Anyone here an ex-SSPX parishioner?

[Geremia19]

Has anyone here ceased being a parishioner at an SSPX church and returned to an “Ecclesia Dei” parish (FSSP, ICRSS, diocesan TLM, etc.)? If so, why?

 

[Ioannes_L]

If you don’t mind me asking, why do you want to know this?

 

[Geremia19]

In light of Cdl. Burke’s comments that the SSPX is schismatic (I don’t think they are, considering they have faculties for absolving penitents and witnessing marriage), I’m wondering if any ex-SSPX parishioners left because they noticed schismatic/cliquey tendencies among SSPX parishioners.

 

[commenter]

If you don’t mind me asking, why do you want to know this?

My preference is threads elicit only positive reasons why someone wants to move to the destination. They may find good stuff specific to their family needs in the diocese, or some Catholic or Protestant new home, describe that.

I would rather not see negatives elicited about the place they left, whether it us SSPX, Lutherans, or wherever. Those threads seem unfairs it because the other side isn’t fully represented here, and posters are anonymous. It sets up a negative slugging war, shedding heat but no light.

 

[Hoosier-Daddy]

There are no sspx parishes to be a parishioner of. It’s important to get this semantic correct. Everyone is a parishioner of their geographical parish. One may attend another parish or in the sspx case another chapel. There are attendees who then choose to attend other options instead of he sspx.

 

[ProVobis]

Maybe the question should be whether they once attended FSSPX Masses exclusively.

 

[Saxum]

I attended an SSPX chapel. I left because I realised that they’re de facto schismatic. I came to this conclusion because they refuse to interact or associate with the local Catholic population; in other words, they reject the authority of the local Bishop. They also set themselves up as the judges of what is authentically Catholic. They see themselves as the faithful remnant of true Catholics who will eventually save corrupt Rome; in other words, they reject the authority of the Pope and make themselves his judge.

 

[Ioannes_L]

Honestly, from my personal experience, the only ones that left the chapel I attend did so after Archbishop Fellay went to Rome to talk with Benedict XVI. They considered this a betrayal towards the history of the Society and the legacy of Archbishop Lefebvre, so they left and broke into small groups, often referred as the “Resistance”.

 

[commenter]

If you choose to, post a few lines about what you like about attending SSPX. I’m curious about how much it is based on SSPX in general, and how much that specific chapel. I am interested in what positive features keep you there, rather than what you don’t like about your diocese, V2, etc.

Or course you can post whatever you like.

 

[ZMystiCat]

I would rather not see negatives elicited about the place they left

I think it would be very difficult to get a fully-positive answer regarding why someone made a major religious transition whether internally or externally. There’s always an element of at least disagreement.

With that said, I agree that leaving somewhere just because of negatives is bad. That’ll leave the person with nowhere to go except inside themselves, where they’ll soon come to hate themselves as well.

 

[ZMystiCat]

They also set themselves up as the judges of what is authentically Catholic. They see themselves as the faithful remnant of true Catholics who will eventually save corrupt Rome; in other words, they reject the authority of the Pope and make themselves his judge.

This all sounds very familiar…

 

[Ioannes_L]

If you choose to, post a few lines about what you like about attending SSPX.

Are you talking to me?
If so, forgive me friend but I’ll decline from your offering.

The time I spent here reading and discussing, with some eventual flags, made/is making me more suspicious and reserved.

 

[Aquinas11]

they reject the authority of the Pope

100% false.

 

[Hoosier-Daddy]

I suppose it depends on the area but in my area the Sspx also do not “mix” with the general Catholic population but who can blame them really. There is no out reached hand by the rest of the Catholic community. In fact there is much disdain and ridicule. Many times the bishops range from outright hostile to almost unaware.

 

[Fauken]

I refuse to attend an SSXP “mass”. I will never participate in their schism.

They’re not in schism, they’re canonically irregular. And it’s Mass, not “mass”. Their Masses are valid (though illicit), as are their Holy Orders.

 

[Theresalux]

Canonically irregular? Meaning what? That they largely refuse the authority of the Holy Father? And illicit masses, aka “forbidden” by definition. Yeah that’s morally dangerous territory. They knowingly perform illicit masses with null holy orders? Sacrilege!

How are they any better than Luther? He broke from the Church because he view it as being corrupted…right? Is this not what SSPX is doing? Claiming to preserving “real” faith because apparently Mother Church is being led astray. I don’t like every thing that has happened. Vatican 2 did a number on the Holy Church, but in Gods timing we will rebound. Did not Jesus say about His Church that “the gates of hell will NOT prevail”? Oh SSPX… ye of little faith. Wandering off like a child who thinks he knows better than his parent.

 

[Fauken]

That they largely refuse the authority of the Holy Father?

They believe the Pope is overstepping his authority.

And illicit masses, aka “forbidden” by definition.

No arguments there (although you may attend one if there’s none near by in good standing, and I don’t know about you, but I’d attend an SSPX Mass before an Orthodox one). That’s not what I mainly took issue with. What I took real issue with is:

They knowingly perform illicit masses with null holy orders? Sacrilege!

Their Holy Orders are not null. Otherwise Pope Francis would not have given them the faculties to hear Confessions. They are 100% valid. Whether they’re licit or not, however, is another matter.

He broke from the Church because he view it as being corrupted…right? Is this not what SSPX is doing?

They’re not. They hold Pope Francis as Pope. They believe he has the charism of infallibility.

Did not Jesus say about His Church that “the gates of hell will NOT prevail”? Oh SSPX… ye of little faith. Wandering off like a child who thinks he knows better than his parent.

He did. The SSPX argue that recent Popes have been trying to force that which is, in their eyes, optional (since they believe Vatican II is pastoral and not an ecumenical council) as required.

 

[Saxum]

100% false

They pray for the Pope during their Masses but they don’t follow his authority. They reject an Ecumenical Council, the Ordinary Form of the Mass, and most of the post-conciliar papal acts. If they were obedient to the Pope, they’d be like the FSSP.

 

[Saxum]

Here’s another issue, which really bothered me when I attended the SSPX chapel. Since they reject Vatican II, they also reject everything that is based on Vatican II. This effectively means they reject the teachings of St John Paul II since his entire papacy was one long implementation of the Council.

And since they disagree with some of the things St John Paul II did, they expressed doubts about the validity of his canonisation. I’ve heard that criticism from the pulpit.

 

[Hoosier-Daddy]

Many chapels are different. This sounds completely different than the one near me. That stuff is almost never discussed. In fact I’d say there’s more dissent and disobedience in my regular parish. Now regular attendees might he a different story because sspx types tend to be uber conservative. Like I am. But in my regular parish I’ve had priests advise birth control. A priest left 5 years ago to marry a man and was given a standing ovation etc. So the spirit if disobedience is not as contained as you think. Any Catholics you know disagree with say contraception, abortion, marriage…?