Saturday, September 7, 2013

Are SSPX sedevacanists?

There seems to be a lot of confusion out there about what a sedevacanist is and how the definition applies to SSPX

Before I let SSPX answer that, here are a few talking points on sedevacanists.

Sedevacanists reject the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. They have their own Magisterium.

They reject the authority of Christ's Church and the authority of the Pope.


Sedevacantism is the theological position of those traditional Catholics who most certainly believe in the papacy, papal infallibility and the primacy of the Roman Pontiff, and yet do not recognize John Paul II as a legitimate successor of Peter in the primacy. In other words, they do not recognize John Paul II as a true pope. The word Sedevacantism is a compound of two Latin words which together mean "the Chair is vacant."1Sedevacantism appears then to be a theological position or a theory kept by some traditional Catholics who think that the most recent popes, the popes of the Vatican II council, lost their pontifical authority on account of the grave heresies they have been promoting, and the crisis that came along...

Survey of the Theological opinions of a heretical pope: For that survey, I will follow the study of Arnaldo Xavier de Silveira in his book ‘La Nouvelle Messe de Paul VI: Qu'en penser’ (or: LNM)3. After explaining how the New Mass departs from the traditional teaching of the Church, this author makes an in-depth study of the theological hypothesis of a heretical pope. Such study was highly praised by Archbishop Lefebvre, as "the very objective study of Xavier de Silveira". .

Just in case you remain unconvinced that SSPX are sedevacanists, here's more:

It consists of saying that a heretic cannot be head of the Church, but John-Paul II is a heretic, therefore he cannot be a true Pope.

Here they are calling Ratzinger and future popes heretics.

This is the exact substance of their defection,

SSPX can claim they are against sedevacanism all they want. It is intellectual dishonesty. It's what they are doing and therefore what they are.

The lifting of their excommunication was for the purpose of trying to bring them into communion - which in my opinion is an exercise of futility because they reject the authority of the Church and Pope.

In my opinion they are worse than sedevacanists because they are telling Catholics what they're doing isn't sedevacanism.


Jack O'Malley said...

Carol: Sedevacanists reject the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. They have their own Magisterium.

Not true. They accept the Magisterium prior to V2. The FSSPX/SSPX is NOT sedevacantist. They pray for the pope in the canon. There is an acknowledged lacuna between the pre- and post- V2 "magisterium". That is the doctrinal issue the FSSPX argues. But this is not the time nor the place to flesh that debate out.

The sedevacantists argue that the pope is not the pope. Cf. the CMRI, SSPV, and other fringe groups. Pope Bergoglio is the pope, despite bowing as he does before a Mohammedan queen. Pope Wojtyła was the pope despite kissing a coran. Pope Montini was the pope despite his leftist leanings. The FSSPX does not deny these things. They were popes.

Carol, you cite the Tablet as evidence? LOL! I expected better from you. There are a lot of eccentrics in the FSSPX, not the least of whom is Williamson (since expelled). But the FSSPX have preserved the true Magisterium.

Disclaimer: I have never assisted at an FSSPX mass, valid though it be, yet illicit. I do the Fr. Higgins mass at MIOL when I do any at all. I've only been in Woburn to shop at Market Basket.

Fellay formerly said that if the reconciliation happened, it would be due to Pope Ratzinger. He (Ratzinger) was subverted. It could have happened.

Let's have some clarity here. Msgr. Lefebvre will one day be canonized. Sanity will return.

TTC said...

Jack, you know me well enough to know I won't engage in wordsmything.

Suggesting one believes and is faithful to Church teaching and then following that proclamation with the heresy that there is point in time when the Church lost its power to bind you to teaching, just doesn't fly.

In order to put actions behind our professed fidelity to Christ and the Church He let Himself be murdered to leave us, you have to accept the Churches power to bind us to the whole thing, lock, stock and barrel.

The diabolical disorientation has permeated the intellect of the uncatechized. The Catechism of Trent is way over their heads. You have to see that the Holy Spirit prepared for these moments in history by dumbing it down.

The election of Pope Francis, who appears to be a very faithful and loving man, but not the sharpest tool in the shed, is another revelation of where we are in history. Christ is not worried about feeding the elect. He knows we know are keeping our souls free of sin by accepting Church teaching, following it, avoiding temptation and sin with the use if His Body and Blood. He is off now to chasing His lost lambs.

His elect are having difficulty seeing the forest through the trees.

Regarding SSPX not being sedevacanists, that assertion also does not comport with the substance they teach and preach.

I have posted links where they clearly say Thenpopes were heretics at the time of their election and/ or are heretics and therefore cannot be a valid pope. If that is what they teach and preach it is what they are. Furthermore, their talking points that they accept the pope but reject the authority of the Chair of Peter to bind teaching in accordance with the Canons is a bold faced lie.

You can't bleep the bleeper.

TTC said...

In terms of LeFabvre, he is a more serious villain than Luther as he is misleading Christ's elect, even from his grave.

Penance, penance, penance.

Lynne said...

Carol, I don't know what to say. You have misrepresented the point of the article. It's obvious the author of this piece is merely putting forth the sedevacantists' arguments, NOT arguing *for* them.