Skip to main content

Is the SSPX in Schism???

Image
By
 +
JMJ

 

Post Traditionis Custodes  I've noticed the echo chamber harping on see the 'SSPX is in schism'!

Let's keep this up to date - at best TC states a schismatic act occurred in 1988.  

Fast forward to an official statement from Rome in 2014 (see original Post here).

The best they can say is that the SSPX is 'not in full communion'.

As my American friends would say 'Duh'!

P^3


























Labels:

Comments

  1. UnknownJuly 29, 2021 at 9:46 AM

    Hi Tradical

    B16 states in the LETTER OF HIS HOLINESS POPE BENEDICT XVI
    TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
    CONCERNING THE REMISSION OF THE EXCOMMUNICATION
    OF THE FOUR BISHOPS CONSECRATED BY ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE
    that the consecrations were not legitimate, any descent Trad would have to be ignorant to believe that, he also says there was a danger of schism, not a schism. There was no danger at all. it is clear from the quote below that the excommunications were regarded by Rome as legitimate and therefore the lifting is explained below as not removing the guilt of the act. Anyone decent Trad who thinks this lifting is a nullification is also ignorant and cannot comprehend the explanation below. Notice in the title Archbishop Lefebvre's name was not included amongst the 4 bishops, did not state 6 bishops. Again any decent Trad would be ignorant to assume that ABL and BDCM had theirs lifted. If they were lifted and a Trad thanked B16 for it those trads would do the heroic Bishops (ABL and BDCM) a great dishonor by thanking B16 for stating they were guilty. The truth demands a nullification not a weakling's thank you for an evil gesture.
    Quote from letter below

    An episcopal ordination lacking a pontifical mandate raises the danger of a schism, since it jeopardizes the unity of the College of Bishops with the Pope. Consequently the Church must react by employing her most severe punishment – excommunication – with the aim of calling those thus punished to repent and to return to unity. Twenty years after the ordinations, this goal has sadly not yet been attained. The remission of the excommunication has the same aim as that of the punishment: namely, to invite the four Bishops once more to return. This gesture was possible once the interested parties had expressed their recognition in principle of the Pope and his authority as Pastor, albeit with some reservations in the area of obedience to his doctrinal authority and to the authority of the Council. Here I return to the distinction between individuals and institutions. The remission of the excommunication was a measure taken in the field of ecclesiastical discipline: the individuals were freed from the burden of conscience constituted by the most serious of ecclesiastical penalties. This disciplinary level needs to be distinguished from the doctrinal level. The fact that the Society of Saint Pius X does not possess a canonical status in the Church is not, in the end, based on disciplinary but on doctrinal reasons. As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church. There needs to be a distinction, then, between the disciplinary level, which deals with individuals as such, and the doctrinal level, at which ministry and institution are involved. In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.

    https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/letters/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20090310_remissione-scomunica.html

    ReplyDelete
  2. TradicalJuly 29, 2021 at 11:49 AM

    Hi Anon,

    I'm not certain if you are criticizing me or just generally upset.

    These points have been discussed elsewhere on the blog, but a few points by way of explanation:

    a. The information that I posted here are to demonstrate from a legal position, the best that they can accuse the SSPX is 'not in full communion.

    b. The validity of the excommunication is a point that I've discussed here and from Rome's point of view the excommunications were imposed automatically by the performance of episcopal consecrations without papal mandate. From the SSPX and my point of view, there are a number of issues with the 'excommunication' as well as the decree.

    c. Lastly,++Lefebvre and +de Mayer were not listed because they had died and excommunications cease at death.

    P^3

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

By
+ JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R
Post a Comment
Read more

Is it sinful to attend the Novus Ordo (New Mass) - Is it Sinful to Not Attend the Novus Ordo on Sunday?

By
+ JMJ A non-SSPX Catholic is upset over the SSPX statements on not attending the Novus Ordo Missae. Ladies and gentlemen, what the SSPX, or at least its website editor, is advocating is a mortal sin against the Third Commandment.  Unless the priest deviates from the language of the Sacramentary, the consecration, and thus the rest of Mass is to be considered valid.  No one may elect not to attend Mass simply because abuses are occurring therein.  Might I suggest that such absenteeism is its own abuse?  The Third Commandment binds under mortal sin.  Father So-And-So from the SSPX has no authority whatsoever to excuse attendance at Mass, be that Mass ever so unpalatable. Source:Restore DC Catholicism Well, this is interesting. First why does the SSPX issue this statement? Because it is sinful to put your faith in danger by attending a protestant service.  It is likewise dangerous to put your faith in danger by attending a protestantized mass (ie the Novus Ordo Missae
Post a Comment
Read more

What the heck is a congregation of "Pontifical Right"

By
+ JMJ In a discussion with a friend the question occurred to me that I didn't actually know was is involved in being a religious order of 'pontifical right'. I had a vague notion that this meant they reported to Rome as opposed to the local diocese. I'm also aware that, according to the accounts I have heard, the Archbishop received 'praise' and the written direction to incardinate priests directly into the SSPX.  This is interesting because it implies that the SSPX priests were no longer required to incardinate in the local diocese but in the SSPX. This is something that belongs to an order of 'pontifical right'. Anyway here's some definitions: Di diritto pontificio is the Italian term for “of pontifical right” . It is given to the ecclesiastical institutions (the religious and secular institutes, societies of apostolic life) either created by the Holy See or approved by it with the formal decree, known by its Latin name, Decretu
Post a Comment
Read more

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

By
+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3
Post a Comment
Read more

"Catholic" Charismatic Renewal - Protestantism within the bosum of the Catholic Church (Part 2)

By
+ JMJ When confronted with the fact that the CCR is not Catholic, modern Catholics attempt to deflect by stating that there are good people who have fervent BIG families who adhere to it. This is a red herring. There are fervent big protestant families as well. They are both equally wrong. It is a Catholic principle that you cannot do evil in order to achieve good. Participating in a protestant practice by Catholic people, even when approved by Catholic bishops, does not make it right or any less evil.   Many Modern Catholics have lost the ability to discern what is Catholic and what is protestant.   Case in point, when I showed a modern Catholic enamored with the CCR, a passage indicating that speaking in tongues reduced over time and is associated with diabolical possession, he reacted both vocally and physically.  He spun away from the text and rejected the fact explicitly (his exact words escape my memory). His mind was unable to accept the possib
Post a Comment
Read more