The SSPX are in schism, per the motu proprio Ecclesia Dei. Even if the excommunication of their Bishops has been lifted, they will remain in Schism until they submit to the teachings of the Second Vatican Council and the Professio Fidei.
Canonically irregular in Latin means contrary to the regula, or rule of the Church. What it means is t…
The SSPX are in schism, per the motu proprio Ecclesia Dei. Even if the excommunication of their Bishops has been lifted, they will remain in Schism until they submit to the teachings of the Second Vatican Council and the Professio Fidei.
Canonically irregular in Latin means contrary to the regula, or rule of the Church. What it means is that the SSPX has no canonical status in the Church. If the SSPX has no canonical status, it means they are in schism. It's a euphemism similar to describing "separated brethren" for Protestants and Orthodox.
You've also expressed elsewhere the erroneous idea that if a group are in schism with the Church, they should have no holiness or grace or validity of Sacraments. This is a false understanding of ecclesiology. Everyone in schism with the Church, is lacking full communion with the Church, but still possesses partial communion by virtue of Baptism, with the degree of this communion depending on their whether they have correct governance and doctrine, and apostolic succession. This is why the Orthodox can have 7 valid Sacraments, why Protestant baptisms and marriages are usually valid, etc.
The SSPX are in schism, per the motu proprio Ecclesia Dei. Even if the excommunication of their Bishops has been lifted, they will remain in Schism until they submit to the teachings of the Second Vatican Council and the Professio Fidei.
Canonically irregular in Latin means contrary to the regula, or rule of the Church. What it means is that the SSPX has no canonical status in the Church. If the SSPX has no canonical status, it means they are in schism. It's a euphemism similar to describing "separated brethren" for Protestants and Orthodox.
You've also expressed elsewhere the erroneous idea that if a group are in schism with the Church, they should have no holiness or grace or validity of Sacraments. This is a false understanding of ecclesiology. Everyone in schism with the Church, is lacking full communion with the Church, but still possesses partial communion by virtue of Baptism, with the degree of this communion depending on their whether they have correct governance and doctrine, and apostolic succession. This is why the Orthodox can have 7 valid Sacraments, why Protestant baptisms and marriages are usually valid, etc.