Is it best to attend dioscean sspx icksp or fssp?

  • Thread starter Thread starter SlavesOfJesusandMary
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Montrose said:
" the Holy See has declared in a letter to the society dated 26 June 2017 and approved by Pope Francis on 20 May 2017 that full re-establishment of communion is conditional on its members making the 1998 profession of faith accepting explicitly, with the degree of adhesion due to them, the teachings of the Second Vatican Council and subsequent church teachings, and recognising not only the validity but also the legitimacy of the rite of Mass and the other sacraments celebrated according to the liturgical books promulgated after that council."
Click to expand...
commenter said:
I agree, what the late Archbishop said is important. There are other, historical threads on CAF.

This thread is about what choices an individual layperson should make in 2020.
Click to expand...
Let me repeat the Church’s official position. It does not matter what you or I or any individual priest or bishop’s opinion is. The only thing that matters is the official stand of the Church.
Based on the stance of the Church individuals should choose ICKSP or FSSP and NOT SSPX.

" the Holy See has declared in a letter to the society dated 26 June 2017 and approved by Pope Francis on 20 May 2017 that full re-establishment of communion is conditional on its members making the 1998 profession of faith accepting explicitly, with the degree of adhesion due to them, the teachings of the Second Vatican Council and subsequent church teachings, and recognising not only the validity but also the legitimacy of the rite of Mass and the other sacraments celebrated according to the liturgical books promulgated after that council."
 
The above quotes concern the canonical standing of the SSPX (which is fraternity of priests within the Catholic Church). They have in fact nothing to do with whether a Catholic may attend Mass there.

Previously the response to the question was alway “don’t attend” when asking Church officials, but for the past 20 years many concessions have been made towards the SSPX, and today there is nothing wrong about at least visiting an SSPX chapel or going to a Mass with them. So to answer the question:
Anicette said:
Is it moral to try the alternative?
Click to expand...
the answer must be in the affirmative. You may, with no moral qualms visit an SSPX chapel for your Sunday obligation or otherwise. It has been pointed out that going to SSPX is NOT adherence to a schism, but that going there to “remove oneself from the authority of the Pope” is definitely illegal (and possibly a schismatic act). Luckily the priests of the SSPX don’t advocate this, and whenever I have gone to the SSPX for the sacraments I’ve always encountered priests on fire for Christ and for the salvation of souls - as well as good, traditional theological sermons.
 
Anicette said:
When the choice is to attend normal parish masses or SSPX mass, what is best?

Is it moral to try the alternative?
Click to expand...
If your choice is SSPX or the Ordinary Form then you should attend the Ordinary Form Mass.
 
God established a hierarchy of bishops to care for us.

Bishops establish parishes as part of their pastoral care. FSSP, ICK, and diocesan priests work within that system. If you go to Mass at these places, you are within that system of episcopal oversight. You likely hear about diocesan appeals for money, and other diocesan events.

SSPX work outside that system. You are not going to a parish, but to an independent chapel. The sacraments now are all valid as I understand It, bishops associate their jurisdiction with them for confession and matrimony.

There is no problem attending them for the most part, just be aware you are not affiliating with a parish or bishop. You are just affiliating with a group of priests that refuses to align itself with the current structure of the Church. They could be correct in doing that, I do not think I could decide that before going.
 
The next question is which Missal?

SSPX uses a pre-vatican II missal, probably 1963, but it might be earlier edition with the smallest of differences.

The Vatican approved the use of the 1963 missal, with some small modifications:
The Good Friday prayer for the Jews has been changed, which raises questions about whether anything can be changed. Can the Church confess that we have sinned against the Jews by use of the old prayer? I say yes, we can repent. Others say no.
Prayers for recently canonized saints have been added, so if you care about St Edith Stein, Maximillian Kolbe, Mother Theresa, Katharine Drexel, you are more likely find them in FSSP or ICK TLMs.

Other than that, there is very little difference between those masses and masses offered by SSPX in terms of liturgy and rubrics.
 
Anicette said:
When the choice is to attend normal parish masses or SSPX mass, what is best?

Is it moral to try the alternative?
Click to expand...
Not every act that is moral is necessarily prudent.

For guidance on religious matters, consider asking your pastor, or writing to your bishop.

Another poster, who formerly posted here frequently, was cautiously supportive of SSPX. He said the situation in France, where he lived, was very different from the USA, where I live. So, a local guide might be helpful. Start with the Church.
 
Last edited:
Dovekin said:
SSPX uses a pre-vatican II missal, probably 1963, but it might be earlier edition with the smallest of differences.

The Vatican approved the use of the 1963 missal, with some small modifications:
Click to expand...
1: SSPX use the 1962 Missal, the same missal that Pope Benedict called an “extraordinary form of the Mass”.

2: The changes to the prayers you were talking about were made before the 1955 missal revisions, but Pope Benedict has since released cleaned up prayers for the missal from before 1955, but that missal is only allowed by insult and the SSPX never used that missal.
 
Thanks for the correction. I knew better.

The Good Friday prayer has been changed several times. The 1962 missal has one version (without perfidy) that talks about “lifting the veil.” 2 Cor 2

The 1970 has a different version.

A few months after Summorum Pontificum, Benedict XVI changed the version in the 1962 missal to yet another version that talks instead about illuminating darkness. Not the same as either 1970 or 1962.

Was my description of parishes and SSPX acceptable to you?
 
Last edited:
Dovekin said:
Was my description of parishes and SSPX acceptable to you?
Click to expand...
It doesn’t seem presumptuous at least. I’d say it’s of course correct they don’t run parishes, they call their buildings chapels or churches (depending on how they were consecrated), but most of them are “missions” because the priests travel to get there. They do however serve a similar function to parish priests to many SSPX adherents.
The only issue I had with your description was that you called their chapels “independent”. I find that word most useful to describe semi-catholic chapels with no structure or connection to the hierarchy of the Church. The SSPX has an internal hierarchy as well as a connection to the larger Church hierarchy, at least in principle. So I wouldn’t characterise them as independent. 😉
 
TheMortenBay said:
The only issue I had with your description was that you called their chapels “independent”. I find that word most useful to describe semi-catholic chapels with no structure or connection to the hierarchy of the Church. The SSPX has an internal hierarchy as well as a connection to the larger Church hierarchy, at least in principle. So I wouldn’t characterise them as independent. 😉
Click to expand...
In spite of occasional communication it’s fair to say the chapels are “independent” of the diocese. The local Bishop’s picture may be hanging up, but not sure if the attached Laity are influenced by him as their Shepherd. Unsure how the SSPX hierarchy applies to Laity.
 
Last edited:
I created an account just to weigh in. I had to speak up when seeing some shade being thrown on the SSPX. It is entirely licit and in many cases preferable for someone to attend an SSPX community. I moved up to North Idaho for about a month (before moving back to California) in order to be close to the FSSP community in Coeur D’Alene, ID. I had a friend living in Post Falls right next door. Now having gotten there I didn’t have a vehicle so it was looking unlikely for me to make it to the FSSP. I saw the SSPX had a chapel 4 miles away from my friends house so I made the hike every Sunday to and from Mass. Upon entering the Church one is met with a very large portrait of the Holy Father. Of the dozen priests they have at the chapel there I had the privilege to attend Mass and confession as well as private conversation with 5 of them, as well as a good number of Catholic families in attendance. All of my preconceived notions were shattered.

Not one person badmouthed the Holy Father. Not one person or priest spent their homily ragging on Vatican II (in a derogatory fashion). Anytime Vatican II was mentioned it was in the context of specific teachings that the conciliar documents leave muddied in ambiguity and then they clarify the position (something entirely reasonable). The priests were so humble and peaceful, I was utterly blown away by the experience. Having encountered the militant rad trad types (of which I spent a number of years in that camp) in the diocesan novus ordo churches I’d had to attend in California (due to not being close enough to a TLM community) I was expecting the SSPX to be fairly toxic. It was, hands down, the most humbling experience I have had. I don’t like the idea of comparing the traditional communities. They are all working toward the same end, albeit with different emphases. Ultimately all these communities have one goal in mind, the complete restoration of the Roman Catholic faith to its fullest expression , free from all the errors of modernism that have ransacked the Church since before Vatican II (Vatican II is not and has never been the source of the problems now facing the Church though it certainly was the ko punch to end the fight and give the round to the modernists).
 
commenter said:
it’s fair to say the chapels are “independent” of the diocese
Click to expand...
And you’re right in the technical sense. It’s obvious that the two of us don’t see eye to eye on the issues surrounding the SSPX. And that’s fine. But I was just pointing out that “independent chapel” has a different connotation in traditional circles. And it’s okay to disagree on what a word denotes. Anyway, we are way off topic again. 😅
 
I didn’t know about the FSSP until about 8 years ago. I was baptized when I was 7-8 into Catholicism at an SSPX parish… fast forward about 12 years later of going to various SSPX churches wherever we moved (Idaho, California, Texas) - we ended back in the same city in Texas where I was baptized.

This priest came along who while, I respect him as a priest, as a fallible, flawed man, he was absolutely insane. It was so bad that half the congregation at the time was chased away from that church, including my family. There were no other options for SSPX around so my aunt informed us about the FSSP. We were all so skeptical about it, but ended up going.

I never knew just how amazing the Catholic faith was until I attended FSSP.

The sermons were amazing. It was no longer the same regurgitated, Gospel based sermon (if it’s a family Gospel in SSPX, it’s going to be a sermon about “be a good family”, etc) - but we learned about topics that were important in the church. The dangers of abortion and contraception, church history, we heard in depth sermons on miracles and possession and everything in between. Reading materials were recommended from the pulpit. Things I had never HEARD spoken about in SSPX, real life events going on that we needed to take a stand against. The gist of the SSPX was always, “you’re a sinner, stop sinning”, with very little context, source material and so on. Basically a protestant sermon. A lot of priests in SSPX always spoke with this tone of voice that was that overly soft, droning tone that must be drilled into them in the seminary, and never spoke like humans speaking to other humans.

Then after going to FSSP for a while, we wandered back to the SSPX occasionally if it was easier to get to for whatever reason - we were immediately shunned. Outright called “switch hitters”, people who used to talk with my family would actually turn their noses up and look away, not acknowledging my families existence. That’s how we realized how much of a cult the SSPX is.
 
The contrast in family was night and day as well.

In FSSP, the women held their heads high, they looked like beautiful powerhouses, equally supported by their husbands, wearing elegant and clean dress. At SSPX, the women always have this look of being downtrodden, exhausted. They’re always corralling their three children under four years old with a newborn in one arm hand, no makeup, same outfit every Sunday, their husbands looking frustrated that their weary wives can’t get their children under control. After mass the women always sit off to the side, still corralling children, while the husbands gather and chat with a coffee in hand without a care in the world. There are of course still big families in FSSP but I have never seen one act as poorly as a family in SSPX so I don’t notice size. The children seem to be ill behaved in SSPX, probably because the father doesn’t feel it’s his duty to be apart of raising the children, they’re content to be “figureheads” while the women do all the work and it seems they merely exist to produce more children. One of my FSSP priests said he could pick an SSPX woman out of a crowd for this reason, they are not given the due respect women, as imitators of the Blessed Virgin, are owed by their husbands.

My fiance’s father is the coordinator of an SSPX chapel and I’ve never met anyone more controlling, more disrespectful to his women and his wife (who not only takes care of the home financially but cooks and cleans and gets him anything he asks for as soon as he asks for it), and also who I perceive to be a pervert. Yet he gets away with it by putting on his charismatic, I’m large and in charge face. Tyranny so often hides behind the guise of being a reliable leader.

So, maybe I’ve been to a particularly bad few SSPX chapels, maybe I’ve been to the worst, but I’m officially done with SSPX. I refuse to be involved in a cult, and a church that calls themselves Catholic while simultaneously deviating from a mark of the church - One, Holy, Catholic and APOSTOLIC.

Until reading this thread, I haven’t realized how many people agree- people in the FSSP don’t stand around badmouthing SSPX all day, while SSPX congregation and priests - again, maybe just where I’ve been - will openly badmouth FSSP and the Pope.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top