www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Transalpine Redemptorist

Hello,

During my discussion with a friend, he raised that SSPX does train its member for Eastern Liturgy.

He gave me address to Transalpine Redemptorist website.
http://www.redemptorists.org.uk/red/ehome.htm

It does speak about Balamand Statement as evil etc.

Does anyone has information about this?
Is the organization is in schism?
And what does the connection with SSPX?

Thank you

I would say looking over their site that they are a schismatic group, under the auspices of SSPX and as out of tune with the mind of the Church as that group.
In denouncing the Orthodox as "Schismatic", for example, they go so far to say that the Balamund agreement denies people the Bread of Life. Now the Bread of Life is generally considered as refering to the Eucharist. If they are suggesting that the Orthodox do not have a valid Eucharist they are going further than the Church ever went, even before a more ecumenical way of looking at things took hold.

Yes, the TR are a schismatic collaboration within the SSPX, they are normally bi-ritual. The Redemptorist order was involved in work with the eastern churches long before the LeFevre movement came to be, so I guess these individuals derive from that order originally. Their website is impressive, lots of great pictures but they seem to claim to continue the legacy of great Eastern Catholic hierarchs, I presume that they are exagerating to some extent.

Recently Patriarch Husar had to do a smackdown on two or three of his priests for associating with them. I cannot remember the results of it but I believe the word "excommunication" was used in the press.

Michael

Michael, I think those were priests associated with the "Society of St. Josaphat" which is an order of parish priests who are affiliated with the SSPX and the TRs, although a TR I believe was also involved.

The TR and SSJ priests are "formed" in Econe, the SSPX seminary in Switzerland. Fr. Franz Schmidberger, the previous Superior General of the SSPX, theorized that actually the Orthodox are not only schismatic, but heretical because of their failure to use the Filoque. Not the kind of people you want to see form priests to fulfill the wishes of our late great Pontiff John Paul II to restore Eastern tradition.

Thank you for all response till now.

More information will be appreciated.

Anyway, yes, I engage in discussion with a friend that maintain that the Ortodox church is indeed a schismatic.

He saw that Cyprianian view is totally not compatible with solemn pronouncement of Catholic Church.
While I myself not really understand the the Cyprianian theology, but the fact that Eastern Catholic Churches are maintaning the theology means that the theological system not in itself incompatible.

He ask if the Catholic church have document that say that Cyprianian theology is ok. I'm not aware of such document ever exist. So, if there is, that will help a lot.

Correct me if I wrong in anything since I by myself is Latin Catholic. But I'm learning alot about Eastern Churches especially from this forum.

Alfonsus,

Actually it is some of the Orthodox that hold the Cyprian view of orders, i.e go into schism/heresy and your orders are no longer valid. Catholics, Latin and Eastern, and some Orthodox hold to the Augustinian view. This why we view Orthodox sacraments as valid and the Orthodox opinion varies as to the validity of Ctaholic sacraments.

Fr. Deacon Lance

I find hard to understand how the SSPX can be schismatic for some Catholics while they now refuse to label Orthodoxy as schismatic.

The possition of traditional Catholics is quite understandable, not because of the agreement but because of the attitude of its hierarchy: not supporting Catholics's right to recover their churches in Romania, not receiving Macedonian Christians who wanted to be in communion with Rome, leaving the Belarussan faithful who were mostly Byzantine-Catholic in the past in the hands of the MP, and so on.

These communities endured horrible persecutions and now they're betrayed.

Most Orthodox Christians and Traditional Catholics hold to the view of St. Cyprian at some extent, even when Catholics put more atention about rhe matter and form to determinate the validity of a sacrament.

The possition of the Society of St. Pius does not differ a lot from that of the Orthodox. A Eucharist offered by a "schismatic" priest might fulfill all requirements to have validity, be celebrated reverently and according to tradition, but a fully true sacrament must come from the Church and the Roman Church traditionaly forbid its faithful to receive sacraments from them.

A major difference is that most living Orthodox were born into separation, while most SSPXers chose separation.

Quite. I know the Transapline Redemptorists - they're a very fine and holy community. They were originally a small group of traditionally-minded Redemptorist fathers who deplored the direction taken by their order and sought the patronage of Archbishop Lefebvre, whom they loyally defended and supported in turn. They serve some SSPX Mass centres. They adopted their bi-ritual apostolate as a consequence of having been approached by Orthodox clergy who had been rebuffed in attempts to enter communion with Rome by the normal means (the SSPX had quite properly referred these Orthodox to Rome).

MTV

MTV

I'm sure that the Transalpine Redemptorists are a community of fine and holy men , but the fact remains they are not in Communion with the Catholic Church.

Anhelyna

Dear Mexican,

SSPX is schismatic because they have willfully chosen to be in schism from their own Patriarchate.

The issue with the Orthodox is quite different.

Apart from the issues of not calling each other names such as "heretic" and "schismatic" etc., I wonder HOW are the Orthodox in "schism" at all?

Were they EVER jurisdictionally UNDER the Pope of Rome? Never!

The role of the Pope of Rome was quite different then than what it became in the Middle Ages.

This is aside from the fact that Orthodoxy considers Rome to have cut itself off from the Church by heresy.

But in terms of schism, the Orthodox were in communion with Rome, a communion that was ruptured.

Schism has to do with disobedience to one's church authorities.

Rome was "First among Equals" but was never jurisdictionally "over" any Church by the Particular Latin Church in those times.

And both Rome and Constantinople, New Rome, saw each other as EQUALS - notice the fact that Pope John VIII made sure the cathedral seats for himself and for Photios were on the SAME level.

SSPX represents a real aberration of Catholic ecclesiology that originated (and should remain in) the dark ages.

Alex

The only thing the SSPX ever did wrong was to
consecrate 3 bishops without Vatican permission.
They are attached to their ancient Western Liturgy
in the same way that the Orthodox are attached to
their ancient Eastern Liturgy. I fail to see how
that makes them a "real aberration of Catholic
ecclesiology".....................

Dear Antonius,

Are you affirming that Rome considers the SSPX to be in full communion with it and that any Catholic may attend its services as they attend the services of any other Catholic church?

I've read SSPX literature, especially on John Paul II.

If you haven't, I have.

Their views leave one in no doubt but that they consider that Pope to have been in error, that the liturgy of the Latin Church today is in error, that it denies the sacrificial reality of the Mass and other nonsense.

If one is a Catholic, one is in submission to Rome - one doesn't make accusatory statements against it affecting faith and worship.

My RC Archdiocese warns Catholics against attending SSPX services. My Patriarch has excommunicated one of his priests for refusing to stop associating with them.

Whatever they did or did not do, they are not in communion with their rightful Patriarch.

And that's not good.

Do you think it is? Or do you pretend they are somehow Catholics in good standing?

Do you think Rome is in error?

And, no, they are not attached to their liturgy as the Orthodox are to theirs.

The Orthodox ARE in full communion with their Patriarchs.

When a group of Old Believers went against liturgical reforms at the time of Patriarch Nikon, they refused to obey the Church and incurred excommunication as a result.

Those Old Believers who wish to be part of the Orthodox Church are welcome to practice their Old Rite.

Just as RC's who wish to follow their "Old Rite" may do so with the Latin Indult.

The two are therefore not comparable. One is obedient, the other is not.

Alex

Antonius,

They are a "real aberration of Catholic
ecclesiology" because while the SSPX denounces the Orthodox as "schismatics" for their refusal to obey Rome and organizes the Transalpine Redemptorists to proselytize them, it turns around and disobeys Rome itself and then cries about its excommunication.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Dear Father Deacon Lance,

After all our EC people had to put up with under the traditional RC's, these type of groups give me the "heebie-geebies."

I think there's an herbal cure for that . . .

Alex