SSPX reading materials

I belong to a faith group that meets once a month. Topics for discussion are chosen by the host couple and vary from newsworthy (ie St. Stans controversy) to sacramental (ie, meaning of Reconcilliation) to offbeat (ie. exorcism). We are fortunate to have a priest that joins us.

The April meeting is at our house and I thought a discussion of what I describe as “radical-traditionalism” would be interesting. Before this forum, I was only familiar with the schism in general terms but have found the various “discussions” here to be interesting and thought others might like to know more.

What I need is some reference materials to hand out to people so that everyone can get up to speed a bit before our discussion. I am looking for easy to read, short materials. Most importantly, they must present the information from the viewpoint of loyalty to Catholic Church and Pope John Paul II. Simply put, I have no intention of being “fair and balanced” on this issue because in my mind there is only one side. I’d welcome any suggestions of what to present to the group to open up the discussion.

Also, if anyone has any other discussion ideas for future meetings, I’d be all ears. We’ve had this group together for almost 15 years now; we’ve covered many topics but I know the subject of Catholicism is limitless.

Thanks,
Kris

Try here.

They’ve got some very long articles, but a few shorter ones too. Very loyal to JP II.

if you want to see how loyal sspx are to JP2 just go to their site. they put knives in his back

[quote=Catholic Dude]if you want to see how loyal sspx are to JP2 just go to their site. they put knives in his back
[/quote]

Dude…I meant the site that I linked to. Did you even click on it?

Of course the SSPX isn’t loyal to JP II. Duh. :rolleyes:

Dude…:nope:

sorry Dr

[quote=Catholic Dude]sorry Dr
[/quote]

No prob. My original post wasn’t very clear. I type faster than I think sometimes. :wave:

Really? So how about the Florida bishops being involved in Lutheran bishop ordinations? Is that schismatic? Is changing the Novus Ordo liturgy ad ib as certain priests do here in Florida schismatic (and their bishops, and liturgical directors of the diocese darn well know what they are dong!)? Let alone the stories of priests involved in the commision telling how the ICEL intentially mistranslated pasages and texts! Is selling the Catholic faith down the river by kissing the rear of every Protestant or dressing up as a Hindu like what took place in Fatima not schismatic? Is allowing women (once decried as an “evil” practice) to serve at the altar and to give Holy Communion as it were simply just a wafer and ignoring what the Catechism of Trent teaches about the distribution of the Eucharist and who can touch the sacred vessals not schismatic? Is facing the people instead of liturgical east like…you get the picture.

No one is liable to a penalty who, when violating a law or precept: acted under the compulsion of grave fear, even if only relative, or by reason of necessity or grave inconvenience, unless, however, the act is intrinsically evil or tends to be harmful to souls."

So, offering the sacrements in a traditional, respectful manner is harmful to souls?

So, offering the sacrements [sic] in a traditional, respectful manner is harmful to souls?

Strawman, irrelevant appeal, misleading argument. The issue was not tradition. The issue was obedience to the Pope.

An example of the Pope picking on the liberals: We had an Archbishop in Seattle many years ago that was outrageous (among other idiocies, claiming God was female). After appeals to the Papal Legate, the Vatican investigated, and the commission in charge commanded certain changes. The bishop superficially complied. Further complaints, another investigation, the bishop again complied, but not quite fully. Before another investigation could be undertaken, this bishop announced his resignation, which the Vatican accepted without delay. Unlike Lefevre, this bishop at a minimum gave lip service to the Vatican. . .and when he found out that wasn’t good enough, quit. Now he has one huge advantage over Lefevre, and it is deserved: He is still a priest in good standing. Because in the end he stopped disobeying.

You and others are quick to suggest that JPII targets only the orthodox (that then become heterodox). This is untrue. The difference between the bishop I am describing (Hunthausen) and Lefevre is that at least Hunthausen showed some (even if it was superficial) obedience. Lefevre was absolute in his obduracy. He put the Pope into an untenable position, where he had to either capitulate to Lefevre (intolerable, and not least of all because Lefevre was wrong, but that’s another thread) or to force Lefevre into silence. Excommunication became de facto when Lefevre refused to submit in obedience, and he then became one with Luther, Calvin, Donatus et al.

Then you tunnel-visioned SSPX apologists keep trotting out obfuscations, straw-men, generalizations and just about any other rationalization you can hope to come up with to rationalize your adherence to a schismatic.

It’s getting old, people. Lefevre put himself out of the church. Learn to live with this fact.

[quote=EddieArent]Really? So how about the Florida bishops being involved in Lutheran bishop ordinations? Is that schismatic? Is changing the Novus Ordo liturgy ad ib as certain priests do here in Florida schismatic (and their bishops, and liturgical directors of the diocese darn well know what they are dong!)? Let alone the stories of priests involved in the commision telling how the ICEL intentially mistranslated pasages and texts! Is selling the Catholic faith down the river by kissing the rear of every Protestant or dressing up as a Hindu like what took place in Fatima not schismatic? Is allowing women (once decried as an “evil” practice) to serve at the altar and to give Holy Communion as it were simply just a wafer and ignoring what the Catechism of Trent teaches about the distribution of the Eucharist and who can touch the sacred vessals not schismatic? Is facing the people instead of liturgical east like…you get the picture.

No one is liable to a penalty who, when violating a law or precept: acted under the compulsion of grave fear, even if only relative, or by reason of necessity or grave inconvenience, unless, however, the act is intrinsically evil or tends to be harmful to souls."

So, offering the sacrements in a traditional, respectful manner is harmful to souls?
[/quote]

I’m curious, do you ever talk about anything else? Like when people come over for coffee and danish, do you just keep going on and on and on about that Lutheran bishop? It’s old news, like the clown mass pics. you posted on another thread. You’ve been answered time and again. Why don’t you start your own web site about the evils of the post-Conciliar Church? You’re being just like the little old ladies in our choir and altar guild (the Stitch and Bitch Guild).

Eddy Arent wrote:

Is allowing women (once decried as an “evil” practice) to

Yeah, and having sex with the wife was also decried as sinful;

And, shutting Jews up in ghettos and making them wear armbands was the height of fashion;

And having a false relic was really cool too;

And, why aren’t you wearing a dress after the fashion of the times of Jesus, or a toga in line with the times of Constantine; or…

What HAVE you DONE Eddy to bring the abuses you decry to the attention of the responsible authorities? Are you only able to vent your spleen on a forum?

[quote=JKirkLVNV]I’m curious, do you ever talk about anything else? Like when people come over for coffee and danish, do you just keep going on and on and on about that Lutheran bishop? It’s old news, like the clown mass pics. you posted on another thread. You’ve been answered time and again. Why don’t you start your own web site about the evils of the post-Conciliar Church? You’re being just like the little old ladies in our choir and altar guild (the Stitch and Bitch Guild).
[/quote]

That is because this is a major sacrilege and God will curse the bishop many times more if the bishop doesn’t repent of this. Sacrilege is Sacrilege.

[quote=Sean O L]Eddy Arent wrote:

Yeah, and having sex with the wife was also decried as sinful;

And, shutting Jews up in ghettos and making them wear armbands was the height of fashion;

And having a false relic was really cool too;

And, why aren’t you wearing a dress after the fashion of the times of Jesus, or a toga in line with the times of Constantine; or…

What HAVE you DONE Eddy to bring the abuses you decry to the attention of the responsible authorities? Are you only able to vent your spleen on a forum?
[/quote]

Sir,
Having sex with your wife was considered sinful by heretics, never by the Church.

You have such nerve! Insulting people[Poles] whose ancestors fought the Nazi and Communist menaces while the world looked on and laughed. Yes,the world’s sloth caused the perfidious Jews to go under this fate and we are the lazy ones! Poles fought against them and all we got was sold for nothing to “good old Uncle Joe” Stalin. Don’t tell us that we are lazy, you deceitful lier. It is you jackasses who accepted handcommunion and standing communion. In no other country as such in Poland, has there been an organized battle against these evil and irreverent things. It is a nice way to call our people lazy to take the finger of blame away from yourself. Once you attack one of my brothers, you attack me and you will receive 60 million slaps in the face, you incompetent moron, useful idiot of satan.

Nice post Katolik, I for one admire the Polish people for their bravery and devotion to Catholicism, never loosing the faith after all of those years of communism. You got suckered with the old line that all liberals use when they encounter anyone who is a conservative, a traditionalist, or whatever, they throw the old anti-semitic (when talking about religion) and Racist (when talking politics). They try to throw you off guard. You should try visiting some good websites which have responses to throw right back at these anarchists and proud people who think they are better than the church and thier “spirit and free will” can lead them to salvation and the right course of action-as the Vatican II documents and Modernism implies against all past 2000 years of church teachings.

[quote=katolik]Sir,
Having sex with your wife was considered sinful by heretics, never by the Church.

You have such nerve! Insulting people[Poles] whose ancestors fought the Nazi and Communist menaces while the world looked on and laughed. Yes,the world’s sloth caused the perfidious Jews to go under this fate and we are the lazy ones! Poles fought against them and all we got was sold for nothing to “good old Uncle Joe” Stalin. Don’t tell us that we are lazy, you deceitful lier. It is you jackasses who accepted handcommunion and standing communion. In no other country as such in Poland, has there been an organized battle against these evil and irreverent things. It is a nice way to call our people lazy to take the finger of blame away from yourself. Once you attack one of my brothers, you attack me and you will receive 60 million slaps in the face, you incompetent moron, useful idiot of satan.
[/quote]

A useful source contra SSPXers is from those who used to be in the SSPX, like Catholic canonist, Peter Vere. (see conversion story here: envoymagazine.com/backissues/4.6/lefebvre.htm)

I recommend the following…

More Catholic Than The Pope: An Inside Look At Extreme Traditionalism by Patrick Madrid, Peter Vere

A good resource is the following blog, call the “Lidless Eye Inquisition” (great , yet weird name)…

lidless-eye.blogspot.com/

In the sidebar, they have other great links, like this one…
A Prescription Against**‘Traditionalism’**
Written by I. Shawn McElhinney matt1618.freeyellow.com/shawn.html

For a one day discussion, I would suggest …

A Canonical History of the Lefebvrite Schism
by Peter J. Vere
home.earthlink.net/~grossklas/canonicalhistory.htm

On second thought, that may be of interest to those interested in canon law, which is rare.

Envoy magazine and This Rock magazine articles are typically short and sweet…

**Going the Distance - **Is the SSPX in Schism?
by Patrick Madrid
envoymagazine.com/backissues/4.6/goingthedistance.htm

Holier Than Thou - How Rejection of Vatican II Led Lefebvre into Schism
By Brian O’Neel
catholic.com/thisrock/2003/0304fea2.asp

You may want to read this also. I found it interesting.

sspx.org/Negotiations/what_catholics_need_to_know.htm

[quote=kwitz]I belong to a faith group that meets once a month. Topics for discussion are chosen by the host couple and vary from newsworthy (ie St. Stans controversy) to sacramental (ie, meaning of Reconcilliation) to offbeat (ie. exorcism). We are fortunate to have a priest that joins us.

The April meeting is at our house and I thought a discussion of what I describe as “radical-traditionalism” would be interesting. Before this forum, I was only familiar with the schism in general terms but have found the various “discussions” here to be interesting and thought others might like to know more.

Thanks,
Kris
[/quote]

  1. You will need both sides of the arguments to get a worthy discussion. Try some places that host Rad-Trad essays.
    Here are some: Traditio is heavy duty and sedev.
    Sungenis is Trad but not sedev.
    Mario Derksen is Trad non-sedev. then went Sedev. about a year ago. He covers a lot of territory.

  2. Not all Rad-Trads are schismatic. Most are not, as a matter of my opinion. They are just regular folks raising families, working, and keeping the faith to hand on to posterity as was done a mere 75 years ago.

  3. What has them all in a knot is Ecumenism, whether applied to the Mass or apologetics or personal practice. They do not understand the horrific apparent about-face from 1958 to 1963. So they have all kinds of theories. They are trying to ascertain what is really happening that caused this trun around, and they see it as the primary destructive force upon the Church of Christ in the 20th cent until now. Many of the Popes from the 1700’s thru 1958 described the plans the world had to destroy the Church or make it ineffective, primarliy by infiltration not external attack. They hold to those theories as the apparent fulfillment of all that they said.
    Their definition remains:
    **Ecumenism: The destruction of Internal Unity in the false hope of external unity.
    **
    This would be a great theme to open the discussion and how it is being addressed by Rad-Trads.

Good Luck. It would be great to hear how it went on a new thread in April.

Kwitz,

And don’t forget the document to end all documents, Ecclesia Dei, authored by his holiness Pope John Paul II himself.

It can be found right here on the Vatican official website: vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/motu_proprio/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio_02071988_ecclesia-dei_en.html

[quote=RSiscoe]You may want to read this also. I found it interesting.

sspx.org/Negotiations/what_catholics_need_to_know.htm
[/quote]

You can hear most of this on Audio at:
Bishop Bernard Fellay : Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X
Update on Society’s Current Standing with Rome - Nov 2004 (11.7 mb)

He has quite a pleasing “French” accent…if there is such a thing.

I will add that this site has quite a bit of Audio in Gregorian Mass, etc. I use it when I pray in the nite, or have a need to concetrate and flush out distractions.

[quote=TNT]You can hear most of this on Audio at:
Bishop Bernard Fellay : Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X
Update on Society’s Current Standing with Rome - Nov 2004 (11.7 mb)

He has quite a pleasing “French” accent…if there is such a thing.

I will add that this site has quite a bit of Audio in Gregorian Mass, etc. I use it when I pray in the nite, or have a need to concetrate and flush out distractions.
[/quote]

Thank you very much for that.

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