Do you support the SSPX?

[Amator Veritatis]

[quote]"It depends on what is is"  [/quote]

This comparison is not equivalent. Support might entail moral support for their cause, ideological support for their irregular canonical status, monetary support of their Order, spiritual support by prayer for them or by assisting at their Masses, [i]et al[/i]. What precisely is meant by "support" in the original question is not yet clear, and as a result, I have withheld a response.

[Guest JeffCR07]

I prostrate myself before the Lord that the Spirit of Truth might move and support them in returning to communion with Rome and giving up their obstinant refusal to submit to the authority of the Holy Father.

[Era Might]

The SSPX is whack.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Amator Veritatis' date='Apr 6 2006, 08:11 AM']OLAM Dad, this is, as far as I understand it, precisely the position of the SSPX. They maintain that one cannot simply believe part of the truth but must hold all of it, namely every dogma of the Catholic Faith. Those who compromise these teachings have "erred from the way of truth", cf., Wis. v.6, and have abandoned part of the Truth. This problem presents itself primarily in the heresy of Modernism, the synthesis of all heresies cf., [i]Pascendi[/i]. In any event, the SSPX, whatever may be one's opinion of the organisation, does not fail in any regard pertaining to the Catholic Faith. They do not fail to hold any teaching of the Church. They are by no means heretics. Quite the contrary, they are one of the few organs within the Church still defending Truth, their canonical status notwithstanding. If one were to argue against supporting them as a result of their canonical status, that position would be more tenable.
[right][snapback]937562[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
My problem with them is that, they see so many grave errors, and there are many sedevacantist priests(okay maybe not many but they are there) within the order. And yet they are trying so hard apparently to reconcile with something they don't agree with. If they reconcile they are going to be forced to accept Vatican II and the new mass as valid and fine. This is something they had been fighting up until the time they happen to want back in...

[Amator Veritatis]

Their hope is that they will not have to accept Vatican II and the [i]Novus Ordo Missae[/i] as "valid and fine". In fact, they would never be regularised under such circumstances. The SSPX does not necessarily hold that the [i]Novus Ordo Missae[/i] is invalid. On their website they state that its validity is doubtful, at least in the vernacular form, as a result of the improper rendering of the [i]pro multis[/i] as [i]pro omnibus[/i]. In fact, the priest of the SSPX with whom I am most closely associated expressed thoughts that would indicate his acceptance of the [i]Novus Ordo Missae[/i] as a valid Mass, even if it be objectively inferior to the traditional Mass. As far as accepting the Mass as "fine", that is another question entirely which is not relevant to the matter at hand, for the Apostolic Administration of Saint John Mary Vianney in Campos, Brazil was not required to accept the [i]Novus Ordo Missae[/i] to this extent in their rapprochement. As far as accepting Vatican II as "valid and fine", all in the SSPX already recognise Vatican II as a Council of the Church, and this is the official position of the SSPX. Whether the interpretations of the Council or the ambiguous pastoral statements within the Council are "fine" is another matter entirely, one which was not necessary for the rapprochement for Campos. With that being said, it would seem that the SSPX would not be required to accept as many terms as some might. In fact, it is entirely possible that they will be regularised without any retractions whatsoever.

[Era Might]

[quote name='Amator Veritatis' date='Apr 6 2006, 11:17 AM']In fact, they would never be regularised under such circumstances.
[right][snapback]937624[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Thank you for admitting that.

Which is why they will remain in schism.

[Amator Veritatis]

I failed to mention previously that Sedevacantism as such is not an issue for the regularisation of the SSPX, for their official position does not advocate this view whatsoever. An interesting historical fact is that members of the SSPX, at least in the early years, did not wear the biretta for a period of time either for Mass or other liturgical functions simply as a means of rooting out the Sedevacantists whom they knew to be within the structure. The impetus for this procedure was that the authorities within the SSPX knew that the Sedevacantists would not, in conscience, offer the holy Sacrifice of the Mass without wearing the biretta. Now, I completely disagree with this course of action, which would be considered objectively mortally sinful by nearly all traditional moral theologians, but I make this point simply to illustrate that the SSPX has no interest in furthering the Sedevacantist position. An additional point of interest is that the FSSP seminary in Wigratzbad, when founded as a replacement to the SSPX, retained the practice of not wearing the biretta as a result of this problem in the SSPX and, sadly, still maintains the practice today, just as they continue to have a silent Low Mass on Wednesdays rather than a Dialogue Mass, which originated from the time when American seminarians were sent there to study and were opposed to the Dialogue Mass. I simply wished to give some interesting inside information regarding the seminary at Wigratzbad in addition to the evidence that the SSPX, as an institution, does not further the Sedevacantist position but, in fact, at least historically, has worked to squelch it.

Edited April 6, 2006 by Amator Veritatis

[Myles Domini]

[quote name='Peccator' date='Apr 6 2006, 08:37 AM']I'd be lying if I said I do not feel sympathies toward their cause...because I do. I however would not support them because they chose to go into schism rather than reform the church the right way - from the inside.

I do pray that they come back...
[right][snapback]937432[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

[Desert Walker]

As JPII's mentor once said:

"God's mill grinds exceedingly slow, but exceedingly thorough."

The SSPX schism is being used by God to put post-Vatican II milquetoast to death.

Don't forget that there is always SOME sliver of good in ALL things. Even Lucifer is good in the sense that he is part of God's creation. He is a filthy, repugnant, malicious hate monger, but he's still part of God's creation.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Apr 5 2006, 09:36 PM']my prayer is that i pass my latin quiz tommorow.
[right][snapback]937223[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


good news everyone. i think i aced it.

[photosynthesis]

i don't support schismatic or heretical groups

[sidemunch88]

I do not support there ultra right ways

[Resurrexi]

[quote]My answer is contingent upon the clarification of the meaning of "support".[/quote]

I should have clarified this. By "support," I mean "to believe them not to be in schism, to believe in their positions, and to (if you are able to) attend their Masses"

[Amator Veritatis]

With the definition of support given by St. Thomas More, I answered in the affirmative. I maintain, with Cardinal Hoyos, that they are not in schism but perhaps in an irregular situation canonically. I believe in their positions--for they are precisely those of all who claim the title traditional Catholic--on essentially every issue except their canonical status, concerning which I withhold judgement, recognising that their arguments are strong canonically but contingent upon application. I do not assist at their Masses, for there is an FSSP parish which is in the same general vicinity. I have assisted at the chapel in our area once or perhaps twice, which assistance is sanctioned by Rome as acceptable.

[son_of_angels]

I do not reject, as is the teaching of the church, "anything that is holy and good" even if it derives from an irregular, or "schismatic" source. The SSPX fosters a genuine Catholic spirituality, offers valid sacraments (other than confession), upholds the essential episcopal constitution of the Holy Catholic Church, and recognizes the spiritual value of the Bishop of Rome.

While I would never pretend to support their current course of action, nor recognize them as a legitimately behaving branch of the Holy Catholic Church, nonetheless, it is important that we do maintain dialogue and share our prayer life with them as much as possible. I have a friend who is VERY much of the SSPX persuasion (unfortunately), but that doesn't keep us from saying the Rosary, visiting the Blessed Sacrament (at a Novus Ordo church), and praying both the Office and the Stations together. Surely growing together in prayer life will unite them in solidarity with Holy Mother Church, and lead them safely home? I can only hope....

The requirement for dialogue here is more important than dialogue with the Orthodox, Lutherans, and Anglicans combined, because these involve our own, our precious children, the lost sheep for which the pastor abandons the other sheep to find.

We need to pray really hard.