Finding Common Ground Between Rome and the SSPX
Despite real disagreements between the SSPX and Rome, Fr. Pagliarani’s “Declaration of Faith” reveals substantial common ground on core Catholic doctrine.
Despite real disagreements between the SSPX and Rome, Fr. Pagliarani’s “Declaration of Faith” reveals substantial common ground on core Catholic doctrine.
In the context of Church history, was Don Pagliarani’s “controversial” statement actually so controversial?
Defenders of the SSPX commit a category error when they invoke a state of emergency (or grave necessity) to justify disobedience.
The question of whether or not the SSPX should consecrate new bishops is a question of prudence, as competing goods are at stake.
The Church’s ‘state of emergency’ is exemplified by this: that for Rome, the only unforgivable sin is noticing there is a problem.
I will not rehearse the theological disputes here. You are an intelligent man, and you can do your reading. I will only ask you to consider the charity of your patron, St. Augustine.
While an act may violate the requirement for a pontifical mandate, it does not necessarily juridically constitute a rupture of communion or schism.
The SSPX responds to recent questions posed concerning their canonical irregularities and underlying doctrinal disputes with Rome.
There are a host of Catholic commentators who express their disdain for the “disobedience” of the SSPX but at the same time find themselves disobedient to certain Vatican commands.
As someone who has never attended Mass at an SSPX chapel, nor even spoken to an SSPX priest, I have questions about their confusing status.
Much like St. Thomas More’s refusal to swear an oath to a legitimate authority, today’s Church crisis likewise calls for fidelity to the Faith when faced with conflicting human laws.
The problem is that the Catholic Church has been attempting to modernize itself over the past six decades plus in order to accommodate itself to modern society.
What one thinks about the SSPX, in a sense, is in the eye of the beholder.
There is still a small squeaky contingent who would wish, by their proclamations, for the SSPX to be schismatics – even against the desires and actions of Rome and the Roman Pontifex.
Archbishop Viganò is starting a new seminary, raising comparisons to SSPX founder Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. Is this fair, or are there differences between them?
Given what we know now, and given the fact that the promised New Springtime turned out to be more like a nuclear winter, maybe we can humble ourselves and be willing to rethink the person of Marcel Lefebvre.
The Society of St. Pius X is perhaps the most controversial Catholic organization today. They have been accused of being schismatic and rejecting Vatican II. We’ll talk to someone from the Society about their organization and the controversies that surround it.
“Tomorrow I’m leaving for Mexico,” Bishop Bernard Fellay tells me, “and then on to Cuba.” I balk. “What’s in Cuba?” The question seems to confuse him. “The faithful,” he explains. “They need Confirmation, too.” What’s the SSPX presence in Cuba like? “Small,” he tells me, “and mostly underground. They’re still badly persecuted by the communists.” … Read more
During the heady days of Vatican II, while spirited disputes over the schema raged on, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre proposed that the governing structure of the episcopal conferences undergirding the Council was “a new kind of collectivism invading the Church.” Lefebvre wasn’t fearmongering when he told the missionary-journalist Fr. Ralph Wiltgen that a handful of bishops … Read more
It’s ironic to me that my recent article, “Fifty Years Later—Vatican II’s Unfinished Business,” has provoked anger among many traditionalists, because for most of my priesthood I have angered liberals who consider me an arch traditionalist. Nevertheless I want to respond to those traditionalists who include both the SSPX and my fellow Catholics still fully … Read more