"I wonder how silence or timidity in the face of savage attacks is "successful" in winning back souls for Christ. I rather think it might convince onlookers of the "justice" of this schism"
I never even heard of the SSPX before I came to FR. Tabula rasa, no knowledge, no opinion.
It was watching the vicious ranting of its detractors and the calm, measured responses of its defenders that first piqued my interest in the controversy. It was clear which side was acting like liberals.
Unfortunately, seven years down the road, I'm not any closer to seeing which side is correct.
There are very strong arguments in support of the necessity of Lefebvre ordaining bishops. On the other hand, this episode hasn't played out yet, and may not in my lifetime, so I just don't know.
One thing I am sure of, though: the vituperation of some of the society's detractors does a lot to create sympathy for them, and little or no harm to them.
You are not the only one. Many defenders of the SSPX have been contacted privately by lurkers for just those reasons.
One thing I am sure of, though: the vituperation of some of the society's detractors does a lot to create sympathy for them, and little or no harm to them.
God's genius at allowing evil in order to bring about a greater good is awesome.
* It is the Catholic Church, not a Schism from the Catholic Church, which is correct. And, yes, I agree your inability to distinguish which is correct is unfortunate although I don't recall any posts from you suggesting the schism is wrong in its scandlaous behavior and charges against Pope, Council,and Mass, so, maybe you really are less conflicted than you think?