why condemn the SSPX

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

Really—who else have you both been condemning along with the SSPX.
The bishop in Italy who called praying in Latin “mumbling.”
Cardinal Martini
Sr. Joan Chichester, OSB
Fr. Richard McBrien
Abusers of the Mass

(But not Saint Faustina or Pope John Paul II, so I’m sure none of the above count:rolleyes:)
 
The bishop in Italy who called praying in Latin “mumbling.”
Cardinal Martini
Sr. Joan Chichester, OSB
Fr. Richard McBrien
Abusers of the Mass

(But not Saint Faustina or Pope John Paul II, so I’m sure none of the above count:rolleyes:)

I see—how about others who are in schism and/or ourside the Church.
 

I see—how about others who are in schism and/or ourside the Church.
Not speaking for JKirk but…

Like who?

Archbishop Milingo = condemn
Catholics for Free Choice = condemn
Pro-abortion politicians = condemn

On the flip side, why are there other people on these boards who condemn all the things listed above by me and other posters, but then give the SSPX a free pass.
 
Not speaking for JKirk but…

Like who?

Archbishop Milingo = condemn
Catholics for Free Choice = condemn
Pro-abortion politicians = condemn

On the flip side, why are there other people on these boards who condemn all the things listed above by me and other posters, but then give the SSPX a free pass.
I see the irony is not wasted on you.👍

But seriously, I don’t really think anyone here on either side “condemn” others. That said, I’m sure that we do condemn the actions of some. Just thought I’d clarify that before someone starts in with the “Only God can judge the soul”, etc. I’m sure it’s bound to come up and has pretty much been alluded to already.
 
Not speaking for JKirk but…

Like who?

Archbishop Milingo = condemn
Catholics for Free Choice = condemn
Pro-abortion politicians = condemn

On the flip side, why are there other people on these boards who condemn all the things listed above by me and other posters, but then give the SSPX a free pass.

For starters:

Arch. Milingo—no valid ordinations----SSPX–valid
Catholics for Free Choice----Do the SSPX also promote “free choice”
Pro- abortion politicians----the SSPX does not seem to be promoting the choice for abortions.
 
The SSPX’s Bishops are in schism, its plain and simple. Why would priests want to subject themselves to Bishops who were ordained illicitly? SSPX confessions and marriages are not valid because of the lack of jurisdiction. You can play games with Canon law all you want, but those “loop holes” you guys cite just aren’t there. And its not true that all Traditional priests come from the SSPX. The ICK actually started earlier then the SSPX under a different name until it became the ICK in 1990.
 

So to you the SSPX is in the same boat as those heretics.
And here we go, a case in point where you WILL read the worst into what I write.

I should think that the SSPX would be in the same boat as anyone who left the Catholic Church and entered Orthodoxy (as opposed to someone brought up in Orthodoxy), if they “imbibed the spirit of schism” the Servant of God Pope John Paul II spoke of in ED. So not heretics, but possibly formal schismatics. We would say that person is in a grave situation, would we not, objectively?
 
And here we go, a case in point where you WILL read the worst into what I write.

I should think that the SSPX would be in the same boat as anyone who left the Catholic Church and entered Orthodoxy (as opposed to someone brought up in Orthodoxy), if they “imbibed the spirit of schism” the Servant of God Pope John Paul II spoke of in ED. So not heretics, but possibly formal schismatics. We would say that person is in a grave situation, would we not, objectively?
Ahhh, the Orthodox are heretics though. They reject several dogmas and points of doctrine.
 

For starters:

Arch. Milingo—no valid ordinations----SSPX–valid
Catholics for Free Choice----Do the SSPX also promote “free choice”
Pro- abortion politicians----the SSPX does not seem to be promoting the choice for abortions.
Archbishop Milingo’s ordinations would be only invalid insofar as he used improper matter (married men), would they not? Given the proper matter (an unmarried man), he could still validly, but illicitly ordain, could he not?

No, the SSPX do not promote free choice, but neither do lots of groups. What’s right with them doesn’t negate what’s wrong with them.
 
Ahhh, the Orthodox are heretics though. They reject several dogmas and points of doctrine.
The Church, however, distinguishes between formal and material heretics. “Cannot charge with the sin of seperation” and all that, consult the CCC.
 
While I do not belong to the SSPX, I greatly admire the stand that Archbishop Levebvre took. To be fair you must understand the situation that Archbishop Levebvre was put into. He believed it was his duty to save the Church from corruption. Read these excerpts from his sermon and maybe you can understand why he felt it necessary to do what he did.

1988 CONSECRATION SERMON by Archbishop LefebvreJune 30th 1988

APPENDIX V
.…This is why we do this ceremony. Far be it from me to set myself up as pope! I am simply a bishop of the Catholic Church who is continuing to transmit Catholic doctrine…Thus, we find ourselves in a case of necessity… . We have tried by these talks, by all these means, to succeed in making Rome understand that, since the Council and since aggiornamento, this change which has occurred in the Church is not Catholic, is not in conformity to the doctrine of all times. This ecumenism and all these errors, this collegiality —all this is contrary to the Faith of the Church, and is in the process of destroying the Church.This is why we are convinced that, by the act of these consecrations today, we are obeying the call of these popes…It is not for me to know when Tradition will regain its rights at Rome, but I think it is my duty to provide the means of doing that which I shall call “Operation Survival,” operation survival for Tradition. Today, this day, is “Operation Survival”. If I had made this deal with Rome, by continuing with the agreements we had signed, and by putting them into practice, I would have performed “Operation Suicide.” There was no choice, we must live! That is why today, by consecrating these bishops, I am convinced that I am continuing to keep Tradition alive, that is to say, the Catholic Church… Thus I believe that with the grace of God, we, Bishop de Castro Mayer and myself, by these consecrations, will have given to Tradition the means to continue, given the means to Catholics who desire to remain within the Church of their parents, their grandparents, of their ancestors. They built churches with beautiful altars, often destroyed and replaced by a table, thus manifesting the radical change which has come about since the Council regarding the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass which is the heart of the Church and the purpose of the priesthood…We turn to the Blessed Virgin Mary. You well know, my dear brethren, you must have been told of Leo XIII’s prophetic vision revealing that one day “the See of Peter would become the seat of iniquity.” He said it in one of his exorcisms, called “The Exorcism of Leo XIII.” Has it come about today? Is it tomorrow? I do not know. But in any case it has been foretold. Iniquity may quite simply be error. Error is iniquity: to no longer profess the Faith of all time, the Catholic Faith, is a grave error. If there ever was an iniquity, it is this. And I really believe that there has never been a greater iniquity in the Church than Assisi, which is contrary to the First Commandment of God and the First Article of the Creed. It is incredible that something like that could have ever taken place in the Church, in the eyes of the whole Church —how humiliating! We have never undergone such a humiliation! … And Our Lady prophesied for the 20th century, saying explicitly that during the 19th century and most of the 20th century, errors would become more and more widespread in Holy Church, placing the Church in a catastrophic situation. Morals would become corrupt and the Faith would disappear. It seems impossible not to see it happening today.I excuse myself for continuing this account of the apparition, but she speaks of a prelate who will absolutely oppose this wave of apostasy and impiety —saving the priesthood by forming good priests. I do not say that prophecy refers to me. You may draw your own conclusions. I was stupefied when reading these lines but I cannot deny them, since they are recorded and deposited in the archives of this apparition.Of course, you well know the apparitions of Our Lady at La Salette, where she says that Rome will lose the Faith, that there will be an “eclipse” at Rome; an eclipse, see what Our Lady means by this.And finally, closer to us, the secret of Fatima. Without a doubt, the Third Secret of Fatima must have made an allusion to this darkness which has invaded Rome, this darkness which has invaded the world since the Council. And surely it is because of this, without a doubt, that John XXIII judged it better not to publish the Secret: it would have been necessary to take measures, such steps as he possibly felt himself incapable of doing, e.g., completely changing the orientations which he was beginning to take in view of the Council, and for the Council.

sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/appendix_v_1988_consecration_sermon.htm
 
I admire greatly His Grace Marcel Lefebvre and the SSPX. If they had not done what they have done there would not be this profound visible sign that the Latin Catholic Church has big problems within it.

This visible sign is what encourages the problems to end.

I know a man who was formerly part of the SSPX and has now been ordained a priest in the Western rite of the Eastern Orthodox Church.
Many Eastern and Western Orthodox Catholic people admire the SSPX very much.
 
I admire greatly His Grace Marcel Lefebvre and the SSPX. If they had not done what they have done there would not be this profound visible sign that the Latin Catholic Church has big problems within it.

This visible sign is what encourages the problems to end.

I know a man who was formerly part of the SSPX and has now been ordained a priest in the Western rite of the Eastern Orthodox Church.
Many Eastern and Western Orthodox Catholic people admire the SSPX very much.
The Church has ALWAYS had big problems within it, from the beginning! There have always been groups hiving off from her in heresy and schism, there have always been wretched sinners skulking and plotting within her. The Archbishop disobeyed the Vicar of Christ on Earth and broke communion with him. He didn’t do the Church any favors.
 
And here we go, a case in point where you WILL read the worst into what I write.

I should think that the SSPX would be in the same boat as anyone who left the Catholic Church and entered Orthodoxy (as opposed to someone brought up in Orthodoxy), if they “imbibed the spirit of schism” the Servant of God Pope John Paul II spoke of in ED. So not heretics, but possibly formal schismatics. We would say that person is in a grave situation, would we not, objectively?

Does not seem that way. You see—apparently JPII considered the Orthodox to be just fine where they are—therefore those who leave the Church to join the Orthodox–do not seem to be in any grave situation. From what is said in the following thread Catholic --Orthodox----it doesn’t really matter.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=184816
 
The SSPX’s Bishops are in schism, its plain and simple. Why would priests want to subject themselves to Bishops who were ordained illicitly? SSPX confessions and marriages are not valid because of the lack of jurisdiction. QUOTE]

Why, then, do we recognize protestant marriages? What about Baptisms?

So, if I was confirmed by Arch Bishop Lefebvre, would I need to be re-confirmed?

If I had received Absolution from a SSPX priest, you would say it was invalid?
 

Does not seem that way. You see—apparently JPII considered the Orthodox to be just fine where they are—therefore those who leave the Church to join the Orthodox–do not seem to be in any grave situation. From what is said in the following thread Catholic --Orthodox----it doesn’t really matter.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=184816
I think in that the Church distinguishes between formal and material schism, it matters (and let’s be frankly honest, Walking Home, I’m not going to accept your interpretation of the mind of the Servant of God Pope John Paul II any more than you’re going to accept my interpretation of the situation with SSPX).
 
Why, then, do we recognize protestant marriages? What about Baptisms?

So, if I was confirmed by Arch Bishop Lefebvre, would I need to be re-confirmed?

If I had received Absolution from a SSPX priest, you would say it was invalid?
A Catholic marriage requires an official witness from the Church, a Priest or deacon with proper jurisdiction from the local ordinary. We recognize protestant marriages because neither party is Catholic, and there is no requirement for an official Church witness. To whom much is given, much will be expected.
As for baptism, anyone can baptize validly.

I am not certain about confirmation, though I would think it wouldn’t be a problem as long as it was a bishop bestowing it, as I believe only the local ordinary can grant a priest the faculties to validly confirm.

The absolution would be valid if you did not know that the priest lacked jurisdiction, and thus could not give you absolution. The Church supplies the jurisdiction in those cases. However if you knew there was grave doubt about the ability of the priest to absolve, then the Church would not supply the jurisdiction, and all the priest did was wave his hand around.

Hope this helps.

Yours in Christ,
Thursday
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top