Summorum Pontificum..Does it apply to the SSPX?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Armor_of_Light
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
BroJR also said:

“since the Church has no obligation to answer questions about anything other than dogma and morality.”

OK…but holy cow. We’re flopping along like dying fish here. Why is this stuff (and all the other silliness) addressed? They may say that there are bigger fish to fry :rolleyes: (get it?)
Not trying to be flip, but what are you talking about?
 
NOT in their philosophy if I understand thier position correctly.🤷

TRUTH friend is singular as is our God and our Faith beliefs.
Ja…I’m beginning to see that. They are so close though. Jeez all they have to do is say “OK you win…VII was valid and the new Mass is valid”. Bogged down in minutiae. Too bad for them and us. That’s what I mean by ‘rooting’ for them.
 
Perception is greater than reality.
What word would you use instead of banned? Explain reality so it becomes clear to all of the unlearned.

Here are some examples for anyone that is interested in the subject to read. Pretty sad how some of the Priests were treated just for wanting to offer the TLM. But hey it was never “banned” or whatever.

news.google.com/newspapers?id=1R0zAAAAIBAJ&sjid=tTgHAAAAIBAJ&pg=4570,2947562&dq=latin+mass&hl=en

news.google.com/newspapers?id=1XBkAAAAIBAJ&sjid=p30NAAAAIBAJ&pg=888,5085207&dq=latin+mass&hl=en

news.google.com/newspapers?id=kztVAAAAIBAJ&sjid=_z0NAAAAIBAJ&pg=3642,2536939&dq=latin+mass&hl=en

Weird this one actually uses the word “ban”
news.google.com/newspapers?id=NJkpAAAAIBAJ&sjid=Y8oEAAAAIBAJ&pg=1893,2565288&dq=latin+mass&hl=en

Another one
news.google.com/newspapers?id=wf5YAAAAIBAJ&sjid=9EUNAAAAIBAJ&pg=1001,14317&dq=latin+mass&hl=en

news.google.com/newspapers?id=8j1VAAAAIBAJ&sjid=Oj4NAAAAIBAJ&pg=985,1361754&dq=latin+mass&hl=en

news.google.com/newspapers?id=4fZQAAAAIBAJ&sjid=x8AMAAAAIBAJ&pg=6175,3637694&dq=latin+mass&hl=en

Interesting article
news.google.com/newspapers?id=94dIAAAAIBAJ&sjid=UIMMAAAAIBAJ&pg=866,198563&dq=latin+mass&hl=en

news.google.com/newspapers?id=fDdPAAAAIBAJ&sjid=XAIEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6949,6082860&dq=latin+mass&hl=en

I could post more of these if anyone is interested. These are news articles from the 1970’s to give an idea of what was going on during that time period.
 
Bold mine.
That is exactly it.
On the other hand, the answer to one extreme is not another extreme.
Just because a few parishes made bad decisions on a local level, does not mean they speak for the whole Church.
Nor should those who oppose such local decisions, decide for themselves that THEY and THEY ALONE speak for the Catholic Church and do, essentially, the same act they criticized the “locals” for: speak for the Catholic Church under self-appointed authority.
The answer to one extreme is not another extreme.
If it was a few parishes (and didn’t have the support of the local bishop), I suspect people would have changed parishes rather than go to the SSPX chapel.

The SSPX’s line of action that eventually led to their current position was wrong, but I don’t think they made a mountain out of a molehill.
 
And the quote from the Vatican is…where?
 
And the quote from the Vatican is…where?
The “Agatha Christie” indult is a famous example of the Vatican denying the TLM to people who requested it in the 1970s.

I may start a thread elsewhere to see if anyone can find examples of permitted TLMs between 1969 and 1984. I’m honestly curious to know what happened. As far as I know, it was not allowed at all, from the pope down.
 
I clicked on one link and it said “defies Pope”. Sounds like a “liberal” concept to me.

/troll

Seriously though, it’s an example of something being sent to storage, rather than being outlawed.
 
I clicked on one link and it said “defies Pope”. Sounds like a “liberal” concept to me.

/troll

Seriously though, it’s an example of something being sent to storage, rather than being outlawed.
The articles are sad stories.

The one funny thing is that most of these reporters evidently though the issue was simply in what language the Mass was said. They didn’t seem to realize the issue was over two different rituals.
 
And the quote from the Vatican is…where?
Heres one stating JPII reiterated the ban on the Tridentine Mass

news.google.com/newspapers?id=LoQwAAAAIBAJ&sjid=4PoDAAAAIBAJ&pg=2651,2964385&dq=tridentine+mass+banned&hl=en

news.google.com/newspapers?id=ZOkgAAAAIBAJ&sjid=H24FAAAAIBAJ&pg=4888,969246&dq=tridentine+mass+banned&hl=en

I can produce hundreds of articles stating it was banned, but not a single one that says it was not banned. But “perception is greater than reality”.
 
The articles are sad stories.

The one funny thing is that most of these reporters evidently though the issue was simply in what language the Mass was said. They didn’t seem to realize the issue was over two different rituals.
Bold mine.
Care to elaborate?
 
Heres one stating JPII reiterated the ban on the Tridentine Mass

news.google.com/newspapers?id=LoQwAAAAIBAJ&sjid=4PoDAAAAIBAJ&pg=2651,2964385&dq=tridentine+mass+banned&hl=en

news.google.com/newspapers?id=ZOkgAAAAIBAJ&sjid=H24FAAAAIBAJ&pg=4888,969246&dq=tridentine+mass+banned&hl=en

I can produce hundreds of articles stating it was banned, but not a single one that says it was not banned. But “perception is greater than reality”.
There is no quote from the Pope in either article. The reporter is “assuming”.
 
:rotfl:
Okay, it is YOUR thread.
😉
The ‘fish to fry’ comment was a reference to FE forum. And true to my promise I’m not over there gossiping about all this. 👍

And, I mis-typed earlier. I meant why isn’t this addressed.
 
Heres one stating JPII reiterated the ban on the Tridentine Mass

news.google.com/newspapers?id=LoQwAAAAIBAJ&sjid=4PoDAAAAIBAJ&pg=2651,2964385&dq=tridentine+mass+banned&hl=en

news.google.com/newspapers?id=ZOkgAAAAIBAJ&sjid=H24FAAAAIBAJ&pg=4888,969246&dq=tridentine+mass+banned&hl=en

I can produce hundreds of articles stating it was banned, but not a single one that says it was not banned. But “perception is greater than reality”.
Not seeing any quotes from the Pope there, just the newspaper mentioning the words “banned”. You can call out the Church for not using proper verbage and not calling out the media though.
 
There is no quote from the Pope in either article. The reporter is “assuming”.
The author is assuming because bishops were throwing priests out of churches for saying the Latin Mass and the pope apparently did get involved.

I don’t think the reporter is being unreasonable in this case, even though they probably think the pope is more involved in low-level operations of the Church than he really is.
 
The ‘fish to fry’ comment was a reference to FE forum. And true to my promise I’m not over there gossiping about all this. 👍

And, I mis-typed earlier. I meant why isn’t this addressed.
Well, as to your one comment over there;), about wanting to learn, you’re not going to learn ANYTHING in a cesspool like that.
It will only make you angry and more isolated.
 
*Not seeing any quotes from the Pope *there, just the newspaper mentioning the words “banned”. You can call out the Church for not using proper verbage and not calling out the media though.
You’re right. We have no recorded comment from the pope about priests being thrown out of ministry for saying the Latin Mass.
 
Well, as to your one comment over there;), about wanting to learn, you’re not going to learn ANYTHING in a cesspool like that.
It will only make you angry and more isolated.
I’ve learned more on FE than on CAF but then I’ve never been normal. 😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top