The FSSP and the SSPX

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

[quote name='Era Might' date='Mar 8 2006, 05:11 PM']Well they better amend themselves promptly. We have enough dissenters in the Priesthood.
[right][snapback]906816[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Unfortunately, the traditional orders attract a few wolves along with the sheep.

[brendan1104]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Mar 8 2006, 05:51 PM']most sspxers accept the validity of the NO mass anyway
[right][snapback]906795[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

who are you getting your information from?

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

People on Fisheaters.

[brendan1104]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Mar 8 2006, 08:48 PM']People on Fisheaters.
[right][snapback]906900[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

hmm. wide variety of people on there.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

true.

[Amator Veritatis]

As far as my point that a person would usually necessarily accept the validity of the [i]Novus Ordo Missae[/i] who receives at the traditional Mass at an indult parish, it should be recognised that there is often or at least sometimes a ciborium of hosts consecrated at the indult Mass each Sunday, so many of those assisting at such a Mass would have at least a possibility of receiving Hosts consecrated at the Mass. Besides, as Pope Pius XII notes in [i]Mediator Dei[/i], those faithful should be indulged who wish to receive Hosts consecrated at the Mass at which they are assisting, as was made clear by that learned and holy Pontiff Benedict XIV. There are various theological reasons for this which are given by Pius XII, and it seems to be a loophole of sorts for those who would wish to receive Hosts only consecrated at the traditional Mass, for such is the teaching of Benedict XIV:

"And although in addition to those to whom the celebrant gives a portion of the Victim he himself has offered in the Mass, they also participate in the same sacrifice to whom a priest distributes the Blessed Sacrament that has been reserved; however, the Church has not for this reason ever forbidden, nor does she now forbid, a celebrant to satisfy the piety and just request of those who, when present at Mass, want to become partakers of the same sacrifice, because they likewise offer it after their own manner, nay more, she approves of it and desires that it should not be omitted and would reprehend those priests through whose fault and negligence this participation would be denied to the faithful." Cf., [i]Certiores effecti[/i], par. 3, cited in [i]Mediator Dei[/i], par. 118.

[Dave]

[quote name='goldenchild17' date='Mar 8 2006, 04:30 PM']Yeah it is a requirement, but I do know that there are at least a few people at the FSSP Mass that I go to who do not accept the NO
[right][snapback]906779[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

So do I, actually.

[Dave]

[quote name='thedude' date='Mar 8 2006, 05:35 PM']Unfortunately, the traditional orders attract a few wolves along with the sheep.
[right][snapback]906830[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

How sad. Although I know that most traditional orders really try and weed out quasi-SSPX types, I suppose it's to be expected there are always going to be some they inadvertently overlook.

[Cam42]

[quote name='Amator Veritatis' date='Mar 8 2006, 04:08 PM']That may very well be the case, but, just as a point of clarification, we ought recognise that a person who assists at Mass at a parish or chapel of the FSSP or ICR or a person who assists at Mass even at an indult, diocesan parish does not necessarily accept Vatican II, nor does he necessarily accept the [i]Novus Ordo Missae[/i], though he would, under most circumstances, necessarily accept its validity, for many Hosts distributed at the traditional Mass in indult parishes are consecrated at the [i]Novus Ordo Missae[/i].
[right][snapback]906712[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

And therein lies the quandry.....and the oxymoronic statement.

The quandry.....how can one who doesn't accept the Missa Normativa or Vatican Council II and her reforms necessarily accept Holy Communion from the tabernacle?

The oxymoronic statement......the person who assists at a Mass or a parish of the FSSP or the Institute, etc. who does not necessarily accept the Missa Normativa, or Vatican II, but does necessarily accept the validity of the Blessed Sacrament consecrated at the Missa Normativa.

There is no reconciling that. And there is no answer which is acceptable to the quandry, other than to say that one accepts the validity of the Missa Normativa; which validates the majority issue of Vatican Council II for most.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

[quote]

"The post-conciliar Church has not turned away from our Lord. But they have reshaped Him into an image that its proponents demand at the moment. We’ve gotten God wrong, not because we have formally disavowed Him, but because for 40 years we have wandered aimlessly articulating only partial truths about the Faith. Our traditional heritage has been ignored or occluded. We are in crisis because we don’t have God right. A Catholic’s perception of God has always been formed primarily by the Mass. The ancient Mass has been discarded. The New Mass is not invalid. That would be too easy and unbecoming the cunning genius of the evil one. There is nothing heretical about the New Mass; it is simply deficient....Let me illustrate one deficiency. The constant changing liturgical form does not convey the central attribute of God: His unchangeableness. Catholics worship Him in novel ways from week to week, from parish to parish, and from nation to nation.... They soon begin to think of God and His moral law in different ways. Catholics may even begin to think that God can change His mind about right and wrong. Artificial contraception, homosexuality, cohabitation before marriage, and divorce: all heretofore unambiguously labeled as evil are reassessed in the light of the new way we think about God."[/quote]

-Fr. McLucas is the editor of the Latin Mass Magazine

[Cam42]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Mar 8 2006, 11:33 PM']-Fr. McLucas is the editor of the Latin Mass Magazine
[right][snapback]907016[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

What's your point?

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

that FSSP priests many times hold quasi-sspx positions.

[Cam42]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Mar 8 2006, 11:45 PM']that FSSP priests  many times hold  quasi-sspx positions.
[right][snapback]907029[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Since you are big on one sentence answers......here is one for ya.....

Nope, you're wrong.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

whats with all the unconstructive criticism?

how am i wrong?

People have told me that FSSP priests they have confessed to "were total trads"

in fact SSPX and FSSP priests prayed the rosary together to stop a rap group from performing inside of a FSSP Church.

Many trads attend FSSP chapels.


im not saying all FSSP priests are trads, but some are.

you need to be more charitable.

Edited March 9, 2006 by Extra ecclesiam nulla salus

[dspen2005]

i think the point of Cam42's assertion is that you incessantly come out with these one sentence claims with nothing to back them up. Your "he said, she said" stuff also isn't very convincing. Don't you have anything else to support the frivolous claim that FSSP holds "quasi-SSPX" positions. btw, what is a "quasi-SSPX position"?? such a claim violates one of philosophy's basic laws -- the Law of Excluded Middle.