en.news
92.1K

Francis Told Bishop: PiusX "Not Schismatic"

Francis told former Chur Bishop Vitus Huonder, Switzerland, that the Society St PiusX “is not a schismatic community.”

Huonder who lives at a PiusX school in Wangs, Saint Gall, told FSSPX.ch (September 26) that he went public with this anecdote to reassure people suffering from a “false argument.”

This is Huonder's reason why he doesn’t want to preside the New Mass anymore which he used all his life, “I couldn’t do it anymore, because when you immerse yourself in the traditional Holy Mass, you simply come to this point where you feel there's no other way.”

Traditionis custodes also touched his feelings. He was “very upset and sad” about it and even “cried.”

Huonder didn't expect such a drastic measure and - had he still been in office - would have asked Francis to "get informed" - as if Francis' misdeed had not been done with knowledge and intention.

According to unconfirmed rumors Huonder had to sign with PiusX that he will not celebrate priestly ordinations for the Fraternity of St Peter.

Picture: Vitus Huonder © FSSPX.news CC BY, #newsWfxrdsngle

Ave Crux and one more user link to this post
Ultraviolet
"I have no idea who you are referring to as an anti-Semite?" @Ave Crux Sure you don't. :P You read enough of Steve D's Jew-hating to copy his name-calling. Irony how you're bawwing about "ad hominem attacks" Copy-pasta is an "Ad Nauseam" Fallacy. Malfunctioning SSPX-Unit is repeating the same message.
Ave Crux
More proof of poor Ultraviolet's desperation.... They now begin resorting to ad hominem attacks for lack of any substance to their baseless position.
I have no idea who you are referring to as an anti-Semite? I have no less than 5 Jewish godchildren --- from different families, no less -- whom I love with all my heart. So you're certainly not talking about me.
Canon Law Clearly Proves SSPX is …More
More proof of poor Ultraviolet's desperation.... They now begin resorting to ad hominem attacks for lack of any substance to their baseless position.

I have no idea who you are referring to as an anti-Semite? I have no less than 5 Jewish godchildren --- from different families, no less -- whom I love with all my heart. So you're certainly not talking about me.

Canon Law Clearly Proves SSPX is NOT in Schism:

I recommend readers view the entire subject at the link for the Canons 1040-1049 which detail impediments to Ordination and administering the Sacraments -- of which Schism is clearly listed as an impediment.

I cite only a portion below which indicates Schism is an impediment to faculties for administering the Sacraments.

Hence, Pope Francis's granting of faculties to SSPX is a clear proof SSPX is not in Schism.

If SSPX were in Schism, not only could they not administer the Sacraments, all their priestly ordinations would be called into question as to their validity (
read the entire Canons provided at link)

CLEARLY ROME AND THE HOLY SEE DO NOT CONSIDER SSPX TO BE IN SCHISM, OR ELSE FACULTIES WOULD NOT BE NECESSARY OR EVEN VALID.

CANON 1043:

"The canons distinguish between the reception of orders and the exercise of orders.

"In other words, the above impediments
[of which schism is included] do not necessarily make the ordination invalid.

"Should a man be ordained with an impediment, the question remains if he is then able to exercise the ministry he has received.

"This is specified in the following canons. They are very clear that those who receive ordination while affected by an undispensed irregularity or impediment are also impeded from exercising the ministry.

"The exception is the prior delict of apostasy, heresy, or schism unless it was publically known
[as the case with SSPX being quite public]. If hidden, the impediment impedes reception of orders but not the exercise of the orders once received."

Poor Ultraviolet.....
Ultraviolet
Quoting an anti-Semite does you no credit. @Ave Crux Then again the SSPX tends to share those sentiments, don't they? Fair enough.;-) You didn't quote Canon Law because it doesn't support your interpretation.
Ave Crux
Yes, I certainly did cut and paste from a similar post! IN FACT, I have saved that precise comment locally, and as soon as any other SSPX article pops up trying to claim SSPX is in schism, I will repost my entire comment sharing the Code of Canon Law which proves they are not in schism!!! Nothing is better than facts to dispel misinformation from "resident captain isano" (I quote)
Ultraviolet
@SSPX Propaganda-Bot uploaded copy-pasta. Word for word over here. Spamming Sub-Routine Engaged! I already debunked it over here too.
Ave Crux
For those who would like to know with certitude whether SSPX is in schism and whether Pope Francis considers this to be the case (dispensation from the irregularity of public schism is reserved exclusively to the Holy See), Canon Law makes this clear:
I refer the readers to Canons 1040 thru 1049, which clearly state that public schism (if it truly exists) is an impediment to Holy Orders and to …More
For those who would like to know with certitude whether SSPX is in schism and whether Pope Francis considers this to be the case (dispensation from the irregularity of public schism is reserved exclusively to the Holy See), Canon Law makes this clear:

I refer the readers to Canons 1040 thru 1049, which clearly state that public schism (if it truly exists) is an impediment to Holy Orders and to the exercise of priestly ministry within the Catholic Church.

As it is an established fact that Pope Francis has granted faculties to the SSPX so they may freely administer the Sacraments throughout the entire world, it is also clear from the regulations of Canon Law concerning schism and priestly ministry that SSPX is not in schism, since schism -- if it were to exist -- is itself is an impediment to the exercise of priestly ministry and the Sacraments within the Catholic Church.

Thus, Pope Francis could not possibly grant SSPX faculties if he held them to be in schism, given this clear and Canonically defined impediment.


Furthermore, SSPX has freely accepted Visitations from Rome whenever Visitators have been sent to their seminaries and houses of formation in order to examine the SSPX from within and to report on their findings to Rome.

During the Pontificate of Pope Francis, Bishop Schneider and Cardinal Brandmuller were sent by the Holy Father as Visitators on several occasions. Upon completion of these Visitations, their findings and report to Rome were extremely favorable.

Schismatic groups do not allow the Holy See to send Bishops and Cardinals to investigate their internal operations, theological positions, spiritual lives and charism in order to pass judgment and provide a report to Rome on these matters, since the very nature of schism is to absolutely and decisively refuse the Catholic Church's authority over such internal matters.

After Bishop Schneider's Visitation, Bishop Schneider reported to Rome that SSPX "thinks with the mind of the Church" and even recommended SSPX be given "full canonical recognition....and should be accepted as they are" without any requirement that SSPX accept the problematic texts of Vatican II which have been sole reason discussions with Rome have not yet resolved differences in this matter.

Notice that Bishop Schneider only refers to the need to grant SSPX a Canonical Mission, not "dispense SSPX from schism" -- since SSPX clearly "thinks with the mind of the Church" and accepts the Church's legitimate authority when exercised justly -- something which could not possibly be said if they are in schism, which is precisely the state of not thinking with the mind of the Church and not accepting the Church's legitimately exercised authority.

SSPX has never denied the authority of Rome to send such Visitators, nor have they impeded these Visitations in any way.

Schismatic sects do not permit Rome access to their houses of formation (e.g. think Society of Pius V, which is sedevacantist)

In fact, the following is SSPX's position regarding their recognition of the Catholic Church's legitimate authority over their priestly society, showing clearly they are not in schism:


"When the SSPX believes, worships and conducts a moral life as it was demanded and recognized by the Supreme Magisterium and was observed universally in the Church during a centuries long period and when the SSPX recognizes the legitimacy of the pope and the diocesan bishops and prays for them publicly and recognizes also the validity of the sacraments according to the editio typica of the new liturgical books, this should suffice for a canonical recognition of the SSPX on behalf of the Holy See."

All of the above is clear proof that SSPX is not schismatic and accepts Rome's authority when it is exercised in a lawful manner.

Unwillingness to obey and collaborate in unlawful and destructive commands and doctrinal errors does not constitute schism, but rather the exercise of one's duty, clear and simple.

Suppressing the TLM and the Faith of the Ages, and depriving seminarians of solid, doctrinal formation as Priests is not lawful, and such Patrimony may not be lawfully wrested from the Priests and the Faithful. Should such destruction be enacted -- as it was following Vatican II -- one is duty-bound to resist the destruction of the Church's inheritance and to ensure its preservation for future generations, as Archbishop Lefebvre did up until the time of his death.
Ultraviolet
So an SSPX sympathizer claims Francis told him the SSPX isn't "schismatic". In legal terms this is hearsay evidence, even ignoring the claimant's very obvious vested reasons for doing so. Zero evidence supporting the claim itself. It's entirely unsubstantiated.
"reassure people suffering from a 'false argument."
Correction: they're suffering from an explicit statement confirming "the schism" as …More
So an SSPX sympathizer claims Francis told him the SSPX isn't "schismatic". In legal terms this is hearsay evidence, even ignoring the claimant's very obvious vested reasons for doing so. Zero evidence supporting the claim itself. It's entirely unsubstantiated.

"reassure people suffering from a 'false argument."
Correction: they're suffering from an explicit statement confirming "the schism" as described by Pope John Paul II in "Ecclesia Dei" where he used that exact term to define Abp. Lefebvre's movement.

Incidentally, Pope Pachama's comments do not always follow The Church's teachings. Like So: Luther's Antiquated Heresy Is Francis' New Teaching

"According to unconfirmed rumors Huonder had to sign with PiusX that he will not celebrate priestly ordinations for the Fraternity of St Peter."

LOL.. If true, it's a classic case of a second-rate product trying to force the genuine article out of the market-place.

Meaning... schismatic "traditionalists" trying to supress a genuine traditionalist Catholic fraternity in full communion with The Church.
Jan Joseph
Grapje zeker. De gelovigen van de Pius X Broederschap belijden het Universele Tridentijnse Rooms Katholieke geloof van voor het Tweede Vaticaanse Concilie, het ware Rooms Katholieke geloof, en dat is een totaal ander geloof dan het Rooms Katholieke geloof van na het Tweede Vaticaanse. Het nieuwe geloof van na het Tweede Vaticaanse Concilie is het geloof van de oecumene, het geloof van Luther en …More
Grapje zeker. De gelovigen van de Pius X Broederschap belijden het Universele Tridentijnse Rooms Katholieke geloof van voor het Tweede Vaticaanse Concilie, het ware Rooms Katholieke geloof, en dat is een totaal ander geloof dan het Rooms Katholieke geloof van na het Tweede Vaticaanse. Het nieuwe geloof van na het Tweede Vaticaanse Concilie is het geloof van de oecumene, het geloof van Luther en Calvijn, dit geloof is een natuurgeloof een natuurgodsdienst met een humanistische overtuiging.
Paus Franciscus wil graag dat de Pius X Broederschap tot zijn Rooms Katholieke kerk behoort, dan kan paus Franciscus de Pius X Broederschap verbieden de Tridentijnse Heilige Mis te vieren en op te dragen. Franciscus is een geboren oplichter een echte maffioos.
Eva