Google Canon 844 Section 2 which reads: “Whenever necessity requires or a genuine spiritual advantage (as far as them being good Confessors) commends it, and provided the danger of error or indifferentism is avoided, Christ’s faithful for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a catholic minister (one not in communion) may lawfully receive the Sacraments of Penance, the Eucharist and Anointing of the Sick from non-catholic ministers (not in communion) in whose Churches these Sacraments are valid.” (This determination is made by the recipient of the Sacrament, especially when the determination is made for a moral reason.)
Note: This code supplies jurisdiction/faculties and so there’s no need for special consideration from the Pope or the local Ordinary where the minister has Sacraments that are recognized to be valid; and the Pope has obviously recognized the SSPX Sacraments to be valid, or he would not have allowed them during the year of Mercy. Also, since the Sacrament of the Eucharist is normally confected and received at Mass, this Canon and the Pope’s permission, tacitly implies that their Masses are valid. Can it be possible that his Eucharist is valid but his Mass is not? Or that his Mass would not fulfill your Sunday or Holy Day obligations? The Bible is the place where validity is spelled out for the Sacraments. Jesus’ Mass consisted of Consecration and Communion only. So that’s all that’s necessary for a ‘valid’ Mass. (Validity is forever and not subject to an on/off switch. They may be declared illicit but not invalid.) Does this not say that the Sunday or Holy Day obligations are met?
I invite you to look up Canon 844 on all but the “Note”. I received the information in the note from a retired Bishop who shall remain nameless to avoid persecution.
