Traditionalists (SSPX) Catholics, Why not right?

  • Thread starter Thread starter dizzy_dave
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

dizzy_dave

Guest
Last year my wife and I were almost duped into joining a Traditional Latin Mass church Ran by the SSPX they are not in accord with Rome. This is a Schismatic group. My question is on the surface thay seem to be better more loyal Catholics than a lot of the Novus Ordo Catholics, They have great devotion to the Rosary, Brown Scapular and Eucharistic Adoration, these are powerful devotions. I don’t see how one can sit before Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament for an hour on a regular basis and not be told or be unaware they belong to a Schismatic group, how is that possible?
 
It is not so much a matter of Doctrine or Devotion. It is a matter of Discipline or recognized authority that separates them.
 
40.png
dizzy_dave:
Last year my wife and I were almost duped into joining a Traditional Latin Mass church Ran by the SSPX they are not in accord with Rome. This is a Schismatic group. My question is on the surface thay seem to be better more loyal Catholics than a lot of the Novus Ordo Catholics, They have great devotion to the Rosary, Brown Scapular and Eucharistic Adoration, these are powerful devotions. I don’t see how one can sit before Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament for an hour on a regular basis and not be told or be unaware they belong to a Schismatic group, how is that possible?
Click to expand...
It is only submission to the authority of the Catholic Church and the vicar of Christ (Pope John Paul II) that makes one a Catholic. Since all the devotions you mentioned are wonderful and we know that God can gives grace through these means, it is a real head scratcher as to how they can stay outside of the Church. Still it is obedience, not sacrifice that God requires of us.
 
The spirit of “Ecumenism” present in the church is highly desirable, but our energies are, in my opinion, best spent on wayward Catholics. I think that our first focus should be on our own, then look to other Christians, and ultimately non-Christians.

I am saddened when I read about the “SSPX”. I feel that we have lost some of our most pious and reverent Catholics to the sin of heresy. Let us work to bring them home.
 
Remember, no where does it say the the Gates of Hell would’t try, it just says the Gates of Hell will not Prevail!.. 👍
 
What is SSPX and are they located in very many places? Haven’t run into them anywhere and curious.
 
40.png
Fitz:
What is SSPX and are they located in very many places? Haven’t run into them anywhere and curious.
Click to expand...
The Society of St. Pious X.established by archibishop Marcel Lefebvre. They may sedvacantist. Here is an archive link to This Rock explaining this term,

catholic.com/thisrock/2000/0003toc.asp

However be aware the this is held as a theological opinion, not a certitude of the SSPX. Do a search on SSPX if you want more info.
 
I appreciate your including the THIS ROCK article to explain the SSPX. I had never heard of this organization before. Thank you for the information. Aren’t they doing what they accuse Protestants of doing? Refusing to recognize Pope John Paul II and the Magisterium? :confused:
 
  • I don’t see how one can sit before Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament for an hour on a regular basis and not be told or be unaware they belong to a Schismatic group, how is that possible?*
They hide their heresies
 
The SSPX is not sedevacantist on the whole. The reason they are in schism is because the Archbishop consecrated Bishops for the society without the permission of the Holy Father.

The Pope agreed in principle to at least one consecration, but Lefebvre went ahead with it before receiving the go ahead. He should have waited for the Pope.

This does not make SSPXers evil or malicious. I think they are people who see all of the evils and perversions going on in the greater Church and as a result, they draw the wrong conclusions.
That is just my opinion.
Peace,
Ryan
 
As would be defined, the SSPX is not in heresy, they do not deny the doctrines and dogmas of the faith. Thir sacraments are valid and at worst, the SSPX is in the same state as the Eastren Orthodox, in schism, but not heresy. In recent years, there have been conflicting signals from the Vatican if the SSPX is in schism or in an irregular relationship with Rome.

We must pray for a regularisation soon between the SSPX and Rome, because the next Pope may not be as generous, and it seems elements within the SSPX are headed towrds the Sede Vacante view.
 
40.png
JNB:
Thir sacraments are valid
Click to expand...
Some sacraments (such as Confession and Marriage) require “faculties” - permission from the Diocesan Bishop. I’ve been told that SSPX priests cannot validly provide these sacraments. (For this reason, I wonder about Communion at Indult Masses - if the goal is to get SSPX’ers back into the fold, charity requires that they be told they need to go to valid Confession first.)
 
As fervent as their devotional life may be, they were born in disobedience to the Pope. (Note that this has occurred on a smaller scale with some who believe in unapproved apparations.) It is a tragedy. We can only pray that they return to full communion; otherwise they risk being just another historical anomaly.

I wonder what the chances are that they would return by incorporating into the Priestly Fraternity of St.Peter (FSSP), for example.

JimG
 
40.png
JimG:
I wonder what the chances are that they would return by incorporating into the Priestly Fraternity of St.Peter (FSSP), for example.

JimG
Click to expand...
I don’t think that they would incorporate into the FSSP (of course, if the Pope told them to, then they should). However, you raise a good point. What the SSPX needs to do is crawl on its knees back to the Holy Father and do whatever needs to be done in order to be regularized. With this accomplished, they could exist in a situation similar to that of the FSSP, where they are given an indult for the Tridentine Latin Mass in full Communion with the See of Peter.

Sadly, I think the SSPX does not trust John Paul II, and thus a reconciliation may not be possible under his pontificate. It is sad, because John Paul II is very accomodating and it seems like he has wanted a reconcilation ever since the consecrations.

Much will come down to the next Pope. When the Holy Father passes on to his eternal reward, I think the SSPX will either reconcile with his successor, or they will go Sedevacantist like the SSPV (or maybe some SSPXers will reconcile while others go sede). We should hope and pray that the reconciliation does occur and that the SSPX becomes like the FSSP.
Peace be with you,
Ryan
 
Anyone else think there are to many acronyms and letters in this thread? :o I’m very confused. Would someone more knowlegable than me please give a very brief history of each of these groups and who is or isn’t in complete union with Rome? I’m getting the impression some were not in union but now are?

I’ve seen SSPX, FSSP and SSPV.

Thanks

Kris
 
Melman, I know you like to jab at traditionalists, but let me set teh record staright. The sacraments of the SSPX are valid, while their faculties are not regular, a Catholic married by a SSPX priest does not need to get re married, and a Catholic going back to a regular relationship with Rome does not need to re confess their sins, and when the Campos deal in Brazil was worked out two years ago, these Catholics were simpily regularised without haveing to “redo” the sacraments they have allready been given.

Like it or not Melman, even the Vatican considers the SSPX bishops to be valid Bishops, and in fact, if there was any question about their valdity, the late Bishop Rangel of Campos Brazil would have been re concecrated Bishop when Campos was regularised with Rome, since Bp. Rangel was concecrated by the 4 SSPX Bishops in 93, note, he was not re concecrated when the regularisation took place. Whoever is telling you this Melman is not giving you the complete story.
 
If the SSPX gets back into a regular relationship with Rome, it will probably be based on the deal Rome offered it in late 2001, that is spmthing similar to the set up Opus Dei now has, where SSPX priests would be directly under their own, not the diocean bishops.

The problem with the SSPX is they have gone much further than their founder wanted to go, especially with Bp. Williamson who seems more of a cult of personality.
 
40.png
JNB:
Melman, I know you like to jab at traditionalists, but let me set teh record staright. … Whoever is telling you this Melman is not giving you the complete story.
Click to expand...
I’m really tired of the allegations that I’m anti-anything. I’m simply trying to get to the truth. Many of the things that are posted in the name of traditionalism have been proven either untrue, or partially true - not really the whole story.
 
So you say Melman, look I think the SSPX should put its pride aside and accept the deal it was offerd by Rome, but you have been making jabs at Traditionalists such as claiming attendence at the Indult in Pheonix is less than it is, and now saying the faculties of the SSPX priests are invalid rather than being illregular. Get to the truth melman, you yourself need to look at both sides of the story.

I gave you the background of the regularisation of the Campos diocese, and what took place, that should tell you the difference between invalid and illregular.
 
40.png
kwitz:
Anyone else think there are to many acronyms and letters in this thread? :o I’m very confused. Would someone more knowlegable than me please give a very brief history of each of these groups and who is or isn’t in complete union with Rome? I’m getting the impression some were not in union but now are?

I’ve seen SSPX, FSSP and SSPV.

Thanks

Kris
Click to expand...
Hi Kris,
The SSPX (Society of Saint Pius X) was founded by Archbishop Lefebvre in the 1970s in order to form traditional Priests who would offer the traditional Latin Rite of Mass. The society was founded with the approval of Pope Paul VI.

When the Archbishop started getting older and felt that death was imminent, he asked the Vatican for permission to consecrated Bishops for the Society. Approval for the consecrations was slow in coming (though the Vatican agreed in principle that at least one Bishop could be consecrated for the society) and so the Archbishop didn’t wait for approval from the Holy Father. Instead, he went ahead and consecrated four bishops for the society. Consecrating Bishops without the approval of the Pope is a schismatic act.

In response to this, the Pope issued the encylical *Ecclesia Dei *which extended an indult for the old Latin Mass and subsquently the FSSP (Fraternal Society of Saint Peter) was created. The FSSP is the established Priestly society (with full approval from the Vatican and the endorsement of John Paul II) that offers the traditional Mass according to the Ecclesia Dei indult. The FSSP was also formed to absorb defectors from the SSPX. I myself am considering joining the FSSP.

The SSPV (Society of Saint Pius V) is a group of sedevacantists who broke off from the SSPX. The official line of the SSPX is not sedevacantist. In other words, they believe John Paul II is the legitimate Pope, but they have failed to reconcile with him.

Hardliners in the SSPX who did not accept the validity of John Paul II as Pope formed their own society. As I understand it, their Masses are neither licit nor valid.
I hope that helps you.
God bless,
Ryan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top