Vatican Offers SSPX Ordinariate

  • Thread starter Thread starter Warloff
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ProVobis said:
I’ll agree with your earlier assessment (post #12). No more SSPX bishops in any case.
Click to expand...
No. That wouldn’t fly.

The SSPX would require that bishops would be consecrated from among the ranks of the priests of the SSPX, as the need arises, for the purpose of dispensing the sacraments of confirmation and holy orders.

The one change from current practice would be that the persons to be consecrated to the episcopate would be selected by the SSPX subject to the approval of Rome.

Back in 1988, Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger were willing to permit the consecration of one or two priests of the SSPX to the episcopate, but 1) were not willing to permit four and 2) did not approve of all of the candidates. I don’t think the situation would be much different in the future post-regularization: Both the SSPX and Rome would have to agree that the necessity exists and both the SSPX and Rome would have to agree on the candidate.
 
Please help me understand what would be the point of having their own ordinariate?

I understand the Anglicans because their liturgy is different, no?

What are the criteria for becoming an ordinariate. What are the benefits?

Thanks.
 
TrueLight said:
Please help me understand what would be the point of having their own ordinariate?

I understand the Anglicans because their liturgy is different, no?

What are the criteria for becoming an ordinariate. What are the benefits?

Thanks.
Click to expand...
It would basically be like being a mini-rite. The SSPX clergy would still have to follow the rules and regulations of the Latin rite, but they would be able to maintain a certain level of autonomy. Most importantly, they would have their own leadership that would report to the Vatican and thus bypass diocesan bishops (in contrast the FSSP must be invited to dioceses by bishops and all their clergy are technically appointed by diocesan bishops). Latin bishops really have about as much say in the Anglican ordinariate as they do in the Eastern Rite, which is practically none.
 
ConstantineTG said:
Not to mention that they are probably a cause for some of the crisis.

But I do hope they repent and return to the Church.
Click to expand...
Who in the SSPX:
  1. called Eastern Orthodox Churches “true particular Churches” of the Church of Christ, thus creating a federation of separated communities?
  2. said we shouldn’t pray for the Jews in a missionary sense?
  3. said that the anti-Modernist documents of the early 20th century only had a contingent character, even though Pope St. Pius X threatened excommunication for anyone who would contradict them?
  4. repudiated the dogmatic definition of the Second Council of Lyons, which teaches that we will be resurrected with the flesh we now possess?
  5. criticized the Apostles’ Creed by saying it was subject to a “false development” because it focused on Christ’s judgment upon His Second Coming?
  6. called the Council of Trent’s teaching on the priesthood “weak”?
  7. criticized the term “original sin”?
Oh wait, no one from the SSPX has done any of that. I do know one cleric in particular – and who resides in Rome – who has, however…
 
SouthpawLink said:
Who in the SSPX:
  1. called Eastern Orthodox Churches “true particular Churches” of the Church of Christ, thus creating a federation of separated communities?
  2. said we shouldn’t pray for the Jews in a missionary sense?
  3. said that the anti-Modernist documents of the early 20th century only had a contingent character, even though Pope St. Pius X threatened excommunication for anyone who would contradict them?
  4. repudiated the dogmatic definition of the Second Council of Lyons, which teaches that we will be resurrected with the flesh we now possess?
  5. criticized the Apostles’ Creed by saying it was subject to a “false development” because it focused on Christ’s judgment upon His Second Coming?
  6. called the Council of Trent’s teaching on the priesthood “weak”?
  7. criticized the term “original sin”?
Oh wait, no one from the SSPX has done any of that. I do know one cleric in particular – and who resides in Rome – who has, however…
Click to expand...
Who has questioned the Pope despite a Church dogma giving the Pope full authority in the Church, which includes requiring his permission before ordaining anyone?

Who has influenced a Ukrainian order into holding on to Latinizations rather than following their own Patriarch into rediscovering their true traditions to the point of becoming schismatics?

Who questions the life and legacy of a Pope whom the Church has declared a Blessed and has given the title “the Great”?
 
Warloff said:
Blessed John Paul II has not been given the title “the Great” by the church.
Click to expand...
Pope Benedict XVI says he is. Why is it that when he says something in favor of traditionalism, it speaks for the Church. But when it not, then suddenly the Church doesn’t say so? 🤷
 
ConstantineTG said:
Pope Benedict XVI says he is. Why is it that when he says something in favor of traditionalism, it speaks for the Church. But when it not, then suddenly the Church doesn’t say so? 🤷
Click to expand...
His official Vatican webpage doesn’t list him as John Paul the Great. Importantly when Benedict beatified John Paul he did not officially give him that title (for example Pope Benedict officially gave Mother Teresa the title of Blessed Teresa of Calcutta). John Paul’s official title is Blessed Pope John Paul II.

I look forward to the day when it’s Saint Pope John Paul II. Perhaps in time the church might recognize him as a “great,” but I think it’s a few centuries too early for that.
 
Warloff said:
His official Vatican webpage doesn’t list him as John Paul the Great. Importantly when Benedict beatified John Paul he did not officially give him that title (for example Pope Benedict officially gave Mother Teresa the title of Blessed Teresa of Calcutta). John Paul’s official title is Blessed Pope John Paul II.

I look forward to the day when it’s Saint Pope John Paul II. Perhaps in time the church might recognize him as a “great,” but I think it’s a few centuries too early for that.
Click to expand...
The Church has never given the title of “Great” to anyone. It has been applied by historians and the public, however.

catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0510fea3.asp

y.
 
Happy times! 😃 Now lets just hope things go better than they did in 1988 😉 and that the Society retains its integrity…
 
Lady_Marchmain said:
I wonder if they do understand, especially Bishop Fellay, who is as stubborn as a mule. If they did care for the Church and the establishment of so many good things their order can offer, I would think they would be eager and cooperative to be in complete harmony with the Pope and their fellow Catholics. Instead it seems they are “holier than Rome” and we must all come to them.
Click to expand...
So was Jesus Christ.
 
I think the notice posted on the SSPX site regarding the Sept. 14 meeting in Rome is worth quoting here:

"According to the agenda given to the Superior General, the purpose of this meeting is to give a final evaluation of the doctrinal discussions between Rome and the SSPX which have occurred since October 2009.

Bishop Fellay also stated on August 15 that no other specifics are known at this time."

That makes it clear that the only item on the agenda is the already concluded doctrinal talks. That says nothing of an “ordinariate”.

sspx.org/discussions/bishop_fellay_confirms_8-24-2011.htm

y.
 
Well I certainly hope and pray that the Rome and the SSPX can work things out. I wouldn’t have to travel as far for Latin Mass! 👍

That said, the SSPX would have some serious repudiation to do regarding some of their attitudes regarding the Council and the Church since the Council. They have to repudiate their position that “Catholics cannot in conscience attend the Novus Ordo Missae” and that there are “latent problems in the council’s documents.” (BTW, I got these quotes right from the Apologetic Materials section on the SSPX’s own American website) Not to rain on the parade, but I just don’t see this happening. And if it does, I’m sure that some of the SSPX chapels would be unhappy with it and split.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top