PabloSerna said:

---

Carmine Scarpacio said:

---

fc2112 said:

---

Keep in mind SSPX is not in full communion with Rome. So, faithful Catholics should not believe all the sacraments there are licit.

Here is what the Vatican has said:

https://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=20046

And before y'all jump me - I have friends who are priests in this order. Yes, they believe they are fine but Rome does not.

The FSSP IS in full communion.

---

Nothing in the Bible gives some Pope the authority to deny a believer communion.

---

The issue is that they think they are and that is what is being clarified. Also, the Vatican has taken the time to allow things to work themselves out and they have begun to fracture among themselves. So, maybe that says something about the whole movement.

---

What is being clarified by giving the Society faculties to wed and absolve? Nothing other than the fact that we are in communion with the Church. I say my rosary for the intentions of the Holy Father daily, I have a Pope Francis bobble-head on my desk, and I am permitted to be Godparent at a run of the mill Catholic Church (not merely some form of witness).

Why so much Ire for the Society and not for Protestants? It is always amusing to me that those who preach "love, love, love" for the justly marginalized turn around and rend their garments at anything with the whiff of traditionalism.

Serviam said:

---

PabloSerna said:

---

Carmine Scarpacio said:

---

fc2112 said:

---

Keep in mind SSPX is not in full communion with Rome. So, faithful Catholics should not believe all the sacraments there are licit.

Here is what the Vatican has said:

https://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=20046

And before y'all jump me - I have friends who are priests in this order. Yes, they believe they are fine but Rome does not.

The FSSP IS in full communion.

---

Nothing in the Bible gives some Pope the authority to deny a believer communion.

---

The issue is that they think they are and that is what is being clarified. Also, the Vatican has taken the time to allow things to work themselves out and they have begun to fracture among themselves. So, maybe that says something about the whole movement.

---

What is being clarified by giving the Society faculties to wed and absolve? Nothing other than the fact that we are in communion with the Church. I say my rosary for the intentions of the Holy Father daily, I have a Pope Francis bobble-head on my desk, and I am permitted to be Godparent at a run of the mill Catholic Church (not merely some form of witness).

Why so much Ire for the Society and not for Protestants? It is always amusing to me that those who preach "love, love, love" for the justly marginalized turn around and rend their garments at anything with the whiff of traditionalism.

---

Further witness to SSPX communion with Rome is last year's confirmations held in a diocesan parish. Bishop Noonan is a caring shepherd regardless of some of the differences we may have. Fr. Payne is likewise a magnanimous pastor. The previous year involved a major rain downfall during the Mass (the priory is too small to host all indoors).

https://liturgyguy.com/2023/10/14/big-news-florida-bishop-permits-sspx-confirmation-mass-in-diocesan-church/

Leonard H. Stringfield said:

---

747Ag said:

---

fc2112 said:

---

I would agree with the limbo term.

All the same, there is no reason a Catholic has to expose themselves to the possibility of illicit sacraments when perfectly licit ones exist at parishes all around them. Which is why - if you just gotta have the Latin - find a FSSP parish.

---

What would be illicit/unlawful considering sacraments confected by priests of the SSPX? Permissions are granted as outlined above. They often work with local ordinaries. What am I missing?

---

Do you find trying to follow all the rules is a bit tiring? Like a cog in a control system?

---

No. It's not about so-called rules, but rather conforming ourselves to the Divine will out of love for Him.

Leonard H. Stringfield said:

---

747Ag said:

---

fc2112 said:

---

I would agree with the limbo term.

All the same, there is no reason a Catholic has to expose themselves to the possibility of illicit sacraments when perfectly licit ones exist at parishes all around them. Which is why - if you just gotta have the Latin - find a FSSP parish.

---

What would be illicit/unlawful considering sacraments confected by priests of the SSPX? Permissions are granted as outlined above. They often work with local ordinaries. What am I missing?

---

Do you find trying to follow all the rules is a bit tiring? Like a cog in a control system?

---

Said the serpent to Eve.....

Leonard H. Stringfield said:

---

747Ag said:

---

Leonard H. Stringfield said:

---

747Ag said:

---

fc2112 said:

---

I would agree with the limbo term.

All the same, there is no reason a Catholic has to expose themselves to the possibility of illicit sacraments when perfectly licit ones exist at parishes all around them. Which is why - if you just gotta have the Latin - find a FSSP parish.

---

What would be illicit/unlawful considering sacraments confected by priests of the SSPX? Permissions are granted as outlined above. They often work with local ordinaries. What am I missing?

---

Do you find trying to follow all the rules is a bit tiring? Like a cog in a control system?

---

No. It's not about so-called rules, but rather conforming ourselves to the Divine will out of love for Him.

---

Did/do you love him as he destroyed the 2 cities, Sodom and Gomorrah? Including the innocent children?

---

Your question presumes that the be-all, end-all is this life. Rather, God made us to know Him, to love Him, and to serve Him in this world, and to be happy with Him forever in the next. There's much more than this passing world.

PabloSerna said:

---

" Why so much Ire for the Society and not for Protestants? It is always amusing to me that those who preach "love, love, love" for the justly marginalized turn around and rend their garments at anything with the whiff of traditionalism."

+++

Where is this "ire" you speak of? You and I both know the truth, but others on here may not. SSPX rejects much of Vatican II and chooses to paint the whole event as a "pastoral" exercise instead of the refresh intended for the church in the modern world. On top of the liturgical reforms were the effort to mobilize the lay faithful for the mission.

I am happy for you and others that love the pre-Vatican II liturgy and wish to remain in that moment. But let's not pretend that SSPX is just another rite with full communion under the papacy. If pointing this fact out seems like ire, it is not- just setting the record straight.

Probably the one observation I have made is the fracture that has begun. I posted a letter from a former SSPX member for the insight- not my words.

Also, please stop with the "traditional" tag- it is a dead give away that you seek to distinguish yourself from the rest of us who are of the same church- don't you see that?

---

What amazes me is the sense of arrogance at telling people not to call themselves traditionalist. Why you may ask? Is it because the traditional movement is fabricating devotions, prayers, liturgies? Is it because it is a true statement then? It would seem so. If a line has been drawn in the sand it is easy to see what side one is on. You oppose someone being traditional because to recognize that would mean that what you embrace is not. You then call those who wish to preserve Catholic Traditionalism schismatics, when in fact the revolution of the past 60 years is a break from what was just known as Catholicism.

You accuse the SSPX as just seeing VII as being "pastoral", where would they get that impression? Would it be words of the Pope John XIII who referred to it as a pastoral council? Could it be from the fact that there wasn't one new teaching, one dogma or one anathema presented at VII? I have never attended the SSPX, but they are not schismatics. Why else would Bishop Barron of all people allow them to say Mass in his diocese?

PabloSerna said:

---

Answer truthfully now- is SSPX in FULL communion with the Roman Catholic Church?

---

Yes, there is no such thing as partial communion.

PabloSerna said:

---

" Why so much Ire for the Society and not for Protestants? It is always amusing to me that those who preach "love, love, love" for the justly marginalized turn around and rend their garments at anything with the whiff of traditionalism."

+++

Where is this "ire" you speak of? You and I both know the truth, but others on here may not. SSPX rejects much of Vatican II and chooses to paint the whole event as a "pastoral" exercise instead of the refresh intended for the church in the modern world. On top of the liturgical reforms were the effort to mobilize the lay faithful for the mission.

I am happy for you and others that love the pre-Vatican II liturgy and wish to remain in that moment. But let's not pretend that SSPX is just another rite with full communion under the papacy. If pointing this fact out seems like ire, it is not- just setting the record straight.

Probably the one observation I have made is the fracture that has begun. I posted a letter from a former SSPX member for the insight- not my words.

Also, please stop with the "traditional" tag- it is a dead give away that you seek to distinguish yourself from the rest of us who are of the same church- don't you see that?

---

I don't need to distinguish the traditional from the ordinary form, the fruits do that all on their own.

With regards to rejection of Vatican II, why has the Novus Ordo mass made such usage of Eucharistic ministers and shunned chanting where the documents from Vatican II specifically say the opposite. I'm sure you're fine with the mainstream picking and choosing which parts of Vatican II to follow but not the Society, why? It's because Vatican II was a non binding pastoral council that gave advice on ways to involve the laity more, but is not being enforced and is not being followed by either the progressives or traditionalists.

(Image posted of fruits of traditional Latin Mass)

Leonard H. Stringfield said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

Leonard H. Stringfield said:

---

747Ag said:

---

fc2112 said:

---

I would agree with the limbo term.

All the same, there is no reason a Catholic has to expose themselves to the possibility of illicit sacraments when perfectly licit ones exist at parishes all around them. Which is why - if you just gotta have the Latin - find a FSSP parish.

---

What would be illicit/unlawful considering sacraments confected by priests of the SSPX? Permissions are granted as outlined above. They often work with local ordinaries. What am I missing?

---

Do you find trying to follow all the rules is a bit tiring? Like a cog in a control system?

---

Said the serpent to Eve.....

---

Yes, from that point of view I suppose so. Do you feel that achieving "salvation" is dependent on following certain rules? There is data suggesting we are slowly being manipulated and controlled by "outside" forces with many religious systems being incorporated.

---

I didn't see all of your edits immediately.

I believe that the sacrifice of Our Lord Jesus Christ is what saves. I believe I cooperate in the life of Christ by believing in the Church he started, participating in the sacraments he gave us. I believe that if I am able to maintain a life of virtue and am able to die in a state of grace only then will I be saved. Rules as you put them or the commandments as our Lord calls them are what keeps us safe, think of guardrails on a mountain road. Our Lord tells us to love him is to keep his commandments, that is clearly defined.

Does the data suggest that I am controlled by outside forces? No since I have freewill. I choose to turn towards God or not. Obviously I see God who is outside of time and space. He created the earth and defined what is good. So if I try to follow his example and the "rules" he left me. However he left me free to to choose. I know you see this as a manipulative situation, however has your skepticism of everything left you in a state easily manipulated yourself? The question all mentally isn't inherently bad, but eventually you need to find answers instead of just more questions. To fail to do so may lead to a rejection of reality itself.

Leonard H. Stringfield said:

---

Serviam said:

---

Wait, what coverup?

---

The extraterrestrial (alien beings) cover-up. Lies have been told over the years to simple cover up previous lies. And we know who the father of lies is yes? Just thought I'd toss that in there...as a born again Christian, I know a little scripture.

---

Worry more about scripture, less about alien coverups. Just my advice

Law361 said:

---

Seems like a pretty closed insular community that is not representative of the wider Church. That is problematic

---

From the looks of the survey, the wider church is not representative of the actual Church.

Law361 said:

---

The actual church is the one we have. There are not two churches. If we don't like it, we need to work on it, not retreat from it.

---

What do you think we're doing? Are the hermits and cloistered religious who live in convents and monasteries "retreating from it" or are they living their vocation?