Fr. Z and Jeff Mirus on SSPX Confessional Validity

[Saints_Alive]

Question’

Since outside of thios forum the SSPX is virtually unknown to the average Catholic, what would happen in the following scenario?

A Catholic, who has never heard of the SSPX or its position in the Church passes by an SSPX Chapel and feeling the need to go to Mass he steps in. He sees a photograph of the Holy Father and Archbishop Lefebrve and assumes that the Chapel is in fact a valid Church. Seeing the different Altar arrangement, he remembers something his grandmother told him years ago about confessing prior to receiving Holy Communion and goes to the confession line, since SSPX Chapels routinely have confessions prior to every Mass. He makes a sincere confession and is contritr. He is absolved by the Priest, says his penance, probably a bit more than one Hail Mary, attends the Mass and receives Holy Communion.

Was the confession and absolution valid?

Imo, yes

 

[Dee_S]

… A putative marriage entered into before an SSPX priest would be declared null if brought before the diocesan tribunal. One document proporting to be a means of reconciliation for the group specifically offered radical sanation of all weddings before the society (I cannot vouch for the authenticity of this document).

What you state is true, their marriages would be declared null, but a *Sanatio in radice *would be offered. The document you refer to is this one:

PROTOCOL OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE HOLY SEE
AND THE PRIESTLY SOCIETY OF SAINT PIUS X
Signed in Rome on May 5, 1988
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre

1. Particular Problems (to be resolved by decree or declaration)

– Sanatio in radice, at least ad cautelam, of the marriages already
celebrated by the priests of the Society without the required delegation.

“As for jurisdiction with regard to the faithful who have recourse to
the priests of the Society, it will be conferred on these priests either
by either the local Ordinaries or by the Apostolic See.”
unavoce.org/resources/protocol-agreement-between-rome-and-saint-pius-x/

SSPX priests are still suspended a divinis, and do not have the faculties for a valid confession or marriage.

More over, Bishop Felley has said that society priests have petitioned Rome for to lift certain penalties so they may absolve certain serious sins. He said these petitions were granted, and that Rome stated all was “good and licit” regarding the handling. It is possible he is straight-up lying (hence the “dice roll”), however this suggests that Rome does not consider society confessions universally invalid (possibly valid only on cases directly petitioned).

This could “suggest” any number of things, but it is not possible from this to draw a conclusion that Rome no longer deems their confessions and marriages invalid.

Bishop Fellay and his organization say many ‘horofic’ things, as did Archbishop Lefebvre - the most glaring example (as can be seen in this extract from the same Protocol) is - that ***they ***consider that the Church offers invalid Masses and Sacraments!! How scary is that

4) We declare in addition to recognize the validity of the Sacrifice of
**** the Mass and the Sacraments celebrated with the intention of doing that
which the Church does and according to the rites indicated in the typical
editions of the Roman Missal and the Rituals of the Sacraments promulgated
by Popes Paul VI and John Paul II.

1. Finally, we promise to respect the common discipline of the Church and
   ecclesiastical laws, especially those contained in the Code of Canon Law
   promulgated by Pope John Paul II, without prejudice to the special
   discipline granted to the Society by particular law.
   unavoce.org/resources/protocol-agreement-between-rome-and-saint-pius-x/

The following are extracts from Q & A on their website:

Is the Novus Ordo Mass
“However, even if we could be certain of the validity of the Novus Ordo Masses celebrated in today’s Conciliar churches, it does not follow that they are pleasing to God. Much to the contrary, they are objectively sacrilegious, even if those who assist at them are not aware of it…
However, regardless of the gravity of the sacrilege, the New Mass still remains a sacrilege, and it is still in itself sinful.”

Can a traditional Catholic go to confession to a Novus Ordo priest?
However, it is not easy to have the assurance of a valid absolution…Manifestly it is not possible to have confidence in the guidance of a priest who compromises with modernism by celebrating the New Mass, even if he otherwise appears orthodox. Neither his judgment as to the reality of our contrition, nor his instruction as to the gravity of our sins, nor his remedies for the ills of our sins can be depended upon…

Consequently, outside case of danger of death, it is preferable to make an act of perfect contrition, and to wait until one can open one’s soul to a traditional priest that can be trusted. [Answered by Fr. Peter R. Scott]"
sspx.org/Catholic_FAQs/catholic_faqs__traditional.htm

 

[Dee_S]

What do you need a ruling on? A priest needs jurisdiction from the local bishop to dispense a valid absolution. The SSPX priests, as far as I know, do not have faculties from the bishops of the dioceses that they operate in.

Indeed.

 

[Dee_S]

If it’s been proven that the SSPX have no permission or authority to offer confession, then no further ruling is necessary from Rome or anyone else to declare their confession invalid. One can draw this conclusion from the law itself:
Can. 966 §1 For the valid absolution of sins, it is required that, in addition to the power of order, the minister has the faculty to exercise that power in respect of the faithful to whom he gives absolution.
§2 A priest can be given this faculty either by the law itself, or by a concession issued by the competent authority in accordance with can. 969.

Can. 969 §1** Only the local Ordinary is competent to give to any priests whomsoever the faculty to hear the confessions of any whomsoever of the faithful.** Priests who are members of religious institutes may not, however, use this faculty without the permission, at least presumed, of their Superior.
The only concessions granted would be to those in danger of death and those who are truly ignorant or in error. I, for example, knowing what I know, cannot go to the SSPX and expect to be validly absolved.

Thanks for giving us the Canon Law, it really does clarify things.

 

[runningdude]

The only concessions granted would be to those in danger of death and those who are truly ignorant or in error. I, for example, knowing what I know, cannot go to the SSPX and expect to be validly absolved.

We keep going around in circles, but you concede my basic point.