What Makes SSPX schismatic?

[bear06]

There is no documentation from a doctor or hospital needed if you are sick. You can simply stay at home and there is no sin. To prove it, just ask any priest if you have committed a sin, and he will tell you: NO, and he will not require any documentation from a doctor or nurse that verifies that you have been sick.

Uh, I think you know the part of your statement I was referring to. Here’s the part I’m talking about.

Similarly, if a Catholic finds that he is losing his faith by attending Peter, Paul and Mary rock and roll Masses, clown Masses, Halloween Masses, gay Masses, feminist Masses or Masses which have similar elements, he may attend a respectful Mass at SSPX in order to preserve his Catholic faith.

 

[palmas85]

There was never a question of validity. They are quite valid. They simply are not licit.

Then if they are valid, would the Eucharist be the body and Blood of Christ after consecration?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Then if they are valid, would the Eucharist be the body and Blood of Christ after consecration?

Yes, but illicitly and sinfully (according to Archbishop Burke) confected, sort of “out of order.”

Do we, as a Church, not believe that the Orthodox liturgies also confect the Holy Sacrifice? Or is that another area where we’ve been mislead by the Popes?

 

[bear06]

Then if they are valid, would the Eucharist be the body and Blood of Christ after consecration?

I’m not seeing where this line of questioning is going. There are many Masses done out there illicitly with a valid Eucharist.

 

[palmas85]

Yes, but illicitly and sinfully (according to Archbishop Burke) confected, sort of “out of order.”

Do we, as a Church, not believe that the Orthodox liturgies also confect the Holy Sacrifice? Or is that another area where we’ve been mislead by the Popes?

If it is the body and blood of Christ do you really believe that it could be sinfully confected? Come on Kirk, you’re going way out on a limb with this one. Christ can be confected from sinful intent?

Even granting that it may be possible to do that, would one not receive the same graces if receiving said Eucharist while properly disposed? Or would the disobedience of the Priest invalidate the graces bestowed by the Eucharist?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

If it is the body and blood of Christ do you really believe that it could be sinfully confected? Come on Kirk, you’re going way out on a limb with this one. Christ can be confected from sinful intent?

Even granting that it may be possible to do that, would one not receive the same graces if receiving said Eucharist while properly disposed? Or would the disobedience of the Priest invalidate the graces bestowed by the Eucharist?

I think the Church dealt with that error long ago, that the spiritual state of the minister had no effect on the Sacrament.

What about priests who’ve been suspended by their bishops? If they were to offer the Mass, sure, it would be valid, but it would be illicit. They can confect the Holy Sacrifice, but still sin through disobedience.

Why have authority if it isn’t going to be obeyed?

 

[TuEsPetrus]

Bear06 do not even dare compare Luther “state of neccessity” with that of Archbishop Lefebvre, because that is not even a question. Once again you have to humble your pride and accept that you are wrong, “Supreme legislator” true obedience is done by those who keep tradition with a spirit of continuing the faith. Archsbishop knew and he did, that he was going to die soon and needed to keep tradition. If you cant somehow have the brains to understand canon law when it says even if it is not necessary but he saw the neccessity then the excomunication is invalid. It is that simple. Also the Holy Father JPII, “respect must be given to those have a love for the Latin mass.” Good luck being a traditional Catholic who happens to have no indult, thye have so few indults its ridiculous, so few religous congregations who are true to the traditional rite. Why do you think there are so many sedevacantist out there because the SSPX even with all the Masses they have all over the US does not suffice the so many trads Catholics who are out there. The SSPX is bigger then all the indult masses has there out there worldwide they have more priest and religous. People need their spiriuality that is why when you have one bishop in every country who allow the Roman Rite in their parish once a month or w/e many few times they have it. The Catholic Church because of her policies has allowed for SedeVacantism to grow WAY WAY bigger than it should, because for so many years it has been hostile to good Catholic’s but rather extremely nice in the name of Ecumenism to Christians, Buddhist and so on. For so many years they intentionally wanted to get rid of the Latin mass, the liberals. In the eyes of “Catholic’s”, trads. are the worst thing ever it is sad o think or say that. Traditional Catholic’s are true to the faith and the Pope in every aspect, for those who dont then dont even claim to be one. Look at the reality we have literally almost NOTHING of tradition left, and the little that is left is away written in some very small magazine who is read by like 1% of Catholics. Instead of fighting against those who have the faith why dont you quit preaching to the choir and start by converting those Novus Ordo Catholic’s who know nothing of their faith or tradition. This is not a Catholic vs Catholic battle, people like yourself are the ones who make the enemies of the Church happy when they see we are disunited in the most importants tenets of the faith. Sedevacantism is thriving because they have so litle Latin Masses that it is the only way some Catholics get their spiriuality because there ARE SO MANY out there tha not even the SSPX have enough priest worldwide to handle even the USA trad catholics. SSPX and indults are merely a drop in the bucket in the world of Traditional Catholics. That makes me sad and I pray that it will change one day. But quit comparing Luther wih Lefebvre because when you make a statement like that you are judging a holy Bishop of the Church and you have no authority to do that. When Saint Padre Pio was told by someone about an evil done by a bishop and that person started to bicker about that bishop and judging him. The Saint said and smacked him in the head hard and said I will beat you down to the floor if he ever did that again and admonished him very harshly. It also comes out in one of the many Saint Padre Pio movies and some of the books. Never judge and compare a Catholic to a heretic NEVER.

 

[bear06]

Bear06 do not even dare compare Luther “state of neccessity” with that of Archbishop Lefebvre, because that is not even a question.

Please, spare the orders.

Once again you have to humble your pride and accept that you are wrong, “Supreme legislator” true obedience is done by those who keep tradition with a spirit of continuing the faith.

 

[bear06]

…continued

The Catholic Church because of her policies has allowed for SedeVacantism to grow WAY WAY bigger than it should, because for so many years it has been hostile to good Catholic’s but rather extremely nice in the name of Ecumenism to Christians, Buddhist and so on.

Sorry but proud is as proud does. Remember, most sedevacantists start out as SSPXers, not raving liberals.

For so many years they intentionally wanted to get rid of the Latin mass, the liberals. In the eyes of “Catholic’s”, trads. are the worst thing ever it is sad o think or say that. Traditional Catholic’s are true to the faith and the Pope in every aspect, for those who dont then dont even claim to be one. Look at the reality we have literally almost NOTHING of tradition left, and the little that is left is away written in some very small magazine who is read by like 1% of Catholics

.
And here comes the “everyone is so mean to us” argument.

Instead of fighting against those who have the faith why dont you quit preaching to the choir and start by converting those Novus Ordo Catholic’s who know nothing of their faith or tradition.

And how do you know I don’t? Mighty presumptuous of you, don’t you think?

This is not a Catholic vs Catholic battle, people like yourself are the ones who make the enemies of the Church happy when they see we are disunited in the most importants tenets of the faith.

We’re disunited in the most important tenets of the Faith? Well, I don’t know if that’s true but I know I’m united to the Church in tenets of Faith and I guess that matters most.

Sedevacantism is thriving because they have so litle Latin Masses that it is the only way some Catholics get their spiriuality because there ARE SO MANY out there tha not even the SSPX have enough priest worldwide to handle even the USA trad catholics.

Again, this argument doesn’t hold water. The SSPX opened the door thus the split from the SSPX to the SSPV.

SSPX and indults are merely a drop in the bucket in the world of Traditional Catholics. That makes me sad and I pray that it will change one day.

And none of this has much to do with what makes the SSPX schismatic.

But quit comparing Luther wih Lefebvre because when you make a statement like that you are judging a holy Bishop of the Church and you have no authority to do that.

Sorry but they were both in schism and both excommunicated according to the Church. I did not impose those penalties. I think it quite funny that you feel free to call him holy and I can’t agree with Church teaching.

When Saint Padre Pio was told by someone about an evil done by a bishop and that person started to bicker about that bishop and judging him. The Saint said and smacked him in the head hard and said I will beat you down to the floor if he ever did that again and admonished him very harshly. It also comes out in one of the many Saint Padre Pio movies and some of the books. Never judge and compare a Catholic to a heretic NEVER.

I’m betting that bishop was not judged schismatic and excommunicated by the Church. Also, I never said that I was judging him a heretic. I said that I was guessing it was probably so.

 

[TuEsPetrus]

That Bishop what I was talking about was having relations with women of his diocese and it was proven that he was. I think that alone should suffice to say, and Saint Padre Pio talked with Archsbishop Lefebvre, now of what he told him I would not rely on anything but just the pictures its him kissing the bishops hands. SSPV what does that have to do with anything. If you make the argument that all Sede-vacantist start from SSPX-ers then the same goes for indult priest k so please dont think you are some type of trad. that defends tradition. FSSP and the indults started by whom all the indult masses and the Ecclesia Dei were priest of the what _____? If you dont know the answer yes its the SSPX. There were no such things as the indult masses before so I guess all the faithful are excomunicated ipso facto. I hope you understand that with your comments in the forums you confuse people rather then bring them to the faith. The debates and the quotes you give are useless, no matter how much stuff you quote or say look at the reality of the situation. “Fight for a indult mass in your parish.” As if anyone has to give a fight for a liberal mass. Before and even after this Motu Propio if the Bishop does not allow you, good luck in that fight. Good luck finding a priest who knows his latin and understands it. All those who know are either dying or retiring already. Just because you have been blessed just like I have with a Latin mass, there are so many that i know that have to drive 10 hours every sunday to get to a Latin mass but they still do it. If you are poor then I guess this mass is just not for you because you are too concerned with just working and surviving and dont have the luxury of a car to drive them too many miles to get to the TLM. Its simple really, if you have money you can move into a city which has a more traditional mass, but if you are stuck in a place where you cant do much then you are in the position of the middle class person. It takes years and years to get something like that established. Unless you give your whole life up and truly want to follow tradition wherever it is. In December I will become a Carmelite monk and I will tell you this, from personal experience. I had to fight with blood sweat and tears to find somewhere its traditional and still under Vatican II. I love the TLM so much that I put my money where my mouth is. I go pursue it no matter at what cost, even if its across the Globe, but most people cant do that. I am young and I am able to do that. You make it sound like its so easy, to find a priest that first of all has the faith and then knows how to say the Latin mass. You make it sound like its no problem and that it’s so easy to follow every single word you say and that by quoting some ecclesial document it is infallible and we have to by penalty of death follow every word of it. Most people would never attend a Novus Ordo mass in their life if they had the option, am talking about the more conservative wing. In the USA we have it easy, but take a look in other countries. Actions speak louder than words, we can talk all day but at the end of the day if we go living are worldy lives, if the liturgy does not affect you then it does you no good if you attend the Novus Ordo or the TLM.

 

[ThereCanBeOnly1]

Bear06 do not even dare compare Luther “state of neccessity” with that of Archbishop Lefebvre, because that is not even a question.

This of course is only logical since Luther was a manifest heretic .

Once again you have to humble your pride and accept that you are wrong, “Supreme legislator” true obedience is done by those who keep tradition with a spirit of continuing the faith. Archsbishop knew and he did, that he was going to die soon and needed to keep tradition. If you cant somehow have the brains to understand canon law when it says even if it is not necessary but he saw the neccessity then the excomunication is invalid. It is that simple.

It is that simple, yes.

 

[old_altar_boy]

I think the Church dealt with that error long ago, that the spiritual state of the minister had no effect on the Sacrament.

What about priests who’ve been suspended by their bishops? If they were to offer the Mass, sure, it would be valid, but it would be illicit. They can confect the Holy Sacrifice, but still sin through disobedience.

Why have authority if it isn’t going to be obeyed?

You avoided the question Kirk. Would the graces received from said Eucharist be cancelled out by the sinful intent of the offending Priest?

 

[ThereCanBeOnly1]

Also the Holy Father JPII, “respect must be given to those have a love for the Latin mass.”

As many can see within the Traditional Forum the modernists do not even listen to Pope John Paul II when he said that respect must be given…
It is amazing that modernist movement will go so far as to disobey Pope JP II in order to destroy the TLM. They are so blind by their agenda they unaware that they do not conform to the Popes’ wishes. This is blatant disregard for the Pope.

The Catholic Church ***(I would say the Vatican not The Church)***because of her policies has allowed for SedeVacantism to grow WAY WAY bigger than it should, because for so many years it has been hostile to good Catholic’s but rather extremely nice in the name of Ecumenism to Christians, Buddhist and so on.

Let us not forget Islam, for which the present stance of the Vatican is that it holds High Regards and Esteem for Islam. A religion that denies Christ and the Most Holy Trinity.

But quit comparing Luther wih Lefebvre because when you make a statement like that you are judging a holy Bishop of the Church and you have no authority to do that. … Never judge and compare a Catholic to a heretic NEVER.

This may be difficult for the modernists to do since they will go to the extreme to realize their agenda. They have consistently equated manifest heretics, such as Luther, to Catholics. What is more intriguing is that they seem to know more about the likes of Luther and Cramner (HERETICS) than anything else. Makes you wonder if they truly are Catholics or…

Instead of fighting against those who have the faith why dont you quit preaching to the choir and start by converting those Novus Ordo Catholic’s who know nothing of their faith or tradition. This is not a Catholic vs Catholic battle, people like yourself are the ones who make the enemies of the Church happy when they see we are disunited in the most importants tenets of the faith.

Again, they would rather dispute with Catholics on the Traditional Forum than on the other forums who are constantly bashing Catholicism (e.g. Islam). This is because modernists will go to any extreme to try and eliminate the TLM, and because they follow the modernist false Ecumenism (they have high regard and great esteem for the religion of Islam which denies Christ’s divinty and the most Holy Trinity). Modernists need to read what the Great St Thomas Aquinas said of Mohamed and worship at a mosque in the Summa Theoligica, oh I forgot most modernists or NO-service attendees do not even know what that is:shrug:

 

[palmas85]

I think the Church dealt with that error long ago, that the spiritual state of the minister had no effect on the Sacrament.

What about priests who’ve been suspended by their bishops? If they were to offer the Mass, sure, it would be valid, but it would be illicit. They can confect the Holy Sacrifice, but still sin through disobedience.

Why have authority if it isn’t going to be obeyed?

You have avoided the question Kirk. Would one still receive the graces of the Eucharist through such reception or would the sinful action of the Priest invalidate it? Simple question.

 

[Sure]

As many can see within the Traditional Forum the modernists do not even listen to Pope John Paul II when he said that respect must be given…
It is amazing that modernist movement will go so far as to disobey Pope JP II in order to destroy the TLM. They are so blind by their agenda they unaware that they do not conform to the Popes’ wishes. This is blatant disregard for the Pope.

Let us not forget Islam, for which the present stance of the Vatican is that it holds High Regards and Esteem for Islam. A religion that denies Christ and the Most Holy Trinity.

This may be difficult for the modernists to do since they will go to the extreme to realize their agenda. They have consistently equated manifest heretics, such as Luther, to Catholics. What is more intriguing is that they seem to know more about the likes of Luther and Cramner (HERETICS) than anything else. Makes you wonder if they truly are Catholics or…

Again, they would rather dispute with Catholics on the Traditional Forum than on the other forums who are constantly bashing Catholicism (e.g. Islam). This is because modernists will go to any extreme to try and eliminate the TLM, and because they follow the modernist false Ecumenism (they have high regard and great esteem for the religion of Islam which denies Christ’s divinty and the most Holy Trinity). Modernists need to read what the Great St Thomas Aquinas said of Mohamed and worship at a mosque in the Summa Theoligica, oh I forgot most modernists or NO-service attendees do not even know what that is:shrug:

This thread is on the SSPX. Not Islam or modernism.

Why the implication that people who attend the OF Mass don’t know St. Thomas Aquinas? That seems like a stupid assertion, especially considering the US universities that truly teach St. Thomas Aquinas in depth like Thomas Aquinas College, University of Dallas, Christendom College, Magdalen College, etc. all have very well attended daily OF Masses (and sometimes in Latin) on campus.

And let’s be very clear, there is not one person on this entire thread who advocates getting rid of Latin, virtually all of us want MORE of it. No one is against the TLM either. No one is against Summorum Pontificum. No one here is in favor of liturgical abuse. Please discard your strawman, it’s worthless.

 

[Sure]

You have avoided the question Kirk. Would one still receive the graces of the Eucharist through such reception or would the sinful action of the Priest invalidate it? Simple question.

Palmas,

The communicant still receives graces from the reception of a validly confected Eucharist. And a priest always has the ability to confect the Eucharist, this can never be removed from him. However, it is a grave sin for a priest to confect the Eucharist when he has been suspended a divinis or excommunicated. In those cases, the priest is forbidden from exercising his priestly office. However, if the communicant is aware that the priest is excommunicated or suspended he should avoid participating in such a Mass since the priest is doing something sinful.

There was a good example of this recently in St. Louis where Archbishop Burke warned his flock not to attend a Mass said by an excommunicated priest in his diocese. He said to do so knowingly would be a mortal sin.

 

[GerardP]

I’m not seeing where this line of questioning is going. There are many Masses done out there illicitly with a valid Eucharist.

And don’t forget that many illicit liturgies are done with full diocesan approval. Some are sacreligious. Yet despite the insults given to Our Lord, there is no action but instead connivance on the part of the diocesan ordinary.

 

[GerardP]

Whoa. I guess I hit a nerve. You believe there was massive incompetence perhaps unholiness on the part of the Holy Father. I don’t. Sorry, I believe what the Church teaches in her documents. Period. Nothing more to discuss.

Funny, I was thinking the same thing. As soon as I challenge the phoney “bewilderment” of Fr. Z. and point to real life examples of negligence and then start putting the buck where it belongs, that’s when it’s time for you to bail on the discussion.

I remember Patrick Madrid used to pull this stunt when confronted with questions about the Church vis a vis the SSPX that he knew the answer to but wouldn’t answer because it would be an admission that I was correct and he was wrong.

This is why popular Catholic apologists of the conservative stripe avoid actual formal debates with prominent traditionalist apologists. It’s also why EWTN won’t request any interviews from the SSPX. The only time I’ve seen an SSPX priest on EWTN was in the “Rome Reports” segment. The Vatican is willing to hear the SSPX more than the English speaking conservative apologetics movement.

I for one would love to see Raymond Arroyo interview Bishop Williamson.

If your are simply going to go with selective evidence namely “Church documents” that fit sort of a sola scriptura mentality and an ultramontanism. Fine. But don’t pretend to know what you’re talking about with regards to the SSPX if you’re afraid to look at the whole picture and see reality for what it is.

 

[Sure]

Funny, I was thinking the same thing. As soon as I challenge the phoney “bewilderment” of Fr. Z. and point to real life examples of negligence and then start putting the buck where it belongs, that’s when it’s time for you to bail on the discussion.

I remember Patrick Madrid used to pull this stunt when confronted with questions about the Church vis a vis the SSPX that he knew the answer to but wouldn’t answer because it would be an admission that I was correct and he was wrong.

This is why popular Catholic apologists of the conservative stripe avoid actual formal debates with prominent traditionalist apologists. It’s also why EWTN won’t request any interviews from the SSPX. The only time I’ve seen an SSPX priest on EWTN was in the “Rome Reports” segment. The Vatican is willing to hear the SSPX more than the English speaking conservative apologetics movement.

I for one would love to see Raymond Arroyo interview Bishop Williamson.

If your are simply going to go with selective evidence namely “Church documents” that fit sort of a sola scriptura mentality and an ultramontanism. Fine. But don’t pretend to know what you’re talking about with regards to the SSPX if you’re afraid to look at the whole picture and see reality for what it is.

I didn’t disappear.

The reason I thought I hit a nerve is because you went on long rant at the mention of Fr. Z.

My evidence of Church documents isn’t selective, it includes all of the Church documents on the subject that I have been able to find. If you have others, please post them. Or perhaps present an argument on how the Church is in error and you are correct.

And the reason EWTN doesn’t interview Bishop Williamson is probably because he represents a tiny minority of Catholics and the interview would not be in any way relevent to their viewers.

 

[Sure]

And don’t forget that many illicit liturgies are done with full diocesan approval. Some are sacreligious. Yet despite the insults given to Our Lord, there is no action but instead connivance on the part of the diocesan ordinary.

And this is terrible and should be dealt with strongly. Illicitness should be stamped out everywhere. Bishops should hold their priests accountable and not encourage or allow such behavior.

Illicit actions in the Mass are always wrong and should always be dealt with.