Catholics only: Opinion of the Society of Saint Pius X

[SNJ1985]

How do you feel about this group?

[7,052,770]

Incredibly negative. Satan isn't real, but they sure do personify him well.

[TJ in Oregon]

Positive but with qualifications.

First, the positive. They are actually practicing Catholics who hold to the faith, unlike so many groups who aren't in an irregular communion with the Church. They are almost unfailingly people who are living a Christian life. Despite being somewhat radical traditionalists, they've mostly kicked out the truly crazy people (like the Sedevacantists) and their current leadership seems to be more open to regularizing the Society. They can sometimes be jaded and bitter, but remember the vitriol they've had to (mostly unfairly) deal with over the course of decades. The bitterness is more often paranoia than actual hatred.

On the negative side, the Society and its members often believe that they alone saved the Tridentine form of the Mass and that Archbishop Lefebvre was justified in illicitly ordaining bishops against the pope. They need to accept that they didn't alone save it, were wrong to illicitly ordain bishops, accept the legitimacy of the Second Vatican Council (which most do anyway), and accept the Pope's authority.

I wouldn't go to an SSPX chapel for Mass unless it was the only valid option and all others were even more illicit or unless they were regularized with the Church, but I wish them well and hope to see them fully regularized in the near future. Christendom needn't be divided over differences so petty as those between the SSPX and the hierarchy of the Catholic Church.

[DC Al Fine]

Not a Catholic, but I'll offer my two cents anyway.

I'm torn in that I support their traditional temperament and conservatism, but vehemently oppose holding church services in non-vernacular language.

[Classic Conservative]

As somebody who attends the Extraordinary Form, on a regular basis and who has actually researched the FSSPX recently. I have numerous thoughts on the Lefebvrists. Firstly, I do firmly wish for the SSPX, the one million Traditional catholics they represent and the over 630 priests in the order. Plus the numerous orders of brothers and religious sisters they have in their ranks. In regards to the Econe consecrations, I do disapprove of their happenings but I understand why they happened. I do hope that Bernard Fellay is consecrated a bishop for the different fraternities that support the Latin Mass whether it's the FSSP or ICKSP. At this point, I do see full communion with Rome happening within the next decade as we can see with the attempts that Rome have made with Econe, including recognition of marriages and other sacraments. To TJ, the Society does respect the Pope's authority and Archbishop Lefebrve said that was what separated his society from the Palmerian Church and other sedevaticanist churches.

[VPH]

Not a big fan. In Kansas, the Mt. Mary's community produces far right politicians and strange events. I think the Society of Saint Pius X is far too repressive in nature.

[Simfan34]

Schismatics, automatic HP. I won't pretend to be an expert on them but while ,I'm all with them in terms of rejecting liturgical wishy-washiness and a "reform of the reform", "good intentions" are not enough in my book to justify de facto rejecting the authority of the Pope and liberally accusing other Catholics of heresy.

[CMB222]

Schismatics, automatic HP. I won't pretend to be an expert on them but while ,I'm all with them in terms of rejecting liturgical wishy-washiness and a "reform of the reform", "good intentions" are not enough in my book to justify de facto rejecting the authority of the Pope and liberally accusing other Catholics of heresy.

[TJ in Oregon]

Schismatics, automatic HP. I won't pretend to be an expert on them but while ,I'm all with them in terms of rejecting liturgical wishy-washiness and a "reform of the reform", "good intentions" are not enough in my book to justify de facto rejecting the authority of the Pope and liberally accusing other Catholics of heresy.

I'd agree, except your criticisms don't actually apply to the SSPX. They aren't schismatic. You're pummeling a straw man.

[Illiniwek]

Schismatics, automatic HP. I won't pretend to be an expert on them but while ,I'm all with them in terms of rejecting liturgical wishy-washiness and a "reform of the reform", "good intentions" are not enough in my book to justify de facto rejecting the authority of the Pope and liberally accusing other Catholics of heresy.

[Georg Ebner]

Leftextreme revolutionaries.

(They are not realizing, that the world they are defending - GregorVII, Gothics, Aristotelism,... - were the first revolutions in Europe, beginning The Autumn of the MiddleAges. GomezDavila: "Thomists and Marxists can interchange their disciples.")


Nontheless together with some byzantine monks and very few oldlutheran quietists the only relicts of Christianity, that can be taken serious to a certain extent.

[Small L]

I am not a big fan, and would never attend one of their masses except as an absolute last resort. I much prefer the FSSP.