Has B-XVI formally withdrawn the excommunications and the declaration of schism???
Well, not that it is entirely the point, but I do believe that the excommunications have in fact been lifted, leading to a great controversy regarding the aforementioned Williamson. And, you may reject the opinions of the Cardinal placed in authority by the Holy Father himself, but it would not change the matter. The Pope commissioned Ecclesia Dei with its authority and when it acted it did so in his name, unless he openly countermanded it. He never did this regarding the state of the SSPX, and considering this suggesting that the opinions of the Cardinal in question can be denied by lay people in the pews sounds a bit like what those in the SSPX are themselves arguing.
And, all of this aside, the SSPX are still obviously Catholic. Their wounded relationship with Rome has not made them otherwise, or severed their responsibilities as priests and bishops to obey Rome. They are Catholics still, if bad ones. If they are not Catholic then they would not be bound in any way to answer to the Holy See, as everyone demands they do, which is itself evidence that people know that they are still in fact Catholic.
“If they are not Catholic then they would not be bound in any way to answer to the Holy See, as everyone demands they do, which is itself evidence that people know that they are still in fact Catholic.”
Faulty logic. They are ask to obey the Church if they would desire to be back in her.
“If they are not Catholic then they would not be bound in any way to answer to the Holy See, as everyone demands they do, which is itself evidence that people know that they are still in fact Catholic.”
Maybe we just aren’t speaking the same language.
If they hadn’t performed a schismatic act to begin with (invalid consecrations in direct disobedience of the Pope) - then there never would have been a split.
So - in that sense they became the “prodigal son”.
The prodigal son remained a member of the family - however - leaving the family and going “elsewhere”.
The Church would love for the son’s return.
However - the return is not without condition - and has not yet occured.
If a split didn’t exist - there would be no need for “reconciliation”.
If they were not on the “outside”, there would be no need to await their return.
The SSPX are "Catholic" only in the same sense that the Catholic baptized Fr. Martin Luther or Jean Cauvin were (i.e not at all as long as unrepentant). They should be denied the sacramental life of the Church unless and until they surrender. In better times, they should have and would have been executed. The purposeful rupture of the unity of the Church and the gross disobedience to the papal authority of John Paul II and their naked contempt for legitimate Church authority are at least as serious as the sins of userers burned at the stake after judgment by the Church's inquisitional authorities.
Dario Cardinal Castrillon de Hoyos is not and, God willing, never will be pope and he has no personal authority to countermand the papal JUDGMENT, not mere opinion, of John Paul II (who had been his patron and whom he has betrayed).
For what it may be worth, I am no fonder of Novus Ordo Masses than you may be. Nonetheless, they are legitimate Masses whatever Marcel's minions may imagine. I attend only Tridentine Masses said by the Institute of Christ the King and its local pastor with the blessings of Bishop Thomas Doran of Rockford who has long since given his permission as diocesan ordinary to ALL of his priests to say Tridentine Masses in appropriate venues. I may attend an occasional Novus Ordo on vacation or when out of town. My cultural preference for the Tridentine Rite in which I was raised does not constitute an enforceable demand on Peter's successors. Nor do the preferences of those in lesser positions of authority.
The silence of B-XVI (assuming he has been silent) is hardly what you need to justify the unsupportable assumption that he disagrees with his own decision to excommunicate Marcel and his adherents when he headed the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under John Paul II much less that he has actually reversed the judgment of John Paul II.
I asked that any claim of that reversal be documented and, given previous SSPX wars here, am not surprised that there are apparently NO SUCH documents. B-XVI has the authority to reverse those judgments now for those still living such as Williamson, Fellay, de Mallerais and Castro de Meyer's successor in Brazil (who may alone have been restored to the good graces of the Church). It would be a nevel theory that even he can lift the excommunications of the likes of dead Marcel. The schismatics and their cronies are, however, not willing to wait for formal action and wish instead to speak for B-XVI because they despise JP II's memory and they JUST KNOW they are right since the other schismatics and excommunicati agree with them. We probably have cardinals who do not believe in God. Christ never guaranteed their wisdom or infallibility. B-XVI has assumed a higher and divinely guaranteed authority just as JP II and hundreds of others before him.
The schismatic and/or excommunicated minions of the SSPX schism actually have the brazen nerve to claim to be responsible for the revival of the Tridentine Mass which is like giving John Dillinger credit for improving bank security procedures and practices, or crediting Osama bin Laden with improving airport security. The SSPX are Catholic like Comrade OBambam is an American patriot.
It ought to be noted that arguing with the SSPX schizzies is like arguing with Darwinians or single taxers or anti-American leftists or abortion lovers, i.e. a futile exercise requiring much effort for little or no positive result.
BTW, that the SSPXers demand to "negotiate" their return to the Church seems an admission that they well know that they are excommunicated. Else, what is to negotiate??? It would have been fun to see the result of them trying to pull this crap with Pius XI, Pius XII, JP I, or, ummmm, Pope St. Pius X (taking his name in vain as it were) or Leo XIII or Pius IX, etc., etc.