Talk:Society of Saint Pius X
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Allies and supporters
[edit]It would be good to add information about Bishop Vigàno and Athanasius here. Eaden (talk) 17:40, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
Section Needs Work: Lifestyle and clothing amongst SSPX adherents
[edit]I'm not sure what the purpose of this section is. There's a quote by a former SSPX member complaining about female attire, and then an anecdote about a mothers in skirts. Can we either get a fuller section that gives a more holistic view of the topic or consider scrapping this section? I am not convinced from reading this section how or if people whom attend the SSPX can be said to be distinct in any particular way. --Valepio (talk) 20:46, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
- The section is worth keeping because there is a difference, which the citations show. You probably have never visited an SSPX Mass Center then nor attended any conferences of the SSPX. The difference between how those who are members of SSPX parishes versus those who attend the Novus Ordo is very noticeable.[1] There is a reason that the SSPX tells its members to avoid attending Novus Ordo churches.[2] If this group wasn't very different from the mainstream, SSPX clerics wouldn't be giving these admonitions. desmay (talk) 21:33, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Rank in size "if it were canonical"
[edit]Per WP:ABOUTSELF this claim is sourced to the WP:PRIMARY SSPX mouthpiece. It is a pointless claim; since SSPX is not canonically regular, they do not hold this distinction of size. Therefore it is inappropriate to place such a claim in the article. Apples should be measured against apples, not oranges. Elizium23 (talk) 20:22, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
- Disagree. A counterfactual can be a striking way of making a point. Example: "If ex-Catholics constituted a denomination, it would be the second largest denomination in the US." MDJH (talk) 03:39, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
Relative size of SSPX
[edit]This article has 2 different claims about the relative size of the SSPX. The last sentence of the first paragraph of the lede says: “In July 2022, the Society reached over 700 priestly members; following the Jesuits, Franciscans, Benedictines, and Augustinians, the SSPX would be the fifth largest religious congregation of ordained priests among its professed members.” The last sentence of the section entitled “SSPX today” says: “If the society's canonical situation were to be regularized, it would be the Church's 4th largest society of apostolic life (similar to a religious order, but without vows), according to the three criteria published annually in Annuario Pontificio.”
There are a number of problems with these claims:
1. The lede speaks of “the fifth largest religious congregation of ordained priests”, and “SSPX today” of the “4th largest society of apostolic life”. While the average person doesn't distinguish between kinds of “religious orders”, canon law distinguishes between institutes of consecrated life (where priests take vows) and societies of apostolic life (where priests live communally without vows). The lede seems to be talking about both kinds with its generic reference to “religious congregations”. If so, the claim is clearly false, since there are many institutes of consecrated life with more than 700 priests other than the 4 mentioned in the lede. Think Salesians of St John Bosco, Dominicans, Redemptorists, Oblates of Mary Immaculate, Holy Ghost Fathers, Society of the Divine Word. The claim in “SSPX today” is more plausible since it is limited to societies of apostolic life.
2. Even if the claim in the lede was amended to limit it to societies of apostolic life, there would still be the discrepancy between “fourth largest” and “fifth largest”.
3. Both claims seem to be supported by a footnote, but when examined closely, neither footnote turns out to be about the size of the SSPX compared to other orders of priests. In other words, no evidence is offered in support of either claim. MDJH (talk) 03:33, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
- Correct; there is no support at all for these claims; I've removed them. Elizium23 (talk) 03:53, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
"List of SSPX Priests sentenced for sexual abuse" - entire section? undue weight? agenda pushing?
[edit]Surely it is undue weight to have an entire section dedicated to this, listing every single person ever associated with the organisation who has ever been convicted? For example, on the American Democratic Party, the British Labour Party, the British National Health Service or the Grand Orient of France, it would be very easy to compile a long laundry list of people from media snipits who have belonged to those organisatons and been convicted of sexual abuse. Yet, there is no way it would ever stand to have a specific subsection where an exhaustive list is dedicated to this on those articles. JustAChurchMouse (talk) 23:07, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yeah, I don't think there needs to be a list. The section on the how the abuse crisis has also affected the SSPX should stay - as is present in most diocesan articles - but the bulleted list doesn't need to be there. ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 23:56, 7 January 2025 (UTC)