whoo hhoooo

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tsion
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Tsion

Guest
Press release of the FSSP following upon the Decree of the Congregation for Bishops

Fribourg (Switzerland), Saturday, January 24th, 2009 www.fssp.org

The Congregation for Bishops, having made public today the decree lifting the excommunication declared in 1988 regarding the four bishops ordained without pontifical mandate by Archbishop Lefebvre, The Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter wishes to express its joy at the news of this step forward towards unity.

Since its foundation, the Fraternity of Saint Peter has not ceased to witness to its double attachment to the Seat of Peter and to the Tradition of the Church, praying constantly that a reconciliation could be achieved between the Holy See and the Society of Saint Pius X.

Today the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter unites itself completely to the hope of the Holy See, desiring that this step be followed by the prompt accomplishment of full communion with the Church of the entire Fraternity of Saint Pius X, thus testifying true fidelity and true recognition of the Magisterium and of the authority of the Pope with the proof of visible unity. (Decree of the Congregation for Bishops, 21 January 2009)

The Fraternity of Saint Peter would like to express its profound gratitude to the Sovereign Pontiff. It sees in this magnanimous gesture a call to unity for all Catholics in order to spread in the world, faced with all the contradictions of our day, the Reign of Christ.
 
Today the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter unites itself completely to the hope of the Holy See, desiring “that this step be followed by the prompt accomplishment of full communion with the Church of the entire Fraternity of Saint Pius X, thus testifying true fidelity and true recognition of the Magisterium and of the authority of the Pope with the proof of visible unity”. (Decree of the Congregation for Bishops, 21 January 2009)

Yes! 😃
 
A joyous day for the Church of Christ! God bless Pope Benedict, and God bless the SSPX.
 
And what does the sspx think of the fssp? From their website:"

"*They are therefore Conciliar Catholics and not traditional Catholics.

This being so, attending their Mass is:
Code: 
*

  accepting the compromise on which they are based,
*

  accepting the direction taken by the Conciliar Church and the consequent destruction of the Catholic Faith and practices, and
*

  accepting, in particular, the lawfulness and doctrinal soundness of the Novus Ordo Missae and Vatican II.
That is why a Catholic ought not to attend their Masses."*
 
which is why they ought to be praised for their charity and good will despite inflammatory remarks in the past. God bless the FSSP, they are truly a set of good holy men!
 
And what does the sspx think of the fssp? From their website:"

"They are therefore Conciliar Catholics and not traditional Catholics.
And so forth.

Keep in mind that the FSSP was founded by clergy who left SSPX, and therefore broke the cardinal rule: Don’t Quit the Club!
 
How can anyone love the Church so much, but at the same time be so ignorant of Her?

Too many of you have no idea what the issues you rail against are, so have you imbibed the false spirit of modernism and liberalism proffered by Her enemies from within. One recoils from the image of satan’s glee over his success–at the precise moment of his failure: the lifting of the excommunication of Tradition by His Holiness. But his gates won’t prevail against the Church of Jesus Christ, which is the Catholic Church founded by Christ and rich in His Tradition and Teachings.
 
maurin said:
How can anyone love the Church so much, but at the same time be so ignorant of Her?

Too many of you have no idea what the issues you rail against are, so have you imbibed the false spirit of modernism and liberalism proffered by Her enemies from within. One recoils from the image of satan’s glee over his success–at the precise moment of his failure: the lifting of the excommunication of Tradition by His Holiness. But his gates won’t prevail against the Church of Jesus Christ, which is the Catholic Church founded by Christ and rich in His Tradition and Teachings.
Click to expand...
IMO, I think that’s a bit harsh. I had a look at the website, and the remarks there (for all the world to see) about the FSSP are certainly less than accurate, not to mention that they are quite uncharitable. (Its interesting that they don’t seem to bash the ICRSS – at least I couldn’t find anything on the site about it.) First time I’ve ever seen one religious institute bash another, and taken altogether, it sound suspiciously like a bad case of sour grapes particularly directed at the FSSP. In short, in this case, I have to more-or-less agree with Cluny.

The FSSP & the ICRSS are both fine, solid religious institutes.
 
malphono said:
IMO, I think that’s a bit harsh. I had a look at the website, and the remarks there (for all the world to see) about the FSSP are certainly less than accurate, not to mention that they are quite uncharitable. (Its interesting that they don’t seem to bash the ICRSS – at least I couldn’t find anything on the site about it.) First time I’ve ever seen one religious institute bash another, and taken altogether, it sound suspiciously like a bad case of sour grapes particularly directed at the FSSP. In short, in this case, I have to more-or-less agree with Cluny.

The FSSP & the ICRSS are both fine, solid religious institutes.
Click to expand...
who also caved in on the Doctrinal issues. that’s what the liberals and the modernists will have you neglect to understand.

you want to talk about harsh? to reduce the issues, as cluny has done to what amounts to a boys club is the height of ignorance and ridiculousness.

you want to talk about harsh? continue to neglect the issues. this is what the evil one is counting on.
 
maurin said:
who also caved in on the Doctrinal issues. that’s what the liberals and the modernists will have you neglect to understand.

you want to talk about harsh?
Click to expand...
I have not had personal experience with either the FSSP or the ICRSS but I have read and seen quite a bit about both and am very impressed with their dedication and orthodoxy.

FWIW, my last contact with the SSPX was 30+ years with a former friend who was at Econe and eventually went SSPV and became bishop before eschewing even that group and going to another sede outfit.

Oh, and, BTW, I know a thing or two about orthodox theology and liturgy, and both the ICRSS and FSSP are “clean” whether you want to believe that or not. So, I guess we have to agree to disagree.
 
malphono said:
Oh, and, BTW, I know a thing or two about orthodox theology and liturgy, and both the ICRSS and FSSP are “clean” whether you want to believe that or not. So, I guess we have to agree to disagree.
Click to expand...
I’m impressed by your knowledge–or I would be if you exhibited it. I don’t have a problem with agreeing to disagree…but you agreed with a preposterous non-statement of cluny’s. it’s up to you if you wish to not bother to defend it.
 
malphono said:
I have not had personal experience with either the FSSP or the ICRSS but I have read and seen quite a bit about both and am very impressed with their dedication and orthodoxy.

FWIW, my last contact with the SSPX was 30+ years with a former friend who was at Econe and eventually went SSPV and became bishop before eschewing even that group and going to another sede outfit.

Oh, and, BTW, I know a thing or two about orthodox theology and liturgy, and both the ICRSS and FSSP are “clean” whether you want to believe that or not. So, I guess we have to agree to disagree.
Click to expand...
The FSSP and the ICRSS --have their hands tied. If they start to make waves by publicly questioning the doctrinal issues brought about by the “Spirit of Vat II” —the bishops would close them down and send them packing. So in essence – they have caved in to doctrinal issues --in order to exist.
 
maurin said:
I’m impressed by your knowledge–or I would be if you exhibited it. I don’t have a problem with agreeing to disagree…but you agreed with a preposterous non-statement of cluny’s. it’s up to you if you wish to not bother to defend it.
Click to expand...
What I more-or-less agreed with was simply the business of what I called “sour grapes.” Perhaps I don’t always succeed, but I try my best to be fair, and as I said earlier, I have never in all my years (and there are more of those than I care to discuss at this point 😉 ) heard of one religious institute hurling public insults at another. For example, the OP and the SJ feuded for years. Then there was the traditional rivalry between OP and O. Carm. There were (are?) more examples, but yet none publicly disparaged the other. The disagreements (or “disputes” or “differences” or whatever one wants to call them) were always kept “in house” in order to not cause distress to the faithful.

The SSPX is entitled to hold whatever opinion they wish about the FSSP, but IMHO it is not correct to publicly air them, and that’s what bothers me. I could care less what either institute privately thinks of the other. Publishing that opinion (or, in this particular case, probably more accurate to say, “airing the dirty laundry”) on the web, though, is quite something else. I can only attribute that lapse in good judgment to “sour grapes.”
Walking_Home said:
The FSSP and the ICRSS --have their hands tied. If they start to make waves by publicly questioning the doctrinal issues brought about by the “Spirit of Vat II” —the bishops would close them down and send them packing. So in essence – they have caved in to doctrinal issues --in order to exist.
Click to expand...
I don’t know what “doctrinal issues” you’re referring to: while I’ve never big a big fan of Vatican II in general, that’s mainly because of the mis-interpretation and mis-application of the various decrees. Remember that even Mgr Lefebvre voted placet and signed them. If there was anything heterodox, I rather doubt he would have done so. Bl PP John XXIII explicitly called for a pastoral Council, not a doctrinal one, and in the end there really was nothing “new” that came from that Council. All which makes me wonder what the ICRSS and FSSP have allegedly “caved in” on.

Of course I have to agree with you about the so-called “spirit of Vatican II” (that expression alone still leaves a bad taste in my mouth, even after 40+ years) and that is precisely what I meant by mis-interpretation and mis-application above. What came after the Council was, in general, horrendous, and succeeded (likely by the design of the perpetrators) in twisting the Council beyond recognition.

Anyway, that’s my 1.25cents (I know it’s not worth the standard 2cents) and is as far as I will go on this topic.
 
Cluny said:
And what does the sspx think of the fssp? From their website:"

"They are therefore Conciliar Catholics and not traditional Catholics.
And so forth.

Keep in mind that the FSSP was founded by clergy who left SSPX, and therefore broke the cardinal rule: Don’t Quit the Club!
Click to expand...
If one spends the time to read the articles on their website you will see just how deep the mindset of the sspx runs. While I think that it is a good thing that the Holy Father is striving to bring an end to this conflict I also think that the mountain may be a bit steeper to climb than some realize, based upon their own stated stances on their website.
 
Walking_Home said:
Gee --it seems someone hasn’t tired of eating sour apples.
Click to expand...
Its got nothing to do with “eating sour apples.” I simply said that things are not “settled” yet because of the lifting of the excommunications. I think that there is still a steep hill to climb based on the position of the sspx as stated on their own website.

BTW, have you ever visited the sspx website and reviewed the FAQs? It is worth it just to see their stand on the key issues.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top