Vatican Confirms SSPX Is Being Offered Personal Prelature

[JReducation]

Originally Posted by iloveangels

Yes, and most of that kind of activity took place in Europe during the Vatican II New New New heyday, when it was very likely to get them into trouble. Particularly in France. France was really messed up after VII. Still is.

But the real kicker was when they looked like they were going to settle down, then suddenly Abp. LeFebvre bolted from the pack, and tried to illicitly ordain some bishops as some kind of guarantee. That's what really elicited the excommunications. You can't do that.

Let's face it, the Church in France has been a mess since the French Revolution. To say that it was Vatican II that threw the Catholics in France under the bus is not to know French history. France and Italy stopped being Catholic a very long time ago. The last Catholic nation in Europe was Spain and now that's gone. Only the little nations are Catholic, like Malta and Monaco.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

[iloveangels]

Originally Posted by JReducation

Let's face it, the Church in France has been a mess since the French Revolution. To say that it was Vatican II that threw the Catholics in France under the bus is not to know French history. France and Italy stopped being Catholic a very long time ago. The last Catholic nation in Europe was Spain and now that's gone. Only the little nations are Catholic, like Malta and Monaco.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

Yes, probably right regarding France. Strange place, grossly overrated & overpriced. Wehn I visited a few years ago, they insisted that I speak French and got angry at me because I didn't do it well, even though they knew exactly what I had been saying in English before. Complete contrast to both the Spanish and the Dutch.

The Dutch even like keeping their language as a sort of code amongst themselves for business reasons. It upsets them a wee little bit when you start picking it up. They start looking at you out of one eye, wondering what you're getting. I've been asked how much I understand point blank on occasion. They're serious about it.

What's really odd when you talk to Catholics is that many are under the impression that Italy is still very Catholic, which it's not really. There are many people in Rome who aren't Catholic in fact. One of the largest mosques in all of Europe is in Rome, not all that far from the Vatican.

[Pork Roll]

What's really odd when you talk to Catholics is that many are under the impression that Italy is still very Catholic, which it's not really. There are many people in Rome who aren't Catholic in fact. One of the largest mosques in all of Europe is in Rome, not all that far from the Vatican.

That's depressing but perfectly acceptable according to Vatican II. It use to be that not even protestant churches were allowed in Rome. But when you stop being catholic, why would it matter.

[TS Aquinas]

Originally Posted by JReducation

The bold is mine

Misspelled 'their.' Apologies.

That's the issue. The really shot themselves in the foot with Bl. John Paul and Pope Benedict when they started to run a campaign against Vatican II and some of them even questioned the validity of the sacraments after the changes in the rites.

It's no secret though that Archbishop Lefebvre was not supportive of Vatican II. Unless I'm mistaken, he refused to accept Nostra aetate and Dignitatis humanae publicly and still was allowed his society and never had problems with Rome about his overt stance. It's not the excommunication that bugs me; it's that they were in communion prior to it with their position of the council.

[TrueLight]

Originally Posted by JReducation

The worse part was that it was never Bishop Fellay. It was his subordinates and one or two of the other bishops. Bishop Fellay is pretty polite person. But these guys were blogging and writing newsletters all over the Internet and making statements from the pulpit. It's probably a handful of men. As I always say, "Those who are not causing trouble rarely get noticed." I can't blame the Holy See for wanting them to sort out what they really think from what some of their hardliners think.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

Bishop Fellay is polite, but that doesn't mean he didn't criticize Vatican II, Modernist Rome, the Conciliar Church, although he didn't go around making anti-semetic remarks, etc.

I can send you a link to one of his sermons. I am sure Bishop Fellay is aware of what is espoused on the SSPX website.

I am very curious to see how all this will work out.

[TrueLight]

Originally Posted by JReducation

Their love for the Tridentine mass never was the issue. It was their hostility toward the Council, the CCC, the OF, the beatification of John Paul II, Mother Teresa and John XXIII, their antagonism of the big three: (Dominicans, Franciscans and Jesuits) and toward Opus Dei. Let's admit here here. The SSPX is little league next to these guys. Especially if you stop and think that all the religious communities in the Church the Dominicans and Franciscans have more bishops than anyone else. You're going to be creamed, if you badmouth them. Opus Dei is a personal prelature of the pope and you're openly hostile to it? That's not one of your better ideas.

Numbers and power don't matter.

Now as I said before, I still think its unfair that the SSPX gets a prelature and the FSSP does not, although I thank you for explaining the limits of both.

However, I wholeheartedly believe that the SSPX were raised for a reason. I hope it is okay to say this. I am not prosyletizing.

They were raised at a time when a modernist mindset had so infected the Church, that we were moving away from our traditions. Thank God we have a Pope who understands sacred tradition.

Without the SSPX, I doubt the Latin mass would even be around, except for a few here and there taking place in hotel rooms.

I find this passage from the Book of Acts, chapter 5 to be very applicable. This takes place after some Apostles were put in jail for preaching the Word.

25 Then someone came and said, “Look! The men you put in jail are standing in the temple courts teaching the people.” 26 At that, the captain went with his officers and brought the apostles. They did not use force, because they feared that the people(AI) would stone them.

27 The apostles were brought in and made to appear before the Sanhedrin(AJ) to be questioned by the high priest. 28 “We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name,”(AK) he said. “Yet you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are determined to make us guilty of this man’s blood.”(AL)

29 Peter and the other apostles replied: “We must obey God rather than human beings!(AM) 30 The God of our ancestors(AN) raised Jesus from the dead(AO)—whom you killed by hanging him on a cross.(AP) 31 God exalted him to his own right hand(AQ) as Prince and Savior(AR) that he might bring Israel to repentance and forgive their sins.(AS) 32 We are witnesses of these things,(AT) and so is the Holy Spirit,(AU) whom God has given to those who obey him.”

33 When they heard this, they were furious(AV) and wanted to put them to death. 34 But a Pharisee named Gamaliel,(AW) a teacher of the law,(AX) who was honored by all the people, stood up in the Sanhedrin and ordered that the men be put outside for a little while. 35 Then he addressed the Sanhedrin: “Men of Israel, consider carefully what you intend to do to these men. 36 Some time ago Theudas appeared, claiming to be somebody, and about four hundred men rallied to him. He was killed, all his followers were dispersed, and it all came to nothing. 37 After him, Judas the Galilean appeared in the days of the census(AY) and led a band of people in revolt. He too was killed, and all his followers were scattered. 38 Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail.(AZ) 39 But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God.”

Is it possible that God, through the Church, is affirming that these holy priests are here for a reason?

[agnes therese]

Originally Posted by Pork Roll

That's depressing but perfectly acceptable according to Vatican II. It use to be that not even protestant churches were allowed in Rome. But when you stop being catholic, why would it matter.

I don't think Vatican II has anything to do with who is allowed to build in Rome. Rome is part of Italy, not part of the Vatican state.

[ProVobis]

Originally Posted by ConstantineTG

So its kind of like, "you can opt not to agree with it, but you cannot disagree with it"?

Not publicly anyway.

[RogerDeCourcy]

Originally Posted by justme

Really?

I do not think so. Even if all the SSPX priests were to come in there are only 511 of them world wide.

The United States has 39,466 priests. Worldwide there are 409,166.

So that means that the SSPX, again if all enter which I greatly doubt, amount to 0.125%.

I'm aware of that. I meant that their regularisation would be a signal to the wider Church that pre-1960's Catholicism is no longer equivalent to heresy. I hope also that in a few decades a priest may elect to say the old rite without fear of losing preferment. Maybe even a few years! The message might get 'round.

[ProVobis]

Originally Posted by TrueLight

Without the SSPX, I doubt the Latin mass would even be around, except for a few here and there taking place in hotel rooms.

Well, the FSSPX certainly were and are among the TLM/EF's chief promoters.

I think some of them went a little overboard on their public negative campaigning (against the council, OF, etc) though. I don't know if those in the mainstream will ever forgive them for that.

[TrueLight]

Originally Posted by ProVobis

Well, the FSSPX certainly were and are among the TLM/EF's chief promoters.

I think some of them went a little overboard on their public negative campaigning (against the council, OF, etc) though. I don't know if those in the mainstream will ever forgive them for that.

Sorry. What I mean is that the FSSP came out of the SSPX.

The SSPX made it apparent to everyone that some of the faithful are really blessed by the TLM and so, the FSSP was created.

[Hesychios]

Originally Posted by ProVobis

Well, the FSSPX certainly were and are among the TLM/EF's chief promoters.

I think some of them went a little overboard on their public negative campaigning (against the council, OF, etc) though. I don't know if those in the mainstream will ever forgive them for that.

I agree with both of you.

Also, I remember attending the Latin Mass at a hotel. It confused the heck out of my kids.

Maybe it was the folding chairs

Anyway, I give Archbishop LeFebvre and the SSPX full 100% credit for saving the EF. Everyone else was obediently just letting it slip away, while it was breaking their hearts.

This did require some hardening of attitude among the followers. I heard comments like "we don't trust the bishop" and that sort of thing. It was very off-putting. I turned my back on them because of that. Still, it is quite clear that there would not have been any indult Masses anywhere if not for the backlash. The very real threat of schism forced the bishops to react and try to defuse the movement by offering indult Masses.

Thankfully there were still some older priests around ready and eager to participate, and there were still some gorgeous old parishes in changing neighborhoods (which almost had become surplus properties) and indults were offered. Then instead of simply splitting the traditionalist movement, or defanging the SSPX, Latin Rite traditionalism became encouraged and grew.

My father didn't live to see it. He would have appreciated the restored 'Old Mass', and this forum, I feel sure.

[TrueLight]

Originally Posted by Hesychios

I agree with both of you.

Also, I remember attending the Latin Mass at a hotel. It confused the heck out of my kids.

Maybe it was the folding chairs

Anyway, I give Archbishop LeFebvre and the SSPX full 100% credit for saving the EF. Everyone else was obediently just letting it slip away, while it was breaking their hearts.

This did require some hardening of attitude among the followers. I heard comments like "we don't trust the bishop" and that sort of thing. It was very off-putting. I turned my back on them because of that. Still, it is quite clear that there would not have been any indult Masses anywhere if not for the backlash. The very real threat of schism forced the bishops to react and try to defuse the movement by offering indult Masses.

Thankfully there were still some older priests around ready and eager to participate, and there were still some gorgeous old parishes in changing neighborhoods (which almost had become surplus properties) and indults were offered. Then instead of simply splitting the traditionalist movement, or defanging the SSPX, Latin Rite traditionalism became encouraged and grew.

My father didn't live to see it. He would have appreciated the restored 'Old Mass', and this forum, I feel sure.

[wasserfall]

Originally Posted by JReducation

He did not. It was just the opposite. They had a superior who wanted to push the celebration of the OF and EF. They elected a new superior at the first possible opportunity. The pope does not replace superiors. This is a myth. It has never happened in the history of the Church. A superior can be asked to step down and an apostolic administrator can be appointed by the pope until such time as an electoral chapter can be held.

Neither of these are quite right.

Fr. Bisig was superior, but he was near the end of his term at the time the controversy arose.
Fr. Bisig was asked to delay any major decisions and, when his term was complete, his reelection was not permitted, and, Fr. Devillers was appointed superior by the Ecclesia Dei commission. It is not clear why Ecclesia Dei opposed Fr. Bisig, but perhaps the fact that he was older and had been rector of the SSPX seminary at Zaitzkofen played a role.
Six years later, at the end of Fr. Devillers' term, in the first election since 1994, Fr. Berg was elected superior general of the FSSP.

[Marie5890]

Originally Posted by JReducation

My point is that regularization is about brothers coming home so that we can share the feast, not to convert each other. Conversion comes through the grace of God and it's a process not magic.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

I love the way you articulated that, Bro. And it can be applied to more than just the SSPX.