Replies

And that remark, in turn, raises questions about the good treatment a regularized Society of St. Pius X might expect to receive in the Archdiocese of Boston.

Would either of you care to post the 'teachings' of the sspx on the documents of Vatican Council II? We would all be interested in gaining a deeper understanding of what has been taught to sspx members over the past 40 years.

I am not an SSPXer, so I have had no first hand knowlege of “the ‘teachings’ of the sspx on the documents of Vatican Council II”.

That said, the parishs in which I have lived for most of the last forty-five years taught me that the documents of Vatican II had:
Outlawed Latin;
Required Communion rails to be removed;
Required standing for Communion;
Required the priest to “face the people” during Mass;
Recommended/required that Traditional Hymns/organ music be discarded in favor of modern contemporary music with guitars, tambourines and pianos;
Required “grip and grin” sessions before and during Mass;
Recommended Communion in the hand;
Recommended that people not kneel at Mass;
Allowed liturgical dancers (or liturgical movement, whatever that is, I am afraid to ask);
and other things too numerous to mention, but you get the idea.

All of these things are BOLD FACED LIES by clerics in communion with their bishops who are in communion with Rome.
And this guy (O’Malley)has the gall to disparage the “caliber of the leadership” of the SSPX folks?

I have no affiliation or correspondence with the SSPX and no care to repeat their teachings, or copy and paste their web site.

Regardless of what they may have said, I would think a Catholic should take far greater offense at what some other "separated brethren" may have been taught about the Immaculate Conception and the role of the Papacy, let alone the sacramental validity of the Roman Canon, than at anyone who might criticize some aspect of some document of Vatican II.

But that's just me. Perhaps you sing hymns related to teachings from Inter Mirifica at the Masses you attend?