The SSPX and True Catholicism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Missa_Solemnis
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
bear06 said:
You are forgetting that the Pope is the arbiter of necessity,
Click to expand...
No he isn’t! A need is a need, whether or not the Pope acknowledges it.

And even if he is right that there isn’t a necessity, Canon Law still supplies that little “get out clause”, which says that someone disobeying an order, even if the perceived necessity is only in his mind, incurs no penalty.

Canon Lawyers say as much!
Excommunication is his jurisdiction. There is not higher authority. They were excommunicated and they are. He wasn’t under diress when he did it.
Click to expand...
Do we know he wasn’t under duress?

Triumpha.
 
Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legal Texts
  1. One cannot furnish any judgement on the argumentation of Murray’s thesis (see below) because it is not known, and the two articles which refer to it appear confused. However, doubt cannot reasonably be cast upon the validity of the excommunication of the Bishops declared in the Motu Proprio and the Decree. In particular it does not seem that one may be able to find, as far as the imputability of the penalty is concerned, any exempting or lessening circumstances. (cf CIC, can. 1323) As far as the state of necessity in which Mons. Lefebvre thought to find himself, one must keep before one that such a state must be verified objectively, and there is never a necessity to ordain Bishops contrary to the will of the Roman Pontiff, Head of the College of Bishops. This would, in fact, imply the possibility of “serving” the church by means of an attempt against its unity in an area connected with the very foundations of this unity.
Click to expand...
catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=1224
 
JKirkLVNV said:
Which Mass is that, TNT?
Click to expand...
It is naive to think that the Holy See is free from abuse, when our last Pontiff celebrated some of the most irreverent Masses ive ever seen at the World Youth Days as well as occasions in Africa, India, and Mexico.

Horrible…

I must say…I am more than thrilled with our new Pontiff.

Long live the Pope!
 
bear06 said:
It’s not about Papal infallibility. It’s about obedience. While I wouldn’t say they aren’t Catholic, I wouldn’t say they are correct.

Nobody has been unjustly excommunicated in the SSPX. They ordained bishops without permission. That is a schismatic act. They will claim necessity. The Pope is the arbiter of necessity so they lose there too. Read Pastor Aeternus.
Click to expand...
Yes, perhaps they arent ‘correct’ as you put it.

But it is not like Marcel Lefebrve woke up one day and decided to go into schism.

The Church (and yes…that means John Paul II at the time…a great Pope no doubt…but hes not perfect) unfairly restricted the Tridentine Rite. Both the Church and the SSPX are at fault.

The Church unjustly refused Lefebrve his requests to ordain Bishops.

It unjustly denied the SSPX Seminary (before the excomunication) the recognition it deserved as a beacon of Tradition.

It unjustly claims that the Tridentine Rite ‘needs’ permission to celebrate. And this talk of the Universal Indult only adds insult to that injury. The “Universal Indult” can be called the “Universal Insult” instead. The insult to all the followers of the Tridentine Mass…a reminder that their liturgy is under persecution.

What the Vatican did and is still doing…is demanding obedience to unjust acts.

Im a Catholic in full communion with Rome. It is not my place to claim wether an excomunication is in effect or not.

But Rome did commit a crime to Tradition, and the Catholic Church as a whole treats the SSPX very badly even today.

A valid crime (if there is such a thing) is still a crime.

Rome did have the authority to suppress seminarians who wished to be ordained in the Traditional Rite by not granting permission to ordain bishops. Rome had the legitimate authority…but it was still wrong regardless.

And now Rome wants the SSPX to apologize.

Funny world isnt it.

JPII apolgizes to Jews, Muslims, protestants and all sorts of heretics.

But doesnt apologize to his orphaned children.

The Concilar Church put Tradition up for adoption.

Im just glad Pope Benedict is trying to get those orphans back…
 
Code: 
                 Originally Posted by **JKirkLVNV**                     [forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif](http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=1832123#post1832123)                 
             *Which Mass is that, TNT?*
Click to expand...
It is naive to think that the Holy See is free from abuse, when our last Pontiff celebrated some of the most irreverent Masses ive ever seen at the World Youth Days as well as occasions in Africa, India, and Mexico.
…
I could have posted lots of actual “Mass” pics, but either:
I’d get banned
Or
I get blasted as “who u gonna believe” me or your lyin eyes?"
Thanks for yur support…so far.
 
Sola_Roma said:
Yes, perhaps they arent ‘correct’ as you put it.

But it is not like Marcel Lefebrve woke up one day and decided to go into schism.

The Church (and yes…that means John Paul II at the time…a great Pope no doubt…but hes not perfect) unfairly restricted the Tridentine Rite. Both the Church and the SSPX are at fault.

The Church unjustly refused Lefebrve his requests to ordain Bishops.

It unjustly denied the SSPX Seminary (before the excomunication) the recognition it deserved as a beacon of Tradition.

It unjustly claims that the Tridentine Rite ‘needs’ permission to celebrate. And this talk of the Universal Indult only adds insult to that injury. The “Universal Indult” can be called the “Universal Insult” instead. The insult to all the followers of the Tridentine Mass…a reminder that their liturgy is under persecution.

What the Vatican did and is still doing…is demanding obedience to unjust acts.

Im a Catholic in full communion with Rome. It is not my place to claim wether an excomunication is in effect or not.

But Rome did commit a crime to Tradition, and the Catholic Church as a whole treats the SSPX very badly even today.

A valid crime (if there is such a thing) is still a crime.

Rome did have the authority to suppress seminarians who wished to be ordained in the Traditional Rite by not granting permission to ordain bishops. Rome had the legitimate authority…but it was still wrong regardless.

And now Rome wants the SSPX to apologize.

Funny world isnt it.

JPII apolgizes to Jews, Muslims, protestants and all sorts of heretics.

But doesnt apologize to his orphaned children.

The Concilar Church put Tradition up for adoption.

Im just glad Pope Benedict is trying to get those orphans back…
Click to expand...
Very well put.

People say that ordaining bishops without Papal mandate (disobedience) constituted a schismatic act. It didn’t, because Lefebvre never intended to break from Rome and set up another Church.

Had he done so, his ordaining bishops without Papal mandate would’ve indeed constituted a schismatic act.
 
Originally Posted by JKirkLVNV forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
Which Mass is that, TNT?
Click to expand...
Sola_Roma said:
It is naive to think that the Holy See is free from abuse, when our last Pontiff celebrated some of the most irreverent Masses ive ever seen at the World Youth Days as well as occasions in Africa, India, and Mexico.

Horrible…
Click to expand...
…
I could have posted lots of actual “Mass” pics, but either:
I’d get banned
Or
I’d get blasted as “who u gonna believe” me or your lyin eyes?"
Thanks for yur support…so far.
 
Irish_High_King said:
TNT,

You’re having a laugh and a half!

That Most Holy Family website is sedevacantist.
Click to expand...
No one else will keep the Pic on their website.
Sorry, tried all the googles & no dice. Any suggestion on where else this pic is on the WEB?
RE: 3rd Site…It WORKS for Americans…Canada may have different Big Brother Prohibitions.
 
TNT said:
No one else will keep the Pic on their website.
Sorry, tried all the googles & no dice. Any suggestion on where else this pic is on the WEB?
RE: 3rd Site…I WORKS for Americans…Canada may have different Big Brother Prohibitions.
Click to expand...
No doubt. They’re always keeping us under wraps here. 😉
 
Irish_High_King said:
Very well put.

People say that ordaining bishops without Papal mandate (disobedience) constituted a schismatic act. It didn’t, because Lefebvre never intended to break from Rome and set up another Church.

Had he done so, his ordaining bishops without Papal mandate would’ve indeed constituted a schismatic act.
Click to expand...
If you refuse to submit to the Pope when he has told you not to do ordain bishops you have committed a schismatic AND disobedient act. Yikes. This isn’t that hard. Intention to break from Rome isn’t necessary.
schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him." [Code of Canon Law c.751]
Click to expand...
Can anyone say that Lefebvre submitted to the Roman Pontiff when he told him not to go through with the ordination?
 
bear06 said:
If you refuse to submit to the Pope when he has told you not to do ordain bishops you have committed a schismatic AND disobedient act. Yikes. This isn’t that hard. Intention to break from Rome isn’t necessary.
Click to expand...
Which, I believe, is where the ‘state of grave necessity’ clause in the Canon I posted earlier in the thread, comes into play.
Can anyone say that Lefebvre submitted to the Roman Pontiff when he told him not to go through with the ordination?
Click to expand...
Can anyone say that many priests in ‘good standing’ submit to the Roman Pontiff when they flagrantly disregard ‘Redemptionis Sacramentum’?
 
Irish_High_King said:
Which, I believe, is where the ‘state of grave necessity’ clause in the Canon I posted earlier in the thread, comes into play.

Can anyone say that many priests in ‘good standing’ submit to the Roman Pontiff when they flagrantly disregard ‘Redemptionis Sacramentum’?
Click to expand...
Makes me wonder which is the graver abuse…SSPX disobedience or liturgically abusing so many NO Masses all over the world.:rolleyes:
 
Bear06 will always reply:
Comparing has NOTHING to do with the SSPX disobedience against. [The dogma of Zombieism]

Regardless that the church is being devastated, collapsing, imploding, penetrated by evil on a world wide scale, distruction of any liturgy but inculturation (as if The Christian world had no superior Culture) means nothing concerning any validation of the SSPX Ordinations…so there.
 
TNT said:
Bear06 will always reply:
Comparing has NOTHING to do with the SSPX disobedience against. [The dogma of Zombieism]

Regardless that the church is being devastated, collapsing, imploding, penetrated by evil on a world wide scale, means nothing concerning any validation of the SSPX Ordinations…so there.
Click to expand...
Well, it just might be comparing apples to oranges, but there is definite disobedience on both sides. I just wonder which is graver. Disobeying the Pope in order to stick to tradition, or gravely (and sometimes not so gravely) abusing the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass repeatedly. Which one causes the loss of more souls?
 
paramedicgirl said:
Well, it just might be comparing apples to oranges, but there is definite disobedience on both sides. I just wonder which is graver. Disobeying the Pope in order to stick to tradition, or gravely (and sometimes not so gravely) abusing the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass repeatedly. Which one causes the loss of more souls?
Click to expand...
Zombieism has to do with OBEDIENCE. Salvation comes* only* from obedience it has nothing to do with other behavior or any circumstances whatsoever.
 
TNT said:
Zombieism has to do with OBEDIENCE. Salvation comes* only* from obedience it has nothing to do with other behavior or any circumstances whatsoever.
Click to expand...
Obedience above all. Got it. 😉 But then who wants to be a zombie? I wanna be a saint!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top