valid but illicit.
As far as I understand it, the lay people who attend mass at SSPX chapels (regardless of whether they should or not) are not excommunicated and are not necessarily in schism.
Archbishop Levebre felt that modernism had completely saturated the Church and that it was his responsibility to ordain bishops who were not so infected. He felt that he was justified by the grave necessity clause on this issue. Pius XII issued a moto proprio that required that a mandate from the Holy See be received before the licit ordination of a bishop unless there is a grave necessity. When the Archbishop made his intentions known the Holy See intervened stating that there was no such grave necessity. After a period of negotiations he was allowed to ordain one bishop and not multiple bishops. To this he agreed and then ordained the original intended number. This caused the Holy Father to issue the moto proprio Ecclesia Dei in which all involved were excommunicated as the act itself was schismatic in nature - usurping of the authority of the pope.I’m just curious… What made them disobey the Pope? What did the Pope ask of them that they willfully disobeyed the Pope?
Thank you all and God Bless.
So if the Confessions are invalid and Matrimony is invalid then there are a lot of people over there that are going to hell because their sins are not forgiven and they are living in adultery? Am i to understand this correctly?All their sacraments are valid but illicit except Confession and Matrimony which are illicit and invalid.