He will be beatified within 20 years.
ROME
WILL
RETURN
TO
TRADITION
The Athanasius of our time
Ryder Rodriguez
Other urls found in this thread:
catholicculture.org
catholicculture.org
wdtprs.com
vatican.va
churchmilitant.com
catholicherald.co.uk
catholiceducation.org
twitter.com
Isaac Cooper
Hardly an Athanasius, just another schismatic, Rome never lost tradition.
Leo Kelly
The only actual, canon "censure" the SSPX received was the excommunication of Lefebvre and his consecrated Bishops (which he only did because the Vatican kept delaying the time he'd actually be able to appoint a Bishop - he decided that he had to do it because of his health), which were lifted by Ratzinger. Now everyone mewls that the SSPX "MUST accept Vatican II" as if the SSPX doesn't accept 90% of it. On the other hand, modernists accept only 10% of Vatican II and get a pass.
Oh, please. So this was a troll post.
Jayden Peterson
You are uninformed or a liar.
I'm just going to repost this
No the thing they are vauge about is the distinction between cannonical schism and the sin of schism.
It's beyond a doubt most sspx advocate schism and to formally cohere with the SSPX you'd be schismatic.
They're vauge about the hypothetical group of people who can go to an SSPX mass and not become schismatic.
Here is some good reading on the subject
catholicculture.org
catholicculture.org
The most recent documents make it pretty clear they don't say so openly because it wouldn't be ecunemical/they want to be nice, because they think some might participate in their liturgies without formally participating with their schism, so they don't call it that.
“We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302.)
This makes it simple
if they don't submit to the Pope, they are not Catholic.
Also if you look at former sspx groups who rejoined the Church, all the document refer to them as ending their schism.
In addition to this the previously highest canon lawyer on earth whose concern this very issue would be, the head of the Apostolic Signatura, is well rather clear on this.
If anyone should know, it's him, and he's known for being clear and orthodox is all other ways as well.
churchmilitant.com
I don't really know how anyone justifies it to themselves to go it seems… rather clear.
Or well lets look to the SSPX themselves
Why do they say they don't return to Rome?
Because they say they have irreconcilable DOCTRINE with the Pope, they differ from Rome in doctrine to such a degree they don't think they can rejoin, so it's a matter of heresy now as well.
They also maintain that all post 1962 ordinations are probably invalid so we probably don't really have bishops/priests anyway.
They can't be called Catholic in anything meaningful way.
Let's look to a quote from Lefebvre (who signed all the documents at Vat 2.)
This is the view of SSPX
They aren't of our religon, that makes it pretty clear.
Juan Stewart
He signed most Vatican II documents. Just nothing that he knew could be used by the liberals to subvert the Church. And that's exactly what happened! They gave the liberals an inch and they took the entire Church. Also, Vatican II didn't define any dogmas.
Inaestimabile Donum prevents sacrilegious lay Eucharistic ministers, but Bishops STILL allow that. Are they in schism?
Right, they are Catholic.
Jonathan Peterson
he won't, died a excommunicate.
Bentley Perez
Didn't he die excommunicated?
Josiah King
Relevant
Austin Russell
Based
So Archbishop Lefebvre might actually be unexcommunicated then. If God wills it, may he someday be considered as a saint, if not a saint at least the venerable or a blessed.
Jason Jenkins
Based and redpilled
Eli Morales
More than likely he will receive the eternal reward all progenitors of schisms receive.
Easton Russell
Also note Lefebvre and the bishops didn't actually incur the excommunication as canon law says its not incurred if they believe they have grave necessity which they all did believe. Jp2 never actually excommunicated them but erroneously told them they had incurred the canonical penalty
Camden Howard
This. People forget that excommunication is something that people incur automatically, it's not something that the Pope gets to decide. When the Pope "excommunicates" people it's only a formal recognition of something that already came to pass without input from the Pope. Lefebvre wasn't excommunicated just because JPII said so.
Zachary Rogers
Without getting into all the canonical particulars, we can nevertheless clearly establish in this statement that the Church has excommunicated Archbishop Lefebvre. Rome has clearly spoken as the voice of Catholic Tradition, and thus the case is now closed.
catholiceducation.org
Chase Edwards
Wrong m8. It's not about interpretation. It's about belief of grace necessity. Canon law states that even if a state of necessity does not exist and the perpetrator is in error, as long as he believes he has grave necessity the latae sententiae excommunication is not incurred. Canon law explicitly says this.
Anyway if you believe Vatican 2 then no one can be compelled to act against his conscience, thus according to v2 Lefebvre has invincible ignorance. So much for the tolerant progressive modernists who tolerate everything except for orthodoxy and sacred tradition
Liam Peterson
Whether the archbishop was this or that is irrelevant. Defending V2 after seeing its disastrous fruits is a terrible tragedy, I honestly believe that Catholics who do it are worse enemies of the Church than protestants. Now, pope Benedict is an example of someone who saw the disaster the council caused but still tries interpret it in the light of tradition, I can respect that. But people who see V2 as some kind of a new advent, I cannot.
Are you people ready to let muslims pray islamic prayers in your churches just because the pope said so? You going to pray to Luther if Rome declares him a saint? You going to get divorced and remarried and receive communion just because the pope says it's okay? You truly believe God wills the existence of false religions just because the pope said so? How long and far are you willing to roll your faith in the mud just to avoid being called a schismatic or whatever?
Colton Miller
It's infuriating to see how many Catholics badmouth the pre-V2 Church and play the "muh council" card whenever they don't like any Church teaching. The Church didn't begin in 1962 and if you want a religion that is 50 years old you should just go to protestantism already.
Oliver Davis
The hell are you talking about? I'm sure all of us here prefer traditional Catholicism. However, what we don't support are people leaving the Church because of bad things going on. Like Western schism and the reformation, the Church will remain strong and true to Christ with or without you. Now you can leave to venerate Martin Luther, or stay true to the Church and help it however you can.
Kayden Howard
I wasn't advocating protestantism, I was merely pointing that modernists are pretty much prots in denial.
Cooper Torres
He said you can die as a Muslim or Jew and be saved. He's a heretic, I don't like him. Fr Feeny is the Athanasius of our time. SSPX are schismatics and useless. NO isn't heretical. Believing you can die without the Catholic faith and be saved IS heresy. St. Thomas said you must believe in the Trinity and the Incarnation, that is the minimum. Almost every big name Saint and Doctor had this at the minimum. SSPXes are heretics and schismatics. I'd pray the NO with boomer music and guitars everyday if we had orthodoxy, I don't care for Latin mass and believing heretical JUNK.
Christopher Allen
To clarify I far prefer TLM to NO, just saying I'd rather take NO with orthodoxy than heretical beliefs with TLM
Kayden Allen
Too many here fall into politics and ultramontism. Fact is, they were trying to forbid and destroy the Catholic faith, and the forbidding of the Mass was the last straw. Someone needed to save it, and actually spread it around (unlike that solitary Bishop in Brazil that was replaced with a total modernist who enforced the Novus Ordo) and you can thank the SSPX for doing that. Do you like the FSSP, ICKSP, diocesan Tridentine Masses? You have the SSPX to thank.
Charles Coulombe is a Feeneyite. Do you want to be associated with that Gnostic occultist?
Parker Hughes
I'm not a feenyite, though his school of thought is possible. I believe what St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Alphonsus and so many other Doctors of the church believed in. Minimum to be saved you must believe in the Incarnation and the Trinity. Anything less is heresy.
Angel Carter
SSPX is absolutely heretical I want nothing to do with that trash. Just because one person (who I have no idea of) subscribes to something so what? Fug off mate.
Jayden Sullivan
Bishop Fellay and the others running the SSPX now are the ones who subscribe to the BoD (something that should and could only apply to Catholic catechumens) stretching out to non-believers, thus a denial of EENS. Lefebvre only articulated the belief that those with true invincible ignorance would be joined to the Church when they died. That's not a denial of EENS. "Feeneyism" as it's generally understood is supposed to be that BoD can only apply to Catholics who, for whatever reason, could not be baptized. That's what I believe is objectively correct, but the dogmatic Feeneyites make it a dogma that even catechumens cannot be saved (ie, Dimond bros), and that it's heresy to say otherwise.
Joshua Davis
That is heretical. Aquinas said if you were actually ignorant God would deliver the faith to you, by Man or Angel. SSPX and Lebefefhfhvhehe are HERETICS. Most probably in hell and a filthy people. I hate heresy and they're garbage schismatic heretics. Who cares about TLM when you're dealing with HERETICS. Filthy heretic.
Chase Thompson
St. Augustine said catechumens aren't saved and there's nothing wrong with that. MAy the SSPX die in flames they're garbage beyond garbage. Better to be a Prot than an SSPX. Pure heretics and garbage.
Jace Brooks
Why are Feeneyites so deranged?
Nathan Nelson
Good thing neither of which are binding church dogmas then.
Carson Hill
Reading all these posts made me realize I don't know what the hell is going on! I'm familiar with the SSPX schism, but not the details, politics, law, nor the OP pic. I have much to learn after all these years. Great discussion.
Matthew Kelly
Rome will return to tradition. However, this schismatic will still be looked down upon.
Brody Powell
I'm a Thomist lol.
Robert Long
It's binding dogma that baptism is essential for salvation. YIKES.
Carson White
You're a smart man. SSPXers are worse than Sedes. NO is not heretical. Believing you have to believe in the Trinity for salvation? HERESY!!!!!! Lol these people are deranged. I prefer TLM but SSPX is schismatic and I will never support it. That was proof for me that SSPX is trash. These people don't believe in orthodoxy. St. Athanasius said heterodoxy leads to heteropraxy and it's so true.
It's the churches right to mandate guitars and boomer music at every mass if she so wishes. People forget saints would literally flog themselves daily. You can't take some crappy music? Give me orthodoxy or give me death
Cameron Murphy
No they dont
Jaxon Allen
How is the SSPX schismatic??? Do you even know what schism is?