Vatican fall out

foghorn

foghorn

Valued Senior Member
Any chance this 'schism' could result in two Popes like back in the 1300s?
Controversial bishops ordained as Pope warns of 'schism' in Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
BBC
Meanwhile in the States...
World Cup Vatican soccer team reserves waiting on the benches.
Bis.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: C C
foghorn said:
Any chance this 'schism' could result in two Popes like back in the 1300s?

BBC
Meanwhile in the States...
World Cup Vatican soccer team reserves waiting on the benches.
View attachment 7634
Click to expand...
Unlikely. This was all started by Lefebvre at the end of the 1960s and has rumbled on ever since without getting very far. It might appeal to the mad fascist Catholics in the US I imagine, but not to very many people more widely. I’ll see what our choir director has to say tomorrow at rehearsal. He’s into all the clerical gossip.
 
exchemist said:
Unlikely. This was all started by Lefebvre at the end of the 1960s and has rumbled on ever since without getting very far. It might appeal to the mad fascist Catholics in the US I imagine, but not to very many people more widely. I’ll see what our choir director has to say tomorrow at rehearsal. He’s into all the clerical gossip.
Click to expand...

Update today...
BBC
It seems the Vatican and The SSPX both think they are the gatekeepers to a heaven.
Makes you think of Doctor Who and the Daleks. You will be excommunicated, excommunicated.
Vatican excommunicates followers of global Catholic sect
The Vatican has excommunicated followers of a conservative Catholic splinter sect, the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX), a day after it consecrated four new bishops against Pope Leo XIV's direct instruction….
….In a decree, it said the Society's total of six bishops were excommunicated - and, in a highly unusual move, it added that any lay members who "formally adhere" to the group "are to be considered schismatic and excommunicated".
But those who left the SSPX would be welcomed back "with sincere affection"….
…..The SSPX was founded in 1970 in opposition to the modernising reforms made by the Roman Catholic Church in the 1960s, at what was known as the Second Vatican Council. The Society is thought to number around 600,000 worshippers globally.
Click to expand...

“it added that any lay members who "formally adhere" to the group "are to be considered schismatic and excommunicated“
Would that include the 15,000 at that ‘meeting’?
 
foghorn said:
Update today...
BBC
It seems the Vatican and The SSPX both think they are the gatekeepers to a heaven.
Makes you think of Doctor Who and the Daleks. You will be excommunicated, excommunicated.


“it added that any lay members who "formally adhere" to the group "are to be considered schismatic and excommunicated“
Would that include the 15,000 at that ‘meeting’?
Click to expand...
Only if they consider themselves as members of this Lefebvreist sect. So they are back to where they were before Benedict XVI offered them the olive branch of readmission. Appointing your own bishops is just asking to be cut off.

Didn’t come up at choir practice. Director was more interested in examples of Mode VII chant and Mendelssohn’s use of a flattened descending note sequence to signify the coda to a piece. So it quite went out of my head, I’m afraid and I forgot to ask him about it.
 
foghorn said:
Update today...
BBC
It seems the Vatican and The SSPX both think they are the gatekeepers to a heaven.
Makes you think of Doctor Who and the Daleks. You will be excommunicated, excommunicated.

“it added that any lay members who "formally adhere" to the group "are to be considered schismatic and excommunicated“
Would that include the 15,000 at that ‘meeting’?
Click to expand...

There are affiliated clerical societies derived from the SSPX. Like the Society of Saint Pius V and the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter. So the non-clergy members (circa 600,000?) might revise their beliefs just enough to migrate to one of those and avoid ostracism. Of course, those might have removed too many of their fangs for the radicals to find solace in them.
  • ...it added that any lay members who "formally adhere" to the group "are to be considered schismatic and excommunicated". [...] The Vatican later clarified that not all members would be excommunicated automatically, but those who "habitually participate" in SSPX celebrations and "formally share its doctrinal positions" would be.
 
It's sort of funny that something like a belief that is held personally by an individual, can cause so much trouble among people that seem desperate to belong in certain groups, who are all suppose to be at one with a god.
It's a funny old world.
 
foghorn said:
It's sort of funny that something like a belief that is held personally by an individual, can cause so much trouble among people that seem desperate to belong in certain groups, who are all suppose to be at one with a god.
It's a funny old world.
Click to expand...
It’s appointing their own bishops that’s the problem, not individual beliefs. The church has a structure of authority: bishops have a certain authority to teach doctrine. That’s why the pope has to approve each appointment. If you set up your own bishops you are implicitly rejecting that authority and saying you want to teach what you like. Well fine, but then you are not part of the Catholic church, that’s obvious. Ergo excommunication.
 
exchemist said:
It’s appointing their own bishops that’s the problem, not individual beliefs. The church has a structure of authority: bishops have a certain authority to teach doctrine. That’s why the pope has to approve each appointment. If you set up your own bishops you are implicitly rejecting that authority and saying you want to teach what you like. Well fine, but then you are not part of the Catholic church, that’s obvious. Ergo excommunication.
Click to expand...

That’s the kicker, their going their way because of how they want to express their belief in the routines of worship, so to speak.
Appointing their own bishops resulting in excommunication, may lead to setting up their own pope and base.
foghorn said:
Any chance this 'schism' could result in two Popes like back in the 1300s?
Click to expand...
 
foghorn said:
That’s the kicker, their going their way because of how they want to express their belief in the routines of worship, so to speak.
Appointing their own bishops resulting in excommunication, may lead to setting up their own pope and base.
Click to expand...
I don’t see how they can do that, because they profess themselves to be ultra-traditionalists! So that would mean they would believe in the traditional papal conclave process for electing a pope, surely?
 
exchemist said:
I don’t see how they can do that, because they profess themselves to be ultra-traditionalists! So that would mean they would believe in the traditional papal conclave process for electing a pope, surely?
Click to expand...
If they have decided to go their own way, then what’s to stop them forming their own conclave from their own ranks and then choosing a pope from their own ranks?
They don’t need the present Vatican organisation or its premises to do this, do they?
A splits a split isn’t it?
 
foghorn said:
If they have decided to go their own way, then what’s to stop them forming their own conclave from their own ranks and then choosing a pope from their own ranks?
They don’t need the present Vatican organisation or its premises to do this, do they?
A splits a split isn’t it?
Click to expand...
Nothing stops them except their own extreme traditionalism. And they don’t need their own pope, so why bother setting up a c.21st antipope? I think doing so would be highly contentious among their supporters and would damage the movement. I think they see themselves as sort of True Scotsmen Catholics, tending the flame of “real” Catholicism. Setting up an antipope would not be in that spirit and might, rather amusingly, trigger a load of divisive, hair-splitting theological arguments internally.

But I have no special insight into how they think so I’m guessing. I may be quite wrong.

What strikes me as important in this business is the bad smell of unchristian far right politics that hovers around the movement. Leo has once again sent a message that such attitudes have no place in the church.

I wonder if Rees- Mogg and Anne Widdicombe will join them…..:)
 
What did Pope Leo have to say about a woman’s right to be a priest or a woman’s right to abortion?
 
And when he was Cardinal...


www.catholicworldreport.com

Pope Leo XIV and the question of women in Holy Orders

www.catholicworldreport.com www.catholicworldreport.com

"Women and the Priesthood: Setting Doctrinal Boundaries

Cardinal Prevost has consistently upheld the Church’s definitive teaching that priestly ordination is reserved to men alone. During the 2023 Synod on Synodality, he addressed inquiries concerning the possibility of ordaining women to the priesthood by stating:

I think we’re all familiar with the very significant and long tradition of the Church, and that the apostolic tradition is something that has been spelled out very clearly, especially if you want to talk about the question of women’s ordination to the priesthood."
 
exchemist said:
If want you to start the whataboutery I think that would need its own thread. :)
Click to expand...
My questions about what Pope Leo thinks about Women priests and abortion was driven by your inclusion of Ann Widdicombe to this thread. Knowing she went catholic because of the women priest issue, and she is staunch anti abortion.
And the very next post after your mention of Widdy, was your post of how Pope leo is spending his 4th July day. Hence my question.

Although, how the Pope is spending his 4th of July is connected to this thread??

whataboutery that then????:smile::)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top