The Reunification Of The Sspx May Be At Hand

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='BG45' timestamp='1307853801' post='2252666']
Vee8's been posting gorgeous pictures of a Traditional Latin Mass and an FSSP vocations video. And a number of people have echoed your sentiment I think that we should pray for unity in the Church and not divisiveness.
[/quote]

It's really sad that we could not just do those two things. The latter more than the former of course.

[Skinzo]

One can certainly hold the opinion that they are schismatic. According to Canon 751: [b][b][b][b][b][b]"schism is the withdrawal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or from communion with the members of the Church subject to him." [/b][/b][/b][/b][/b][/b]The SSPX has made no submission to Benedict XVI so one may certainly regard them as in schism. As to their being "friends", that's quite a stretch since their website is full of attacks against John Paul II, (Fellay is quite skeptical of his beatification and has even called into question the saints that have been canonized since Vatican II. There is plenty more of course. Here in this link from the SSPX the Novus Ordo is described as "illegitimate". http://sspx.org/news/does_the_new_mass_fulfill_the_notion_of_catholic_liturgy/does_the_new_mass_fulfill_the_notion_of_catholic_liturgy.htm
To challenge the legitimacy of a rite promulgated by a pope is arguably in and of itself schismatic.

I think the society has a mentality which is also somewhat schizoid. For years they denied that in fact their bishops were excommunicated. Then suddenly they petitioned Benedict XVI to lift the excommunications. ?? So what happened to all the arguments against the validity of the original excommunications? Don't answer, I don't want to get into that again.

Abp. Lefebvre said this of the new Mass: "[font="Arial"][size="2"][color="#000000"]The [i]Novus Ordo Missae[/i], even when said with piety and respect for the liturgical rules, ...is impregnated with the spirit of Protestantism. It bears within it a poison harmful to the faith [i](An Open Letter to Confused Catholics[/i], p. 29 [[/color][/size][/font][font="Arial"][color="#BD1700"][url="http://sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/suggested_additional_reading.htm"][size="1"][u]APPENDIX II[/u][/size][/url][/color][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][color="#000000"]])"
This is still featured prominently on their website:[/color][/size][/font][color="#000000"][size="2"][font="Arial"]http://sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q5_novus_ordo_missae.htm

Do "friends" of the Church describe the reformed liturgy as "poison".?? I have problems with it myself but would never call it poison.
In light of that and numerous other things posted on the SSPX website, it stretches credulity to call them "friends".

The SSPX has spent over 30 years sitting in judgment on three popes and their actions as well as Vatican II. It's very doubtful they will accord much submission to anyone at this point unless the Church agrees with them on everything. Canon law states explicitly: "No one judges the Apostolic See".
Pope Benedict made it quite clear in his letter to the bishops on this very subject that the real problems between the Holy See and the SSPX are doctrinal:
"[/font][/size][/color]This will make it clear that the problems now to be addressed are essentially doctrinal in nature and concern primarily the acceptance of the Second Vatican Council and the post-conciliar magisterium of the Popes." http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2009/03/12/official-text-of-popes-letter-to-bishops-on-williamson-affair/

S.

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1307854936' post='2252672']
It's really sad that we could not just do those two things. The latter more than the former of course.
[/quote]
There[i] is[/i] a prayer board for people who wish to post topics without having them discussed. Just saying.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' timestamp='1307855180' post='2252674']
There[i] is[/i] a prayer board for people who wish to post topics without having them discussed. Just saying.
[/quote]

Had it been posted there the only thing keeping it from turning into a debate, like this is now, would have been the lack of people being able to respond. Just saying.

[KnightofChrist]

Every time good news about the SSPX comes up on PM we must always ripped upon old wounds and debate the negatives about the SSPX. It's frankly sad.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff)' timestamp='1307854260' post='2252668']
Showed you Fr Z. If he's not good enough for you, talk to your learned friend.
[/quote]
Fr. Z presented his conclusions, which I trust, but without his references and processes, which doesn't help me to understand. I imagine you don't know the specifics either, since you have not presented anything.

[quote name='Skinzo' timestamp='1307855098' post='2252673']
One can certainly hold the opinion that they are schismatic. According to Canon 751: [b][b][b][b][b][b]"schism is the withdrawal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or from communion with the members of the Church subject to him." [/b][/b][/b][/b][/b][/b]The SSPX has made no submission to Benedict XVI so one may certainly regard them as in schism. As to their being "friends", that's quite a stretch since their website is full of attacks against John Paul II, (Fellay is quite skeptical of his beatification and has even called into question the saints that have been canonized since Vatican II. There is plenty more of course. Here in this link from the SSPX the Novus Ordo is described as "illegitimate". http://sspx.org/news/does_the_new_mass_fulfill_the_notion_of_catholic_liturgy/does_the_new_mass_fulfill_the_notion_of_catholic_liturgy.htm
To challenge the legitimacy of a rite promulgated by a pope is arguably in and of itself schismatic.

I think the society has a mentality which is also somewhat schizoid. For years they denied that in fact their bishops were excommunicated. Then suddenly they petitioned Benedict XVI to lift the excommunications. ?? So what happened to all the arguments against the validity of the original excommunications? Don't answer, I don't want to get into that again.

Abp. Lefebvre said this of the new Mass: "[font="Arial"][size="2"][color="#000000"]The [i]Novus Ordo Missae[/i], even when said with piety and respect for the liturgical rules, ...is impregnated with the spirit of Protestantism. It bears within it a poison harmful to the faith [i](An Open Letter to Confused Catholics[/i], p. 29 [[/color][/size][/font][font="Arial"][color="#BD1700"][url="http://sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/suggested_additional_reading.htm"][size="1"][u]APPENDIX II[/u][/size][/url][/color][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][color="#000000"]])"
This is still featured prominently on their website:[/color][/size][/font][color="#000000"][size="2"][font="Arial"]http://sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q5_novus_ordo_missae.htm

Do "friends" of the Church describe the reformed liturgy as "poison".?? I have problems with it myself but would never call it poison.
In light of that and numerous other things posted on the SSPX website, it stretches credulity to call them "friends".

The SSPX has spent over 30 years sitting in judgment on three popes and their actions as well as Vatican II. It's very doubtful they will accord much submission to anyone at this point unless the Church agrees with them on everything. Canon law states explicitly: "No one judges the Apostolic See".
Pope Benedict made it quite clear in his letter to the bishops on this very subject that the real problems between the Holy See and the SSPX are doctrinal:
"[/font][/size][/color]This will make it clear that the problems now to be addressed are essentially doctrinal in nature and concern primarily the acceptance of the Second Vatican Council and the post-conciliar magisterium of the Popes." http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2009/03/12/official-text-of-popes-letter-to-bishops-on-williamson-affair/

S.
[/quote]
Cardinal Hoyos, who as you may recall was the Prefect of Ecclesia Dei, stated on more than one occasion that while the actions of the FSSPX in the Econe consecrations were schismatic acts, they are not and never were themselves in a formal state of schism. Recall, it was his job to know these things. Ecclesia Dei was specifically tasked with examining the situation of the FSSPX.

I also think that it is helpful to read the Ottaviani Intervention. Cardinal Ottaviani was always in complete communion with Rome. In fact he was one of the highest ranking of the Cardinals. Yet he criticized many aspects of Paul's Mass that he found to be too friendly to Protestantism. He called it, in fact, " grave break with tradition", "a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass", and that "It has every possibility of satisfying the most modernist of Protestants."

[HisChildForever]

When is the Holy Father going to make this proposal? And if the SSPX accept, they would be in full communion, yes?

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='HisChildForever' timestamp='1307855740' post='2252679']
When is the Holy Father going to make this proposal? And if the SSPX accept, they would be in full communion, yes?
[/quote]
At this point it's only rumour. I hope that it will happen, and the rumours implied that it would occur very soon.
If the FSSPX accept, they would be completely in communion with Rome, similar either to Opus Dei or to the new Anglican Ordinariate. The rumours I read imply something closest to the Ordinariate, though past rumours suggested a personal prelature like Opus Dei. In any case, they would be an entirely legitimate, approved society within the Church.

[Skinzo]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1307855477' post='2252677']
Every time good news about the SSPX comes up on PM we must always ripped upon old wounds and debate the negatives about the SSPX. It's frankly sad.
[/quote]

The only good news right now is a rumor. And discussing rumors is fruitless. Similar rumors circulated in 2008 provoking similar discussion here: http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=81846 And it was a waste of time as no reconciliation happened in 2008 though seasoned Vatican journalists such as Andrea Tornielli said it was imminent.
If the SSPX cleans up their act, there will no negatives to discuss.The wounds they inflict on themselves and the Church are unfortunately quite fresh.

S.

[faithcecelia]

I hope and pray there is a reunification, and that all parties respond with Christian love and respect to the others. I pray that everyone will grow to accept that differences in style of worship does not mean that one is better or worse than another, just different, and that modern styles does not automatically mean liberal beliefs, nor that a preference for the Tridentine Mass means an unwillingness to consider spiritual progress. I feel so grateful to belong to the church that is more than big enough for us all and that allows us to worship and glorify God in the way we each prefer. I am also eternally grateful for the fact that I live in a country that also allows me this freedom - so many Christians throughout the world would give anything to be allowed to practise their faith freely.

[Jaime]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1307855739' post='2252678']
Fr. Z presented his conclusions, which I trust, but without his references and processes, which doesn't help me to understand. I imagine you don't know the specifics either, since you have not presented anything.


Cardinal Hoyos, who as you may recall was the Prefect of Ecclesia Dei, stated on more than one occasion that while the actions of the FSSPX in the Econe consecrations were schismatic acts, they are not and never were themselves in a formal state of schism. Recall, it was his job to know these things. Ecclesia Dei was specifically tasked with examining the situation of the FSSPX.

I also think that it is helpful to read the Ottaviani Intervention. Cardinal Ottaviani was always in complete communion with Rome. In fact he was one of the highest ranking of the Cardinals. Yet he criticized many aspects of Paul's Mass that he found to be too friendly to Protestantism. He called it, in fact, " grave break with tradition", "a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass", and that "It has every possibility of satisfying the most modernist of Protestants."
[/quote]

It is so hard for you to argue outside of what you can regurgitate either from what you've heard from your learned friend or from what you've cut and pasted from a few sources. If you cannot answer with Ottaviani or declare they aren't in schism, you really don't have anything to add. Then when I actually provide support to what I state, you ignore and cry YOU DON"T PRESENT ANYTHING.

Open your eyes Nihil.

[quote]“An indispensable condition for any future recognition of the Society of St. Pius X is their full recognition of Vatican Council II and of the Magisterium of Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI.
“As already affirmed in the Decree of 21 January 2009, the Holy See will not fail, in ways considered most appropriate, to join the parties concerned in a profound examination of outstanding issues, so as to be able to reach a full and satisfactory solution to the problems that gave rise to this painful split”. [/quote]

Whoops who presented that? Oh yeah

[quote]"The remission of the excommunication has freed the four bishops from a serious canonical penalty, but it has not altered the juridical position of the Society of St. Pius X which, at the present time, enjoys no canonical recognition within the Catholic Church. Even the four bishops, though released from excommunication, have no canonical function in the Church and cannot legally exercise a ministry within her".[/quote]

[quote]Whenever I post something about the SSPX, and I mention that the priests and bishops of that Fraternity are suspended, I get loads of email protesting that they aren’t.

They are. Sorry.

[/quote]

I tire of you just ignoring what you don't like (translation: the stuff that proves you completely wrong)

respond don't just bury your head in the sand and cry "You never present anything!!"

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff)' timestamp='1307856474' post='2252686']
It is so hard for you to argue outside of what you can regurgitate either from what you've heard from your learned friend or from what you've cut and pasted from a few sources. If you cannot answer with Ottaviani or declare they aren't in schism, you really don't have anything to add. Then when I actually provide support to what I state, you ignore and cry YOU DON"T PRESENT ANYTHING.

Open your eyes Nihil.



Whoops who presented that? Oh yeah





I tire of you just ignoring what you don't like (translation: the stuff that proves you completely wrong)

respond don't just bury your head in the sand and cry "You never present anything!!"
[/quote]
I was referring to sources from Canon Law itself, and I think I made that clear. Who are you to talk about regurgitating? You've prooftexted your way through this entire thread. I was hoping that you might actually have some relevant knowledge of Canon Law to add to this thread, but I guessed correctly that this would be too much for which to hope.

I have ignored nothing you have posted, however nothing you have posted remotely addresses my points, which are simply. They are as follows:
[list]
[*]The FSSPX are not heretics.
[*]The FSSPX are not in schism.
[*]The FSSPX are not excommunicated.
[/list]
THEREFORE: The FSSPX are Catholic.
THEREFORE: It is acceptable and reasonable to call them traditionalists, notwithstanding an act of disobedience on the part of Archbishop Lefebvre and the bishops he consecrated.

That is all.

[Skinzo]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1307855739' post='2252678']
Fr. Z presented his conclusions, which I trust, but without his references and processes, which doesn't help me to understand. I imagine you don't know the specifics either, since you have not presented anything.


Cardinal Hoyos, who as you may recall was the Prefect of Ecclesia Dei, stated on more than one occasion that while the actions of the FSSPX in the Econe consecrations were schismatic acts, they are not and never were themselves in a formal state of schism. Recall, it was his job to know these things. Ecclesia Dei was specifically tasked with examining the situation of the FSSPX.

I also think that it is helpful to read the Ottaviani Intervention. Cardinal Ottaviani was always in complete communion with Rome. In fact he was one of the highest ranking of the Cardinals. Yet he criticized many aspects of Paul's Mass that he found to be too friendly to Protestantism. He called it, in fact, " grave break with tradition", "a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass", and that "It has every possibility of satisfying the most modernist of Protestants."
[/quote]

Hoyos was inconsistent on the subject. In his last press conference he stated that the pope "was trying to heal a schism". So he must have believed that one had happened. I have no idea how one commits schismatic acts without in fact being is schism. Some people are fond of quoting Ottaviani but they always forget that he withdrew his criticism:
"[font="Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"][size="2"][color="#336699"][left][size="4"][color="#006600"][color="#ff0000"]"I have [i]rejoiced profoundly[/i] to read the discourse by the holy father on the question of the new ordo missae, and especially the doctrinal precisions contained in his discourses at the public audiences of november 19 and 26, [i]after which I believe, no one can any longer be genuinely scandalized[/i]. As for the rest, a prudent and intelligent catechesis must be undertaken to solve some legitimate perplexities which the text is capable of arousing. In this sense I wish your ‘doctrinal note' [on the novus ordo] and the activity of the militia sanctae mariae wide diffusion and success." -- Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani
[/color][/color][/size][size="4"][color="#006600"]----from James Likoudis and Kenneth Whitehead, [i]The Pope, The Council and The Mass,[/i] The Christopher publishing house, w. Hanover, Massachusetts, 1981, p. 74. [/color][/size][/left]
[left][size="4"][color="#006600"]And later: [color="#ff0000"]"The beauty of the church is equally resplendent in the variety of the liturgical rites which enrich her divine cult when they are legitimate and conform to the faith. Precisely [i]the legitimacy of their origin[/i] protects and guards them against infiltration of errors. . . the purity and unity of the faith is in this manner also [i]upheld by the supreme magisterium of the pope through the liturgical laws.[/i]"[/color]
---ibid, ibid., p. 129, ‘letter from his eminence alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani to Dom Gerard Lafond, o.s.b., in [i]Documentation Catholique,[/i] ‘#67, 1970, pp. 215-216 and 343[/color][/size][/left]
[left]S.
[/left]
[left]
[/left]
[left][size="4"][color="#006600"]
[/color][/size][/left]
[/color][/size][/font]

[Nihil Obstat]

I have to ask Jim, why do you refuse to treat me with respect? Why, when I am here to discuss Catholic issues, do you feel compelled to mock me and treat me with condescension? I've asked before and you've never answered. Why do you do this? What is Christian in what you are doing?
I have done nothing to deserve this treatment. Do you get a kick out of mocking other Catholics? Or mocking people younger than you? People who disagree with you?
Are you proud of yourself?

[Jaime]

Show me where the SSPX has done this

[quote]"An indispensable condition for any future recognition of the Society of St. Pius X is their full recognition of Vatican Council II and of the Magisterium of Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI.
"As already affirmed in the Decree of 21 January 2009, the Holy See will not fail, in ways considered most appropriate, to join the parties concerned in a profound examination of outstanding issues, so as to be able to reach a full and satisfactory solution to the problems that gave rise to this painful split".[/quote]