Are the FSSP sedevacantist?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gavin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
No! They are in full communion with the Church and are fully canonically regular. They celebrate the Sacred Liturgy in forma extraordinaria. They do not have a large presence here in the UK but in a neighbouring diocese they have a chapel and their presence there was at the invitation of the diocesan bishop.
 
The Society of St. Pius X is also in good standing. It is in good standing with Eternal Rome.
 
Minnesota said:
The Society of St. Pius X is also in good standing. It is in good standing with Eternal Rome.
Click to expand...
Assuming the SSPX has a presence in your diocese, can you find a single one of their chapels on the directory of the website for your diocese?
 
Last edited:
This thread is about the FSSP and not the SSPX. The SSPX are not in the same situation as the FSSP because the Holy See considers the SSPX to be canonically irregular.
 
No, they’re not. They are practically in schism, they disobey the Pope, and their Priests celebrated the Mass, whilst validly, illicitly and without and against the Church’s permission.
 
TomH1 said:
They do not have a large presence here in the UK but in a neighbouring diocese they have a chapel and their presence there was at the invitation of the diocesan bishop.
Click to expand...
Am I correct in saying that the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest has a bigger presence in the UK?

E.g., St Walburge’s in Preston is run by them and is the tallest parish church in England.
 
The FSSP ( fraternitas sacerdotalis sancti petri or the priestly fraternity of saint peter) is an order established by Paul John Paul II, and given the unusual honor of being named after St Peter, as a way to recognize their fidelity to the Papacy

The SSPX or sometimes seen as the FSSPX is the religious order that the FSSP seperated from. At the time a small handful of their leaders were automatically excommunicated according to the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith. Whether the excommunications happened or not is disputed, but that’s what caused the separation.

Neither is in schism, as the SSPX (my friends call them “Spixies” lol) had the potential excommunications lifted by Benedict XVI.

Whether you can go to a SSPX Mass is a long discussion, but FSSP is highly encouraged

NEITHER ARE SEDEVACANTISTS!!!
 
Then why did Pope Francis allow their Priests to licitly hear confessions??
 
Minnesota said:
40.png
Minnesota:
The Society of St. Pius X is also in good standing. It is in good standing with Eternal Rome.
Click to expand...
Assuming the SSPX has a presence in your diocese, can you find a single one of their chapels on the directory of the website for your diocese?
Click to expand...
IDK what I believe about the SSPX, but the argument goes that there is a distinction between outward canonical union with Rome and true Metaphysical union. The SSPX (to the best of my understanding) would claim that they are Metaphysically in full union (take for example John Kerry or Joe Biden who are outside the church because of their positions on Abortion, but they are “canonically” in full union)

For example, the old Code of Canon Law, did not consider ordaining a bishop without permission of the Pope to be by itself a schismatic act. There clearly must be a continual persistent not mere disobedience, but disagreeing that the Pope has any authority over them to begin with. The SSPX recognizes the Pope’s authority in some areas, but contest that the repression of their order in 1975 and the refusal to actually send the paperwork so Mons. Lefebvre could ordain a Bishop, as an abuse of Power. Assisi and such too, but that is more doctrinal.
 
Jbrady said:
That can be easily countered with “Then why doesn’t he allow them to perform ALL the sacraments”.
Click to expand...
That’s the point as Bishop Athanasius Schneider points out, how can it be that a priest is not suspended in the confessional, and then as soon as he approached the Altar that he is?

If you have a solid argument, I am more than open, but it just doesn’t add up to me
 
You are right, my apologies @Fauken
 
Last edited:
JakubMaximilian said:
For example, the old Code of Canon Law, did not consider ordaining a bishop without permission of the Pope to be by itself a schismatic act.
Click to expand...

Note the date. 1988. The current Code was made in 1983 and in force.
JakubMaximilian said:
how can it be that a priest is not suspended in the confessional, and then as soon as he approached the Altar that he is?
Click to expand...
The SSPX weren’t granted faculties simply because they’re priests. They were granted faculties because they weren’t asking local bishops for them, and so were hearing invalid confessions due to them being illicit. Tribunals even now are dealing with marriages with canonical problems due to them being done in SSPX chapels by SSPX priests who didn’t have the faculties to conduct them. I’ve spoken with a canon lawyer from one such tribunal.

We’re not discussioning the Sacramental nature of their priesthood, which is totally fine and valid. We’re discussing their canonical status, and while canon law is rooted in theology, it is not theology.

As a final note, saying Mass and hearing confessions are two different things as I’m sure you’ll agree. In canon law, in cases of emergency, even a laicized priest may hear confessions. Any priest, with or without faculties may hear confessions in an emergency case, because it’s part of the Last Rites. Mass, treasured and wonderful as it is, is not (directly) required for the Last Rites and has no such allowance in canon law.
 
Last edited:
I just need the Trisagion (Holy God, Holy and Mighty…) with the Glory be to the Father…

And if you have in Greek All you who have been baptized into Christ… that would be great too since it’s Bright Week.

Thank you, Father!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top