Discerning SSPX affiliation

  • Thread starter Thread starter mitch2007
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The Mass is both a sacrifice and a meal. Honestly, I have never seen a bishop sit in the pews while a priest offers Mass…rather I usually see the bishop leading the consecration. That’s pretty well stated in the Our Father…I mean the Pater Noster. But yes, the SSPX is a misled group, but I hope and pray for our rift to be healed. Where they are misled is that they do not fully accept the authority of the Magesterium. If Jesus has pledged to be with His Church until the end of the ages, and this is part of our belief, then to obey the Church of all ages is to obey the Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church, fully. If the First Vatican Council declared that the Pope is infallible in matters of faith and morals, and if we believe that an Ecumenical Council of the Church is guided by the Holy Spirt to also be infallible, then it is wrong and misguided to believe that one particular Council stands out as not being subject to the same powers that Christ pledged to His Church, i.e. to bind and loose. The matters at hand here are not simply which version of the Church one likes or doesn’t like, but whether or not you believe that the Church, at all times, speaks on behalf of Christ on Earth. If the Second Vatican Council is heretical or modernistic, or non-Catholic, then everyone, including SSPX is following a false religion, since that would mean that Christ is not with His bride and therefore we are all misguided.
Re: Can I go to an illicit Mass in order to experience a Tridentine Latin Mass?

No, you should not attend an SSPX chapel because you want to witness a Tridentine Latin Mass. As stated in a previous Q&A, the only reason that I can foresee that would justify going to an SSPX chapel would be to attend a funeral for an SSPX follower. Lesser reasons do not appear to suffice. I recommend calling your diocese to find out if an indult Tridentine Latin Mass is available in your diocese. If it is not, then you will have to wait to experience such a Mass until one is being licitly offered in your area or in an area in which you are visiting.

“If anyone comes to me, I want to lead them to Him.” --St. Edith Stein

Last edited by Michelle Arnold : Dec 16, '05 at 4:46 pm.
 
This is rude, crude and boorish.

We get these SSPX people who come here, multiply their identities by creating fake IDs and come up with these pathetic stories about someone who found his way into SSPX services, and found them wonderful, and the standard Mass in their own tongue is something disgusting, but the Latin mass is so much better, and understood by everyone.

We all see thru the fakery.

Your Abbott
Your Abbott,

If you think I am a fake, so be it. Have you read my posts? I am contemplating LEAVING the SSPX. I am so accustomed to the SSPX arguments that I am weighing them all up. I came to this forum because I thought it may help me. If you think I am a troll, so be it. I am no such thing. I have never joined CAF before.

I am sorry you have had such a bad experience with SSPX people - believe me, so have I. But surely you would welcome an opportunity to advise and assist someone who is contemplating severing ties with them? Instead you say or insinuate he is a fake, and boorish, to boot!

I am sorry also if my description offended you - sad to say, this is a good description of the parishes I grew up in, and which I fled. If I am unable to say WHY I went to the SSPX, it won’t help other posters understand why I am scared of leaving the SSPX, will it?

No-one is forcing you to attend a TLM - by the way, the Holy Father has broadened permission for it, and Pope John Paul II described attachment to it as legitimate. Some of us dearly love the TLM and would welcome the opportunity to attend it, without condemning the Novus Ordo done by the book. I am in that category. If you resent the fact that we love the TLM and have had bad experiences with the Novus Ordo, so be it.

God bless you, Your Abbott. Please, if you have advice or suggestions, I would welcome them. But if you are convinced I am a troll, on account of my current ties with the SSPX, then I suppose nothing I say will convince you otherwise.

Mitch
 
Re: Can I go to an illicit Mass in order to experience a Tridentine Latin Mass?

No, you should not attend an SSPX chapel because you want to witness a Tridentine Latin Mass. As stated in a previous Q&A, the only reason that I can foresee that would justify going to an SSPX chapel would be to attend a funeral for an SSPX follower. Lesser reasons do not appear to suffice. I recommend calling your diocese to find out if an indult Tridentine Latin Mass is available in your diocese. If it is not, then you will have to wait to experience such a Mass until one is being licitly offered in your area or in an area in which you are visiting.

“If anyone comes to me, I want to lead them to Him.” --St. Edith Stein

Last edited by Michelle Arnold : Dec 16, '05 at 4:46 pm.
What, then, of Mgr Perl of the PCED, who said, one can strictly speaking, fulfil ones Sunday obligation by attending an SSPX Mass, even though they don’t recommend it? They even said that it is appropriate to contribute modestly to the collection? Are we to ignore that?

Mitch
 
The Mass is both a sacrifice and a meal. Honestly, I have never seen a bishop sit in the pews while a priest offers Mass…rather I usually see the bishop leading the consecration.
I’ve seen the bishop remain away from the Altar a few times.
  1. Bishop Kinney at Holy Family Cathedral, the seat of the See of the Archbishop of Anchorage, then Archbishop Hurley. Mass was said by Rev. Fr. John Fearon. (A bishop outside his own see.) He concelebrated as if just a priest, other than wearing his miter.
  2. Archbishop Schweitz at the Funeral Divine Liturgy of Right Rev. Fr. Michael Artim. Funeral was presided over by the Pastor of the Byzantine parish (Very Rev. Fr. Wes Izer); Archbishop Schweitz sat in Choir. (Again, technically outside his see, and further, outside his rite.)
  3. Archbishop Hurley while suffering laryngitis. The presidential chair was moved to the front beside the Altar, and the Mass celebrated by one of the Dominicans as presiding celebrant. (Inability to be heard…)
 
SSPX? How about Orthodox? Of the two which would be better?
Orthodox. They are licit and valid, despite being in schism, for their schism is both minor, and is due to invalidated/rescinded anathemas, and involves no disobedience nor major error. While they are unlikely to let you commune, they do not sin by offering the liturgy… And they have valid sacraments for all sacraments; SSPX absolution is neither licit nor valid! (Valid confession requires imminent threat of death or permission to hear confession from the local ordinary. Such permission can not be given to one suspended ad divinis.)
 
Orthodox. They are licit and valid, despite being in schism, for their schism is both minor, and is due to invalidated/rescinded anathemas, and involves no disobedience nor major error. While they are unlikely to let you commune, they do not sin by offering the liturgy… And they have valid sacraments for all sacraments; SSPX absolution is neither licit nor valid! (Valid confession requires imminent threat of death or permission to hear confession from the local ordinary. Such permission can not be given to one suspended ad divinis.)
My understanding (correct me please if I am mistaken) is that the Orthodox churches are schismatic - they do not claim to derive any jurisdiction from the Pope - and that therefore they are not bound to purely ecclesiastical law, such as jurisdiction/faculties etc. Therefore, their sacraments are all valid, including confession.

Now, surely, if the SSPX were a fully-fledged schism, the same would apply? It’s an irony - if they were truly, properly a consolidated schism in the sense that the Orthodox are, then there would be no debate about the validity of certain of their sacraments where jurisdiction is not an issue - but that it is said that it IS an issue - it implies that they are subject to ecclesiastical law, and therefore not schismatic in the full sense…or am I misunderstanding?

How does one answer the assertion that SSPX priests can hear confession due to the legal concept of “common error”, or the provision that says one can even approach a suspended priest for the sacrament for any just cause whatsoever? I am not a canon lawyer, and I get presented with arguments on both sides, and I have no means of evaluating them? Another defence, if I can call it that, is when the Campos group regularised in 2000, there was no provision at all for regularisation of sacraments of matrimony, also questioned, or confessions.

God bless
Mitch
 
This is rude, crude and boorish.

We get these SSPX people who come here, multiply their identities by creating fake IDs and come up with these pathetic stories about someone who found his way into SSPX services, and found them wonderful, and the standard Mass in their own tongue is something disgusting, but the Latin mass is so much better, and understood by everyone.

We all see thru the fakery.

Your Abbott
Your Abbott,

I have reread your post, and, against my better judgment, I feel compelled to ask you:
  1. Do you normally consider people who have had painful experiences, “pathetic”.
  2. Do you think I am lying? Is anyone who has ever had ties the SSPX assumed to be disingenuous or pathetic?
  3. Where did I say the “standard Mass in [their] own tongue” is disgusting? I related an illustration of the abusive environment I am familiar with. If I could find an English Mass in my vicinity that is said in accordance with the rules from Rome, I’d be thrilled.
  4. Am I not allowed to love the Latin Mass?
Just asking, Your Abbott,

Mitch
 
So, the Church had it wrong all those years? If it were a supper, then yes, it is appropriate for the priest to face the people. If it’s a Sacrifice (which the Mass is) then the priest, offering the Sacrifice, should not have his back to God, don’t you think?
At the Last Supper, Jesus was with the Apostles, the bishops. How many bishops do you see sitting/standing in the pews (okay, maybe kneeling) while the priest offers Mass?
Where is God in the church (building)? He is everywhere–He fills up the church and beyond. How can a priest have his back (in physical sense) to God? The priest can face God in facing the people in that direction while the people can face God in facing the priest in that direction making God at the center of the celebration. Is this not more meaningful? Is God not at the center and apex of the Mass?

Mass is both a supper and a sacrifice that fit well in N.O. setup. Since the meal is bread, the way to participate, in line with scriptural account, is communion by the hand. Jesus did not feed the apostles directly in their mouths. Tongue communion, although, is childlike (humble) way of receiving the Bread of Life.

TLM is a development. Novus Ordo (excluding the weird interpretations) is also a development of tradition which does not really eradicate the essence of the Catholic Mass in the form of TLM. The first Mass, the Last Supper, was done not in Latin but in a local language, Aramaic. Why is it so difficult for some or many to accept local language for the Eucharistic celebration? I just wonder, in 2000 years of Catholic Church existence, no one bothered to teach Latin to all people for free so that all people can understand and participate in a Latin Mass. Or at least to all people belonging to Latin Rite.

I don’t accept the idea that accepting the validity of N.O. (excluding weird interpretations) is tantamount to rejecting the validity of TLM.
 
My understanding (correct me please if I am mistaken) is that the Orthodox churches are schismatic - they do not claim to derive any jurisdiction from the Pope - and that therefore they are not bound to purely ecclesiastical law, such as jurisdiction/faculties etc. Therefore, their sacraments are all valid, including confession.

Now, surely, if the SSPX were a fully-fledged schism, the same would apply? It’s an irony - if they were truly, properly a consolidated schism in the sense that the Orthodox are, then there would be no debate about the validity of certain of their sacraments where jurisdiction is not an issue - but that it is said that it IS an issue - it implies that they are subject to ecclesiastical law, and therefore not schismatic in the full sense…or am I misunderstanding?

How does one answer the assertion that SSPX priests can hear confession due to the legal concept of “common error”, or the provision that says one can even approach a suspended priest for the sacrament for any just cause whatsoever? I am not a canon lawyer, and I get presented with arguments on both sides, and I have no means of evaluating them? Another defence, if I can call it that, is when the Campos group regularised in 2000, there was no provision at all for regularisation of sacraments of matrimony, also questioned, or confessions.

God bless
Mitch
Read the Canon Law at the vatican web site.
vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_INDEX.HTM

Rules for confession are here:
vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3G.HTM
Either faculties from the bishop or the law itself; pastors, bishops, cardinals, and superiors-general of priestly orders have faculties by the law itself. Any priest may hear a confession of a dying man by the law itself.

and here the office of pastor is defined:
vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P1U.HTM

The definition of pastorship is clear: The bishop is the sole appointer of pastors. If the SSPX are errecting parishes, then they are clearly acting as a separate hierarchy. Since they claim not to be such, they can appoint no pastors, and so only 4 men in the SSPX are able to hear valid confession: the bishops, since they claim not to be the ordinaries. (but they act as if they are.)

regularizing confessions is easy: the next valid confession does it.
 
Orthodox. They are licit and valid, despite being in schism, for their schism is both minor, and is due to invalidated/rescinded anathemas, and involves no disobedience nor major error. While they are unlikely to let you commune, they do not sin by offering the liturgy… And they have valid sacraments for all sacraments; SSPX absolution is neither licit nor valid! (Valid confession requires imminent threat of death or permission to hear confession from the local ordinary. Such permission can not be given to one suspended ad divinis.)
How can the schism of the Orthodox be considered more minor than the informal schism of SSPX? SSPX does not even claim superiority nor equality with the Church of Rome but it is even trying to show its uncompromising loyalty by being faithful to Catholic Tradition. I think, there is double standard here.

The departure of the Orthodox Church from Rome is not minor. While claiming equality with the Church of Rome, they reject Filioque, Immaculate Conception, not to mention Infallibility. To say that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father alone and to say that Mama Mary was conceived with original sin are not serious but minor? None of these were rejected by SSPX.
The SSPX does not even offer the TLM without including the Pope in the prayer. And, yet all sacraments administered by Orthodox are all valid and licit. This is simply a double standard.

Anyway, mitch2007, have peace considering that Rome declared that you can fulfill Sunday obligation with the SSPX TLM. If offered only twice a month, why don’t you lobby for a weekly celebration? Or, lobby to the diocese to order every parish church to offer the TLM every Sunday. Or, just be at peace fulfilling your Sunday obligation in N.O. when TLM is not offered. Trust in Jesus who promised the keys of the kingdom of heaven to Peter.
 
Mitch,

I’ve been in your shoes. I converted to the Catholic Church 10 years ago through the SSPX. At the time, I didn’t know anything about the SSPX or the “excommunications”. It just so happened, that this was the Church where I took my Catechism classes and entered the Church.

When I learned about the “excommunication” and everything else, I began doing more reading on the subject. I thought the best thing for me to do, in order to remain objective, was to stop attending the SSPX while I worked through things in my mind. I thought that separating myself from the SSPX for a while would help me to be more objective. I even started attended the typical scandelous and blasphemous Novus Ordo Mass - not all were scandelous and blasphemous - but many were.

When I was a Protestant looking into the Catholic Church, it took me no time to see that the Catholic Church was the true Church. It was extremely obvious. One thing I saw very when looking into the Catholic Church is that the Protestant arguments were often staw man arguments. For example, they would say “Catholics worship Mary, etc.” The Catholics would respond “no we don’t believe that, this is what we believe”. When looking at both sides, you could see that the Protestants were distorting what the Catholic Church teaches and attacking the distorted teaching. Wtih respect to the Novus Ordo, it was the opposite. This is what I mean…

As a Traditionalist (SSPX), I would always hear “the Novus Ordo does and teaching such and such”. When I started attending the Novus Ordo, I found out that what I had heard was exactly right. They did do and teach those things, but they defended them. In other words, it wasn’t straw man arguments, it was true arguments. They Novus Ordo’s didn’t say “we don;t beleive that”. Instead, they defended it. I can’t remember all of the specifics, but that was one thing that I remember noticing.

I also noticed some of the strange behavior of certain people in the SSPX. There are a lot of very good and even holy people in the SSPX, but you also have your share of strange people. This must be the case with any group.

What should you do? Trust me, if you have been formed in the Traditional Faith, you will be shocked over and over again by what takes place in the Novus Ordo. The faith is under attack. May of the Bishops have lost the faith and * are doing all they can get away* with to destroy the faith. Keep in mind that Faith is a theological virtue, while obedience is a moral virtue. As such, faith is of a much higher level than obedience. Like all moral virtues, obedience is not an absolute - it is a balance point between two extremes: excess and defect. Obedience is only a true virtue when it is properly balanced. A person who obeys when he should not violates the virtue just as the one does who fails to obey when he should. Don’t forget that.

Faith, on the other hand, IS an absolute, and is necessary for salvation. I believe without any doubt at all, that attending the typical Novus Ordo Mass with the typical heretical Priest will endanger your faith. Not only is the lex orandi, lex credendi a problem, but the general lack of reverence and heresies from the pulpet are common.

We live in a difficult day. We all want to obey, but when the faith is being attacked as it is today, we must take precautions.

For myself, I attend diocesean Traditional Masses and the SSPX Mass from time to time. I avoid the Novus Ordo as I would a leprous women. I support Novus Ordo Priests who are beginning to say the Old Mass, but am trying very hard to hold my ground and not be led astray by the Liberalism that has deceived an entire generation of Catholics, Priests, and Bishops.

Read the old encyclicals and learn the errors of liberalism so you can counter them. Avoid the “near occaisions of sin” such as the Novus Ordo Mass with its heretical Priests. Remember, occaisions of sin does not only apply to moral sins, but to sins in the area of faith as well (intellectual sins). That’s why there used to be an index of forbidden books.

Some of my language in this post may sound strong, but I think it fits the situation. I know a good Novus Ordo Priest. I asked him how many Priests in our large Archdiocese have the faith. His answer: 5. Only five Priests in our diocese have the faith. The Church is in a very serious crisis. The devil has been very successful in attacking and destroying the faith. We must take precautions or we too will be in serious danger.

Remember what I said about faith and obedience and study up on it. You will want to keep that in mind while you are discerning.

Also look up an article titled Deception Under the Appearance of Good, by Harold Welitz, and read it. I found it very helpful.

Good luck and God Bless.
 
Communion in the hand upsets me a lot - should it? I know it is permissible, and I don’t agree with the SSPX who say it is a sacrilege - at least not objectively, I just wish they’d stop it!
I think, there is not sufficient education on the part of the people regarding the Real Presence of Christ under the appearance of bread. I think that’s the culprit why there is so much irreverence.

The TLM’s kneeling/tongue communion is itself teaching implicitly that what is being fed is indeed sacred.

The reverence required in receiving Christ is many times neglected in N.O… But it is just a matter of reminding the people regularly. Personally, when I receive the Lord in my hand, I precede it with a bow and examine closely my hand if there are fragments left; some do not bother–probably because they don’t know much. So education, catechism will make all things right.
 
You mean they may be frauds. That they claim want union with Rome, but in order to negotiate that they want something in return, like respectability, like Rome denying these folks were ever in schism, that the ordinations of the four bishops was not only valid, but licit, like they want full recognition, like FSSP, and, maybe even the beginning of the process of canonization of bishop Lefebrve??? Things like that?
You mean, they want Rome to speak truth?:eek: How dare they!:rolleyes:
 
Where is God in the church (building)? He is everywhere–He fills up the church and beyond. How can a priest have his back (in physical sense) to God?
This line of thinking means there’s no reason to even attend Mass.
 
This is rude, crude and boorish.
No, it’s straight to the point.
We get these SSPX people who come here, multiply their identities by creating fake IDs and come up with these pathetic stories about someone who found his way into SSPX services, and found them wonderful, and the standard Mass in their own tongue is something disgusting, but the Latin mass is so much better, and understood by everyone.
This is your best argument? One could easily argue the same thing in regards to you and yours. I’ve never heard such a lame response, just goes to show…nevermind, this is a Christian site.
We all see thru the fakery.
Your Abbott
That’s embarrassing. Surely you can make an actual defense rather than thow out rude (and false) accusations? Can’t you?
 
Glorious day!
  1. Confused?
    No problem- Turn on the Will of GOD and turn off our will and pursue HIM Alone.
  2. Majority presence of non- catholics?
    No problem- as long as we have the Spiritual Presence of our GOD, inside and out.
  3. TLM- unmodified?
    It’s the most solemn HOLY MASS, celebrated, attended, participated by our Saints and Fathers.
    Only watched IT ( HIM ) on you tube online by typing, Traditional Latin Catholic Mass
    then by clicking button at yahoo or google search.
    No problem- as long as we worship GOD in SPIRIT, interiorly and exteriorly.
  4. Schism is heretical or mixed, and rupture of the bond of subordination.
    But our** TRUTH ( John 14: 6 )** must be observed in LATRIA with the highest degree of rationality of reasoning, literally and spiritually, for GOD’s Glory, in GOD THE HOLY SPIRIT, Amen.
    Faith and Reason, is like Body and Soul, can’t be separated by men, only by our GOD.
    Supreme thanks be to GOD!
 
No, it’s straight to the point.

This is your best argument? One could easily argue the same thing in regards to you and yours. I’ve never heard such a lame response, just goes to show…nevermind, this is a Christian site.

That’s embarrassing. Surely you can make an actual defense rather than thow out rude (and false) accusations? Can’t you?
Yes, you are an embarassment to orthodox Catholicism.

Your Abbott
 
Your Abbott,

I have reread your post, and, against my better judgment, I feel compelled to ask you:
  1. Do you normally consider people who have had painful experiences, “pathetic”.
  2. Do you think I am lying? Is anyone who has ever had ties the SSPX assumed to be disingenuous or pathetic?
  3. Where did I say the “standard Mass in [their] own tongue” is disgusting? I related an illustration of the abusive environment I am familiar with. If I could find an English Mass in my vicinity that is said in accordance with the rules from Rome, I’d be thrilled.
  4. Am I not allowed to love the Latin Mass?
Just asking, Your Abbott,

Mitch
Every week or so, SSPX people here create a new person who have the same pathetic experiences. It’s all very boring, and anyone can see through it. How many other identities have you had here?

Your Abbott
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top