Help -- is this place schismatic?

[Mary_Henley]

For those who are in Union with Rome…the SSPX priests do not have faculties to hear confession…so the confessions that are heard are invalid…
Priests need to receive their faculties from the Bishop…one appointed and approved by the Holy Father…not just any rogue bishop.
No faculty…no sacrament.

 

[Gamera]

Thanks, everyone, for your help. I’ll keep away from that place.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

For those who are in Union with Rome…the SSPX priests do not have faculties to hear confession…so the confessions that are heard are invalid…
Priests need to receive their faculties from the Bishop…one appointed and approved by the Holy Father…not just any rogue bishop.
No faculty…no sacrament.

The same goes for the Sacrament of Marriage and I believe Confirmation.

 

[Uxor]

For those who are in Union with Rome…the SSPX priests do not have faculties to hear confession…so the confessions that are heard are invalid…
Priests need to receive their faculties from the Bishop…one appointed and approved by the Holy Father…not just any rogue bishop.
No faculty…no sacrament.

What declaration has Rome said that their confessions are invalid?

.

 

[Uxor]

The same goes for the Sacrament of Marriage and I believe Confirmation.

What declarations has Rome made saying their Sacraments are invalid?

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

What declaration has Rome said that their confessions are invalid?

.

What declarations has Rome made saying their Sacraments are invalid?

No declaration is needed.

For those sacraments to be valid for a Catholic the priest presiding at them must have faculties granted by the bishop of the diocese the priest is acting in.

As the SSPX are not in communion with the Catholic Church they do not have faculties so those sacraments are invalid for Catholics.

 

[Uxor]

No declaration is needed.

For those sacraments to be valid for a Catholic the priest presiding at them must have faculties granted by the bishop of the diocese the priest is acting in.

.

The SSPX are claiming crisis in the church and supplied jurisdiction.

 

[Ham1]

The SSPX are claiming crisis in the church and supplied jurisdiction.

Which fails because the person who legally decides if such necessity exists is the Pope. Pope John Paul II in Ecclesia Dei clearly determined that such a condition did not exist. The priests of SSPX are suspended and therefore lack juridiction for confession, marriages and confirmations.

By the way, your earlier quote from the Pontifical Commission hardly sounds like encouragement to attend such Masses. They don’t say: “it is is a good and virtuous practice”, they say: “it does not bring about excommunication”…Not exactly the same thing.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

The SSPX are claiming crisis in the church and supplied jurisdiction.

The SSPX can “claim” anything they wish, the authority resides with Rome though.

I would expect nothing less than that from those in schism anyways. Just as when people break the law, they almost always come up with a convenient excuse.

It is a rationalization to allow them to do what they want rather than do what they should.

Show me where in Canon Law it allows for a single bishop to declare such a crisis within the Church, and what was the crisis? The fact that he could not ordain the bishops that he wanted when he wanted them? Does this “crisis” also allow for a bishop to go against his written word to the pope?

 

[Uxor]

The SSPX can “claim” anything they wish, the authority resides with Rome though.

I would expect nothing less than that from those in schism anyways. Just as when people break the law, they almost always come up with a convenient excuse.

It is a rationalization to allow them to do what they want rather than do what they should.

Show me where in Canon Law it allows for a single bishop to declare such a crisis within the Church, and what was the crisis? The fact that he could not ordain the bishops that he wanted when he wanted them? Does this “crisis” also allow for a bishop to go against his written word to the pope?

Vatican II would be the crisis. They are saying from what I understand when ecclesiastical law interferes with canon law the higher law takes precedence…"the salvation of souls is the supreme law.

 

[Uxor]

Which fails because the person who legally decides if such necessity exists is the Pope. Pope John Paul II in Ecclesia Dei clearly determined that such a condition did not exist. The priests of SSPX are suspended and therefore lack juridiction for confession, marriages and confirmations.

By the way, your earlier quote from the Pontifical Commission hardly sounds like encouragement to attend such Masses. They don’t say: “it is is a good and virtuous practice”, they say: “it does not bring about excommunication”…Not exactly the same thing.

How would it not be a good and virtuous practice if someone’s intention is simply to participate in a Mass according to the 1962 Missal for the sake of devotion? The Rev Msgr Camille Perl Secretary, said you can attend for the sake of devotion.

.

 

[cloverleaf]

Lets not confuse the issue at hand here.

This is not about a private Mass said by a traveling priest for himself and those traveling with him.

This is about an “independent” chapel with an advertised Mass.

A wholly different thing.

In this case, if the Chapel is not under the jurisdiction of the local bishop and the priest does not have facilities granted by that bishop then it is at best an illicit Mass. It could even be invalid as we have no way of knowing if this “priest” was validly ordained.

The best thing to do would be to avoid it.

If he is an ordained priest and cannot otherwise practice his faith due to the local bishop, isn’t he correct to attempt to circumvent a political problem and serve the people rather than fret over facilities? I’d stake my life on respect and reverence over charismatic masses any day!

 

[Ham1]

If he is an ordained priest and cannot otherwise practice his faith due to the local bishop, isn’t he correct to attempt to circumvent a political problem and serve the people rather than fret over facilities? I’d stake my life on respect and reverence over charismatic masses any day!

A priest who has been suspended a divinis by the Vatican (as all SSPX priests have) ought to seek to reconcile his status with the Holy Church, not go off on his own and commit the serious sin of confecting the Eucharist when he has been absolutely forbidden to do so.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

If he is an ordained priest and cannot otherwise practice his faith due to the local bishop, isn’t he correct to attempt to circumvent a political problem and serve the people rather than fret over facilities? I’d stake my life on respect and reverence over charismatic masses any day!

With this logic of yours then anything a priest wants to do he can do as he is correct in attempting “to circumvent a political problem and serve the people”.

So while you may dislike charismatic masses, if any bishop said no to them then the priest would be right in doing it anyways.

This idea of your is nothing but protestantism. Raising yourself (or in this case any priest) to the level of authority.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Vatican II would be the crisis. They are saying from what I understand when ecclesiastical law interferes with canon law the higher law takes precedence…"the salvation of souls is the supreme law.

Vatican II was an ecumenical council that this archbishop was a member of and at the time he agreed with it. It was not until some time after that he had second thoughts.

It seems that this happened with many of the councils. After Vatican I there was a schism when the Old Catholics jumped ship.

 

[cloverleaf]

A priest who has been suspended a divinis by the Vatican (as all SSPX priests have) ought to seek to reconcile his status with the Holy Church, not go off on his own and commit the serious sin of confecting the Eucharist when he has been absolutely forbidden to do so.

Does the Indult support ecumenism, “ad intra” (internal)?
Cardinal Hoyos disagrees with you my friend. The quote below is from a 8 feb 2007 interview with Cardinal Hoyos which you should read. The address is below the exerpt:

Please accept that I reject the term “ecumenism ad intra”. The Bishops, Priests and Faithful of the Society of St Pius X are not schismatics. It is Archbishop Lefebrve who has undertaken an illicit Episcopal consecration and therefore performed a schismatic act. It is for this reason that the Bishops consecrated by him have been suspended and excommunicated. The priests and faithful of the Society have not been excommunicated. They are not heretics. I do, however, share St Jerome’s fear that heresy leads to schism and vice versa. The danger of a schism is big, such as a systematic disobedience vis-à-vis the Holy Father or by a denial of his authority. It is after all a service of charity, so that the Priestly Society gains full communion with the Holy Father by acknowledging the sanctity of the new Mass.

From interview with Cardinal Hoyos at
cathcon.blogspot.com/2007/02/president-of-ecclesia-dei-commission.html

May the Lord bless us all in our pursuit of his Truth

 

[cloverleaf]

With this logic of yours then anything a priest wants to do he can do as he is correct in attempting “to circumvent a political problem and serve the people”.

So while you may dislike charismatic masses, if any bishop said no to them then the priest would be right in doing it anyways.

This idea of your is nothing but protestantism. Raising yourself (or in this case any priest) to the level of authority.

The protestantism arises in public actions that attempt to defy and block the practice of the faith in the form of the tridentine mass or destroying the altar, and asking God’s people to ignore the words of Jesus himself who tells us to stay off the path of sin. Priest and Bishops who publicly promote homosexuality in the priesthood can read the document posted at the Holy See website by Pope John Paul II regarding the issue. If they chosse not to follow the dogma of their own Church, they are welcome to leave, rather than spread lies to God’s people. I am a baptised Catholic and I pray for a return to the true teachings.
May God’s blessing guide you always

 

[Ham1]

Does the Indult support ecumenism, “ad intra” (internal)?
Cardinal Hoyos disagrees with you my friend. The quote below is from a 8 feb 2007 interview with Cardinal Hoyos which you should read. The address is below the exerpt:

Please accept that I reject the term “ecumenism ad intra”. The Bishops, Priests and Faithful of the Society of St Pius X are not schismatics. It is Archbishop Lefebrve who has undertaken an illicit Episcopal consecration and therefore performed a schismatic act. It is for this reason that the Bishops consecrated by him have been suspended and excommunicated. The priests and faithful of the Society have not been excommunicated. They are not heretics. I do, however, share St Jerome’s fear that heresy leads to schism and vice versa. The danger of a schism is big, such as a systematic disobedience vis-à-vis the Holy Father or by a denial of his authority. It is after all a service of charity, so that the Priestly Society gains full communion with the Holy Father by acknowledging the sanctity of the new Mass.

From interview with Cardinal Hoyos at
cathcon.blogspot.com/2007/02/president-of-ecclesia-dei-commission.html

May the Lord bless us all in our pursuit of his Truth

My comments never said anything about schism or heresy so your response doesn’t really address anything I stated. Cardinal Hoyos does not say that the priests are not suspended as this has been confirmed many times by the Vatican.

The priests are not excommunicated. They are suspended a divinis. It means they are suspended from the use of their priestly faculties. To practice sacraments in violation of this suspension, is indeed a matter of grave disobedience.

It was stated in Ecclesia Dei and is confirmed here by then Cardinal Ratzinger:

“While the priests of the Society of St. Pius X are validly ordained, they are also suspended a divinis, that is they are forbidden by the Church from celebrating the Mass and the sacraments because of their illicit (or illegal) ordination to the diaconate and the priesthood without proper incardination (cf. canon 265).”

ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CEDSSPX2.HTM

 

[Herbalist]

I attend Mass at St. Michael’s Chapel and invite you to come and ask any questions you may have. Believe me, we are a friendly and welcoming crowd! Holy Mass is celebrated by Father Joseph Collins (ordained by Archbishop Marcel Levebvre on June 27, 1980. at 10:00 on Sunday mornings. Contrary to what one post stated, independent priests are most willing to tell you when and by whom they were ordained because that is one of the KEY concerns among traditional Catholics since the FORM (remember the importance of “matter & form” in a Sacrament?) in the the New Rite of Ordination was changed as a result of Vatican II directives, (as was the FORM changed in the consecration of bishops), making many of us have GRAVE DOUBTS as to the validity of these new consecrations and ordinations.