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

The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law – Part I: Dr. John Lamont

By
+ JMJ Is a Traditional Catholic who abandons the doctrine of the Catholic Church - are they truly worthy of the name of Catholic? This is why it is important to understand Catholic Doctrine so we don't knowingly abandon it! This is a lecture provided by Dr. Lamont that touches on the topic of obedience. Obedience is one key to emerging from this crisis. P^3 Source Part A: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny Source Part B: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny 8 May 2014 The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law – Part I By John Lamont (Lecture given in New York on Friday, April 4, 2014)
Post a Comment
Read more

Schism

By
There is some question as to whether the Pope can be in actual schism as per the Cardinal Torquemada: Citing the doctrine of Pope Innocent III, Torquemada further teaches:  "Thus it is that Pope Innocent III states [De Consuetudine] that, it is necessary to obey the Pope in all things as long as he, himself, does not go against the universal customs of the Church, but should he go against the universal customs of the Church, 'he need not be followed' . . . " [Cited from A Theological Vindication of Roman Catholic Traditionalism, Father Paul Kramer, B.Ph., S.T.D., M. Div. (2nd edition, St. Francis Press, India) p. 29. The full quotation from Cardinal Torquemada reads, "By disobedience, the Pope can separate himself from Christ despite the fact that he is head of the Church, for above all, the unity of the Church is dependent on its relationship with Christ. The Pope can separate himself from Christ either by disobeying the law of Christ, or by commanding som...
Post a Comment
Read more

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

By
Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...
8 comments
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

The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II: Dr. John Lamont

By
+ JMJ This is the second article from Dr. Lamont from his lecture given in May 2014. P^3 Source Part A: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny Source Part B: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny 8 May2014 The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II By John Lamont To understand how the Jesuit conception of obedience departed from earlier conceptions, it is helpful to compare it with the teaching of St. Thomas on obedience. The fundamental difference between the two is that St. Thomas considers the proper object of obedience to be the precept of the superior (2a2ae q. 104 a. 2 co., ad 3). Obedience that seeks to forestall the expressed will of the superior does not bear on what the superior wants or thinks in general, but only on what the superior intends to command. St. Ignatius’s lowest degree of obedience, which he does not consider to be virtuous, is thus what St. Thomas considers to be the only form of obedience. St. Thomas holds that St. Ignatius’s alleged higher forms of o...
Post a Comment
Read more