Ultraviolet
When The Church decrees something, it remains in effect until The Church says otherwise, @Ave Crux. It isn't " just because UV says so".

"We have a real expert here who thinks they speak for the Church and the Pope"

Wrong. I'm just quoting them both, to your considerable chagrin. :D

"who -- it seems it has never registered with UV -- doesn't agree"

ORLY? So quote Pope Francis More
When The Church decrees something, it remains in effect until The Church says otherwise, @Ave Crux. It isn't " just because UV says so".

"We have a real expert here who thinks they speak for the Church and the Pope"

Wrong. I'm just quoting them both, to your considerable chagrin. :D

"who -- it seems it has never registered with UV -- doesn't agree"

ORLY? So quote Pope Francis stating the SSPX is not in schism. Go for it. I've quoted him repeatedly. Why can't you?

"since he has granted SSPX faculties throughout the entire Universal Church"

…which he doesn't need to do for Catholic priests. This grant was, in fact, necessary under Canon 1047.1ecause the SSPX have an impediment of schism. I've raised this before when you've raised this before.

"Francis also directed the collaboration of Bishops and Priests with the SSPX to officiate with them at Marriages."

…and I'm still calling BS and demanding you 1.) cite the document 2.) quote it verbatim. I asked you this elsewhere, I'm asking you here and you STILL haven't come up with the goods!

. You have an ungodly habit of making things up and I’m not going to humor it.
Ave Crux
Ultraviolet "Ave Crux is still pretending documents from 33 years ago don't apply anymore. They still do."

Oh right, just because UV says so. We have a real expert here who thinks they speak for the Church and the Pope, who -- it seems it has never registered with UV -- doesn't agree, since he has granted SSPX faculties throughout the entire Universal Church making it possible to serve …More
Ultraviolet "Ave Crux is still pretending documents from 33 years ago don't apply anymore. They still do."

Oh right, just because UV says so. We have a real expert here who thinks they speak for the Church and the Pope, who -- it seems it has never registered with UV -- doesn't agree, since he has granted SSPX faculties throughout the entire Universal Church making it possible to serve Catholics and their many chapels anywhere in the world and without any preconditions; and Francis also directed the collaboration of Bishops and Priests with the SSPX to officiate with them at Marriages.

Nothing has changed....? Living in the past and imagining it as the present...Sad.
Ave Crux
@michael5 Oh, I'm sorry...perhaps you didn't notice my comments elsewhere that this isn't based on my opinion?

To cite just a few of my sources:

Pope Francis (he granted them faculties, remember?)

Pope Benedict (he declared the Mass had never been abrogated; hence the abusive, treacherous treatment of Lefebvre by Modernists was juridically baseless, making it null and void even if one …More
@michael5 Oh, I'm sorry...perhaps you didn't notice my comments elsewhere that this isn't based on my opinion?

To cite just a few of my sources:

Pope Francis (he granted them faculties, remember?)

Pope Benedict (he declared the Mass had never been abrogated; hence the abusive, treacherous treatment of Lefebvre by Modernists was juridically baseless, making it null and void even if one insists it was valid to begin with)

Cardinal Burke
Archbishop Vigano
Bishop Schneider
Numerous Canon Lawyers who have analyzed the situation and whose treatments I have read
Priests with whom I confer on the matter

You see, I make sure I am informed by others -- those who live in the present and never rely on my own opinion.
Ultraviolet
The Church disagrees with you on the former @michael5 Thanks for the "block" btw. Sore loser behavior and one of the most reliable concessions of defeat I see around here.
Ultraviolet
@Ave Crux. It appears the profanity-prone Michael5 has attracted the attention of The Angel Of Death Moderator.

"Pope Francis (he granted them faculties, remember?)"

Same document where he said they need to recover full communion with the Catholic Church. Which means they don't have it now and that's what schism is.
"
Pope Benedict (he declared the Mass had never been abrogated;"

Zero …More
@Ave Crux. It appears the profanity-prone Michael5 has attracted the attention of The Angel Of Death Moderator.

"Pope Francis (he granted them faculties, remember?)"

Same document where he said they need to recover full communion with the Catholic Church. Which means they don't have it now and that's what schism is.
"
Pope Benedict (he declared the Mass had never been abrogated;"

Zero relevance to Lefebvre's disobedience. Before he was Pope, the same man stated... "we may well hope that the schism of Mgr. Lefebvre will not last long."

"hence the abusive, treacherous treatment of Lefebvre by Modernists was juridically baseless"


Canon Law 1382 says otherwise: "A bishop who consecrates some one a bishop without a pontifical mandate and the person who receives the consecration from him incur a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See."

Ironic how you condemn "modernists" who excommunicated Lefebvre, lawfully and then praise "modernists" who show clemency. Those same modernists share a misguided notion that doing so will someday hopefully encourge the SSPX to recover/ attain/ etc. full communion with The Catholic Church... since they don't have it now and that's what schism is.
Scapular
UV and Michael5 where is your mercy? Christ extends His mercy to you both daily yet you are determined to go out and grab the SSPX by the neck. Rome has shown mercy yet you won’t recognise this act! “ At the same time I declare that, as of today's date, the Decree issued at that time no longer has juridical effect.”
Rome, from the Congregation for Bishops, 21 January 2009

Cardinal Giovanni Batti…More
UV and Michael5 where is your mercy? Christ extends His mercy to you both daily yet you are determined to go out and grab the SSPX by the neck. Rome has shown mercy yet you won’t recognise this act! “ At the same time I declare that, as of today's date, the Decree issued at that time no longer has juridical effect.”
Rome, from the Congregation for Bishops, 21 January 2009

Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re
Prefect
Ultraviolet
"UV and Michael5 where is your mercy?" This from the same fellow who called me out with "put up or shut up". :D That's the diffrence between us, @Scapular I'm not charitable but I'm not a hypocrite about it either. Speaking of which, I'm STILL waiting for you to supply a Vatican document stating the SSPX is not in schism. You asked me, (and I quote) "supply the Vatican document stating …More
"UV and Michael5 where is your mercy?" This from the same fellow who called me out with "put up or shut up". :D That's the diffrence between us, @Scapular I'm not charitable but I'm not a hypocrite about it either. Speaking of which, I'm STILL waiting for you to supply a Vatican document stating the SSPX is not in schism. You asked me, (and I quote) "supply the Vatican document stating SSPX are in schism." I did so. Now I'm waiting for you to supply the opposite. "Put up or shut up!" Your words. ;-)
Rand Miller
Catholic theology teaches that the "Recognize and resist" position is untenable regardless of what certain recent "prelates" have said.
Ave Crux
SSPX's position from the beginning is exactly what Traditional Communities are now considering as the only course of action when faced with a clear abuse of power against the sacred Patrimony and Traditions of Holy Mother Church: i.e. filial and loyal disobedience.

FSSP said they will continue with their adherence to the Traditional Roman Rite and Sacraments as always.

The Benedictines in …More
SSPX's position from the beginning is exactly what Traditional Communities are now considering as the only course of action when faced with a clear abuse of power against the sacred Patrimony and Traditions of Holy Mother Church: i.e. filial and loyal disobedience.

FSSP said they will continue with their adherence to the Traditional Roman Rite and Sacraments as always.

The Benedictines in Taggia, Italy just said the same. Below is a statement from their Prior.

"Talking to Present.fr (January 3), the prior, Father Jean de Belleville, criticised Francis’ “desire to suppress the use of the Old Rite” and announced that the monks will “remain faithful, whatever the cost.”

He warns other traditional communities that a lack of firmness will weaken them and that they may be required to reject unjust orders from Rome.

Belleville admits that his community is under Roche's Congregation for Divine Worship which, however, "is not all-powerful.” If the monks are forced to use the Novus Ordo, they will remain faithful to their vows even if this means that they are labelled 'disobedient.'"


We are now living a replay of what happened following Vatican II. An attempt to bury forever the Sacred Liturgies and praxis of nearly 2,000 years of Catholic history. It must be resisted and dissented from.

SSPX never stopped discussions with Rome to resolve this conflict of Tradition vs. Modernism and Destruction.

But to abandon that Patrimony before God would have been just as criminal for SSPX as it was for all those who did then and since.
Ultraviolet
"loyal disobedience." Yeah, that's the contradictory faux-Catholicism of the SSPX in a nutshell. :P

"We are now living a replay of what happened following Vatican II." -which was signed by Abp. Lefebvre, let's not forget.

"SSPX never stopped discussions with Rome to resolve this conflict of Tradition vs. Modernism and Destruction.

That isn't the conflict at all. Submission to the Pope isMore
"loyal disobedience." Yeah, that's the contradictory faux-Catholicism of the SSPX in a nutshell. :P

"We are now living a replay of what happened following Vatican II." -which was signed by Abp. Lefebvre, let's not forget.

"SSPX never stopped discussions with Rome to resolve this conflict of Tradition vs. Modernism and Destruction.

That isn't the conflict at all. Submission to the Pope is and the SSPX won't do that. Why should they? They can call themselves "Catholic" mislead real Catholics and still remain separate from real Catholic authority.
Ave Crux
Ultraviolet is still referring to documents and statements from 33 years ago that have now become irrelevant and superseded by subsequent actions on the part of the Holy See!!! It's quite sad.

Well, time didn't stand still, UV. Popes Benedict and Francis have since changed a great deal:

* Juridical faculties granted to SSPX for administering the Sacraments throughout the Universal Church
* …More
Ultraviolet is still referring to documents and statements from 33 years ago that have now become irrelevant and superseded by subsequent actions on the part of the Holy See!!! It's quite sad.

Well, time didn't stand still, UV. Popes Benedict and Francis have since changed a great deal:

* Juridical faculties granted to SSPX for administering the Sacraments throughout the Universal Church
* Papal directive that Bishops and Priests collaborate with SSPX in Nuptial Masses
* the alleged excommunications of SSPX Bishops lifted
* Papal declaration that the Immemorial Mass was never abrogated, thereby vindicating SSPX's filial and loyal resistance as Catholics and Priests to its illicit suppression to begin with.

Hence, Cardinals, Bishops, and Canon Lawyers have now indicated positions quite contrary to yours.

It's not good to live in the past, UV. It keeps one out of touch with reality. God bless
Ultraviolet
Ave Crux is still pretending documents from 33 years ago don't apply anymore. They still do.

Nothing the Holy See has said or done has made them "irrelevant and superseded". The same Apostolic Letter you cite grantting faculties to the SSPX also states they are not in full communion with The Catholic Church.

"Well, time didn't stand still, UV. Popes Benedict and Francis have since changed a …More
Ave Crux is still pretending documents from 33 years ago don't apply anymore. They still do.

Nothing the Holy See has said or done has made them "irrelevant and superseded". The same Apostolic Letter you cite grantting faculties to the SSPX also states they are not in full communion with The Catholic Church.

"Well, time didn't stand still, UV. Popes Benedict and Francis have since changed a great deal:"

They haven't changed the status of the SSPX.

"Papal directive that Bishops and Priests collaborate with SSPX in Nuptial Masses"

There is no such directive requiring Bishops to "collaborate" with the SSPX. You made that up. Quote the document verbatim. Oh boy, this is going to be another one of your "express permission" fabrications. You heard it here first.

"the alleged excommunications of SSPX Bishops lifted"

It wasn't "alleged" and it doesn't change the status of the SSPX or those who formally adhere to the schism.

"Papal declaration that the Immemorial Mass was never abrogated, thereby vindicating SSPX's filial and loyal resistance as Catholics..."

Irrelevant to a Papal declaration Abp. Lefebvre's movement was a schism. That doesn't vinidcate breaking Canon Law and disobeying The Pope.

"Hence, Cardinals, Bishops, and Canon Lawyers have now indicated positions quite contrary to yours."


Your Fallacy Is: Fallacious Appeal to Authority. Again. Also argumentum ad nauseam since you're repeating it.
Ultraviolet
"It's not good to live in the past, UV."

It's not good to be a hypocrite either, Ave Crux. Like I said you're quite the self-serving little modernist when it suits you.

The same Pope who granted the SSPX faculties is the same Pope who authored Traditionis Custodes is the same Pope who also said the SSPX priests still need to recover full communion with the Catholic Church. Which means they …More
"It's not good to live in the past, UV."

It's not good to be a hypocrite either, Ave Crux. Like I said you're quite the self-serving little modernist when it suits you.

The same Pope who granted the SSPX faculties is the same Pope who authored Traditionis Custodes is the same Pope who also said the SSPX priests still need to recover full communion with the Catholic Church. Which means they don't have it now and that's what schism is.
Ultraviolet
"Ecclesia Dei" That was easy. Direct quote: --" In the present circumstances I wish especially to make an appeal both solemn and heartfelt, paternal and fraternal, to all those who until now have been linked in various ways to the movement of Archbishop Lefebvre, that they may fulfil the grave duty of remaining united to the Vicar of Christ in the unity of the Catholic Church, and of ceasing …More
"Ecclesia Dei" That was easy. Direct quote: --" In the present circumstances I wish especially to make an appeal both solemn and heartfelt, paternal and fraternal, to all those who until now have been linked in various ways to the movement of Archbishop Lefebvre, that they may fulfil the grave duty of remaining united to the Vicar of Christ in the unity of the Catholic Church, and of ceasing their support in any way for that movement. Everyone should be aware that formal adherence to the schism is a grave offence against God and carries the penalty of excommunication decreed by the Church's law."--

That has never been rescinded. The excommunication against Abp. Lefebvre and his flunkies was. But that has no bearing on Saint John Paul II's formal decree OR his defining " the movement of Archbishop Lefebvre" as "the schism". Those are the Pope's own words. All those who formally adhere to Lefebvre's schism are also excommunicated and that has never been rescinded either.

Cardinal Burke contradicts Cardinal Castrillón. It doesn't matter because neither man can contradict the Pope. Now that I've "put up" it's your turn supply the Vatican document stating SSPX is NOT in schism. Back at'cha... Put up or shut up! :D

@Ave Crux "They don't cite any current worthy sources that maintain their opinion."

Implying a Church document stops being "worthy" simply because it's a mere 34 years old... and THIS from a so-called "traditionalist." :P

"They just keep repeating something from decades ago, and disregard what has transpired since then."

Implying "something" namely an official Apostolic Letter from "decades ago" stopped being valid. Christ's teachings are over 2000 years old. Are they no longer valid as well? What of the many centuries of "Magisterium" hmmm? Did all of that cease to be valid?

After all, you "disregard what has transpired since then" yourself, specifically everything that's transpired since Vatican Council II.

It always amuses me what a self-serving little modernist you are when it suits you.

...and only then and nowhere else. You're still telling a falsehood. I don't disregard it at all. Every time you bring up "what has transpired since then" we go through this and I show how "what has transpired since then" doesn't change the fact the SSPX are stil in schism. Happened just yesterday in fact. It'll happen again here. More importantly, Ecclesia Dei has never been rescinded. It's still in effect.

"Their opinion is not based on the actions of this Pope"

Wrong. This Pope has not rescinded Ecclesia Dei. This Pope has not stated the SSPX is no longer in schism. You're just repeating the same old lies you always do whenever this subject comes up. Glad you mentioned "Misericordia et Misera" That's an official Aposotlic Letter too.

In the Letter this Pope states the SSPX should "strive with God’s help for the recovery of full communion in the Catholic Church

When this Pope hopes SSPX priests will strive for "the recovery of full communion in the Catholic Church" then he acknowledges they do NOT have full communion in the Catholic Church" right now and that's what schism is.

Simply put, "Misericordia et Misera" does not contradict "Ecclesia Dei." On the contary. Pope Francis' own letter reinforces it. JP II defined Abp. Lefebvre's movement as "the schism" and Pope Francis confirms the SSPX is still not in full communion.

"Nor is it based on the position of many Bishops…"

Bishops can't countermand The Pope any more than Cardinals can. Many Bishops today have forbidden the Traditional Latin Mass, too. Pic related.

"or that of Canon Lawyers, who certainly are uniquely far more qualified than either Michael5 or UV to make the proper distinctions."

Funny how you can't ever cite (much less plagiarize) any compelling arguments from them.

" It is to these sources that I look and on which I base my position, due to their credentials and knowledge in these matters "

Pic related again.
Scapular
Corrected and superseded. Vatican DECREE REMITTING
THE EXCOMMUNICATION "LATAE SENTENTIAE"
OF THE BISHOPS OF THE SOCIETY OF ST PIUS X


Roma locuta, causa finita

vatican.va/…cbishops_doc_20090121_remissione-scomunica_en.html
Ultraviolet
Fact Check: The decree remitting individual excommunications did not change the status of the SSPX as a schism. It corroborated it! Direct quote: " It is hoped that this step will be followed by the prompt attainment of full communion with the Church on the part of the whole Society of St Pius X"

Which means "the whole Society of St. Pius X" doesn't have "full communion with the Church" …More
Fact Check: The decree remitting individual excommunications did not change the status of the SSPX as a schism. It corroborated it! Direct quote: " It is hoped that this step will be followed by the prompt attainment of full communion with the Church on the part of the whole Society of St Pius X"

Which means "the whole Society of St. Pius X" doesn't have "full communion with the Church" right now and that's what schism is.

I repeat: @Scapular Supply the Vatican document stating SSPX is NOT in schism. Put up or shut up! Those are your words and now you're going to eat them. :D . You can use all the bold and colored text you want. That's Ave Crux-style propaganda. Try again.
Ave Crux
@Scapular That's just it -- it's merely their own opinion. They don't cite any current worthy sources that maintain their opinion. They just keep repeating something from decades ago, and disregard what has transpired since then.

Their opinion is not based on the actions of this Pope and his encouragement and "paternal solicitude" to provide for those who attend SSPX chapels and Sacraments (…More
@Scapular That's just it -- it's merely their own opinion. They don't cite any current worthy sources that maintain their opinion. They just keep repeating something from decades ago, and disregard what has transpired since then.

Their opinion is not based on the actions of this Pope and his encouragement and "paternal solicitude" to provide for those who attend SSPX chapels and Sacraments (see Misericordia et Misera), and the directive which Francis gave for local Ordinaries and their Priests to collaborate with SSPX in officiating over marriages.

Nor is it based on the position of many Bishops (some of whom have contacted them and urged them to continue their priestly work in their dioceses) or that of Canon Lawyers, who certainly are uniquely far more qualified than either Michael5 or UV to make the proper distinctions.

It is to these sources that I look and on which I base my position, due to their credentials and knowledge in these matters. I DIDN'T MAKE UP MY POSITION OUT OF THIN AIR OR PREFERENCE.

So, who are @michael5 and Ultraviolet....? They're NOBODIES.... And what's more, they don't possess the necessary qualifications which the sources we've cited certainly possess, by which to justify their constant disparaging of these exceptionally fine Priests. So we can just ignore them.
Scapular
US Spacy “knock and the door will be opened” you desire and Christ will do the rest.
U S Spacy
Can I go to the SSPX Mass? I read all I can on this, and it seems to be like going to the neighbour because the bread in yout home is poor, or eating bread that is wholesome yet illicit. Not judging the reasons of others, but do *I* have enough reason for such rebellion? How can I know?
Ultraviolet
Yes you may. :) I'm surprised Ave Crux didn't see fit to point this out. But why would you want to? There are plenty of Catholic Churches around with Catholic priests and you won't be exposed to the pernicious SSPX schismatic falsehoods in the sermons and homilies. This is the real reason the schismatics are such "evangelists". They want to expose you to SSPX culture and ideology instead of …More
Yes you may. :) I'm surprised Ave Crux didn't see fit to point this out. But why would you want to? There are plenty of Catholic Churches around with Catholic priests and you won't be exposed to the pernicious SSPX schismatic falsehoods in the sermons and homilies. This is the real reason the schismatics are such "evangelists". They want to expose you to SSPX culture and ideology instead of Catholic culture and ideology Just look what that's done to Ave Crux and Scapular. :/