@peregasolinus@CatholicPods Indeed, and the FSSPX themselves concur exactly that the Church remains "even when many of her children become instruments of the mystery of iniquity:"
"Here before our eyes is the drama of the occupation of the Church Militant by an alien power."
https://t.co/Lg0zRrva3P
@CatholicSmark@rustyoscardev I think I don't understand your question, then. Are you asking which specific propositions the SSPX claims Rome is demanding they hold? I think they answered "what order the pope has given..." on February 12, but they may not have answered "what are they rejecting" at that time.
@SoberopenMike@TARSRel0aded "For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using [separated Churches and Communities] as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church."
From Unitatis Redintegratio, which the Pope insists you accept.
@thelb236@Hildifons159911@FinnishZoomer I'm going to release a transcription & translation of the response of the University of Paris to the Quinones Breviary. Apparently the entire faculty had no idea they were schismatic for criticizing a duly promulgated Liturgy.
@ModernBoethius So when does the Bugnini strategy "to help in any way the road to union of the separated brethren, by removing every stone that could even remotely constitute an obstacle or difficulty" apply to the Rad Trads?
It was applied to the Protestants.
In this 32-second clip of an Anglican ordination, see Fresno 'Catholic bishop' Joseph Brennan, far left, participate by reciting the formula of ordination and extending his hands. Some are insistent this is not a 'co-consecration', but call it what you like, this is what he did.
@SenecaNostrae@cath_menarion Rome offered to discuss the minimum necessary for communion and the SSPX said they have no right to discuss that with Rome.
It is the pope's duty to define it for the whole Church, and he could end all confusion by publishing a list of what has to be believed after V2.
@TaylorRMarshall The SSPX has produced several lists, as other comments point out. But the SSPX as such does not have the duty to teach the whole Church. Rome does and they will not speak plainly.
The pope could easily list the specific things about Vatican 2 the SSPX ostensibly rejects. The fact that he doesnโt indicates weโre back to the โVatican 2 is whatever we say it isโ phase of refusing to use precise theological language.
@holysmoke@TLM_Ryan His Holiness does not seem to think separate denominations really exist.
This double mindedness is so tiresome.
https://t.co/95rOSk4i5u
@Tom_McGovern_72@GaiusLatine@thelb236 If it's not a problem, it makes the claim that the SSPX is schismatic collapse. Apparently saying the pope is/was wrong, as they have, is just fine.