FSSP and SSPX

  • Thread starter Thread starter paul11b
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

paul11b

Guest
So my question is this, what’s the difference between the FSSP and the SSPX? I mean the FSSP is in full communion with Rome and they are completely traditional. They both offer only the Traditional Latin Mass the women wear mantillas, they follow the 1962 missal. They both even recite the traditional style rosary. Why is the FSSP in communion with Rome but not the SSPX. I know that the SSPX and Rome are in the process of maybe reconciling but what more could the SSPX want?
 
Good question… I’ve attended an FSSP church but I don’t know that much about the SSPX. It seems that they are similar in terms of being traditional but the SSPX aren’t in good standing with the Church maybe for historical reasons, like how they appointed Bishops without Rome’s approval. Also, it seems to me that in the FSSP, they accept the validity of the Novus Ordo but discourage those things that were inserted into it after VII under the influence of liberalism. (I hold the same view). I’m not very sure about SSPX on this point, and whether they accept the validity of the NO or not. I remember reading something by Archbishop Levebfre saying that the NO is valid if the priest intends to consecrate the Eucharist but since the wording in the NO is more ambiguous it would be easier for a heretical priest to say Mass (without even having the intention of consecrating the Eucharist), making it all invalid. In the TLM, it’s harder because the wording is so precise.

Based on the document that came out from Rome, SSPX probably won’t be required to agree with the things in VII that are merely pastoral, or they would be allowed to hold their own interpretation of it, if they come back into communion with the Church. They would just need to affirm their submission to the Magisterium. I could be wrong.

God bless
 
The division came about historically. SSPX had its priests’ faculties suspended (they still are), meaning they cannot ordain or celebrate the mass licitly (though these sacraments are still valid for them) or offer marriage or sacramental absolution licilty or validly (excepting the rare circumstances suspended priests are permitted to do these things). Some priests in the organization of course were dismayed at this and left SSPX, reconciling with the Church, to avoid this suspension and continue their ministry both validly and licitly. These people became the first members of FSSP.

If SSPX is eventually reconciled to the Church I wonder if they and FSSP will reunite or if they will continue on as separate priestly fraternities. It would obviously be up to them, but I think it might be good for the wider Church if they did reunite so that the modern SSPX (or whatever other name they would go by) would be derived from both branches, softening the sense of them being this formerly gravely disobedient group and thus making their witness to the rest of the Church stronger. Whether such a reunion would be good for FSSP and their congregations I’m not as sure of.
 
Aelred_Minor said:
The division came about historically. SSPX had its priests’ faculties suspended (they still are), meaning they cannot ordain or celebrate the mass licitly (though these sacraments are still valid for them) or offer marriage or sacramental absolution licilty or validly (excepting the rare circumstances suspended priests are permitted to do these things). Some priests in the organization of course were dismayed at this and left SSPX, reconciling with the Church, to avoid this suspension and continue their ministry both validly and licitly. These people became the first members of FSSP.

If SSPX is eventually reconciled to the Church I wonder if they and FSSP will reunite or if they will continue on as separate priestly fraternities. It would obviously be up to them, but I think it might be good for the wider Church if they did reunite so that the modern SSPX (or whatever other name they would go by) would be derived from both branches, softening the sense of them being this formerly gravely disobedient group and thus making their witness to the rest of the Church stronger. Whether such a reunion would be good for FSSP and their congregations I’m not as sure of.
Click to expand...
The SSPX are about as likely to agree to that as they are to celebrate the NO mass
 
jmj1984 said:
The SSPX are about as likely to agree to that as they are to celebrate the NO mass
Click to expand...
To being reunited with FSSP? Well, it doesn’t surprise me, since they’ve been spending decades justifying their not doing exactly what FSSP priests did. It wouldn’t surprise me if FSSP would also be opposed. As I said, it really would be up to them (and Rome, I imagine, though I don’t know what rules would apply to the situation).
 
Aelred_Minor said:
To being reunited with FSSP? Well, it doesn’t surprise me, since they’ve been spending decades justifying their not doing exactly what FSSP priests did. It wouldn’t surprise me if FSSP would also be opposed. As I said, it really would be up to them (and Rome, I imagine, though I don’t know what rules would apply to the situation).
Click to expand...
We have a different situation. The FSSPX have their own bishops with Apostolic Succession. Some priests may join the FSSP (or the ICRSS or SJC, for that matter), which have no bishop, but that’s an individual thing. If the two groups don’t “unite,” it won’t be the end of the world.
 
Holy cow, there’s more misinformation in these posts than accuracies. 😉 Understandable, it’s complicated. If you are trying to make a personal decision about Masses, stay away from SSPX!

The Doctrinal Preamble is now in Fellay’s hands. Unless the Holy Spirit works a true miracle in the huge ego of that man, it’s looking unlikely they will ever be reconciled to the Church, despite the Holy Father’s gracious and generous attitude. Bad move on their part because with FSSP now spreading the old Mass, and even some seminaries offering training, SSPX are nobodies and in a few decades will dwindle to nothing just like other groups that have done this.

SSPX got attention when they were the only game in town for trads. Now if a Catholic wants a Latin Mass, he can go to a legitimate one under his own bishop! The SSPX think they hold the bargaining tool, but it’s the opposite, they are making themselves obsolete if they are not united with the Faith.

The SSPX persistent reasoning against “Vatican II acceptance of the Jews” is repulsive. The negotiators were right to finally say, shape up or ship out; this Jew-hating stuff is one thing Pope Benedict will never tolerate, nor will any Catholic!
 
No, no, folks, that is impossible! Laughable. FSSP and SSPX unite? If, and this is the big “IF”, SSPX reunites with THE CHURCH, they will likely be made a separate Prelature, a designated status for an order WITHIN the Church with a special purpose.

FSSP and SSPX have nothing to do with one another and never shall in the sense someone described above.

Simply put, FSSP are the good guys and SSPX are the bad guys.

All this gobbledeguk over the past years is about trying to get them to come home and be good again and now it’s down to the wire.
 
Margie9 said:
No, no, folks, that is impossible! Laughable. FSSP and SSPX unite? If, and this is the big “IF”, SSPX reunites with THE CHURCH, they will likely be made a separate Prelature, a designated status for an order WITHIN the Church with a special purpose.

FSSP and SSPX have nothing to do with one another and never shall in the sense someone described above.

Simply put, FSSP are the good guys and SSPX are the bad guys.

All this gobbledeguk over the past years is about trying to get them to come home and be good again and now it’s down to the wire.
Click to expand...
You sure have a lot to say.

🍿
 
Margie9 said:
with FSSP now spreading the old Mass, and even some seminaries offering training
Click to expand...
Don’t forget the many diocesan priests who have gone through the proper training to say the old Mass as well.
 
Margie9 said:
No, no, folks, that is impossible! Laughable. FSSP and SSPX unite? If, and this is the big “IF”, SSPX reunites with THE CHURCH, they will likely be made a separate Prelature, a designated status for an order WITHIN the Church with a special purpose.

FSSP and SSPX have nothing to do with one another and never shall in the sense someone described above.

Simply put, FSSP are the good guys and SSPX are the bad guys.

All this gobbledeguk over the past years is about trying to get them to come home and be good again and now it’s down to the wire.
Click to expand...
You know when people say that if you don’t know anything about a subject you probably shouldnt offer an opinion about it? Well this is one of those times 😉
 
I was just wondering what more could the SSPX possible want that the Catholic Church can’t give them? Considering that the FSSP is as Trad as you can get and they are in the Church I’m just wondering what reason the SSPX could find for not reconciling with the Church. (I’m also asking because I love Trad Mass and the closet FFSP Chapel is 2 hours from me and a SSPX Chapel is 3o mins from my house so I’m REALLY praying that they are reconciled.) I’m not familiar with any specific differences between the two fraternities and I can’t see why they wouldn’t want Papal approval.
 
paul11b said:
I was just wondering what more could the SSPX possible want that the Catholic Church can’t give them? Considering that the FSSP is as Trad as you can get and they are in the Church I’m just wondering what reason the SSPX could find for not reconciling with the Church. (I’m also asking because I love Trad Mass and the closet FFSP Chapel is 2 hours from me and a SSPX Chapel is 3o mins from my house so I’m REALLY praying that they are reconciled.) I’m not familiar with any specific differences between the two fraternities and I can’t see why they wouldn’t want Papal approval.
Click to expand...
Maybe the SSPX don’t feel comfortable being with the Vatican as long as the Novus Ordo (etc) is in the Church… and the FSSP want to be in communion with the Pope
 
jmj1984 said:
You know when people say that if you don’t know anything about a subject you probably shouldnt offer an opinion about it? Well this is one of those times 😉
Click to expand...
I’ll call your bluff. Where am I wrong?
 
Monica4316 said:
Maybe the SSPX don’t feel comfortable being with the Vatican as long as the Novus Ordo (etc) is in the Church… and the FSSP want to be in communion with the Pope
Click to expand...
Where have you guys been? You know about the Sept. 14 document, the meetings? Fellay’s defiant statement? This has been all over the Catholic blogosphere for a week.

You are all ridiculing me (unjustly I might add since YOU started the attacks) for being “wrong” and I have already given you the answer to this very question.

It is the same “Vatican II” issues that have dragged this down before. Do you want me to spell them out? I thought I was conversing with folks up on the issue, but now I see maybe when I mentioned about the **Prelature **and the famous Vatican 2 clause on ecumenism, and the unification with the Jews, it just went over your heads?

I give up. Google the above words if CAF doesn’t have enough well-informed people for you. Look at the GOOD articles from the past week.

Sorry you have found my contribution, although accurate, not to your liking Paul11b. But then SSPXers are extremely defensive, thinking the Church should conform to them, not vice versa, and you seem to fit right in with that mentality. So I will shut up and let you, the expert, explain where I am off base in my interpretation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top