The SSPX and True Catholicism

[tcraig]

The SSPX profess a loyalty to the Holy Father. They just refuse the New Mass, and consequently anything the Holy Father does in support of the New Mass.

One can wonder then, exactly how loyal the SSPX actually are if they refuse to obey Rome. Professing loyalty without corresponding obedience is merely lipservice.

I do recognize there is some disobedience in the SSPX towards Rome, but what I find appalling is the fact that they are treated with less respect than other Christians who are openly schismatic with the Church. Such as the Orthodox.Or profess a different religion alltogether, like the Muslims or Jews.

If one is Catholic, then he is held to a higher standard than a non-Catholic. Disobedience from your own children is much more serious than disobedience from the neighbor’s kids.There is a crisis in the Church, and it is one based on authority. The SSPX contributes to this crisis just as much as the liberal kooks who want to ordain a Father Barbara; both want to have their own way, and Rome be hanged.

 

[Lisa_Lavadores]

The SSPX contributes to this crisis just as much as the liberal kooks who want to ordain a Father Barbara; both want to have their own way, and Rome be hanged.

Well said – plus, the day the kooks ordain Father Barbara on their own is the day we will have two equal situations to compare.

Imagine the gall one must have – not to just talk a good game, but to actually go ahead and consecrate despite having been personally warned by the Holy Father himself.

Please do not think I am without sympathy – I am a convert who has never exerienced a really beautiful Mass. I have had to leave a parish because the abuses got out of control. It was my first parish, the one in which I was baptized, and I was on fantastic terms with the pastor. But although he seemed to sympathize with me, he would not take control of the liturgy committee, and I finally had to leave. It was heartbreaking. I cried for days. For weeks, I cried at every Mass at my new parish. Three years later, I still haven’t immersed myself in parish life because that first split hurt so bad. Yes, I do understand how deep all these things cut.

But obedience is obedience. It is something you do, not something you profess. Consecrating those bishops was practically an act of war – it was like Luther pounding in the nail at the church door.

And the point I have often seen, but have not yet seen in this thread, is this: Most Protestants, Jews, Muslims, Orthodox, etc. are born into their faith. They have not yet had the birth scales fall from their eyes. They have a better excuse for their positions. The SSPX was born into truth and threw it away. However, as time goes by, more people like the OP will be born into it, and I think there will then come a softening on the part of Rome’s attitude as She begins to deal, not with the original offenders, but with their innocent children.

Finally, as to heretical priests, theologians, etc. – Rome cannot police every word said in every speech and every book. Of course, there are some very public speakers of whom Rome is aware and has not acted towards as I would have preferred She did. But as bad as some of them are, I don’t know of any that did anything as serious as muddy the waters of apostolic succession with illicit consecrations.

 

[Genesis315]

Some good points. It is indeed a paradox that we are open and welcoming to the Eastern Orthodox heretics and schismatics, the Protestant heretics and schismatics, and the Muslim infidel; and yet those who are in fact FAR more Catholic than any of these groups are treated by most like they have the plague.

That’s because traditionally first generation schismatics have been dealt with more harshly than those born and raised outside the Church. The former are assumed to know better while the latter are given the benefit of the doubt of ignorance.

Do some reading about how missionaries traditionally treated the infidels in the lands they went to compared to how the founders of schisms and their direct followers have been traditionally treated. Understanding these two approaches will help one to also understand the true missionary spirit of the Second Vatican Council and how it differs from the fortress-spirit of most previous councils who were dealing primarily with first generation heresies and their founders and followers.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

I do recognize there is some disobedience in the SSPX towards Rome, but what I find appalling is the fact that they are treated with less respect than other Christians who are openly schismaticwith the Church. Such as the Orthodox.

I think you’ve just answered your own question there. An illustration:

In high school I knew very many people, very few of whom led upright lives. But as you come to know someone better you learn to try to meet people where they are, forge bonds based on commonality, and look for the good. So even the individuals with the loosest of morals could often have qualities that elicited a bit of respect. One friend of mine, however, who had gone to Catholic elementary with me, began to drift more and more during high school, starting to drink, smoke weed, and have sex. I found that even though he was no worse than many people whose sins I could overlook in the course of casual conversation, I had basically no respect for him whatsoever. Why? Because he would deny all his wrongdoing. A doctor’s son from an extended family of doctors, he tried to keep the appearance of respectability while engaging in his favorite pastimes. The dishonesty of it all torpedoed his chances of (re)gaining my respect.

Let’s transfer that to the SSPX. I don’t think I would regard the SSPX much differently from the Orthodox, meaning on the whole schismatic, not heretical, which in my book places them above those who must first be won over to true doctrine. There is the issue of the SSPX still containing formal schismatics, while these are relatively fewer in Orthodoxy, but in judging the communions I can let that slide. The SSPX invite criticism, however, by pretending their communion is in good standing. Every priest of the SSPX is suspended a divinis. That’s been the case since a decade before the excommunications. So no matter what the intricacies of informed conscience might mean for the laity who frequent their chapels and receive the sacraments, we know for a fact that they do not have any clergy who are in good standing with Rome or who can confect the sacrament without it being grave matter. Yet we continue to hear sob stories about how they are just good Catholics who decline the new Mass.

Bottom line, SSPX will be Catholics in good standing as soon as they ask. Until then, though, they force Catholics to expose the lie that their communion is just as Catholic as the next. The Orthodox don’t try to pass themselves off as Catholic. The SSPX, while laudably Catholic in belief and practice, refuse communion with Peter, which, as any reader of Unam sanctam (a favorite document of traditionalists) knows, spells grave trouble.

At the end of the day, I admire the commitment of the SSPX to much of tradition. I love the Pian missal. I wish I were raised in a more traditionally Catholic culture so I could merge that lifestyle with my TLM attendance. But until the SSPX is honest about at least its priests not being in good standing, I’m going to have to debate every sob story that comes along.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

I just thought I should point out that I would treat even more harshly than (what I consider) the dishonest SSPX any supposed Catholic who also perverts the faith.

 

[bear06]

The differance here being that the SSPX is of sound Catholic doctrine (as clearly demonstrated in the topic post) while the liberals are often heretical.

Well, I’d disagree with you here. I believe them to have missed the boat when it comes to Pastor Aeternus. They’re just off on less than the liberals.

The big problem is of course that more Bishops find fault with the SSPX then they do with the liberals. You can be a priest now and denounce the Church’s position on gay marriage, abortion, birth control and the like; you can celebrate Masses that are truly pathetic and abusive; you can even molest children and get away with it- but dont you dare speak a word of latin!

 

[bear06]

The EO does not teach what Rome teaches, neither do the protestants, nor any of the other non-Catholics.

The SSPX doesn’t do what Rome teaches either. If they did, they would be the FSSP!

Yet a warm and open hand is extended to them, while a cold and suspicious hand is thrust at the SSPX.

I think this is a one sided opinion. First of all, I seem to remember a whole organization being set up just to deal with them.

There are priests out there who have done** far worse **things than ordaining illicit bishops, these priests preach perverted doctrines from Parish and University pulpits, they openly profess heresy, they molest children, they question time-tested valus concerning marriage and chastity…They are not excomunicated, to do so would be radical in the eyes of many Bishops today.

And “far worse” is the phrase of the day. I can agree with you that there are more of the liberals who have caused way more damage but that doesn’t excuse the fact that the SSPX has blown it.

Yet the SSPX, who teaches Catholicism in its true form, are oppressed just like, no, even worse than heretics

.

Not wether or not the SSPX are justified, but wether or not they should be treated the way they do by the majority of the Church today.

Again, I don’t believe they teach it in a totally true form. They teach a schismatic view of it. Close but not total. If I had my drothers, the rest of the schismatics or those bordering would be treated exactly like the SSPX not the other way around. That, of course, would probably drag all of those who don’t know any better into formal schism too which is probably why the Church doesn’t do so. I think a Mahoney schism would make the Lefebvre schism look like a hiccup.

Anyways, my point is why can’t we just all say that all of them are wrong? It seems silly to go on and say that these people are just a little disobedient and these people are way disobedient.

 

[historybrat]

For what its worth here’s my two cents. I think the are many reasons for why the SSPX is treated more harshly than other Christians groups not in communion with Rome, some fair and some not so fair. We could go on debating forever,and going through each reason, but I think it basically comes down to this one reason:

Eastern Orthodoxs and other groups do not claim to be in communion with Rome and to the follow the Pope. Therefore when they do things contrary to our practices, we are not that shocked, offended, appalled, whatever.

The few SSPX I have known (I’m not claiming to be an expert, or that they are perfect examples of SSPX members) claim that they are in fact in communion with Rome and are follow the Pope, but do things which prove otherwise. Their statements and actions do not show them to be obedient to Rome. If you claim to be part of the Church but say her teachings are wrong, her practices are wrong, etc then I think the rubs people more than say other groups would.

I think what bothers some people is what appears to be lying/hypocrisy. Again I’m not an expert by any means, but thats what I seem to have gathered from other people.

historybrat

 

[bear06]

For what its worth here’s my two cents. I think the are many reasons for why the SSPX is treated more harshly than other Christians groups not in communion with Rome, some fair and some not so fair. We could go on debating forever,and going through each reason, but I think it basically comes down to this one reason:

Eastern Orthodoxs and other groups do not claim to be in communion with Rome and to the follow the Pope. Therefore when they do things contrary to our practices, we are not that shocked, offended, appalled, whatever.

The few SSPX I have known (I’m not claiming to be an expert, or that they are perfect examples of SSPX members) claim that they are in fact in communion with Rome and are follow the Pope, but do things which prove otherwise. Their statements and actions do not show them to be obedient to Rome. If you claim to be part of the Church but say her teachings are wrong, her practices are wrong, etc then I think the rubs people more than say other groups would.

I think what bothers some people is what appears to be lying/hypocrisy. Again I’m not an expert by any means, but thats what I seem to have gathered from other people.

historybrat

I think this pretty much sums it up nicely.

 

[TNT]

I think what bothers some people is what appears to be lying/hypocrisy. Again I’m not an expert by any means, but thats what I seem to have gathered from other people.

historybrat

I think this pretty much sums it up nicely.

Now, now.
Being the supreme Ecumenist that I am:
They are in confusion.
They may even be in INVINCIBLE ignorance.
That is, they cannot see for being wrapped in a confused conscience.
Which of course can be a really good road to salvation.
In fact, it’s become the most popular road to salvation for anyone opposed to the catholic Faith; far exceeding baptism.​

Finally, I have often wondered WWPPX do with Today’s SSPX?
The answer is:
Nothing, because they wouldn’t exist, having nothing to gripe about.
The NO catholics - laity & clergy would have been labeled Modernists.​

Funny how the whole Catholic world can get turned completely upside down in a mere 100 Masonic years.

 

[Missa_Solemnis]

Finally, I have often wondered WWPPX do with Today’s SSPX?
The answer is:
Nothing, because they wouldn’t exist, having nothing to gripe about.
The NO catholics - laity & clergy would have been labeled Modernists.
.

 

[paramedicgirl]

Now, now.
Being the supreme Ecumenist that I am:
They are in confusion.
They may even be in INVINCIBLE ignorance.
That is, they cannot see for being wrapped in a confused conscience.
Which of course can be a really good road to salvation.
In fact, it’s become the most popular road to salvation for anyone opposed to the catholic Faith; far exceeding baptism.​

Finally, I have often wondered WWPPX do with Today’s SSPX?
The answer is:
Nothing, because they wouldn’t exist, having nothing to gripe about.
The NO catholics - laity & clergy would have been labeled Modernists.-----------------------
Funny how the whole Catholic world can get turned completely upside down in a mere 100 Masonic years.

And that means they would be heretics, since modernism is a heresy.

 

[Missa_Solemnis]

And that means they would be heretics, since modernism is a heresy.

Yes St. Pius X was not afraid to don the Papal butt kicking boots every now and then.

 

[paramedicgirl]

Yes St. Pius X was not afraid to don the Papal butt kicking boots every now and then.

I wonder if they were red Prado boots.

 

[TNT]

Yes St. Pius X was not afraid to don the Papal butt kicking boots every now and then.

JPII was no slouch either…he kicked out the whole SSPX…1984.

 

[Unfinished]

…snip…

Missa, I’ll give you the down and dirty on my take with the SSPX.

But first, know that I finally left my previous Church when I went to Mass one day and they started singing “Awesome God” complete with choreography. It was the last straw, I had enough of the priest shoveling the Sacred Hosts by the handful and 18 (yes, 18) EMHCs up on the altar handing out communion. Not to mention the mini skirts, flip flops on the altar girls, and a host of other problems that made me wonder.

The next Sunday I went to the indult parish 45 minutes away just to check it out. I walked in the small church and took a big whiff of the incense left over from adoration that morning. As my eyes adjusted I focused on the altar, the statues, the candles, the altar rail - everything. I knew right then I was never going back to my previous parish. It took about three Sundays of “just” Low Mass and I came to the conclusion that I would now die without the Latin Mass. Then came the monthly High Mass. It was like a breath of fresh air.

Onward to the SSPX. Their chapel is closer, so I thought “why not?”

Perhaps it was just the priests there, but I do not attend Mass to listen to a homily about the “evils of the Novus Ordo.” As sick of the abuses as I was, I couldn’t be “fed” there despite the beauty of the liturgy. Now, I do not mean to make generalizations, but it seemed like there was more Pope and Novus Ordo bashing going on from the pulpit then there was teaching of the Scriptures.

And perhaps that is just this one SSPX Church. In fact, I would like to believe that it is just this one Church. But, at the same time, I feel that if Pope Benedict showed up at Bishop Fellay’s doorstep, beating his breast and stating that Vatican II was all wrong, it wouldn’t be enough for them.

They may say formally they only want freedom of the Tridentine Mass and the excommunications lifted, but the attitude put forth sometimes says otherwise. Once again, it would make my DAY/MONTH/YEAR/DECADE/LIFETIME if the SSPX were reunited, but sometimes I wonder. Just because of what I have seen.

Edit: To add, I am glad your experience with the SSPX was favorable. And Heaven knows I am thankful for what they have done, even if it wasn’t the proper means. Maybe one day all this will get settled.

Although, after saying ALL that, perhaps I am a hypocrit, but I would still take the SSPX over the local Novus Ordo parish.

 

[Missa_Solemnis]

Missa, I’ll give you the down and dirty on my take with the SSPX.

But first, know that I finally left my previous Church when I went to Mass one day and they started singing “Awesome God” complete with choreography. It was the last straw, I had enough of the priest shoveling the Sacred Hosts by the handful and 18 (yes, 18) EMHCs up on the altar handing out communion. Not to mention the mini skirts, flip flops on the altar girls, and a host of other problems that made me wonder.

The next Sunday I went to the indult parish 45 minutes away just to check it out. I walked in the small church and took a big whiff of the incense left over from adoration that morning. As my eyes adjusted I focused on the altar, the statues, the candles, the altar rail - everything. I knew right then I was never going back to my previous parish. It took about three Sundays of “just” Low Mass and I came to the conclusion that I would now die without the Latin Mass. Then came the monthly High Mass. It was like a breath of fresh air.

Onward to the SSPX. Their chapel is closer, so I thought “why not?”

Perhaps it was just the priests there, but I do not attend Mass to listen to a homily about the “evils of the Novus Ordo.” As sick of the abuses as I was, I couldn’t be “fed” there despite the beauty of the liturgy. Now, I do not mean to make generalizations, but it seemed like there was more Pope and Novus Ordo bashing going on from the pulpit then there was teaching of the Scriptures.

And perhaps that is just this one SSPX Church. In fact, I would like to believe that it is just this one Church. But, at the same time, I feel that if Pope Benedict showed up at Bishop Fellay’s doorstep, beating his breast and stating that Vatican II was all wrong, it wouldn’t be enough for them.

They may say formally they only want freedom of the Tridentine Mass and the excommunications lifted, but the attitude put forth sometimes says otherwise. Once again, it would make my DAY/MONTH/YEAR/DECADE/LIFETIME if the SSPX were reunited, but sometimes I wonder. Just because of what I have seen.

So Unfinished, do you still attend the indult Mass?

But back on topic…

Yes it could be 1 sspx church, it could be 10.

But I hope you know that the SSPX priests who bash the Novus Ordo dont do it just for the fun of it…they are just manifesting their anger. Something we all have trouble doing.

Often times I type nearly sedevacantist posts here on CAF, not because im a Sede, but just because sometimes you get pushed over the edge a bit. Its a vent and it expresses your zeal, even if expressed in an uncharitable way, for the renewel of the Liturgy.

Everyones experience with the SSPX is different. I am sure that there are some ex-Catholics who believe all priests are pedophiles.

And there is…from a secular view…plenty of support for such a view.

But I dont hold that belief on the basis that I have met in my lifetime such wonderful holy men, such amazing ‘other Christs’ as the Church calls them, that I could never hold such a belief.

But we cannot allow our experiences with the SSPX that are bad, cloud our experiences with them that are good, and we cannot forget that the SSPX have contributed greatly to the Traditional movement as it stands today.

And I think the Bishop Fellay comment is a bit untrue. Bishop Fellay is the Bishop out of the four that is working the hardest for reunification. Its Williamson who would probably slam the door in the Popes face.

Your comments about the SSPX are valid, they state true problems with the Society.

That is why I havent returned to the SSPX. I am a proud member of an FSSP parish now…and I love it.

I just think that the Vatican and the SSPX both have “mea culpas” to say…not just the Society.

 

[paramedicgirl]

Missa, I’ll give you the down and dirty on my take with the SSPX.

But first, know that I finally left my previous Church when I went to Mass one day and they started singing “Awesome God” complete with choreography. It was the last straw, I had enough of the priest shoveling the Sacred Hosts by the handful and 18 (yes, 18) EMHCs up on the altar handing out communion. Not to mention the mini skirts, flip flops on the altar girls, and a host of other problems that made me wonder.

The next Sunday I went to the indult parish 45 minutes away just to check it out. I walked in the small church and took a big whiff of the incense left over from adoration that morning. As my eyes adjusted I focused on the altar, the statues, the candles, the altar rail - everything. I knew right then I was never going back to my previous parish. It took about three Sundays of “just” Low Mass and I came to the conclusion that I would now die without the Latin Mass. Then came the monthly High Mass. It was like a breath of fresh air.

Onward to the SSPX. Their chapel is closer, so I thought “why not?”

Perhaps it was just the priests there, but I do not attend Mass to listen to a homily about the “evils of the Novus Ordo.” As sick of the abuses as I was, I couldn’t be “fed” there despite the beauty of the liturgy. Now, I do not mean to make generalizations, but it seemed like there was more Pope and Novus Ordo bashing going on from the pulpit then there was teaching of the Scriptures.

And perhaps that is just this one SSPX Church. In fact, I would like to believe that it is just this one Church. But, at the same time, I feel that if Pope Benedict showed up at Bishop Fellay’s doorstep, beating his breast and stating that Vatican II was all wrong, it wouldn’t be enough for them.

They may say formally they only want freedom of the Tridentine Mass and the excommunications lifted, but the attitude put forth sometimes says otherwise. Once again, it would make my DAY/MONTH/YEAR/DECADE/LIFETIME if the SSPX were reunited, but sometimes I wonder. Just because of what I have seen.

Edit: To add, I am glad your experience with the SSPX was favorable. And Heaven knows I am thankful for what they have done, even if it wasn’t the proper means. Maybe one day all this will get settled.

Although, after saying ALL that, perhaps I am a hypocrit, but I would still take the SSPX over the local Novus Ordo parish.

I have been to the SSPX Mass in Calgary four times in the last six years, and I have never heard any NO bashing in the homilies. When I was there in November for my sisters’ confirmations, Bishop Tissier said the Mass, and his homily was about the sacraments of the Church. All seven sacraments. I honestly never hear homilies like that at my NO church, but I wish I did.

My limited experience with the SSPX Mass has been a good one. No NO bashing. Only reverence, beauty and sacredness.

Makes me want to cry going back to my NO parish. When will that Motu Proprio be released?

 

[Missa_Solemnis]

JPII was no slouch either…he kicked out the whole SSPX…1984.

John Paul II and Pope St. Pius X had very different ways of handling things.

John Paul II has never been very popular with me…I think he took ecumenism WAY too far. Also, though I may sound really, really, picky now… I’ve seen many Masses celebrated by him filled with liturgical abuse…or even pagan influence and blasphemy. Especially in visits to Asia or South America.
But thats another thread all together.

But one thing for sure…concerning Papal buttkicking…he sure did handle those people supporting contraception, gay marriage, and feminism quite well.

Benedict XVI was my favorite theologian long before his name even came up on the Papalible lists. So I look forward to the future of this magnificent man and saintly priest.

Long Live Pope Benedict the Great!

 

[Missa_Solemnis]

I have been to the SSPX Mass in Calgary four times in the last six years, and I have never heard any NO bashing in the homilies. When I was there in November for my sisters’ confirmations, Bishop Tissier said the Mass, and his homily was about the sacraments of the Church. All seven sacraments. I honestly never hear homilies like that at my NO church, but I wish I did.

My limited experience with the SSPX Mass has been a good one. No NO bashing. Only reverence, beauty and sacredness.

Makes me want to cry going back to my NO parish. When will that Motu Proprio be released?

Bishop Tissier!!!

That man is an angel with words.

I love his accent.