Fisher-More, FFI, SSPX - What connects the dots?

+

JMJ

There has been a lot of chatter about the latest events at Fisher-More.  You can read about it here , here, here and here.

What triggered the reaction against F-M?



As far as I can determine it comes down to two things:

1. Second Vatican Council
2. Reforms emanating from it.

What must the Ecclesia Dei institutes accept in order to be canonically regular?

1. Second Vatican Council
2. Reforms emanating from it.

What is the rallying point around which the authorities consistently have struck for the last fifty years?

The Tridentine Mass

All I want to know is the answer to one question: Why?

We know what the SSPX hold as being contrary to previous doctrine :

• "The doctrine on religious liberty, as it is expressed in no. 2 of the Declaration 'Dignitatis humanae,' contradicts the teachings of Gregory XVI in 'Mirari vos' and of Pius IX in 'Quanta cura' as well as those of Pope Leo XIII in 'Immortale Dei' and those of Pope Pius XI in 'Quas primas.'

• "The doctrine on the Church, as it is expressed in no. 8 of the Constitution 'Lumen gentium,' contradicts the teachings of Pope Pius XII in 'Mystici corporis' and 'Humani generis.'

• "The doctrine on ecumenism, as it is expressed in no. 8 of 'Lumen gentium' and no. 3 of the Decree 'Unitatis redintegratio,' contradicts the teachings of Pope Pius IX in propositions 16 and 17 of the 'Syllabus,' those of Leo XIII in 'Satis cognitum,' and those of Pope Pius XI in 'Mortalium animos.'

• "The doctrine on collegiality, as it is expressed in no. 22 of the Constitution 'Lumen gentium,' including no. 3 of the 'Nota praevia' [Explanatory Note], contradicts the teachings of the First Vatican Council on the uniqueness of the subject of supreme power in the Church, in the Constitution 'Pastor aeternus'."

We further know the issues that they see with the reform the emanated from the Second Vatican Council.

Setting aside the issues with the N.O.M. and focusing on the doctrinal issues.

If  ...

• the SSPX has a correct understanding of the pre-conciliar doctrines noted above
• the Second Vatican Council did not change doctrine

Then what is the fuss about?

Logically, if the SSPX 'position' is not against pre-conciliar doctrine and that doctrine was not changed by the Council, what is the problem?

I think the problem revolves around what seems to happen as people have their culture reformed by exposure and participation in the Tridentine Liturgy.  They seem to realize that there are issues with the N.O.M. as well as the Council documents.

Maybe there is a method to the madness of the Bishops who reject the Tridentine Mass.

What would be the consequences for the Pope, Bishops and Catholic Church if the SSPX position is the right one?

Off the top of my head here of some pieces of low hanging fruit:

1. Our Lord Jesus Christ is God, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity
2. The Church of Christ IS the Roman Catholic Church
3. Membership in the Church of Christ (actual or by desire) is necessary for salvation
4. Religious organizations that are do not form part of the unity of faith or government of the Roman Catholic Church are not part of the Church of Christ

Not a bad start.

Of course, when they are no longer afraid to say such things, then life for Catholics will be very interesting.

No wonder they are afraid

No wonder they attack anyone that crosses the red-line of V2 and the N.O.M.

There's more to think of here ... put perhaps after the Ascension.

P^3