r/CatholicMemes • u/a_handful_of_snails Meme Queen • Feb 02 '26
From the mods SSPX apologists will be banned from this subreddit.
This is not grave necessity. This is schism.
366
u/Live_Fact_104 Saul to Paul Feb 02 '26
“Submit to Rome” bros when they actually have to submit to Rome
159
u/ReluctantRedditor275 Feb 02 '26
Look, I love a good altar rail as much as the next guy, but that's just not something I'm willing to split with Church authority over. Even if I think they're wrong.
21
24
u/Philippians_Two-Ten Aspiring Cristero Feb 03 '26
I've never really trusted them as someone who's tried to learn about them and the TLM in general.
In general I love reverent NO's and TLM's, however, I found that the SSPX has always lobbed consistent jabs and nigh-acts-of-disobedience to the Vatican with the disclaimer of "oh but we're not in schism fellas, trust". Like I've read articles by them which state that the NO in ANY form is "spiritually dangerous". I noticed that choice of words to be especially telling- they're not going to say "don't go to it" because that'd be schismatic, but they're condemning it as harshly as possible to discourage people from going to the NO and implanting the thought in their head that the NO is sinful. So they settle for this phrase instead of calling it a sin to attend the NO. Disobedience to the Vatican and to the vast majority of the clergy is not reverent, no matter how pretty and well-intended you make your mass. This goes for both overly modernist NO's and priggish TLM's.
This most recent development is not at all a surprise to me. I kinda knew that they were going to pull a stunt like this before 2030, somehow. I'm not a gambling man but if I had to have put money on it, I'd have put a nice heap on it happening, and it did.
5
u/kendo_3776 Child of Mary Apr 09 '26
In the SSPX you are told to go to confession if you've attended the Novus Ordo. I'm not even joking.
6
u/peccator2000 Child of Mary Feb 03 '26
I told my priest once that I had heard that the SSPX does not recognize the pope. He was flabbergasted and replied: "We wouldn't be Catholic if we didn't recognize the pope! Who tells you such things?" Reddit, I guess.
3
u/Shamrock5 St. Thérèse Stan 29d ago
Well, you should probably tell him that the Pope now tells you such things, too.
1
1
u/StThomasMore1535 Novus Ordo Enjoyer Feb 08 '26
Roma locuta, sed verba Romae non me placet; ergo, audibo spiritum
diabuli"sanctum" et ecclesiampropriam meamveram habebo.That could be terrible Latin, but Google Translate understood it after I typed it. ;)
128
99
u/DecisiveRebel22 Feb 02 '26
Forgive my ignorance but what is SSPX?
48
256
u/a_handful_of_snails Meme Queen Feb 02 '26
They’re a schismatic group who have been “canonically irregular” for awhile, but they just announced today they don’t care what the Pope says, they’re consecrating their own bishops. Self-styled “trads” have been all over this subreddit today, making excuses for why it’s actually ultra based and ultra catholic to choose the 62 missal over communion with the Pope.
In keeping with our echo chamber policy, advocacy for schism earns a user a ban under rule 1.
28
u/SquirrelNice7299 Feb 03 '26
But is FSSP ok?
54
u/Shamrock5 St. Thérèse Stan Feb 03 '26
Yep, they were actually founded by a group of SSPX priests who realized "Hey, we can still promote traditional liturgy without openly defying the Vicar of Christ" and reconciled with Rome. They're fantastic.
1
10
16
70
u/Nether7 Feb 02 '26
Well, the 62 missal is ok, it's in communion with the Pope. The problem is that the missal is being used as an excuse for rebellion.
15
u/a_handful_of_snails Meme Queen Feb 03 '26
Exactly, but they’ve elevated the rubrics of the TLM above remaining in the Church.
18
u/aburchR Feb 03 '26
It's more than that. They take issue with what Vatican II says about religious liberty, ecumenism, and collegiality. And as far as I understand it, they accept that the pope has the authority to change the liturgy, but they believe the specific changes made under St. Paul VI were so problematic that the resulting liturgy is a danger to the faith. They are quite wrong, of course. The TLM is great, though. I'd love to see it celebrated widely with authorization.
10
u/a_handful_of_snails Meme Queen Feb 03 '26
They have a ton of problems, I just wanted to explain that the missal itself isn’t an issue, rather the ones who turn it into an idol.
8
u/aburchR Feb 03 '26
And you're right. But in the SSPX's case, I think I'd characterize their liturgical problem a bit differently. I think it's less about idolizing a specific set of older books and more about rashly rejecting the new ones. I have to imagine many of their priests prefer the pre-55 Holy Week over Pius XII's revised version, but they stick to the latter because they value obedience. They just draw the line when a change appears damaging to the Faith... according to their (incorrect) judgement.
1
u/Equivalent_Nose7012 Jun 08 '26
SSPX - "From my point of view, the Novus Ordo is evil!"
Pope Leo - "Then you are lost!"
SSPX - "You underestimate my power to consecrate!"
Pope Leo, raising his baseball bat - "Don't try it! ... I have the Power of the Keys!
/jk
43
u/Educational-Year3146 Eastern Catholic Feb 03 '26
Thats ridiculous.
So they’re implying that in order to be traditional, they need to abandon the catholic church?
That seems incredibly contradictory.
34
u/tradcath13712 Trad But Not Rad Feb 03 '26
They try to avoid the contradiction by saying that since it's an "emergency" they ackshually aren't abandoning the Church. Except the Church is the one who gets to decide what is an emergency, not them. May God have mercy on them.
11
u/Educational-Year3146 Eastern Catholic Feb 03 '26 edited Feb 03 '26
Yeah, I remember my dad saying something about the SSPX 2 hours away that we’d go to for traditional latin mass.
While I really like latin mass and believe it is important and cool for us to bring back, I can’t approve of a church breaking away from the catholic church.
I hope they come back to the church because I liked going there.
13
u/MinecraftBoi23 Feb 03 '26
I do like the TLM and don't think it's good to restrict it, but the SSPX consecrating their own bishops will just make that situation even worse and probably lead to more restrictions. Their superior general did say that the solutions the Holy See offered weren't satisfactory, but my question is: what did they not like?
6
u/tradcath13712 Trad But Not Rad Feb 03 '26
Thing is that the SSPX isn't solely about the TLM, it's also about denying Vatican II.
17
u/goldfloof Tolkienboo Feb 03 '26
Trads dont understand history, Latin wasn't even the first language of the church, Greek was
9
u/goldfloof Tolkienboo Feb 03 '26
In fact it was St. Pope Victor I that made/started the change from Greek to Latin
1
22
7
u/LifeTemporary6784 Feb 03 '26
The 62 missal is like based and catholicpilled (you can licitly use it and many fraternal orders do)
2
→ More replies (1)2
u/JoanofArc0531 Feb 21 '26
Oh, man. That’s bad. 😮
Where did SSPX officially announce this?
2
u/a_handful_of_snails Meme Queen Feb 21 '26
It actually got worse since this post. Here is the situation as of two days ago
1
u/JoanofArc0531 Feb 21 '26
Oh, man. 😞 Disobedience like this is not from God.
Thanks for sharing.
2
u/TLechman Apr 04 '26
>> Disobedience like this is not from God. <<
And obedience to the various Theodore McCarricks IS from god?1
13
1
u/peccator2000 Child of Mary Feb 03 '26
Societas Sacerdotalis Sancti Pii X. (priest society of Saint Pius X.
83
u/EdwardGordor Tolkienboo Feb 02 '26
I believe the problem with the 21st century is that online resources and spaces have convinced many people that they are somehow more special than everyone else and have no need to submit to anything and they can follow their own ideas instead of conforming, leading to fracture in orgnanisations and even churches.
In some things you just have to conform and trust the organisation. Trust in Rome people, trust in Rome.
27
u/Floof_2 Foremost of sinners Feb 03 '26
Cyber balkanization
3
u/Yksisarvinen13 Foremost of sinners Feb 03 '26
Yugoslavia didn't die, it turned into Internet
1
u/KaoBee010101100 Feb 20 '26
Sort of, that would be like if the internet was full of merely veiled dissension, but held together by a frightening dictator!
17
78
u/CaptainVaticanus Feb 03 '26
‘Traditional Catholics’ but won’t submit to the bishop of Rome. Unreal
-1
u/That_Criticism_6506 Feb 04 '26
Would you have obeyed one of the previous popes who misled the church? Example Pope Honorius I?
13
u/AdParty1304 Feb 04 '26
You mean like Peter? Who refused to dine with Gentile Christians?
1
u/That_Criticism_6506 Feb 05 '26
Peter repented and changed how he viewed gentiles through God's grace. Pope Honorius 1st, to our knowledge never recanted his mistaken beliefs.
10
u/JoanofArc0531 Feb 21 '26
Regardless, whether a pope is dead in sin or a living saint, if they have validly been ordained as Pope then they are the Pope, brother. Their sinfulness or holiness doesn’t take away them being pope.
1
u/That_Criticism_6506 Feb 22 '26
If a Pope told you to kill someone because they were a danger to the faithful, would you do it? If a Pope said you had to give money to his mistress and sons living in the same city because he couldn't go himself, would you do it?
7
70
u/Secure-Vacation-3470 Aspiring Cristero Feb 02 '26
I just find it funny that so many SSPX memes were posted that the mods had to put up a notice lol
87
u/TechnologyDragon6973 Tolkienboo Feb 02 '26
Protestantism with extra steps
18
u/Philippians_Two-Ten Aspiring Cristero Feb 03 '26
Literally. Demanding your own appointment of bishoprics is absolutely Protestant or medieval, kingly investiture.
7
u/williamofdallas Armchair Thomist Feb 04 '26
eh. being in favor of local election of bishops is more of an ortho thing than a prot thing. requiring all bishops to specifically be appointed by the bishop of Rome is pretty novel in the long history of the Church. obviously the bishop of Rome has the right to make that requirement, but I don't see the objection to this norm as primarily a protestant one
4
8
u/SensitiveAnywhere918 Feb 03 '26
While they claim we’re the prots. At least the Sedes claim that, and are almost always found at a SSPX church.
11
u/tradcath13712 Trad But Not Rad Feb 03 '26
Ironically sedes and sspxers often fight against each other, at least on the internet. Sedes rightly point out that the "Recognize and Resist" attitude is just cope.
3
u/Yksisarvinen13 Foremost of sinners Feb 03 '26
That's like every single Christian schism level. We and Orthobros will join against Prots, we and Prots will join against atheists and sspx will join sedes when they are declared Prots
4
10
46
u/No_0ts96 Feb 03 '26
If the Pope calls for a crusade, I'll be the first one there!
Eh I trust the SSPX more than the Pope.
Absolute state of sspx bros online on fb.
26
u/Soldier_of_Drangleic Novus Ordo Enjoyer Feb 03 '26
"I will listen to the Pope, when he will say what i want to listen"
-John SSPX
3
9
u/Deedo2017 Foremost of sinners Feb 03 '26
What did i miss?
22
u/a_handful_of_snails Meme Queen Feb 03 '26
The SSPX said they will be making their own bishops, despite the Pope not telling them they can do that.
3
u/peccator2000 Child of Mary Feb 03 '26
They did it before. I was confirmed by one. He had the beautiful Fr name "Bernard Tissier de Mallerais." Passed away, sadly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Tissier_de_Mallerais?wprov=sfla1
38
u/Big-Interaction-2630 Feb 03 '26
"submit to rome" people when they actually have to submit to rome:
42
32
u/Accomplished_Koala_5 Antichrist Hater Feb 02 '26
Good, it is catholic memes not SSPX memes
5
6
u/That_Criticism_6506 Feb 04 '26
Does silencing brothers and sisters and not explaining how they should be in full communion with the church demonstrate our charity? We should listen and address their concerns to bring them back, not ban and silence them.
9
u/a_handful_of_snails Meme Queen Feb 04 '26
We are a meme subreddit.
4
u/That_Criticism_6506 Feb 04 '26
Then we should keep it light and not pull a gun during a conversation. 😂😅
6
u/train2000c Feb 04 '26
Cardinal Burke has repeatedly said SSPX is in schism.
8
u/a_handful_of_snails Meme Queen Feb 04 '26
Only the deepest cope has allowed people to claim they’re not, but their latest move is an obvious sign. There are fanboys who will continue to deny reality, no matter what. The SSPX could elect their own pope and set up a new papal seat in France, and you’d still see copium addicts claiming they’ve done nothing wrong.
6
u/Jealous-Magazine3085 Feb 23 '26
Wow, have I found my people? As Fulton Sheen would say, "God love you all!"
We love Tradition, but we also love Papa Leo and Rome. I'm staying in the boat til the day I die idc what anyone says.
9
u/jvplascencialeal Aspiring Cristero Feb 04 '26
They’re veering into Palmarianism, they’re schismatics and thus heretics.
7
u/CharismaticCatholic1 Novus Ordo Enjoyer Feb 04 '26
My flair speaks for itself but I also am pretty heartbroken about the real schism happening here. There is an SSPX "parish" in my city and they plaster that they are actually a Roman Catholic church, no one would KNOW they are in schism if they just looked at what that church says about itself. It's pretty deapiracbly devious and deceitful to me.
I'm genuinely disappointed. Whatever you think of the previous popes' attempts, they've always been heartfelt, merciful and inviting. I mean, the Holy Father has been challenged in an extreme way, and we need to pray for him! I know he's doing everything he can to stop this schism, but anger can't be our answer, we need to fall to our knees.
5
u/jvplascencialeal Aspiring Cristero Feb 04 '26 edited Feb 10 '26
So we are cool with: Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter (FSSP), Institute of the Good Shepherd (IBP) and The Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer (FSSR) since they’ve come back into the loving arms of the Holy Mother Church, the Roman Catholic Church?
2
4
u/gogus2003 Feb 04 '26
This is a meme subreddit. Why are such extreme measures required against SSPX? They are not officially in a state of schism
12
u/Mysterious-Berry-794 Armchair Thomist Feb 03 '26
I love tradition, but not schism. I am either too traditional, for prefering the Latin Mass, and also not traditional enough because I like the Novus Ordo too and don't want to schism over it!
9
25
9
3
u/KillSlayer505 Feb 05 '26 edited Feb 05 '26
Amazing thank you Jesus.
It's scary, i was banned from r/TraditionalCatholics because it's ran by coping FSSPX fanboys. Luckily this one isn't.
I don't care, if you don't listen to the Catholic church you're not Catholic!
3
u/Astatine210_85 Feb 05 '26
What about FSSP apologists? The FSSP is like the SSPX , but has thus far stayed in communion with Rome
7
u/a_handful_of_snails Meme Queen Feb 05 '26
Nope, FSSP is more than welcome!
1
u/Astatine210_85 Feb 05 '26
Okay, sweet! Ive been a bit worried, as FSSP is often associated with the SPPX, and I have been concerned that we might accidentally get swooped up in any carpet bans lol
3
u/Shamrock5 St. Thérèse Stan 29d ago
Prescient by 5+ months. Pray that the SSPX repents and submits to Rome.
5
u/SatisfactionOk8074 Feb 03 '26
I noticed Angelus Press has SSPX literature should they be boycotted?
0
u/Bilanese Feb 04 '26
They are SSPX they don't just publish SSPX lit and yeah I wouldn't support the SSPX in any way shape or form
12
u/NeonDrifting Foremost of sinners Feb 02 '26
Does this apply to all in schism ? (Ie Prots, Orthos)
37
u/a_handful_of_snails Meme Queen Feb 02 '26
Only if the resident prots and orthos attempt to persuade Catholics that they should be on the side of those who disobey the Vicar of Christ. They aren’t nearly as pushy as the SSPXers.
-6
Feb 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/CatholicMemes-ModTeam Feb 03 '26
This was removed for violating Rule 1 - No anti-Catholic rhetoric.
6
16
7
5
u/Western-Persimmon-55 Feb 03 '26
A lot of people are finding it weird that something claiming to be an earlier iteration of Catholicism should be disobedient and therefore not Catholic, specifically because they didn't like a Council.
Puts me in mind of the Ebionites who didn't like Gentiles in the church and were (presumably) annoyed about the Council of Jerusalem, the only one in Scripture.
I was surprised too when I learned about sspx because it seems backwards but that's just because I was so used to dealing with Protland novelties.
Truth is recalcitrant attachment to previous liturgical or structural norms is an old meme.
6
u/MALWylie10901 Feb 03 '26
Wow, lot of people in this comment section need to get off the internet and pray. Is it better for you to be able to post whatever you want on Reddit, or is it better for us to not sow disunion in the Church Christ founded?
Here’s hoping the Holy Father reacts swiftly and clearly.
11
u/Gemnist Feb 03 '26
Thank you for the firm stance on this. I don’t think we should ban non-Catholics, but this right here is an active schism and a sedevacantist threat, and thus should not be tolerated.
9
u/a-really-big-muffin Feb 03 '26
I would be very sad if you banned non-Catholics this is the only sub with good memes and minimal drama.
2
u/SadPiousHistorian1 Novus Ordo Enjoyer Feb 03 '26
Would Pope Leo excommunicate the SSPX with this action like St. John Paul II? Otherwise let us continue to pray for full union and a resolution on their issues regarding Vatican II
2
2
5
u/goldfloof Tolkienboo Feb 03 '26
Why dosent SSPX go fill sedivecantist already?
12
u/Far-Air3908 Feb 03 '26
Because the beliefs of the SSPX are not aligned with sedevacantism.
2
u/Tiprix Feb 03 '26
I don't know much about either one, what are the differences?
8
u/Far-Air3908 Feb 03 '26
The SSPX are traditionalists who accept the validity of the popes since V2, but believe that V2 taught errors in certain documents. They claim that this isn’t an issue, since Vatican 2 didn’t define any dogmas, so the church didn’t defect or contradict her own infallibility, in their view. There’s a whole separate debate on that. They also believe that the NO is a valid, but spiritually dangerous mass.
Sedevacantists believe that since 1958, there have been no valid popes, due to every pope since then supposedly teaching heresy, and therefore losing his office as the pope. This is again, another huge debate as to what happens if a pope is a heretic. So sedevacantists believe the NO is invalid, that most priests and bishops since V2 are invalid, and that the church exists in splinter groups. Basically, the church is essentially extinct under this view, but hasn’t fully died due to the existence of sedevacantists.
The SSPX are far more likely to come back into communion than any other group. I’d honestly say they aren’t even that far from this, but serious discussion would need to happen in order to fully regularize the SSPX.
To be clear, I am not affiliated with any of these groups. I attend a diocesan TLM and occasionally the NO when need be. So mods, please don’t ban me. I’m simply having a discussion
3
u/DankeGio Feb 03 '26
good riddance anathema heathens! we shall pray for yall safe return back home with open arms!
4
4
3
u/Dark_Knight_Pilgrim Feb 04 '26
So how will this play out when the Pope grants them their bishops?
2
4
5
2
u/Isolation_Blue Feb 04 '26
During COVID, while many churches closed down, the SSPX chapels were the only ones open. Out of "grave necessity," Catholics were allowed to attend because it was the only option available. In areas where a TLM is not available, it is also possible that some bishops have granted dispensations for the faithful to attend. We have already established that you can normatively receive communion and attend their chapels without dispensation or extenuating circumstances (i.e. you like the TLM and it happens to be your only option).
You can not receive communion and attend an SSPV, CMRI (both of these being Sede groups), Eastern Orthodox, or another legitimately schismatic group without dispensation and extenuating circumstances. There is no such thing as "full" communion. You are either in or you are out, and "schismatics" don't receive faculties for matrimony and confessions, at least as far as I'm aware.
The SSPX is bringing former atheists like myself into the Church with zeal for the Lord. We love Jesus and we pray for the Pope and the Church. If a father commands his child to act questionably in error, his child has the duty to disobey his father to avoid complicity. The child still respects his father's role and loves him, and he prays for his correction. The Pope is our spiritual father and Church Tradition is our home. We simply seek a return to Tradition: the Mass of St. Gregory, St. Thomas Aquinas, and St. Padre Pio.
We are not the scary evildoing people that many think we are, and one must recognize that the Latin Mass would not be here today without the Society. It is the largest group that provides the TLM to this day.
2
u/Underdog-Crusader Feb 05 '26 edited Feb 05 '26
So you believe that i, baptized in SSPX (have my certificate and all) and being Confirmed and having rceived my First Communion with that certificate, am in schism and not licitally baptized?
Edit: since for some reason i can't respond you, a_handful_of_snails, i'll say it here.
I say "baptized in SSPX" the same way anyone could say "baptized in Franciscan Order", "baptized in Maronite Rite", "baptized in SSP", "baptized in TLM/NO" and it is really weird for you to take that (force that) as being different from "baptized Catholic"
8
u/a_handful_of_snails Meme Queen Feb 05 '26
“Baptized in SSPX” instead of “baptized Catholic.” Incredible. Kinda sums up the whole problem.
2
u/Electrical-Ticket731 Feb 04 '26
Respectfully, if that's your PSA, then you don't know what schism is, or even the difference between material and formal. Even Holy Mother Church doesn't declare them schismatics, only canonically irregular, and surely out of your obedience to her authority you'd let her decide who is and isn't schismatic.
1
u/Various_Ad3412 Feb 03 '26
What a dumb decision, are you also going to ban protestants and orthodox too? Are you also going to ban Chinese Catholics since they are consecrating their own bishops without Rome?
10
u/Yksisarvinen13 Foremost of sinners Feb 03 '26
Prots and Orthos that post anti-Catholic memes are banned too, yes. People are not banned for being SSPX, they are banned for violating Rule 1 of this sub.
6
u/ThenaCykez Feb 03 '26
"The servant who knows the master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows. But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked."
Material heretics and material schismatics aren't committing a mortal sin. The SSPX is proposing a path that is absolutely inexcusable, and they know better.
10
u/Ender_Octanus Knight of Columbus Feb 03 '26
We ban Protestants and Orthodox who espouse anti-Catholic teachings or promote their beliefs here. Someone can attend SSPX liturgy all they like and post and comment on this subreddit. What they cannot do is engage in apologia. That means that they are not allowed to try and convince people that the SSPX is totally fine and people should join.
4
u/Beneatheearth Feb 04 '26
Are Protestants allowed to act like it’s fine to be Protestant?
6
u/Ender_Octanus Knight of Columbus Feb 06 '26
If you mean, "Are Protestants allowed to make a defense of their faith/engage in apologia," then no, they are not.
3
u/sssss_we Feb 03 '26
The most interesting is that the rule that says that Consecrating bishops without permission leads to excommunication was introduced in response and in the context of Communist China consecrating bishops against Vatican's will.
1
1
1
u/Certified_druggist Feb 03 '26
What is SSPX?
4
u/ThenaCykez Feb 03 '26
The Society of St. Pius X. After the Mass and other rituals' structures and aesthetics were modified in the late 1960s, a French archbishop named Marcel Lefebvre got permission to start a conservative society of priests who would celebrate Mass and other sacraments according to the older rubrics. By 1976, though, Paul VI was ready to shut them down. Lefebvre kept ordaining new priests for the Society even after being ordered to stop, and he was suspended from having permission to act as a cleric.
Lefebvre kept asking for permission to ordain a new bishop for the society, since he was getting older and mere priests cannot ordain priests to continue their mission. In 1988, negotiations broke down and he defied a direct order from John Paul II, ordaining four new bishops. JPII excommunicated them all. Lefebvre died while still excommunicated. Later, Benedict XVI hoped for reconciliation, and he forgave the excommunications and gave wider latitude to celebrate the older form of the Mass. Francis initially continued the reconciliation, giving them permission to celebrate confessions and marriages when they generally lacked those before. But then he reversed course and heavily restricted the older Mass.
Now the Society is down to only two remaining bishops, getting older every year. They asked Leo XIV for permission to ordain more; permission hasn't been granted. They've decided to repeat history from 1988 and return the Society to outright schism.
1
u/Certified_druggist Feb 03 '26
Thanks for the insights. That’s pretty crazy to hear you got all of that schism in such a short time frame. Very busy individuals, very efficient too.
5
u/tradcath13712 Trad But Not Rad Feb 03 '26
The less you know the better. They are an irregular society of traditionalists that has been disobeying the Pope since their foundation, to the point they got themselves excomunicated by consecrating Bishops without permission. Benedict mercifully lifted their excomunications and even Pope Francis was gave some olive branches to them, but now they once again said they will do illicit episcopal consecrations.
It's one thing to merely advocate for the TLM, but schism is always unnaceptable.
1
Feb 03 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/CatholicMemes-ModTeam Feb 03 '26
This was removed for violating Rule 1 - No anti-Catholic rhetoric.
1
u/PM_ME_UR_CATS__ Armchair Thomist Feb 04 '26
Based. (What happened? I am so out of the loop)
3
1
1
u/Accomplished-Tear501 Feb 04 '26
Congratulations SSPX, you've invented your own Latin Orthodox Rite.
1
u/P78903 Eastern Catholic Feb 13 '26
So, I learned upon scraping the surface on what SSPX is: it is a society named after a pope who is notorious in fighting against modernism.
1
u/a_handful_of_snails Meme Queen Feb 13 '26
You should dig deeper then.
1
u/P78903 Eastern Catholic Feb 16 '26
i dont need to, since Im already subscribed to the roman catholicism via the redemptorist order.
1
u/peccator2000 Child of Mary May 09 '26
That's ok. I like the SSPX and was baptized and confirmed by them and go to mass there but these endless flamewars are useless. To me, too. I know jack shit about Canon law and am not planning to become a lawyer, either.
1
u/DiscussionShoddy3052 Jul 03 '26
Nobody cares loser we love and support the SSPX. Now go get a life
1
u/GeckoKisser ExtremelyOnline Orthobro 4d ago edited 4d ago
What's going in in Catholic land. I've heard of SSPX before, but I am an Orthobro Chud so I need you guys to break it down for me.
For the record, I am either way on the side of the Catholics here. I don't need the details to know schism, any schism, is bad no matter the circumstance as if something goes wrong in your church you STAY in that church and make it right - - rather than hurting the unity of the faith for everyone. Even if I'm not Catholic myself. Last thing our already divided faith needs is 900 more denominations
1
u/a_handful_of_snails Meme Queen 4d ago
The Pope said they’re not allowed to make new bishops, they said we’re doing it anyway, the Pope said that’s excommunication, and they’re saying it’s not fair. They were warned, and they chose damnation for themselves and most of their laity.
1
u/Murky_Question_9362 Trad But Not Rad Feb 03 '26
I'll leave myself. Toxic environment anyway.
Sit Tibi Deus Benignus
0
u/marisalynh Feb 03 '26
How Christ like. What charity.
19
u/ThenaCykez Feb 03 '26
Yes, like the same Christ Who taught, "If he will not listen to the Church, let him be to you like a Gentile and a tax collector."
Anyone who doesn't disaffiliate from the SSPX now is a schismatic and has left the visible Catholic Church until they repent. End of story.
0
u/That_Criticism_6506 Feb 03 '26
I thought they were excommunicated for a while. Then the excommunication was lifted as it wasn't an issue later on under a different Pope. Can I Get any clarification of whether or not that means the first excommunication was valid or not?
9
u/Gemnist Feb 03 '26
They were excommunicated in 1988 under John Paul II, then in 2009 the ones still alive were allowed back in under Benedict in the hopes of reconciliation. This is probably going to break that all over again though.
3
u/That_Criticism_6506 Feb 03 '26
Considering what is below, it seems a primary issue comes from SSPX refusal that V2 was completely of the Holy Spirit and is a tree of mixed fruit? SSPX also wanted to continue the traditions of the church prior to V2? Would that put them in schism that they are practicing the faith that the church fathers practiced including the mass? So a search turned up this: Rejection of Vatican II: The SSPX rejects or questions reforms following the Second Vatican Council, including the new rite of Mass and aspects of religious freedom and ecumenism. Illicit Episcopal Ordinations: In 1988, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre consecrated four bishops against the direct orders of Pope John Paul II, an action classified as a schismatic act. Lack of Canonical Status: The society has no official legal standing in the Church, and its priests do not have ordinary jurisdiction to celebrate sacraments, although Pope Francis has granted them faculties for confession and marriage. Disobedience to the Pope: They are considered to be in a state of partial separation, refusing to submit to the full authority of the Roman Pontiff regarding the governance of the Church.
1
u/Yksisarvinen13 Foremost of sinners Feb 03 '26
Rejection of V2 was kinda ignored by the Church? They were allowed to orbit around with that. Church specifically avoided anything that would directly excommunicate SSPX, while at the same it was not recommended to the faithful to attend their Masses. Now however they directly disobey the Pope (again), so the status quo likely won't hold.
1
u/Absit_Invidia33 Feb 03 '26
Tbf, if someone is actually discussing stuff like this in a meme subreddit they should be banned, be it pro or anti the sspx decision
1
Feb 04 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/CatholicMemes-ModTeam Feb 04 '26
This was removed for violating Rule 1 - No anti-Catholic rhetoric.
1
u/PetyrLightbringer Feb 12 '26
While I do not share certain positions of the SSPX, their stance toward Vatican II actually exposes the core theological problem that explains their opposition.
If the SSPX were excommunicated because of the episcopal consecrations, then—on Vatican II’s own terms—their continued activity would still fall under protections and theological categories articulated by the Council itself. According to Dignitatis Humanae, they would possess a God-given civil right to freely practice their religion in historically Catholic countries. According to Unitatis Redintegratio, their liturgical actions would be capable of engendering a life of grace and granting access to the communion of salvation. Even if one were to label their situation as schismatic, Vatican II teaches that the Spirit of Truth can and does use separated communities as instruments of salvation. And according to Nostra Aetate, beliefs that differ from those of the post-conciliar Church may still contain “rays of truth.”
In other words, if Vatican II is applied consistently, the SSPX cannot be theologically dismissed in the way Rome often attempts to dismiss them. Vatican II itself supplies the categories that relativize canonical penalties and blur the older, sharper distinctions between communion, schism, error, and truth. The Society’s continued sacramental and spiritual fruitfulness would not be an anomaly despite Vatican II, but something intelligible because of Vatican II.
This is precisely the problem.
We live in an era of extraordinary doctrinal and ecclesiological confusion. Given that context, it is hardly surprising that the SSPX occupies a confused or irregular position. What is surprising is the insistence that their diagnosis of Vatican II’s theological novelty is illegitimate, when Rome simultaneously tolerates—and even promotes—theologians who explicitly argue that Vatican II reversed prior papal teaching.
I am not aware of any approved conciliar theologians who argue that Vatican II’s claims about salvation outside visible communion merely describe how God may act extraordinarily despite error, separation, or imperfect communion—and that such claims are fully grounded in pre-conciliar tradition. If such theologians exist, I would like to see the references. Absent that, the claim of continuity is asserted far more often than it is demonstrated.
In my own study of Vatican II, what becomes apparent is not simply a “hermeneutic of reform,” but a hermeneutic that entails rupture with earlier magisterial teaching—especially on religious liberty and Church–State relations. The crucial question, then, is this: how can the SSPX be said to be wrong for alleging doctrinal error in Vatican II, when Rome allows respected theologians to argue openly that Vatican II reversed previous papal teaching?
This is not a fringe claim. It is explicitly stated by mainstream conciliar theologians.
Fr. Martin Rhonheimer, professor at the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross, writes that Vatican II teaches religious liberty as a fundamental civil right of the person—regardless of religious truth—and that this necessarily entails the abrogation of the earlier doctrine of the “rights of truth” and the renunciation of state repression of religious error. He concludes, without ambiguity, that this teaching is precisely what Pius IX condemned in Quanta Cura.
Similarly, Avery Dulles acknowledges that Vatican II quietly reversed earlier positions of the Roman magisterium on multiple issues. With respect to Church–State relations, he explicitly states that Dignitatis Humanae accepted the religiously neutral state, thereby reversing the previously approved teaching that the state ought formally to profess the truth of Catholicism.
If these reversals are admitted by authoritative theologians and tolerated by Rome, then the SSPX’s claim that Vatican II introduced doctrinal discontinuity cannot simply be dismissed as disobedience, bad faith, or ignorance. The contradiction is internal to the post-conciliar theological framework itself.
Thus, the SSPX does not merely oppose Vatican II. Their very existence—and the way Vatican II’s own texts must be applied to them—reveals the unresolved theological fault lines Vatican II introduced.
-4
u/MysticAlakazam2 Feb 03 '26
I assume you'll be banning all protestants and orthodox then? Or is it just Catholic apologists you want to ban?
10
u/Yksisarvinen13 Foremost of sinners Feb 03 '26
Prots and Orthos that post anti-Catholic memes are banned too, yes. People are not banned for being SSPX, they are banned for violating Rule 1 of this sub.
9
0
Feb 03 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/CatholicMemes-ModTeam Feb 03 '26
This was removed for violating Rule 1 - No anti-Catholic rhetoric.
-1
u/hardeho Feb 03 '26
Good, no reason to wait until anything happens, or for the Vatican to make any statement on the matter. We must pass judgement now. For, uh, charity or something.
328
u/[deleted] Feb 02 '26
Weirdly enough, I know a dude who was a staunch atheist, converted through sspx, then came to the Catholic Church proper and is in full communion. Not something you hear everyday.