"Seperate heirarchy, seperate catechism, seperate Mass, ..."
True of the Neos, not true of the SSPX. The catechism? The same the Church used for centuries. The Mass? The same the Church used for centuries. The hierarchy? The same Rome gave them until 1988 and even then only in a state of necessity, not a total change of theology, liturgy, catechism and belief.
From "The Jews are cursed" to "the N.O. Mass is evil" to their sspx marriage tribunals, the sspx is a heretical, and schismatic collection of antisemites and theological blockheads and, back when he was a Cardinal, Ratzinger publicly noted their intellectual and theological defencies vis a vis the Mass. He used a phrase dimplomatically that really parsed as "they are idiots"
Nice try but schismatic agitprop doesn't work with real Catholics
You need to study the SSPX history a little more for some of these points, for others you are playing semantics."Seperate heirarchy, seperate catechism, seperate Mass, ..."True of the Neos, not true of the SSPX. The catechism? The same the Church used for centuries. The Mass? The same the Church used for centuries. The hierarchy? The same Rome gave them until 1988 and even then only in a state of necessity, not a total change of theology, liturgy, catechism and belief.
You cannot deny the SSPX is using a different Mass Rite than the current normative Rite. Your basis for your argument is that the Rite they use, which you must admit is different than the current normative one, is one that was used previously. The Neocatechumenal Way could try to make a similar argument, that their Rite harkens back to less formal days of the early Church. It's still a fact that the Neocatechumenal Way's Rite is different than the approved Rite, and its still a fact that the SSPX refuses to use the current normative Rite of the Mass.
Re hierarchy: I assume you are willing to concede they have a separate hierarchy now, and that this has been true since 1988. However, the SSPX was setting themselves up outside the normal hierarchy long before the Consecrations. That is not always a problem, many orders have separate hierarchies. However, at times it can become a matter of grave concern when that separate hierarchy begins to move them away from the body of the Church. It appears to me this is happening with the Neocatechumenal Way, and it also appeared to me long ago that the SSPX began preparing its adherents for schism long before that schism occurred. You can differ with me on the last point, and it can't exactly be proven in a court of law. However, it is quite plain that both organizations have hierarchies separate from the ordinary hierarchy. Both can stand alone if they decide to.
Re catechism, they may have used a traditional catechism, but again, it had to be specific ones (pre '62). Moreover, in their their teaching from it followed their own program. Ask someone who was SSPX at the time what the catechism teaching was like. Even today, a rejection of the post '62 catechisms is a part of SSPX doctrine.
It has never been acceptable to justify disobedience by saying "the same as the Church used for centuries." The Orthdox could justify their split by saying their belief was what they'd used for centuries. The Old Catholics could justify their split by saying that their rejection of Papal infallibility was the same as their belief had been for centuries. Fact is, one cannot simply justify disobedience by pointing to something done for a long time. In general, the SSPX has much better arguments than this one.
And regardless, the fact remains that IMHO the Neocatechumenal Way is currently very near the slippery slope that the SSPX fell off of.
patent