B
bear06
Guest
Please. If parents raises there child according to God’s will and laws and the child heads off in the wrong direction, is it the work of the parents? Outcome does not equal cause.
- Status
B
bear06
Guest
And, what does that have to do with the fact that they still acknowledge the pope as the head of the Roman Catholic Church and still do not submit to him? The SSPX, in many ways, show a disobedience similar to the protestants. Nobody claimed they were not Catholic. Many have claimed, and rightfully so, that they don’t submit to the authority of the Pope. You can’t claim they submit to the authority of the Pope when they don’t.
B
bear06
Guest
And most schismatics think they are “THE remnant”. They are wrong.
U
under_the_dome
Guest
Agreed.
A
Aramis
Guest
If he had not disobeyed direct orders from the pope, and yet had been willing to continue to push for the TLM, I suspect we’d see not a MP, but a separate Church Sui Iuris. (See the Code of Canon Law for the Eastern Rites for the definitions, the CCEO)
His Schismatic act and consequent self-excommunication, as well as leading more than 20 priests into schism, well, it was the turning point in many bishop’s eyes. The local indult was pulled; the AB had allowed 1 TLM per month per city; Anchorage had had one. He withdrew permission following that schismatic act. In any case, the Dominican Rite Latin Mass occasionally was and still occasionally is used at the Cathedral, since Holy Family is staffed by Dominican Friars, and diocesan Permanent Deacons, and that indult was part of Vatican II, and quite separate.
His Schismatic act and consequent self-excommunication, as well as leading more than 20 priests into schism, well, it was the turning point in many bishop’s eyes. The local indult was pulled; the AB had allowed 1 TLM per month per city; Anchorage had had one. He withdrew permission following that schismatic act. In any case, the Dominican Rite Latin Mass occasionally was and still occasionally is used at the Cathedral, since Holy Family is staffed by Dominican Friars, and diocesan Permanent Deacons, and that indult was part of Vatican II, and quite separate.
B
BobP123
Guest
I don’t know if this applies but the (TLM) indult was granted to many elderly priests following the “promulgation” of the Novus Ordo. This on top of the famous Agatha Christie Indult. The TLM was far from being dead as one was probably lead to believe.
L
labernadette
Guest
The SSPX does not submit to error, they hold fast to tradition, too bad there aren’t more soldiers of Christ in His Church Militant.
U
under_the_dome
Guest
You people are nuts on this forum.
B
bear06
Guest
Yeah, no error there. Just a disregard for much of Pastor Aerternus.
J
Jean_Anthony
Guest
Stay on topic, people, or I will close this thread. Thank you.
L
laudamus_te
Guest
From Catholic Encyclopedia, the definition of “schism” in part:
" …not every disobedience is a schism; in order to possess this character it must include besides the transgression of the commands of superiors, denial of their Divine right to command."
“CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: Unfortunately Monsignor Lefebvre went ahead with the consecration and hence the situation of separation came about, even if it was not a formal schism.”
“CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: Unfortunately that is proof that within the Church, even at high levels, there is not always full knowledge of the Fraternity. The Fraternity has always recognized in John Paul II, and now in Benedict XVI, the legitimate successor of Saint Peter. That is not a problem.”
The SSPX is not is schism.
A
Aramis
Guest
The Dominican (and other orders with separate ritual) were not adjusted by Trent, and V II permitted them the choice, to use their Order’s ritual, or to use the “New” ritual.
B
BobP123
Guest
Maybe I’m nitpicking but was it VII or was it Paul VI that gave them that choice?
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
An excellent point - there is far more capacity for major scandals in a much bigger body, with a much longer history, & a much larger geographical spread.Conversely, this can mean that properly Christian beghaviour by tne Church is correspondingly more obvious to those in a position to see it
C
Catholic_Dude
Guest
The last part is the irony of the SSPX, their leaders are explicitly excommunicated in the Pope’s letter, yet they “recognize him as legitimate successor”?
One would think if they truly accepted him as legitimate successor they would adhere to his authority.
Means that they didn’t have to wear tuxes.
L
laudamus_te
Guest
Excommunication is not dependant upon the subject denying the authority of the Pope. I don’t see what’s so confusing about that.The last part is the irony of the SSPX, their leaders are explicitly excommunicated in the Pope’s letter, yet they “recognize him as legitimate successor”?
One would think if they truly accepted him as legitimate successor they would adhere to his authority.
B
bear06
Guest
And the Church document to prove this is where?
L
laudamus_te
Guest
The rumored MP, if it ever comes about, will not have existed, nor would the Indult communities exist, were it not for Lefebvre and the SSPX. I belive the indults are established primarily as strategy to stamp out the SSPX.
A
anthony022071
Guest
The fruit of the SSPX is dissention and apostasy from the Church.
- Status