SSPX

[ebia]

Okay, so it had nothing to do with what I said.

Well, it doesn't support the view that everyone who uses the term "spirit of vatican II" is misinterpreting.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Well, it doesn't support the view that everyone who uses the term "spirit of vatican II" is misinterpreting.

The expression "spirit of Vatican II" is most commonly used by progressive Catholics who believe that the Church should "get with the times" and "move beyond Jesus." But, like most things, it's possible that there can be an exception to the rule.

 

[ebia]

The expression "spirit of Vatican II" is most commonly used by progressive Catholics who believe that the Church should "get with the times" and "move beyond Jesus." But, like most things, it's possible that there can be an exception to the rule.

So you've broadly and vaguely generalised the use of the phrase, and broadly and vaguely generalised Paul VI's statement, and then...

Seriously, you need to address the actual specifics that specific people put forward, and deal less in these il-defined groups.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

So you've broadly and vaguely generalised the use of the phrase, and broadly and vaguely generalised Paul VI's statement, and then...

Seriously, you need to address the actual specifics that specific people put forward, and deal less in these il-defined groups.

Are you saying that the progressive Catholics don't use the expression "spirit of Vatican II" to mean that they want the Church to "get with the times" and "move beyond Jesus"?

 

[ebia]

Are you saying that the progressive Catholics don't use the expression "spirit of Vatican II" to mean that they want the Church to "get with the times" and "move beyond Jesus"?

I'm saying people use "spirit of vatican II" and "get with the times" in various ways to mean a wide variety of different things that are only meaningful in context.

I can't recall ever having heard the term "move beyond Jesus".

And there's a wide variety of "progressive Catholics".

Dealing with specific questions is much more productive than assigning vague terms to vague perceived groups.

 

[Rhamiel]

So this seems like the appropriate place. Any explanation why the SSPX never created an AntiPope to challenge the Vaticn II Popes legitimacy?

the SSPX does not reject the authority of the Pope nor the legitimacy of the current Pope

they have a misguided understanding of Sacred Tradition and tradition and the authority of Church Councils

they view their actions not as a rejection of the authority of the Pope, but rather something akin to Civil Disobedience (or maybe Ecclesial Disobedience would be the better term?) in matters where they think the Pope has overstep his bounds

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

the SSPX are mostly nice but kind of confused people

with all the changes that happened in the past 50 years, it is understandable that some people might be confused

I know one family; about 4 households close to home. Their congregation meets about 30 miles away. They are good and faithful Christians except for the fact that they have, for lack of a better word, a profound hatred for "regular" Catholicism and Catholics. We Lutherans are heretical, satanic, demonic and beyond redemption... but they have always been respectful otherwise.

 

[Fish and Bread]

the SSPX does not reject the authority of the Pope

They don't obey him either. All of their current bishops were consecrated without permission from Rome, and all of their current priests, aside from perhaps a few who left the real Church and defected to their organization, were similarly ordained without permission. Under canon law, they are all automatically suspended and forbidden from saying mass, but do so anyway, and these illicit ordinations continue as well.

Moreover, they have rejected the teachings of the Second Vatican Council and several Popes on religious liberty and other issues, and questioned the sacramental validity of the post-Vatican II Catholic mass.

These people are heretics and schismatics.

I suppose it'd bother me less if so many of them weren't so hateful towards so many races and religions and if they didn't hold themselves up as being better Catholics than the Pope. It is ridiculous for them to be so critical of the Eastern Orthodox and the Protestants and such for doing exactly what they did- breaking from the authority of Rome and forming their own Church. Sure, the SSPX doesn't claim to be it's own Church, but it is not in communion with Rome, and it uses it's own mass and has it's own teachings. They should just admit to being what they are- Protestants.

Nothing wrong with Protestants. I do have a problem with the SSPX, though. I think they have some deep rooted issues with denial. How can you say you are in communion with the Pope when the Pope says he isn't in communion with you? And the pure hate and evil and contempt that exists in the SSPX parishes is so grossly inappropriate that, though they may technically be called Christians, in no way do I think they reflect the true spirit of Christ.

I think they may be the least Christ-like of any Christian church or denomination I have ever heard of with the exception of the Westboro Baptist Church cultists. These guys are in second place to them when it comes to most racist hateful group of people- or at least they give the impression of being such.

Obviously, that doesn't apply to everyone who attends their chapels, but this is really not a good group to associated with, in my view. I am very open to attending masses and services from different Christian groups and take good things away from past visits to them, but I would never visit an SSPX chapel. I do not think God dwells there apart from in the literal sense that they may have a valid Eucharist.

It's just said. The old mass is a beautiful liturgy. But these people are not a historical appreciation society. They are more like a right-wing hate group with wacky conspiracy theories. I shudder to think what they must be saying about our President now. Knowing them, I would not care to read the insane racist conspiratorial ramblings that no doubt populate their message forums in regard to him and to basically everything.

Something is just not right with these folks. I think the Archbishop who founded them was struggling with some degradation of his mental faculties and possible issues with psychological health towards the end, which is sad and gives him a possible excuse. His writings and sayings were really all over the place and contradictory. And maybe some within this organization today are also less than responsible for their actions because they struggle with mental health issues. But some, I think, are just bigots and like to hate.

Pope Benedict did everything possible that he could to reach out to this people, including a tremendous gift and concession to them theologically and practically in 2007 when he opened up the old mass to all Catholic priests and said it was never abolished (Even though it indeed had been abolished) and lifted the excommunications of their bishops, and they returned his generosity and his olive branch with hate.

 

[Rhamiel]

my cousin knew a family that attended an SSPX chapel

my cousin is an Evangelical born and raised (my moms side of the family is Protestant)
they were always very nice and she just said "we go to Latin mass and regular Catholics do not think we are really Catholic"
my cousin did not even remember the name SSPX but when I said that, she said that was it

 

[LivingWordUnity]

These people are heretics and schismatics.

SSPX are in schism, but they are not heretics. Schism and heresy are not the same thing. It's like how the Eastern Orthodox are in schism with Rome but are not heretics.

 

[Fish and Bread]

The SSPX attitude towards women makes Muslims look liberal by comparison, by the way.

 

[Fish and Bread]

my cousin knew a family that attended an SSPX chapel

And it is entirely possible that they were a nice family. I imagine that they would be the exception rather than the rule, though. I don't think they everyone affiliated with this group is hateful or bigoted, I just think that many or most are.

SSPX are in schism, but they are not heretics. Schism and heresy are not the same thing. It's like how the Eastern Orthodox are in schism with Rome but are not heretics.

I understand the distinction. To be specific, one heresy that the SSPX propagates is their rejection of the Second Vatican council's teaching, and the teaching of the post-conciliar Popes, on religious liberty. That is a specific doctrinal difference that they have with the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

The SSPX attitude towards women makes Muslims look liberal by comparison, by the way.

That statement is totally false. Do SSPX men say like Muslims that it takes the witness testimony of two women to equal the witness testimony of one man? Do they forbid women to drive? Do they say that a man can beat his wife? Do they approve of a man having multiple wives? Do they say that a man can marry outside of the religion but that a woman has to marry a man within the religion or it's considered adultery? Do they stone their women as the Koran allows men to do to women?

 

[Davidnic]

The ban on SSPX posting evolved over time. Every time they would post it would be antisemitic or flaming attacks on anyone faithful to Rome. Without fail. We let it happen for years putting out fires and then finally decided, as a community, it could not be allowed. The problem with dealing with a problem is that when it is gone people forget it was a problem. When SSPX and other Ultra Traditional groups posted in OBOB it was not just disagreeing with teachings and such as some far left do. It was hateful, anti Semitic and constant attacks. And it happened in organized waves until we just refused to allow it anymore. I always worked patiently with anyone and advocated for all sides to have a voice. But to be frank...without fail...they were mean, vile, racist and cruel. And we eliminated a huge problem when the community added restricting them to the rules. Like I said the problem with getting rid of a problem is people forget what it was.

 

[Rhamiel]

These people are heretics and schismatics

technically true
but technically we could say the same about Eastern Orthodox and Protestants

in the spirit of charity and ecumenism should we not try and be more charitable to those who are outside the Church?

They should just admit to being what they are- Protestants.

isn't it against the rules of this site to say that people who claim to be Catholic are not really Catholic?

if you saw Catholics talking about any other group the way you talk about the SSPX you would have a fit

 

[Fish and Bread]

Just to give you a brief hypothetical example, most of the SSPX people that one would encounter, at least based on what I know, would not take either side of the two people debating above about karma, they'd call them both heretics for using a "pagan" word and tell them to repent so they don't suffer the torments of hell. That is how far from the mainstream they are. LivingWordUnity would be considered much too liberal for them. I'd say I'm their opposite, but I'm not liberal enough to be their opposite, and I'm pretty liberal. I'd say they were like something out of the middle ages, but I don't think the Church was as extreme in the middle ages as they are today. Steer clear is my best advise and I'll leave it at that for now (Maybe in general).

 

[Fish and Bread]

If people have an attachment to the Tridentine mass, I would recommend attending one truly in union with Rome at your local parish recognized by the bishop of your diocese.

 

[ebia]

If people have an attachment to the Tridentine mass, I would recommend attending one truly in union with Rome at your local parish recognized by the bishop of your diocese.

That presumes the main attraction is the latin mass.

I suspect the main attraction is the certainty of being in the exclusive "in group".

 

[Colin]

Where exactly does that quote come from? Did you find it on the Vatican's website?

Yes , it's on the Vatican website .

http://w2.vatican.va/content/paul-v...vi_spe_19670725_cattedrale-spirito-santo.html

As I said , I'm all for the spirit of the Second Council of the Vatican .

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Yes , it's on the Vatican website .

http://w2.vatican.va/content/paul-v...vi_spe_19670725_cattedrale-spirito-santo.html

As I said , I'm all for the spirit of the Second Council of the Vatican .

But later Popes, when they mention it they often say the "authentic spirit" of Vatican II. They preface the term with the word "authentic" to make a distinction between the authentic and the unauthentic spirit.

CDF - Regarding some errors arising from the interpretation of the decrees of the Second Vatican Council, 1966

9) The errors in the field of moral theology are no less trivial. Some, in fact, dare to reject the objective criteria of morality, while others do not acknowledge the natural law, preferring instead to advocate for the legitimacy of so-called situational ethics. Deleterious opinions are spread about morality and responsibility in the areas of sexuality and marriage.

10) In addition, it is necessary to comment about ecumenism. The Apostolic See praises, undoubtedly, those who promote initiatives, in the spirit of the conciliar Decree on Ecumenism, that foster charity toward our separated brothers and to draw them to unity in the Church. However, it is regrettable that some interpret the conciliar Decree in their own terms, proposing an ecumenical action that offends the truth about the unity of the faith and of the Church, fostering a pernicious irenicism [the error of creating a false unity among different Churches] and an indifferentism entirely alien to the mind of the Council.

These pernicious errors, scattered variously throughout the world, are recounted in this letter only in summary form for the local Ordinaries so that each one, according to his function and office, can strive to eradicate or hinder them.

(Read more)




.​