www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News CMRI post

thanks for the Rx re the Sedevacatists.

Now who are the SSPX?

And why are Ukrainians and Bulgarians joining them?

Are we talking clergy, bishops, or laity?

Has anyone heard of Bishop Yurij before? Why would an Orthodox bishop do that? Is this accurate? And why that group? Is he going to transfer into the Latin Church [or rather Latin Rite]? If he will retain his own Rite? If he wanted to belong to a fairly Latinized group, there is many more canonical jurisdictions he could belong to - alas.

What's going on?

herb.

Dear Herb,

if he is joining a group like this we do not want him. It seems God is merciful.

About the SSPX only unhappy Priests join them.

Well, in the last Chrismation in my OCA parish, the renunciations were not used (it was for a lady from the ROman-rite tradition) but only the affirmations of Orthodox Faith.
Good to see!

dear Steve:

thanks for info on the SSPX. Are they (the SSPX) in Communion with us or have they broken Communion with Older Rome [and presumably us as well] ? It's pretty clear the Sedevacantists are not in Communion with Older Rome [nor us, I suppose].

I suppose I can see how Ukrainians might be in contact with them, as there are Latins Uk.s and Latin Poles in Galicia, but how is it that Bulgarian Orthodox [where there is nary a Catholic in sight] join them?

Does this mean that they have being entering eastern Europe as "missionaries" to proselytise the Orthodox?

herb.

Everyone seems amazed that an Orthodox bishop would join a pre-Vatican II schismatic Latin Catholic group, but obviously he truly does believe that they are right. Why would a Latin Catholic bishop join a schismatic/non-canonical Orthodox group? These things just happen.

Herbigny,

The bishops of the SSPX movement are excommunicated from the Catholic Church, but the laity are not. As far as the Sedavacantists, I believe the entire "laos" (isn't that the correct Eastern term?) are excommunicated and in formal schism.

Gosh people, is it so hard to just be part of the Catholic Church and not have to go into schism every which-a-way?! lol.

ChristTeen287

But Teen. as Herbigny said, this only increases the fear of some Orthodox in the East that proselytism is taking place by ROman Caths towards Orthodox Christians.
Not that I agree that this is always the case and freedom of conscience is paramount. But these are very dangerous times for ecumenical relations/ Fuel must not be added to the fire.

Peace,

Brian

Brian,

I agree with your statement and could even sympathize with Orthodox who might think this hints at Roman Catholic proselytism. But how does it? If an Orthodox Christian willingly wants to become a Catholic Christian, that doesn't necessarily imply any proselytism by the party into which the convert is being received. Every year, many Orthodox become Catholic and many Catholics become Orthodox, but that doesn't mean there is proselytism involved. I know you know this, and my post is not directed to you; it's basically directed to no one in particular, just stating a point.

ChristTeen287

Someone asked what "sedevacantist" means. Literally, this means "empty seat". These are various groups who believe there has been no current Pope since Vatican II as in their eyes the "true Rome" would not let such drastic liturgical and theological changes happen.

Some of these groups believe John XXIII was the last valid Pope, other groups believe Pius XII, Pius X and there is even one group who takes it back to Pius V and the Council of Trent as the last valid Pope and Council, everything else since then having been infiltrated with modernism.

I believe Bishop Pivorunas was one of the bishops illicitly consecrated by Bishop Thuc directly or indirectly.

Although farther out, I can understand the arguments of the sedevacantists somewhat better than those of the SSPX. At least the sedevacantists don't believe there is a Pope and are acting accordingly. This is more of an act of conscience based on their (albeit flawed) ecclesiological understanding.

On the other hand, the SSPX says there is a Pope, and they are faithful to Rome, but they certainly don't follow him or the Church. This is more of an act of arrogance and outward rebellion to accept the position and place of the Pope and then blatantly refuse obedience.

Any Latin bishops encur ipso facto excommunication from the Roman Church if consecrated without permission from Rome. The faithful are not explicitly excommunicated, but if they understand the position of the Church,the mandates of Ecclesia Dei, and continue to remain in schism then there is some burden of schism upon them as well.

I hadn't heard of any Latin bishops going "schismatic Orthodox" [meaning the equivalent of the Sedevacantists]. Was there such?

Of course, one went Moonie, but that seemed to be a temporary lapsus mentis or something.

What is further odd is that Bishop Yuri went to the US to do this. Curiouser and Curiouser... What's going on down there?

herb.