Could reconciliation with the SSPX arrive with ease?

pdudgeon said:

and why exactly should the Pope budge with a disobedient Archbishop?

Click to expand...

I think it would boil down to whether the disobedience was reasonable or not. My understanding was that the biggest issue was that the SSPX wanted to ensure the continued use of the TLM while JP2 wanted it to be phased out. Since the SSPX eventually got their primary goal under Pope Benedict, it seems in hindsight that it was not an unreasonable request. And if Pope Francis ends up allowing them to not accept Vatican 2, it will be even more so.

The question then becomes, was a split necessary? If the SSPX ended up getting everything they originally asked for, was the fight against them during JP2's papacy necessary at all? If it was not necessary, why was it waged at all?

Stabat Mater said:

If its fine for them to dismiss certain parts of Vatican II then it should be allowed to all catholics dont you think David?
Doesnt this undermind the whole council?

Click to expand...

Not necessarily.

If they are just wanting the Mass to be as old - then how does it ignore Vll?

pdudgeon said:

and why exactly should the Pope budge with a disobedient Archbishop?

Click to expand...

That's where the troubles always exist.
Everyone wants the Pope to be wrong.

I cannot imagine the Apostles wanting Peter to be wrong when they fully relied on his prudential judgment and then the bishops of the church due his successors.

WarriorAngel said:

That's where the troubles always exist.
Everyone wants the Pope to be wrong.

I cannot imagine the Apostles wanting Peter to be wrong when they fully relied on his prudential judgment and then the bishops of the church due his successors.

Click to expand...

St. Paul rebuked Peter "to his face" then bragged about it in the Bible.

The Pope is only infallible under certain very specific circumstances. Otherwise, he can be wrong.

Tallguy88 said:

St. Paul rebuked Peter "to his face" then bragged about it in the Bible.

The Pope is only infallible under certain very specific circumstances. Otherwise, he can be wrong.

Click to expand...

He rebuked his behavior towards the gentiles by acting like he preferred the Jews - and AS the leader of all - this was unbecoming of his chair.
Paul wasnt arguing with him on teachings.
Behavior.

Tallguy88 said:

St. Paul rebuked Peter "to his face" then bragged about it in the Bible.

The Pope is only infallible under certain very specific circumstances. Otherwise, he can be wrong.

Click to expand...

For not practicing what he preached. Not that what he preached was wrong.

Michie said:

I disagree. They seem to be following Martin Luther in spirit whe trying to cling to their own form of Catholicism.

Click to expand...

Not true. They wanted to cling to the faith unchanged.

Rhamiel said:

technically they have not left the Church
they are just disobedient

now it is arguable if that disobedience is just or unjust

I think SSPX has gone over the line in several ways
but it is not the same as leaving the Church

Click to expand...

People need to not lose sight. They are Catholic.

Stabat Mater said:

Vatican City, Apr 26, 2016 / 04:01 am (EWTN News/CNA).- Pope Francis may soon offer the Society of Saint Pius X regular canonical status within the Church, without requiring the acceptance of certain texts of the Second Vatican Council with which they disagree.

Link Below;
http://www.ewtnnews.com/catholic-news/Vatican.php?id=13587

Click to expand...

I can only say, Amen. It will be interesting to see if this can bring a certain something back to the Church by opening the conversation that is long over do.

MikeK said:

Modernism? I don't think you understand what modernism is. The Church absolutely had the authority to take the measures they did against the SSPXers when they did. The error was by those in dissent, not by Rome. Should Pope Francis, in this time of forgiveness, welcome these rebels back into full communion in spite of their sins it will be because Christ's Church is merciful and tolerant of imperfections, not because the SSPXERS aren't in grave error. That is quite similar to the position of the "remarried" Catholic who cannot fully commit to what the known ideal is but can be dealt with pastorally.

Click to expand...

Mike the grave error isn't doctrinal but disobedience. The society was going to be the society regardless because they didn't agree to changes to Mass. They are old school, that's all and the schism is from disobeying a request to stop ordaining more bishops to the cause. That was disobeyed and that caused them to be axed. If Francis gives them status, then I'm sure he'll give them some do and don'ts himself. It will then be up to them to obey. They are Catholic.

MikeK said:

If it is possible, I would love to see the SSPXers forgiven for rejecting the Church and brought back into full Communion with Her, even if they persist in their sin. Perfection should be our goal, but as humans we aren't always able to achieve it and sometimes we fall into sin even though we're doing our best with what we've got. I see SSPXers as very similar to "remarried" Catholics. Yes, what they are doing is clearly and objectively sinful, but that doesn't mean they have to be seperated from us. Ideally, we'd all repent of all of our sins, but I have to trust that Grace will cover a lot. If not, I'm in trouble.

Click to expand...

They didn't reject the Church, Mike. The disagreed with changes to the Mass and they existed fully in the Church until JP gave them the ax for disobeying orders to not consecrate anymore Bishops. That's not rejecting the Catholic Church. It's disobeying an order from the pope. So them existing wasnt a problem. Them disobeying the pope was. What they did wasn't right but it wasn't as if they rejected the Catholic faith. They are the Catholic faith.

Stabat Mater said:

Yes indeed and if its happening during pope Francis pontificate its very wird.
Well twist and turns is the thing in our days it seems...

Click to expand...

I think it's brilliant. He's a clever fox.

Davidnic said:

If it does happen the mainstream media reaction will be very interesting.

Click to expand...

I thought the same thing. They are going to be deer in headlights. I really don't believe they'll understand it.

Tallguy88 said:

I think it would boil down to whether the disobedience was reasonable or not. My understanding was that the biggest issue was that the SSPX wanted to ensure the continued use of the TLM while JP2 wanted it to be phased out. Since the SSPX eventually got their primary goal under Pope Benedict, it seems in hindsight that it was not an unreasonable request. And if Pope Francis ends up allowing them to not accept Vatican 2, it will be even more so.

The question then becomes, was a split necessary? If the SSPX ended up getting everything they originally asked for, was the fight against them during JP2's papacy necessary at all? If it was not necessary, why was it waged at all?

Click to expand...

Well no one can say why it was but God uses things for His own purposes. That purpose is to draw all people to Him. So perhaps SSPX being their mollified some of the more extreme ultra trads and led them gradually back to obedience. Who can say. Or perhaps the long fight weeded out some of the more unreasonable demands that came up at times in between. Sometimes the view is too long and the picture too large for us to see why. But I trust it was necessary or JPII would not have done as he did. But again, I would find it hard to believe that they will just be allowed to say they do not follow VCII. It will have to be a working dialog.

If they are allowed to just not follow it that causes serious problems with all teachings that are Ordinary Magisterium. Remember the CDF has stated that the infallibility of the male priesthood is an act of the Ordinary Magisterium. Same as VCII. This was in the Dubium of 10.25.85.

They said:
"it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium (cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium 25, 2)."

I know many people struggle with what is what level and talk about pastoral councils. But the council is Ordinary Magisterium (at the very least). So is the authority that says women can not be priests. If they just let the SSPX ignore aspects of the Council...it is a serious problem. So I assume it will be structured carefully if it happens.

But perhaps the reason it did not happen before is (and I think this is the reason based on past documents) that the SSPX would not accept anything other than a blanket "you can reject it". And that just basically can't happen. So now, I read the conversation as they are open to other mechanisms.

I am sure people will argue it but it is clear that once you allow some of the Ordinary Magisterium to slide...you have a problem with all of it. And the dubium (and theologians are clear) both VCII and the teaching on male priesthood are Ordinary Magisterium. Although there are also aspects of the Universal (and some argue VCII is also Universal). But...there is laundry list of Ordinary Magisterium teachings that just given a blank check without a different mechanism would throw into disarray. So I would be shocked if it was without such a fail safe.

pdudgeon said:

this part of the response could create new problems:

"Similarly, Schmidberger’s memo asserts that whilst the group would like to 'return from its ‘exile' further discussions would be expected: 'We will not be silent, more over, we will point out the errors by name. Before and after our normalization'.”

if 'not being silent and pointing out the errors' didn't work for Luther, why would it work for him?

Click to expand...

I think perhaps pointing out liturgical abuses rather then doctrinal errors.

pdudgeon said:

yes, and the key there is working within the church, not leaving it to form another church.

Click to expand...

SSPX did not form another Church. ???? Why would you say something like that?

It might be worth pointing out that we have had serious issues since Vll. It was never the council, it had been the implementation of it. So in a way, sspx has be vindicated because this is what they were disagreeing with. What they knew would happen. Lo

Tallguy88 said:

I think it would boil down to whether the disobedience was reasonable or not. My understanding was that the biggest issue was that the SSPX wanted to ensure the continued use of the TLM while JP2 wanted it to be phased out. Since the SSPX eventually got their primary goal under Pope Benedict, it seems in hindsight that it was not an unreasonable request. And if Pope Francis ends up allowing them to not accept Vatican 2, it will be even more so.

The question then becomes, was a split necessary? If the SSPX ended up getting everything they originally asked for, was the fight against them during JP2's papacy necessary at all? If it was not necessary, why was it waged at all?

Click to expand...

But your arguement is one-sided. What about all the other differences in Vatican 2?
Using the vernacular language in the mass was a big draw to get more people and more social classes of people especially into the church. If the mass is in a language that they can understand, it's much easier to become engaged in worship, and also much easier to understand the homily.

Secondly the change of liturgical language to the native tongue put forth in Vat2 follows closely the example of the early apostles who went out of Jerusalem and spoke to the people, and were understood by them.

If i had a printer i could put forth a better arguement here, (sorry about that) but the whole point of Vat2 was to open up the church to the very people in the street that Christ was trying to reach with the message of God.
When He was here on Earth Jesus spoke to everyone from every class.
Yes, His message was first to the Jews, but God wanted to reach everyone. That's why He sent Jesus.

And that was what Vat2 was trying to do--to reach everyone; to open up the world, to involve people in the mass,
to explain about the relationship between men and women, and to talk about what submission of a person's mind
and will to God was about.
And in order to do that, when we have no other way we have to use words in a language that people can understand.
We have to look them in the eye, reach out and touch them and be with them.
Pope Francis calls that "smelling like the sheep".

It wasn't just the language, it wasn't just about the priests, or the proscribed movements, or the words of the rite.
God is so much bigger than that.
The world is so much bigger than that.

That's what Saint Pope JohnPaul II was about. He knew the dangers of not getting God's word out there and of letting Socialism and Communism take over Europe. Pope Paul IV saw it, Pope Pius XII saw it. Duns Scotus saw it, St. Therse of the Little Flower saw it, Blessed Mother Theresa saw it, Saint Faustina saw it.

All of these people saw the same need; to take the Word of God to the people so that they could know, so that they could understand, so they could learn, so that they could be comforted with the Word and with the presence of God.

Yes the Latin Mass is beautiful and it has it's place in showing adoration to God.
But the mass is not just about the priest acting on behalf of the people.
The mass is also great comfort and nourishment to the soul,
and food for the body.
And that's why we also need Vat2, because we the people have souls and bodies that are in need of God.

benedictaoo said:

SSPX did not form another Church. ???? Why would you say something like that?

Click to expand...

they voluntarily separated from the Catholic church, right?
at some point in time after that separation there would have to be a decision made whether to come back or to go forward.
the decision to consecrate more bishops on their own was a step towards that decision, and not a step back towards the Church.
now they are contemplating taking another step--this time perhaps in a direction that will lead them back to the Church.
We'll have to wait and see.