Society of Saint Pius X

Thats true.

[quote=“Catholic Encyclopedia”]St. Thomas (II-II:11:1) defines heresy: “a species of infidelity in men who, having professed the faith of Christ, corrupt its dogmas”. "The right Christian faith consists in giving one’s voluntary assent to Christ in all that truly belongs to His teaching. There are, therefore, two ways of deviating from Christianity: the one by refusing to believe in Christ Himself, which is the way of infidelity, common to Pagans and Jews; the other by restricting belief to certain points of Christ’s doctrine selected and fashioned at pleasure, which is the way of heretics.

I believe the topic of this thread is “are the SSPX heretics,” not “are they schismatic?” Instead of the usual arguments that are always trotted out to turn people against them, why not really answer the question? It’s a resounding “no.”

As I said, I know of one.

I think they deny a misunderstanding of the teachings, not the actual teachings themselves. They are similar to the non-Chalcedonians who condemned Chalcedon for essentially teaching Nestorianism, which of course it did not.

Why is calling the New Mass an “abomination” a heresy? Now, if this priest had said it’s invalid, you would have a case.

The Church by her divine constitution cannot propose to her people an abomination… An abomination, by definition, is at the very least an impiety and the disciplines of the Church cannot lead the faithful to impiety, per Trent. So I can think of one SSPX who I think is a heretic, but then I know lots of people who think they’re Catholic, but have heterodox views.

“…the Novus Ordo represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXIII of the Council of Trent.” (A SHORT CRITICAL STUDY OF THE NOVUS ORDO MISSAE, Sept. 25, 1969)

[Edited by Moderator] Sounds like that priest was just telling it like it is. You may think it’s heresy, but it isn’t. Popes are not prevented from personally promoting a defective rite simply by virtue of their being Pope.

"…the rite and its related rubric are not in themselves a dogmatic definition."
-Pope Paul VI

In other words, not protected by infallibility.

You are incorrect. They are protected by the same negative infallibility that surrounds all of the Church’s disciplines, as articulated by Trent. Pope Paul VI said saying that they were not dogmatic declarations and don’t enjoy the same kind of infallibility that dogamtic declarations enjoy, but none of the Church’s disciplines are dogmatic (and thus they are not immutable, including Quo Primum).

Cardinal Ottaviani was satisfied with Pope Paul’s response to the objections he raised (from your quote) and withdrew those objections (unless one buys into the conspiracy theory that he was tricked).

The Church cannot lead the faithful into impiety on this such a crucial issue as the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, which propitiates for our sins. The Church cannot propose an abomination.

No the church can’t… But a lot of Bishops around the world have done so. By letting SOME masses which are abominations happen.

Certainly, this is indisputablly true. The Pauline Mass, of itself, however, and correctly offered, is NOT an abomination and cannot be an abomination. An abuse of a Mass is not the Mass itself.

Please return to the original topic or I will have to close the thread. Thank you.

Oh, please. :gopray2:

This is the single most legitimate criticism of SSPX-- the Latin NOM has to be protected by indefectibility or what the theologians call ‘practical infallibility’ as a universal discipline.

Even SSPX sympathizer Michael Davies admitted this.

You are incorrect. They are protected by the same negative infallibility that surrounds all of the Church’s disciplines, as articulated by Trent. Pope Paul VI said saying that they were not dogmatic declarations and don’t enjoy the same kind of infallibility that dogamtic declarations enjoy…

I usually disagree with JKirk, but he basically has it right. Universal disciplines are protected from error.

Michael Davies grasped this. :slight_smile:

They are not heretics… yet… as a group. They are in error.

If they try to develop theology to explain their schism, that would possibly be heresy.

They are in violation of canon law, Tradition, tradition, and obedience… but none of that constitutes heresy per se.

Justification of same might.

Confessing their error and coming back into union is open to all of them.

They are, as a whole, no worse than the Orthodox of the Moscow or Byzantine/Ecumenical Patriarchates: just a small something is missing: obedience and unity with the Pope and the church he holds reign over on behalf of Christ as successor of Peter.

This is not true. Take this simple test for the priest.

Ask the priest: who does he obey? Who does he report to?
The SSPX bishop (who is excommunicated) or the local ordinary?

Schism is:
“is the withdrawal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or from communion with the members of the Church subject to him” (Can. 751).

And about the laity who attend: have their masses, the same test: If the local ordinary (The regular bishop in communion with Rome.) says “don’t attend the SSPX masses” will they obey?

I was a member of SSPX during my youth, and I still attend their Mass quite often, their priests are arrogant, and sometimes out of touch with the modern world, but NEVER have they ever turned their backs on Rome, or our Pope.
Some years back some renegade priests denounced the Pope,and were later thrown out of the Society, these are the troubled traditionalist, but the Archbishop LeFebvre, and his Devotee’s always stayed true to Rome, and directed the faithful to do likewise.To this day, in EVERY Mass, prayers are directed to the Pope, and Rome. I’m glad Pope Benedict XVI has removed the restrictions on the Latin Mass, and I hope Rome installs SSPX an office in the Vatican.
Above all I hope Bishops, and Priests of SSPX show a bit more humility, and respect for Rome, and the clergy who continue with the modern reforms of Vatican 2. It truly is an awesome time in church history, to teach through example, and not by harsh words and impatience towards those who are ignorent of the Tridentine rite. God Bless Pope Benedict XVI and the SSPX.:signofcross:

Good. Then why don’t they listen and obey the Pope?
Oh wait. They won’t.

Thus, this is a lie.

SSPX are not heretics (but they’re getting awfully close from some of the outlandish statements I’ve read from them).

God knows, is just matter of time SSPX wil full communion with vatican. Pope Ben16 already took the first step (motu propio), i hope SSPX leader will consider pope intention. come back to the house of vatican… WE ARE ONE FAMILY… maybe are we have differences but we are one… i love SSPX too and SSPX must have the intention to full communion with the Holy See.

God bless Pope Benedicto & SSPX…

The Light of Traditional is Burning Stronger Each Day, this is the power of HOLY SPIRIT…

I would caution about painting everything “SSPX” with a broad brush. Over the past twenty years, a good many former SSPX priests have been recognized by Rome in new priestly institutes, such as IBP in France. Bishop Fellay, current superior general, is very moderate and has been accused of planning a secret reconciliation with the Vatican.

There are also hard line SSPXers and priests. The situation, especially after the MP, is much more complex than some of the posters here would have it.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit