A Fresh Attack on the SSPX (Western Catholic Reporter, Canada)
#21
http://wcr.ab.ca/old-site/news/2009/0202...0209.shtml
http://wcr.ab.ca/old-site/news/2000/0110...1000.shtml

The articles describe in detail his view of Catholicism.
:eyeroll:
Reply
#22
(07-25-2012, 12:27 AM)Crusader_Philly Wrote: I agree. This is why the SSPX position is a bit problematic, but even then, they are not schismatic.

Even the authorities in the Vatican have not said as such.

So, you think the Vatican gets it wrong when they say non-Catholics can be saved, but the Vatican is right when they say the SSPX isn't schismatic?  I don't see how they aren't, they pay lip service to submission to Rome but their actions often refuse that submission.

(07-25-2012, 12:53 AM)TraditionalistThomas Wrote: Your interpretation is dodgy. The SSPX do submit to the Holy Father. They are just disobedient in not accepting Vatican II, for good reasons.

Saying you submit and actually submitting are two different things.  Disobedience is disobedience, and is mutually exclusive from submission.  They can say they submit all they want, but their actions say otherwise.  They are in schism.
Reply
#23
(07-25-2012, 12:33 PM)Melkite Wrote: So, you think the Vatican gets it wrong when they say non-Catholics can be saved, but the Vatican is right when they say the SSPX isn't schismatic?  I don't see how they aren't, they pay lip service to submission to Rome but their actions often refuse that submission.

If they say non-Catholics (heretics, schismatics, apostates) can be saved, then it wouldn't really matter what they say about a small, Swiss based congregation of priests. Right?

I acknowledge that there are some glaring problems with the SSPX position - thus, I am not an SSPXer.

This post (and my post immediately following it) sum up my views on the situation.

http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/inde...sg33761713
Reply
#24
(07-25-2012, 12:54 PM)Crusader_Philly Wrote:
(07-25-2012, 12:33 PM)Melkite Wrote: So, you think the Vatican gets it wrong when they say non-Catholics can be saved, but the Vatican is right when they say the SSPX isn't schismatic?  I don't see how they aren't, they pay lip service to submission to Rome but their actions often refuse that submission.

If they say non-Catholics (heretics, schismatics, apostates) can be saved, then it wouldn't really matter what they say about a small, Swiss based congregation of priests. Right?

I acknowledge that there are some glaring problems with the SSPX position - thus, I am not an SSPXer.

This post (and my post immediately following it) sum up my views on the situation.

http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/inde...sg33761713

Yes, if the Vatican now is right that non-Catholics can be saved, then being schismatic doesn't not absolutely condemn the SSPX, depending upon the reason for their schism.

I think I agree with you about the FSSP and SSPX.  I have been having that feeling for a while but didn't know how to put it to words.  Thank you for posting the link.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)