You don't have to wait @michael newman You just made one yourself.
Losers and schismatics love calling me a "troll" when I debunk their false claims. You're no different at least you're not pretending anymore that you're above "running battles".
You started this one nineteen days
after the discussion had concluded. Surprise, surprise there's an SSPX fan-boy under that gold mask. That's why you're so hell-bent to get me banned. ;-)"If their shepherds are excommunicants then de facto the organisation is condemned."
In point of fact, that happened. JP II formally called Lefebvre's movement "the schism" in Ecclesia Dei. That wasn't rescinded with the excommunications, either.
"If they are schismatics this would not be permissible."
Wrong. That's standard SSPX false apologetics. Canon Law says differently
Also, from Canon 1040: "An irregularity is a perpetual impediment even though a dispensation may be granted in some cases..."
Thus schismatics may
minister if a dispensation is given. They still remain schismatics, though.
Canon 1047 §1. "Dispensation from all irregularities is reserved to the Apostolic See alone..."
....and that's what happened here. Pope Francis granted a dispensation for the schismatic priests of the SSPX.
That doesn't change the fact the SSPX ARE schismatics. Pope Francis has granted them limited faculties and only
for the pastoral benefit of Catholic laity.
Let's revisit your claim:"The Holy Father Francis has granted them a Canonical privilege to grant two sacraments to the laity.... If they are schismatics this would not be permissible."
As I've shown, that IS permissible. Protip: Catholic
priests don't need privileges granted by Pope to celebrate Catholic
sacraments. If the SSPX were Catholic
, this would not be needed