Are masses run by the SSPX acceptable?

  • Thread starter Thread starter hockeyfighter21
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

hockeyfighter21

Guest
I am running into some confusion on this issue and I apologize if it has been already addressed. Is going to a mass run by a SSPX priest considered a mortal sin even if there is a different mass in full communion with the Vatican in the area? For example, if i prefer the traditional mass in a certain area and there is a SSPX mass and a Novus Ordo mass going on and I choose the SSPX mass, is that a grave matter and therefore a mortal sin?
 
40.png
hockeyfighter21:
Are Masses run by the SSPX acceptable?
Click to expand...
in my experience they are more acceptable than the Masses “run” by the avg. NO priests.
 
hockeyfighter21 said:
For example, if i prefer the traditional mass in a certain area and there is a SSPX mass and a Novus Ordo mass going on and I choose the SSPX mass, is that a grave matter and therefore a mortal sin?
Click to expand...
I believe the answer is that unless you are attending for the expressed purpose of being in schism with the Catholic Church, then no, it is not a mortal sin. Decide for yourself as there is not unbiased opinion here. At the top of this forum there are the Church documents linked, but here is a cheater.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=269697

The last on is of specific interest an is a recent letter.

unavoce.org/resources/protocol-53999/
 
hockeyfighter21 said:
I am running into some confusion on this issue and I apologize if it has been already addressed. Is going to a mass run by a SSPX priest considered a mortal sin even if there is a different mass in full communion with the Vatican in the area? For example, if i prefer the traditional mass in a certain area and there is a SSPX mass and a Novus Ordo mass going on and I choose the SSPX mass, is that a grave matter and therefore a mortal sin?
Click to expand...
No that is not a sin to go to the SSPX Mass. When I was at the seminary, they never called it a sin either.

I would say that it is commendable. Archbishop Lefebvre has been greatly slandered in past decades. He only wished to preserve what He was taught and to worship in the way of our forefathers.

Some good reads if you’re interested:

amazon.com/dp/0935952136?tag=acatlif-20&camp=213381&creative=390973&linkCode=as4&creativeASIN=0935952136&adid=0MVTGSSVKTMYGM7CD3ZJ&

amazon.com/dp/093595211X?tag=acatlif-20&camp=213381&creative=390973&linkCode=as4&creativeASIN=093595211X&adid=15EYB2NCS7GYP9F6PHYH&
 
You may, indeed, attend an SSPX Mass.

Up in the stickies, Msgr Perl said the following: *It is precisely because of this schismatic mentality that this Pontifical Commission has consistently discouraged the faithful from attending Masses celebrated under the aegis of the Society of St. Pius X. *

Take that for what it’s worth. Nothing has changed that would change that, has it?
 
The only real changes would be if you want to believe and listen to the German and Austrian Bishops. (which I don’t).

I have heard all kinds of false claims about “how radical the SSPX priests are”. But my personal experience has NOT shown that side of them. Even had a good friend tell me that they are Sedevacantist, which is a crock of ****.

It is amazing how wild some of the stories are that are whorling around. Even the garbage about Bp Williamson’s not believing all the Jewish claims about the Holocaust (sp?).

Good grief, he is entitled to his personal opinion. Its not criminal to think those things. I mean, if my opinions on the President were known then I should probably be sent up river. And yet they are just opinions.
 
One thing–the Holy See has said that SSPX clergy have no canonical standing in the Catholic Church and celebrate the Sacraments illicitly, except for Confession and Marriage, which are invalid for lack of jurisdiction.

If you go out of interest or curiousity, that’s one thing.

But at the present time, it would NOT be a good idea to frequent their chapels.

I do pray for their full reconciliation and regularization.
 
bpbasilphx said:
But at the present time, it would NOT be a good idea to frequent their chapels.

.
Click to expand...
yes Your Excellency–although Cardinal de Hoyos said that one may assist at their Masses for love of Tradition, and that it is not inappropriate to make a modest donation to the collection plate.

Who should we believe, a Cardinal, or His Excellency, basil–who I assume is only stating his unqualified opinion?
 
I don’t attend the OF of mass except if I have to (normally family events; marriage; funeral and etc.) The rare occasions I do attend the SSPX, I make an act of Spiritual Communion rather than take the Body and Blood. Not because I doubt the validity, but because we are not yet unified. I hope we will be soon.

Laus Deo
 
bpbasilphx said:
One thing–the Holy See has said that SSPX clergy have no canonical standing in the Catholic Church and celebrate the Sacraments illicitly, except for Confession and Marriage, which are invalid for lack of jurisdiction.

If you go out of interest or curiousity, that’s one thing.

But at the present time, it would NOT be a good idea to frequent their chapels.

I do pray for their full reconciliation and regularization.

I** subscribe to the Zoghby initiative**
Click to expand...
Doesn’t the Zoghby initiative allows to the Pope primacy of honor and/or first among equals. It seems --someone who subscribes to this ideology is not in a situation to be involving himself in matters of the Holy See and the SSPX.
 
Walking_Home said:
Doesn’t the Zoghby initiative allows to the Pope primacy of honor and/or first among equals. It seems --someone who subscribes to this ideology is not in a situation to be involving himself in matters of the Holy See and the SSPX.
Click to expand...
Pretty ironic, huh?
 
yes Your Excellency–although Cardinal de Hoyos said that one may assist at their Masses for love of Tradition, and that it is not inappropriate to make a modest donation to the collection plate.

Who should we believe, a Cardinal, or His Excellency, basil–who I assume is only stating his unqualified opinion?
This is a direct quote from a press release by the Holy See concerning the legitimacy of SSPX and its clergy. It’s taken from the blog WHAT DOES THE PRAYER REALLY SAY?

**COMMUNIQUÉ OF THE HOLY SEE PRESS OFFICE
REGARDING THE ORDINATIONS ANNOUNCED BY THE FRATERNITY OF SAINT PIUS X

In response to frequent questions which have come to this office in the last days regarding the priestly ordinations of the Society of St. Pius X scheduled at the end of June, there is nothing else to do but refer to what the Holy Father affirmed in his Letter to Bishops of the Catholic Church from last 10 March: “As long as the Society (of Saint Pius X) does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church (…) until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers (…) do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church”. The ordinations are, thus, still to be considered illegitimate.**

wdtprs.com/blog/2009/06/holy-see-press-office-on-sspx-june-ordinations/

The Fathers have frequently referred to irregular (illicit) ordinations and the sacraments celebrated by such clergy as “stolen bread.”
 
bpbasilphx said:
yes Your Excellency–although Cardinal de Hoyos said that one may assist at their Masses for love of Tradition, and that it is not inappropriate to make a modest donation to the collection plate.

Who should we believe, a Cardinal, or His Excellency, basil–who I assume is only stating his unqualified opinion?
This is a direct quote from a press release by the Holy See concerning the legitimacy of SSPX and its clergy. It’s taken from the blog WHAT DOES THE PRAYER REALLY SAY?

**COMMUNIQUÉ OF THE HOLY SEE PRESS OFFICE
REGARDING THE ORDINATIONS ANNOUNCED BY THE FRATERNITY OF SAINT PIUS X

In response to frequent questions which have come to this office in the last days regarding the priestly ordinations of the Society of St. Pius X scheduled at the end of June, there is nothing else to do but refer to what the Holy Father affirmed in his Letter to Bishops of the Catholic Church from last 10 March: “As long as the Society (of Saint Pius X) does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church (…) until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers (…) do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church”. The ordinations are, thus, still to be considered illegitimate.**

wdtprs.com/blog/2009/06/holy-see-press-office-on-sspx-june-ordinations/

The Fathers have frequently referred to irregular (illicit) ordinations and the sacraments celebrated by such clergy as “stolen bread.”
Click to expand...
All that is saying is that the situation remains the same. Nothing has changed.

I have a question, though: The lifting of the excommunications in January was clearly a life-giving gesture of the Pope. Would the Pope offer fuller life with the expectation of causing the death of the life of the Society?

Another question: The German Bishops threatened to excommunicate all involved with the Ordinations in Regensburg, and asked the Holy See how they should proceed. The Holy See remains silent. Have we lost all and any sense of reading the “signs of the times?”

Now, what we WERE discussing before you entered the above press-release was your having posted Monsignor Perl’s statement, and in effect, putting it forward as the last or final word on the subject. I merely posted Monsignor Perl’s superior –Cardinal Castillon de Hoyos’-- statement, and asked who (or is it whom?) ought we believe, and if you were putting your opinion forth as qualified or unqualified.

At the time of the Cardinal’s statement, the SSPX Bishops were still excommunicated, the priests were still (and are still) suspended, and yet the Cardinal said that it is perfectly acceptable, with the conditions you have cited, to assist at their Mass and contribute modestly to their collection plate.

How much more acceptable is it now that the Bishops are now no longer excommunicated?

I repeat, have we lost all sense of being able to read the “signs of the times?”
 
How can you, for love of Tradition, forsake the Tradition of the Catholic Church and knowingly belong to a Society who has no canonical status in the Church—the Church founded by Christ to preserve the truth. Pope Benedict didn’t remove the excommunication because he gave up on SSPX reunion with Rome, but the opposite, that they will indeed be fully one with the one Church, under the head of the Supreme Pontiff.

Number 4 on Pope John Paul II’s Ecclesia Dei is very profound. I’m not talking about thier Mass, but rather that belonging to such a group is still to belong to a shismatic group and unacceptable.

Seminarian Matt, this is especially intended for you, with great love.
 
Josh_Elzner said:
How can you, for love of Tradition, forsake the Tradition of the Catholic Church and knowingly belong to a Society who has no canonical status in the Church—the Church founded by Christ to preserve the truth. Pope Benedict didn’t remove the excommunication because he gave up on SSPX reunion with Rome, but the opposite, that they will indeed be fully one with the one Church, under the head of the Supreme Pontiff.

Number 4 on Pope John Paul II’s Ecclesia Dei is very profound. I’m not talking about thier Mass, but rather that belonging to such a group is still to belong to a shismatic group and unacceptable.

Seminarian Matt, this is especially intended for you, with great love.
Click to expand...
Pope Benedict has said that there is no schism, Josh. the modernists say there is, many people on this forum say there is, but the Pope said there is not.

We, those of us who do, support (we do not belong to the Society, it is a Priestly Society) the Society exactly for the reason you noted above: the Church, who should be receiving, upholding and handing on the Traditions She received from Christ, in the last 40 or so years, has not succeeded in doing so according to those Traditions She received from Christ.

We do not require you to do the same.
 
The Church can never fail to uphold the Tradition given to her by Christ, though by the fault of people it can be dimmed in shining forth.

Can you give me a document where the pope says there is no schism. I am no expert on this so I would like to know. I thought there was, since the remission of the excommunication still did not bring back in the Society.
Thanks alot.
 
Josh,

read the accompanying letter of the Pope’s Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum which was addressed to the Bishops of the world. You can find it on ewtn’s website.

The Pope refers to the situation as "an interior matter of reconciliation within the Church.’ Unless “interior” and “within” have changed their meaning to “exterior” and “without” or “outside of”, it seems the Pope believes there to be no schism.

You and others, of course, are free to believe what you wish.
 
I have read it and I didn’t get that impression, but I’ll read it again and get back to you.
 
Never mind. I’ve read the remission of excommunication but not the Summorum Pontificum.
 
Do not also the divisions caused by Protestantism rend the heart of the Church? Maybe what the Pope meant by this was that this matter (on the new Mass and, concerning Levebvre, the validity of the Council) was at the very heart of the Church. In the sentence right after the one you quoted he mentions divisions rending the body of Christ:

“It is a matter of coming to an interior reconciliation in the heart of the Church. Looking back over the past, to the divisions which in the course of the centuries have rent the Body of Christ, one continually has the impression that, at critical moments when divisions were coming about, not enough was done by the Church’s leaders to maintain or regain reconciliation and unity.”

ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/b16SummorumPontificum2.htm
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top