Actually, I meant that the SSPX is 180 degrees off. Their origins are in pride, disobedience and deception.
You’re right that we see evil at work in the Church, including in all levels of the hierarchy, but she is a supernatural reality, the Bride of Christ, so she will be redeemed and it will be through humility and obedience. And a good amount of suffering.
Using the term “bastard”, as you do below, to describe the sacrifice of Christ, validly and licitly offered, may rise to the level of blasphemy.
If you think these terms adequate describe the origin of the SSPX, then you obviously do not know much about them. They remained faithful to the Church while many others went mad, with the terrible results we see today.
Like so many groups and individuals, they have been treated disgracefully by the Church authorities, over the years.
I am not their "defender in chief" but I do not like to see groups defamed.
Our contributions should be temperate and based on facts.
No-one is perfect, but the things you accuse the SSPX of are more descriptive of the mainstream Church.
Altar girls and the protestant practice of communion in the hand were both introduced to the Catholic Church via disobedience. The disobedience continues even today, with many priests ad-libbing rubrics and, of course, the inevitable abuse of the concept of EMHC at every Mass.
The reason some people dislike the SSPX, is because the beauty and magnificence of authentic Catholicism shames the sloppy ersatz Catholicism (really, Roman Protestantism) served up in the majority of Parish Churches.
I do have difficulty being charitable, and Pope St John Paul II is a much better source of information than me. You can read his words in his letter Ecclesia Dei:
I am familiar with the lettter and organisation Eccelsia Dei, Pope Francis recently having done away with this organisation.
Note that there have been various significant developments in the decades since the Ecclesia Dei letter.
Approx 20 years ago, the then head of Ecclesia Dei, Cardinal Dario Castrillion Hoyos, said in an interview that the SSPX "are not schismatic" multiple times and so it is disappointing that this calumny continues.
The Church authorities have never formally declared the SSPX to be in schism, because they are not. It is true the SSPX Bishops were punished (since rescinded) for being consecrated without a mandate, but they have never set up a separate organisation or authority, nor failed to acknowledge the Pope.
In my opinion, Pope Francis fairness towards the SSPX (for example, clarifying their ability to conduct weddings and hear confessions), has been one of the few highlights of his Pontificate. He was also kind towards them when he was the Archbishop of Buenos Aires.
The developments over the past 35 years have been demonstrations of great mercy on the part of the Church. There has been no corresponding repentance shown by the leaders of the SSPX.
You certainly cannot mean that the words of Pope St. John Paul II in Ecclesia Dei are irrelevant because they are several decades old? Here they are, from paragraphs 1-4:
"With great affliction the Church has learned of the unlawful episcopal ordination conferred on 30 June last by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, which has frustrated all the efforts made during the previous years to ensure the full communion with the Church of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X..."
"In itself, this act was one of disobedience to the Roman Pontiff in a very grave matter and of supreme importance for the unity of the church, such as is the ordination of bishops whereby the apostolic succession is sacramentally perpetuated. Hence such disobedience - which implies in practice the rejection of the Roman primacy - constitutes a schismatic act."
"The root of this schismatic act can be discerned in an incomplete and contradictory notion of Tradition."
However, neither communion in the hand, female altar servers, nor Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion are currently disobedient to the rubrics. One person can't administer both the host and the chalice, and many parishes only have one pastor, or so many Masses that each priest reaches his maximum limit per day without assisting at other Masses.
Insofar as SSPX acted in opposition to the Pope in union with the bishops, they were schismatic. Schismatic means separated from the Pope while continuing to hold the same faith as those with whom they have broken unity.
I find my NO Masses neither sloppy nor fake, and I get appalled by those who think they are.
Your description of SSPX activities may have inadvertently hit the nail on the head: “same route but opposite direction.”
Hi Lucy,
I suppose there is an analogy there, traditional always remains full of vitality, while the mainstream Church sadly continues to waste away.
Actually, I meant that the SSPX is 180 degrees off. Their origins are in pride, disobedience and deception.
You’re right that we see evil at work in the Church, including in all levels of the hierarchy, but she is a supernatural reality, the Bride of Christ, so she will be redeemed and it will be through humility and obedience. And a good amount of suffering.
Using the term “bastard”, as you do below, to describe the sacrifice of Christ, validly and licitly offered, may rise to the level of blasphemy.
Hi Lucy,
If you think these terms adequate describe the origin of the SSPX, then you obviously do not know much about them. They remained faithful to the Church while many others went mad, with the terrible results we see today.
Like so many groups and individuals, they have been treated disgracefully by the Church authorities, over the years.
I am not their "defender in chief" but I do not like to see groups defamed.
Our contributions should be temperate and based on facts.
No-one is perfect, but the things you accuse the SSPX of are more descriptive of the mainstream Church.
Altar girls and the protestant practice of communion in the hand were both introduced to the Catholic Church via disobedience. The disobedience continues even today, with many priests ad-libbing rubrics and, of course, the inevitable abuse of the concept of EMHC at every Mass.
The reason some people dislike the SSPX, is because the beauty and magnificence of authentic Catholicism shames the sloppy ersatz Catholicism (really, Roman Protestantism) served up in the majority of Parish Churches.
I do have difficulty being charitable, and Pope St John Paul II is a much better source of information than me. You can read his words in his letter Ecclesia Dei:
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_commissions/ecclsdei/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio_02071988_ecclesia-dei_en.html
Hi Lucy,
I am familiar with the lettter and organisation Eccelsia Dei, Pope Francis recently having done away with this organisation.
Note that there have been various significant developments in the decades since the Ecclesia Dei letter.
Approx 20 years ago, the then head of Ecclesia Dei, Cardinal Dario Castrillion Hoyos, said in an interview that the SSPX "are not schismatic" multiple times and so it is disappointing that this calumny continues.
The Church authorities have never formally declared the SSPX to be in schism, because they are not. It is true the SSPX Bishops were punished (since rescinded) for being consecrated without a mandate, but they have never set up a separate organisation or authority, nor failed to acknowledge the Pope.
In my opinion, Pope Francis fairness towards the SSPX (for example, clarifying their ability to conduct weddings and hear confessions), has been one of the few highlights of his Pontificate. He was also kind towards them when he was the Archbishop of Buenos Aires.
The developments over the past 35 years have been demonstrations of great mercy on the part of the Church. There has been no corresponding repentance shown by the leaders of the SSPX.
You certainly cannot mean that the words of Pope St. John Paul II in Ecclesia Dei are irrelevant because they are several decades old? Here they are, from paragraphs 1-4:
"With great affliction the Church has learned of the unlawful episcopal ordination conferred on 30 June last by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, which has frustrated all the efforts made during the previous years to ensure the full communion with the Church of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X..."
"In itself, this act was one of disobedience to the Roman Pontiff in a very grave matter and of supreme importance for the unity of the church, such as is the ordination of bishops whereby the apostolic succession is sacramentally perpetuated. Hence such disobedience - which implies in practice the rejection of the Roman primacy - constitutes a schismatic act."
"The root of this schismatic act can be discerned in an incomplete and contradictory notion of Tradition."
However, neither communion in the hand, female altar servers, nor Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion are currently disobedient to the rubrics. One person can't administer both the host and the chalice, and many parishes only have one pastor, or so many Masses that each priest reaches his maximum limit per day without assisting at other Masses.
Insofar as SSPX acted in opposition to the Pope in union with the bishops, they were schismatic. Schismatic means separated from the Pope while continuing to hold the same faith as those with whom they have broken unity.
I find my NO Masses neither sloppy nor fake, and I get appalled by those who think they are.