www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Lefebvrites?

What exactly are Lefebvrites?
http://www.risu.org.ua/eng/news/article;8249/
The new Ukrainian Archbishop discussed it in this article.

Thanks,

Paul

They are Catholics who attend Mass at the chapels of the Society of Saint Pius the Tenth (SSPX), which only offers the Ancient/Traditional Roman Rite Mass.

As to whether or not the Society is in schism, it depends upon whom you ask. There are cardinals who say the group is not (Cardinal Hoyos and Cardinal Medina come to mind), and there are others who say they are. Certainly, the Society's status is irregular in some form or another.

Those who attend their Masses are not in necessarily in schism, even if one believes that the Society itself is; any Catholic can attend Mass at an SSPX church, but should be warned against having a schismatic mindset.

The group is named after its founder, the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.

Anyway, it seems the group's making a great deal of headway in Eastern Europe, especially in Poland and western Ukraine. I think the Society has six or so parishes in Lviv (but I could be wrong on that...it might be in all of western Ukraine).

As you will undoubtedly soon see from future posts on this thread, some people harbor a great disdain for the Society, while others more easily identify with the Society and especially those who attend SSPX Masses.

Logos Teen

Very well summarized Logos Teen. As for myself, I very strongly disagree with them, about 10 pct of the time.

The bishops and priests are clearly in schism; as for the laity, from the ones I have known that does not seem too extreme a term...
[I worry about you, kid...]
-Daniel

Teen-- I wouldn't call the Tridentine/Pre-Vatican II Mass ancient. I think it only dates back to the Council of Trent so that would put it in the 1500's. I think Eastern Liturgies have much more ancient roots, but I digress....

We have a of them (SSPX-ites) at my hometown parish. I have so many horror stories I can write a book. I can honestly say they have chased out many parishioners because of their combative nature and unChristian approach to basic social behavior.

They flock to Eastern Catholic parishes because we still have "valid Eucharist." So they come not because of the Holiness of the East or for praying and living the Liturgy, but just to recivice communion then bye bye Charlie.

They proposed to our Bishop to have a "Noon High Mass" in our church because they were unhappy with the DL. That also led to a fight over our pews and the iconostas. (We weren't supposed to have pews or chairs in our new building according to the Bishop). Thank God the bishop only laughed at thier proposal.

I think it would be healthy to refrain from letting all SSPX adherents into Eastern Churches for Liturgy. You will see that the much more successful parishes kicked them out years ago.

-uc

Since the only person with the ultimate authority to state whether or not someone is in schism from the Catholic Church is the Pope; and since both Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI have affirmed that the SSPX is in schism; I think it's fairly safe to say that they're in schism.

Hi,

If you ask the Pope (both John Paul the Great and Benedict XVI), they are in schism.

If you ask the Code of Canon Law, which excommunicates the Latin biship who has the temerity to ordain a bishop without Papal approval, as did Lefebvre, they are in schism.

If you ask me, and those who like me suffered persecution at their hand for being loyal to the Catholic Church, they are in schism.

To those who disagree with these positions, I would like to bring to memory the part of "Ecclesia Dei", in which the Servant of God, John Paul the Great said that supporting schism is schism.

Have a good day.

Shalom,
Memo

I shall have to go back and re-read the workings of the Council(s) of Constance.

Andrew

Memo,

I couldn't have said it any better.

Shalom,
-uc

As for the Society's priests and bishops as being "clearly in schism," I just don't see how anyone can draw this conclusion so easily. We all know that a person who violates Canon Law out of necessity, even if the "state of necessity" exists only in his mind, is not subject to the punishments otherwise incurred by disregarding Canon Law.

UkrainianCatholic,

The Tridentine Mass is ancient, and I can't believe you thought it was made up at the Council of Trent! This was when the Ancient Roman Mass was codified as the normal Mass for all Western Catholics, not when it was invented. The TLM is as old as the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.

Now, as far as members of the SSPX using Eastern Catholic churches to their own advantage and not because they appreciate the East - this is certainly true in many cases.

In any case, I am neither making an argument for or against the Society being in schism, only reminding everyone that it is quite a complicated issue and that many cardinals, bishops, and canon lawyers who specialize in this kind of thing disagree.

Logos Teen

Hi,


The esteemed cardinals, bishops and canon lawyers are all entitled to their opinion, of course.

Those who had to go underground to keep our Catholic faith while we were students in an SSPX-friendly high-school are entitled to ours, I think.

Shalom,
Memo

There were (and are) plenty of cardinals, bishops and canon lawyers who disagreed with Pope Paul VI's upholding of the ban on artificial contraception, but none of them had the authority to make the final decision.

Same with determining schism - we can argue till the cows come home, but it ain't our call - it's that lonely guy up in the Vatican window.

That's what being a [Roman] Catholic is all about, Charlie Brown.

The SSPX is in a particular schism called "latae sentiae ex parte excommunication", which means they weren't judged by a tribunal and the facts of their defense (subjective necessity, which is a legitimate defense under the 1983 code) were never considered.

In my opinion, they mean well, but their adherents are often quite fanatical, and some even believe the popes since Pius X to be heretical -- certainly the Novus Ordo is an abomination to them.

Also, the Tridentine formulation of the Roman Mass was begun under Pope Gregory the Great 590-604. More info: http://www.latin-mass-society.org/msshst.htm

Are the Orthodox in schism then? Why not call the Orthodox schismatics? By the reasoning of this thread, that is what they are: schismatics. They are not under the Pope, and they make no pretensions of being so.

If you are going to throw names around, at least be consistent.

If there are moves and countermoves by both the SSPX and Rome for a "reconciliation," then there must be a "separation," aka "schism!"

Amado