Any SSPX "converts" to Rome out there?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ks_catholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Why is that an odd thing to say? The SSPX itself has admitted that there are “disputed doctrinal issues” between its beliefs and those of Catholics still adherent to Rome.
(Quote from ""Press Release from the General Superior of the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X)
It’s odd to say that SSPX chapels are off-limits to Catholics because, as I said, the only people who go to SSPX chapels, as well as all of the priests at those chapels, are Catholics.

The “disputed doctrinal issues” you refer to are problems the SSPX has with the documents of Vatican II. Since Vatican II did not teach any new dogma, the disputes are over non-dogmatic doctrine in which, specifically, the SSPX believes that the documents of Vatican II in some cases teach doctrine which is the opposite of the teaching of the Church on the same subject before the council. The SSPX wishes for these apparent contradictions to be resolved by an authoritative interpretation of the documents of the council by the Holy See that specifically addresses the apparent contradictions.

Now it is by no means only the SSPX that would like to see these apparent contradictions addressed by the Holy See, but it is only the SSPX that is tipping over the apple cart about it.
 
It’s odd to say that SSPX chapels are off-limits to Catholics because, as I said, the only people who go to SSPX chapels, as well as all of the priests at those chapels, are Catholics.

The “disputed doctrinal issues” you refer to are problems the SSPX has with the documents of Vatican II. Since Vatican II did not teach any new dogma, the disputes are over non-dogmatic doctrine in which, specifically, the SSPX believes that the documents of Vatican II in some cases teach doctrine which is the opposite of the teaching of the Church on the same subject before the council. The SSPX wishes for these apparent contradictions to be resolved by an authoritative interpretation of the documents of the council by the Holy See that specifically addresses the apparent contradictions.

Now it is by no means only the SSPX that would like to see these apparent contradictions addressed by the Holy See, but it is only the SSPX that is tipping over the apple cart about it.
Thank you for clarifying the details, but as said before, it isn’t proper for Catholics to go to a chapel that has doctrinal differences with Rome. Let those in authority hash out the fine points. We are foot soldiers, and should not give support to a potentially schismatic group.
 
When I converted to Catholicism in 1977, one thing that attracted me was the sense of history, of connection to the ages, of doing what the faithful had been doing for centuries; and it seemed to me that nearly everyone else in the Church was rushing headlong the other way, scattering vestments, monstrances, hymnals and prayer books behind them as they went in desperate quest of ugly burlap banners, copies of Kumbaya, and the trendiest heresies. The Diocese of Charlotte’s education office even sent out tape sets that explicitly contradicted the Council of Trent! It was easy to think, in those days of swimming against the current and trying to preserve a few of the beauties of worship and art which were despised or ignored because they were old, and the inerrant, though vague, “spirit of Vatican II” mandated that we throw out everything old, no matter how uplifting, and embrace everything new, like clown masses, that the Church had lost her way, or been hijacked by modernists, as the council had allegedly been.
In this frame of mind, attending a week-long Ignatan retreat hosted by the SSPX in Ridgefield in 1980 was like a revelation. I had never in my life attended a Tridentine Mass, and the one that ended the retreat is still one of the most profounly moving liturgies I have ever attended. I was hooked. Here, it seemed, was the Church of the Ages I had sought in my home parish, only to find wishy-washy priests and the rather flat, everyday prose of the Novus Ordo.
However, none of the trappings, the Latin and Gregorian Chant and wonderfully contemplative liturgy, could mask forever the basic contradiction that you can’t have traditional Catholicism in opposition to the Pope and virtually the whole Church. Plus I noted disturbing trends of paranoia and anti-semitism in the Society, and eventually even reading many defenses and meeting Archbishop Lefebvre himself, I couldn’t stay. But returning to Catholicism, in full communion with the Pope and the bishops, has been a long, circuitous route, with many bizarre twists and turns irrelevant here. Reading a book called The Pope, the Council, and the Mass,
Very good post. Your experience closely parallels my own. After the post VII abuses became intolerable, we began attending an SSPX chapel. There we found the reverence and fervency that had seemingly departed from the NO Church. Excellent priests and committed,devout faithful. What could be wrong? For five years we traveled long distances and sacrificed a parish life in order to practice a truer version of the ancient faith. But as time went by, with no moves by either the Vatican or SSPX to resolve their differences, we realized that if one was not in union with the Pope and the Magisterium, one could not truly call one’sself “Catholic.” So we returned to our NO parish, with great misgivings, in the hope that the destruction would be halted and the faith restored. We have great hopes that the Vatican and the SSPX will finally reconcile and that the Church will finally make use of the great gifts possessed by the SSPX.
 
That last one’s an especially good point, TrueLight. I’d rather go to an Ordinary Form mass that isn’t terribly traditional over an SSPX mass that is steeped in Latin and incense. Why? Because of obedience to my bishop and the desire to avoid the scandal of giving wind in the sails of a potentially schismatic group.

Obedience is an act of the will. The availability of a beautiful Extraordinary Form mass in my area is a circumstance, not an act of my will. (Heck, maybe it’s penance for me to hear a Marty Haugen tune! JK)
I have at least 4 EF masses I can attend on any given Sunday, but this shows just how unique the SSPX situation is - just the fact that you can attend when there are no other traditional mass options.
 
I’m just wondering if anybody here used to adhere to the SSPX arguments and now believes in the licitness of the Novus Ordo. If so, what brought you back?

My family used to go back & forth between the Novus Ordo and Tridentine rite Mass every other weekend, but husband now attends SSPX chapel exclusively. It’s been very difficult for our marriage & kids.

Thanks much.
Yes, I bought into it hook, line and sinker, and stayed with them for a long time. From there, it didn’t take much to make the leap to the sedevacantists.

What brought me back? My conscience. No peace. It took years. Once the first dice fell, the others started collapsing rapidly. Also, reading books about church history and previous popes.

I haven’t read all of the responses here, but I see that someone mentioned reading James Likoudis’ book. I read that and it is a good book, but reading the history of the Church and the popes was what did it for me.

For a long time I sat on the fence, and then I guess Our Lord and His Blessed Mother finally had pity on me and gave me the shove I needed.

KsCatholic, I feel for you. Your husband has been sucked into quicksand. Once you allow their propanganda to grab hold, only the grace of God can draw you out. My advice to you is to pray and pray for your husband. If you think he will be open to an open and honest talk, then do so, but do not argue with him. There is something that grabs hold of these people that dismisses any type of reasonable and rational discussion. They have canned and rote responses to everything.

Humility and obedience - not my will but Thine. What arrogance and pride to think that I ever knew better than the Church! My own personal “non serviam”.
 
I have at least 4 EF masses I can attend on any given Sunday, but this shows just how unique the SSPX situation is - just the fact that you can attend when there are no other traditional mass options.
Maybe I misunderstood the previous post. Are you saying that if someone prefers the EF but one is not offered nearby, then it is OK to go to the SSPX chapel, rather than the nearby OF that is in full union with Rome?
 
Maybe I misunderstood the previous post. Are you saying that if someone prefers the EF but one is not offered nearby, then it is OK to go to the SSPX chapel, rather than the nearby OF that is in full union with Rome?
According to the Vatican, if you want to attend the Traditional Mass due to a deep love and affection for it, and there are no approved Traditional Masses offered in your area, then you can atend at a SSPX Chapel. You may receive Holy Communion. The Vatican does not reccomend that you do so on a permanent or regular basis however, due to the possibility of developing a schismatic mentality.

Even if there is a licit Ordinary Form Mass available, you can still go to te SSPX if for the listed above reasons…
 
Maybe I misunderstood the previous post. Are you saying that if someone prefers the EF but one is not offered nearby, then it is OK to go to the SSPX chapel, rather than the nearby OF that is in full union with Rome?
In 2002, a letter was sent to the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei which asked the following three questions:


  1. *]Can I fulfill my Sunday obligation by attending a Pius X Mass?
    *]Is it a sin for me to attend a Pius X Mass?
    *]Is it a sin for me to contribute to the Sunday collection a Pius X Mass?

    The questions were answered by Msgr. Camille Perl, Secretary of Ecclesia Dei as follows:

    1. *]In the strict sense you may fulfill your Sunday obligation by attending a Mass celebrated by a priest of the Society of St. Pius X.
      *]We have already told you that we cannot recommend your attendance at such a Mass and have explained the reason why. If your primary reason for attending were to manifest your desire to separate yourself from communion with the Roman Pontiff and those in communion with him, it would be a sin. If your intention is simply to participate in a Mass according to the 1962 Missal for the sake of devotion, this would not be a sin.
      *]It would seem that a modest contribution to the collection at Mass could be justified.

      Here is a link to the full communication:
      latinmas.s701.sureserver.com/perl-011803.htm
 
In 2002, a letter was sent to the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei which asked the following three questions:


  1. *]Can I fulfill my Sunday obligation by attending a Pius X Mass?
    *]Is it a sin for me to attend a Pius X Mass?
    *]Is it a sin for me to contribute to the Sunday collection a Pius X Mass?

    The questions were answered by Msgr. Camille Perl, Secretary of Ecclesia Dei as follows:

    1. *]In the strict sense you may fulfill your Sunday obligation by attending a Mass celebrated by a priest of the Society of St. Pius X.
      *]We have already told you that we cannot recommend your attendance at such a Mass and have explained the reason why. If your primary reason for attending were to manifest your desire to separate yourself from communion with the Roman Pontiff and those in communion with him, it would be a sin. If your intention is simply to participate in a Mass according to the 1962 Missal for the sake of devotion, this would not be a sin.
      *]It would seem that a modest contribution to the collection at Mass could be justified.

      Here is a link to the full communication:
      latinmas.s701.sureserver.com/perl-011803.htm

    1. Interesting indeed.
 
Glad to see Will S post the quotes from Msgr Perl. I used to go to Post Falls ID and if fact met Abp Lefebvre. He was there for Confirmations and first Communions in 1980. Three of my 7 kids were Confirmed by him.

I returned to the church in 1988 after the “excommunications”. It was a heart-breaking experience for my family. Since then we have fought the good fight for the 1962 Mass and have been successful here in western Washington.

Last Sunday, when we went to Portland, OR we tried to make it to the weekly TLM at St. Birgitta’s but missed the turn off and got lost. So we went to Our Lady of Fatima chapel(SSPX) and attended the low Mass there. Met some old friends there and had a very enjoyable day.

I pray for a “just” reconciliation and soon for the SSPX.
 
I have never attended an SSPX mass, nor to I have plans to, but I’ll still say that they are REAL Catholics as opposed to the multitudes within the Catholic Church who are pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, pro-sex outside of marriage, pro-divorce, pro-contraception, pro-womens ordination, deny that the Eucharist is the true body of Christ, deny the sacrament of penance, have no time for adoration or the rosary, etc, etc.
 
How interesting.
  • The SSPX is not in full communion
  • The OF is a perfectly valid mass
  • If one cannot find a traditional mass in the neighborhod, it’s okay to go to an SSPX chapel? Why not go to an OF?
These are mixed messages. Just like the phrase valid but illicit.

That’s why so many traditional folks borderline support the SSPX.
This why you should listen to your priest and not the typical poster on this forum.
 
I have never attended an SSPX mass, nor to I have plans to, but I’ll still say that they are REAL Catholics as opposed to the multitudes within the Catholic Church who are pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, pro-sex outside of marriage, pro-divorce, pro-contraception, pro-womens ordination, deny that the Eucharist is the true body of Christ, deny the sacrament of penance, have no time for adoration or the rosary, etc, etc.
Very well said Seamus L. The priests and parishioners of the SSPX are one of the main reasons I converted from, well…nothing really, to traditional Catholicism a few years ago. They have a strong faith and a strong distinction between right and wrong, combined with a real aura of serene happiness. Yes, they are strict in their philosophies, teachings and expectations but with virtually no religous background whatsoever that is just what I needed. Due to my many weaknesses & faults I simply would not have lasted in the “please yourself, be good and everyone goes to heaven” style of the modern church.

I am now a rare Catholic who has never attended a NO mass, nor do I intend to, but I have had some interesting discussions with a couple of NO friends. They go to mass occasionally when there is nothing else on, they did not know of the true presence, one doesn’t believe in Hell & doesn’t mention the Devil as she thinks it will scare her children and they are both pro-contraception. If this is the modern way it seems to me to be a bit wishy-washy.

And, I still find it strange that we have had Popes, Bishops & Priests doing and saying things which are clearly against the teachings of the church but it is the SSPX who are still not in full communion with Rome because they are…well…Catholic.

However, in my short time on this site I must admit there seems to be many ‘modern’ Catholics with a strong & devout faith and I certainly admire you for that. In Australia this doesn’t seem as evident, and some of the crazy, liberal ideas I have seen from modern Australian Catholics is frightening, and clearly not Catholic.
 
Very well said Seamus L. The priests and parishioners of the SSPX are one of the main reasons I converted from, well…nothing really, to traditional Catholicism a few years ago. They have a strong faith and a strong distinction between right and wrong, combined with a real aura of serene happiness. Yes, they are strict in their philosophies, teachings and expectations but with virtually no religous background whatsoever that is just what I needed. Due to my many weaknesses & faults I simply would not have lasted in the “please yourself, be good and everyone goes to heaven” style of the modern church.

I am now a rare Catholic who has never attended a NO mass, nor do I intend to, but I have had some interesting discussions with a couple of NO friends. They go to mass occasionally when there is nothing else on, they did not know of the true presence, one doesn’t believe in Hell & doesn’t mention the Devil as she thinks it will scare her children and they are both pro-contraception. If this is the modern way it seems to me to be a bit wishy-washy.

And, I still find it strange that we have had Popes, Bishops & Priests doing and saying things which are clearly against the teachings of the church but it is the SSPX who are still not in full communion with Rome because they are…well…Catholic.

However, in my short time on this site I must admit there seems to be many ‘modern’ Catholics with a strong & devout faith and I certainly admire you for that. In Australia this doesn’t seem as evident, and some of the crazy, liberal ideas I have seen from modern Australian Catholics is frightening, and clearly not Catholic.
However, this is not to say that all NO Catholics teach lessons that are not in communion with the Church. By the way if what you are teaching is that there is a Pope currently that is teaching something that is not in Communion with the Church than I would ask for your example so we can discuss because I think maybe you have had a bit of the kool-aid.

For instance do you know that Franciscans while having given birth to the Charismatic movement still hold Obedience to the Will of God as seen through the Magisterium as one of their Rules of Order?
 
Thanks, Hosemonkey (I laugh as I type your screen name ;)) for your honesty and sharing your experience. I too hope for unity in the church.

Lormar – thanks for your story and advice. Please offer a prayer for our family if you are able.
 
Thanks, Hosemonkey (I laugh as I type your screen name ;)) for your honesty and sharing your experience. I too hope for unity in the church.

Lormar – thanks for your story and advice. Please offer a prayer for our family if you are able.
Very willingly will I pray for you and your family, ks! In fact, I will offer my Mass and Holy Communion for you and your family tomorrow.

Just remember: don’t argue with him. It is pointless. Win him to the Truth with love and “kill” him with kindness!

If you have any other questions or problems, please PM me. I do have a lot of experience with these people and, if I can, I will help you.

God bless you!
 
However, this is not to say that all NO Catholics teach lessons that are not in communion with the Church. By the way if what you are teaching is that there is a Pope currently that is teaching something that is not in Communion with the Church than I would ask for your example so we can discuss because I think maybe you have had a bit of the kool-aid.

For instance do you know that Franciscans while having given birth to the Charismatic movement still hold Obedience to the Will of God as seen through the Magisterium as one of their Rules of Order?
Sorry about the delay in replying but I don’t get a chance to look on this site every day. Firstly I’m not a theologian so I’m not teaching anything, and I’m sorry but I don’t know what you mean by kool-aid. I’m just a dumb Aussie. 🙂

All I’m saying is that I have been taught a traditional Catholic catechism that is in line with current Catholic teachings, and we are urged by our priests to follow them. However I am also aware that in Australia at least a lot of people who call themselves Catholics do not follow these teachings. A google search will find Catholics who support just about anything that is in total opposition to Catholic teaching. A classic, and sad, example is “Catholics for choice”, a group of Catholics who support abortion. Seamus L has listed others.
 
Sorry about the delay in replying but I don’t get a chance to look on this site every day. Firstly I’m not a theologian so I’m not teaching anything, and I’m sorry but I don’t know what you mean by kool-aid. I’m just a dumb Aussie. 🙂

All I’m saying is that I have been taught a traditional Catholic catechism that is in line with current Catholic teachings, and we are urged by our priests to follow them. However I am also aware that in Australia at least a lot of people who call themselves Catholics do not follow these teachings. A google search will find Catholics who support just about anything that is in total opposition to Catholic teaching. A classic, and sad, example is “Catholics for choice”, a group of Catholics who support abortion. Seamus L has listed others.
And you will also find that those groups are very small. Drinking the Kool-Aid is a slang term to one that drinks poison within a cult. It has to do with an American cult who ended their lives tragically following their leaders to their deaths. Something like SSPX can often be even more dangerous as it puts one’s soul danger by teaching (I know YOU are not doing the teaching but the Order is) such heresies such as Sedevacantism. This is what SSPX believes and this is why they are out of Communion with Rome. I would say and recommend that you could get the same things from an FSSP (same philosophies without the Sedevacantism) and not put your soul in danger. Catholics for Choice is not a Catholic group and has been spoken out against by the Bishops. Dignity USA is a group that has been barred from meeting on any Catholic Church property in the USA and has taken to meeting in the UCC while still calling themselves Catholic. These people simply are not Catholic. Neither are Sedevacantists. Please find your obedience within the Magisterium.
 
And you will also find that those groups are very small. Drinking the Kool-Aid is a slang term to one that drinks poison within a cult. It has to do with an American cult who ended their lives tragically following their leaders to their deaths. Something like SSPX can often be even more dangerous as it puts one’s soul danger by teaching (I know YOU are not doing the teaching but the Order is) such heresies such as Sedevacantism. This is what SSPX believes and this is why they are out of Communion with Rome. I would say and recommend that you could get the same things from an FSSP (same philosophies without the Sedevacantism) and not put your soul in danger. Catholics for Choice is not a Catholic group and has been spoken out against by the Bishops. Dignity USA is a group that has been barred from meeting on any Catholic Church property in the USA and has taken to meeting in the UCC while still calling themselves Catholic. These people simply are not Catholic. Neither are Sedevacantists. Please find your obedience within the Magisterium.
The SSPX are sedevacantists?
 
And you will also find that those groups are very small. Drinking the Kool-Aid is a slang term to one that drinks poison within a cult. It has to do with an American cult who ended their lives tragically following their leaders to their deaths. Something like SSPX can often be even more dangerous as it puts one’s soul danger by teaching (I know YOU are not doing the teaching but the Order is) such heresies such as Sedevacantism. This is what SSPX believes and this is why they are out of Communion with Rome. I would say and recommend that you could get the same things from an FSSP (same philosophies without the Sedevacantism) and not put your soul in danger. Catholics for Choice is not a Catholic group and has been spoken out against by the Bishops. Dignity USA is a group that has been barred from meeting on any Catholic Church property in the USA and has taken to meeting in the UCC while still calling themselves Catholic. These people simply are not Catholic. Neither are Sedevacantists. Please find your obedience within the Magisterium.
I would like to clarify quiet clearly that SSPX does not teach sedevacantism nor believe in it. They teach that the Pope is a true and valid Pope and the legitimate head of the Church. They just don’t always agree with the Pope and disagree with the direction the Popes have taken the church over the last 40 or so years. In fact we are instructed by our Priests to pray for the Pope daily, using his name, and most families I know do just that when we pray the rosary.

Here is a link to their official position on sedevacantism; sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q15_sedevacantists.htm

I quote from that reference: This being so, we ought not to associate with, or, receive the sacraments from them, most especially if they set up sedevacantism as a certitude which all have to accept.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top