Is SSPX in schism and are its adherents excommunicated?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Joe_5859
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Joe_5859

Guest
I am new to the Traditional Catholicism sub-forum. I’m sure this has been discussed ad nauseum, but it’s a bit difficult to wade through dozens of old threads with hundreds of posts looking for the answer, so I decided to start a new one.

In the bit of poking around I’ve done, it seems that there are many that claim that the SSPX is not a schismatic group. Also, while everyone seems to agree that Lefebvre and the four bishops he illicitly ordained have been excommunicated, there are those who further claim that those priests and lay-Catholics that are part of the SSPX are not excommunicated.

I’m having a bit of difficulty reconciling that with Ecclesia Dei (para. 5c), which states:
In the present circumstances I wish especially to make an appeal both solemn and heartfelt, paternal and fraternal, to all those who until now have been linked in various ways to the movement of Archbishop Lefebvre, that they may fulfil the grave duty of remaining united to the Vicar of Christ in the unity of the Catholic Church, and of ceasing their support in any way for that movement. Everyone should be aware that formal adherence to the schism is a grave offence against God and carries the penalty of excommunication decreed by the Church’s law.(8)
Click to expand...
The bolded sentence above seems to indicate both that the the “movement of Archbishop Lefebvre” (i.e. the SSPX) is in schism AND that its followers are automatically excommunicated (latae sententiae by virtue of Canon 1364 of Canon Law).

I’m not looking to start a fight. I’m just trying to understand why people claim that the SSPX is not in schism or its adherents are not excommunicated when Ecclesia Dei seems to indicate otherwise. I’m sure that everyone is familiar with Ecclesia Dei, so I assume there must be some answer to this question from the SSPX supporters.

Thanks in advance for your charitable responses! 🙂
 
Joe_5859 said:
I am new to the Traditional Catholicism sub-forum. I’m sure this has been discussed ad nauseum, but it’s a bit difficult to wade through dozens of old threads with hundreds of posts looking for the answer, so I decided to start a new one.

In the bit of poking around I’ve done, it seems that there are many that claim that the SSPX is not a schismatic group. Also, while everyone seems to agree that Lefebvre and the four bishops he illicitly ordained have been excommunicated, there are those who further claim that those priests and lay-Catholics that are part of the SSPX are not excommunicated.

I’m having a bit of difficulty reconciling that with Ecclesia Dei (para. 5c), which states:

The bolded sentence above seems to indicate both that the the “movement of Archbishop Lefebvre” (i.e. the SSPX) is in schism AND that its followers are automatically excommunicated (latae sententiae by virtue of Canon 1364 of Canon Law).

I’m not looking to start a fight. I’m just trying to understand why people claim that the SSPX is not in schism or its adherents are not excommunicated when Ecclesia Dei seems to indicate otherwise. I’m sure that everyone is familiar with Ecclesia Dei, so I assume there must be some answer to this question from the SSPX supporters.

Thanks in advance for your charitable responses! 🙂
Click to expand...
I agree 10000000000000%. I have been saying this very thing the whole time. Also, read above where the Holy father commands Catholics to stop supporting Lefebvre’s movement “in any way.” The Vicar of Christ must be obeyed in this matter. Unless Pope Benedict XVI or a future Pope overturns this decision we must obey the Holy Father.
 
No. The “excommunications” are invalid. You can’t be penalized if you don’t commit a crime. If you want to go by the letter of the law, anyone supporting the Society “is in schism” then the likes of the Canons Regular of St. John Cantius are in schism for selling books/Missals by Angelus Press, Fr. Z is excommunicated likewise for praising the books, etc. Such words for the SSPX but the Orthodox who deny so many dogmas and the like are treated as equals.
 
The Ecclesia Dei Commission has made statements that laypeople are not excommunicated for attending the SSPX Masses, that it is not a sin to attend them for love of the traditional Mass, and that they fulfill the Sunday obligation.
 
BrendanD said:
The Ecclesia Dei Commission has made statements that laypeople are not excommunicated for attending the SSPX Masses, that it is not a sin to attend them for love of the traditional Mass, and that they fulfill the Sunday obligation.
Click to expand...
The same commission said that it could not recommend attendance upon the same. What you cite was particular to a specific questioner, not a blanket permission. That is an important distinction.
 
It has been said that the original Bishops were excommunicated by being consecrated without Papal mandate. That is certain; canon law is absolute and clear on that point.

Everyone else is simply in a sticky situation, often called a “canonically irregular” position.
 
JKirkLVNV said:
The same commission said that it could not recommend attendance upon the same. What you cite was particular to a specific questioner, not a blanket permission. That is an important distinction.
Click to expand...
The Ecclesia Dei letter clearly said that it is not a sin to attend the SSPX for love of the traditional Mass. When they say something anti-SSPX, do you also consider it “only particular to the specific questioner”, or do you take it as a blanket statement that applies to everyone?
 
BrendanD said:
The Ecclesia Dei Commission has made statements that laypeople are not excommunicated for attending the SSPX Masses, that it is not a sin to attend them for love of the traditional Mass, and that they fulfill the Sunday obligation.
Click to expand...
Are these statements online? If you could post some links, that would be very helpful.
 
BrendanD said:
The Ecclesia Dei letter clearly said that it is not a sin to attend the SSPX for love of the traditional Mass. When they say something anti-SSPX, do you also consider it “only particular to the specific questioner”, or do you take it as a blanket statement that applies to everyone?
Click to expand...
But they also said they could not recommend it. The Holy See NOT recommending something ought to be enough for obedient Catholics. The status of the SSPX remains the same, as I told you in another post. And further, they do not possess proper faculties and exist contrary to the obedience proper to the local ordinary.
 
EddieArent said:
No. The “excommunications” are invalid. You can’t be penalized if you don’t commit a crime. If you want to go by the letter of the law, anyone supporting the Society “is in schism” then the likes of the Canons Regular of St. John Cantius are in schism for selling books/Missals by Angelus Press, Fr. Z is excommunicated likewise for praising the books, etc. Such words for the SSPX but the Orthodox who deny so many dogmas and the like are treated as equals.
Click to expand...
:confused: The pope issued the statement Ecclesia Dei in regards to Lefebvre and the SSPX. I don’t think any such statements exist about the other people/groups you mentioned, so I’m not sure I understand the relevance. Is the only answer to the original question the fact that Ecclesia Dei is invalid? It is a motu proprio issued by the pope at the time (who has the authority to do such things). How can it be considered invalid?

I think it makes sense that the Orthodox and SSPX are approached from different angles. The break with the Orthodox happened 1000 years ago and no one alive today had anything to do with it. That’s not true of the SSPX. The bishops of the SSPX are the very same ones mentioned in Ecclesia Dei as being part of an act of disobedience to the pope. So, again, I’m not sure what the relevance is in the comparison.
 
Further, the commission said this (emphasis mine):
“Unfortunately, as you will understand, we have no way of controlling what is done with our letters by their recipients. Our letter of 27 September 2002, which was evidently cited in The Remnant and on various websites, **was intended as a private communication dealing with the specific circumstances of the person who wrote to us. What was presented in the public forum is an abbreviated version of that letter which omits much of our pastoral counsel. Since a truncated form of this letter has now become public, we judge it appropriate to present the larger context of our response.”

To the Moderator:

As Brenden D. provided the links to the letter in question once, I have not provided it again.
 
JKirkLVNV said:
But they also said they could not recommend it. The Holy See NOT recommending something ought to be enough for obedient Catholics. The status of the SSPX remains the same, as I told you in another post. And further, they do not possess proper faculties and exist contrary to the obedience proper to the local ordinary.
Click to expand...
I’m not recommending that anyone attend the SSPX. I was answering the poster’s question of whether the laity attending the SSPX are excommunicated, which they absolutely are not (although some here continue to insist that they are.)

The Ecclesia Dei letter says that it is not a sin to attend SSPX for love of the traditional Mass. It doesn’t say “It’s not a sin for you, but it is for everyone else.” That would be totally relativistic. There is also the public interview where Msgr. Perl said “Those who assist at a Mass of the SSPX are absolutely not excommunicated”, and numerous statements from Cdl. Hoyos explaining that the SSPX are “not exactly in schism”, “not in a formal schism”, etc.

I don’t see how obedient Catholics can ignore all of these statements by various Vatican officials, and then make up their own definition of “formal adherence” out of thin air, and claim that one is excommunicated for attending the SSPX, when the Church has said nothing of the sort.
 
BrendanD said:
The Ecclesia Dei Commission has made statements that laypeople are not excommunicated for attending the SSPX Masses, that it is not a sin to attend them for love of the traditional Mass, and that they fulfill the Sunday obligation.
Click to expand...
BrendanD said:
Yes
unavoce.org/articles/2003/perl-011803.htm
wdtprs.com/blog/2007/10/msgr-perl-of-the-pont-comm-ecclesia-dei-we-are-drafting-an-instruction-on-the-interpretation-of-summorum-pontificum/
Click to expand...
Forgive me if I’m being obtuse, but I didn’t see any mention of excommunication one way or the other. It seems to me that this is just a letter that was originally intended as a private letter (not as some sort of official addendum to Ecclesia Dei). So I’m not sure how this letter answers my original question. I suppose one might interpret the letter as qualifying that those who attend the SSPX liturgy for devotional purposes only are not sinning (and presumably are not excommunicated). I can agree to that. But how many people does that describe? Don’t most people that attend SSPX churches do so because they also support the group? Please correct me if that is an incorrect assumption.

To rephrase my original question: Does Ecclesia Dei or does it not say that supporters of SSPX are excommunicated and the group is in schism? Maybe we all don’t agree on the authority or validity of the document, but do we all agree that that is what it says?
 
Joe_5859 said:
:confused: The pope issued the statement Ecclesia Dei in regards to Lefebvre and the SSPX. I don’t think any such statements exist about the other people/groups you mentioned, so I’m not sure I understand the relevance. Is the only answer to the original question the fact that Ecclesia Dei is invalid? It is a motu proprio issued by the pope at the time (who has the authority to do such things). How can it be considered invalid?

I think it makes sense that the Orthodox and SSPX are approached from different angles. The break with the Orthodox happened 1000 years ago and no one alive today had anything to do with it. That’s not true of the SSPX. The bishops of the SSPX are the very same ones mentioned in Ecclesia Dei as being part of an act of disobedience to the pope. So, again, I’m not sure what the relevance is in the comparison.
Click to expand...
I hate to yell but the Pope clearly stated, as is posted above, that Catholics SHOULD NOT SUPPORT THE SOCIETY IN ANY WAY!!!
 
BrendanD said:
I’m not recommending that anyone attend the SSPX. I was answering the poster’s question of whether the laity attending the SSPX are excommunicated, which they absolutely are not (although some here continue to insist that they are.)

The Ecclesia Dei letter says that it is not a sin to attend SSPX for love of the traditional Mass. It doesn’t say “It’s not a sin for you, but it is for everyone else.” That would be totally relativistic. There is also the public interview where Msgr. Perl said “Those who assist at a Mass of the SSPX are absolutely not excommunicated”, and numerous statements from Cdl. Hoyos explaining that the SSPX are “not exactly in schism”, “not in a formal schism”, etc.

I don’t see how obedient Catholics can ignore all of these statements by various Vatican officials, and then make up their own definition of “formal adherence” out of thin air, and claim that one is excommunicated for attending the SSPX, when the Church has said nothing of the sort.
Click to expand...
We were writing posts at the same time, so some of the questions in my previous post were addressed with a little more specificity.

In response to the bolded paragraph above, I don’t think anyone is trying to pull definitions out of thin air (at least I’m not). But I keep coming back to Ecclesia Dei. Regardless of whatever this or that Vatican official said in this interview or that private letter, it doesn’t negate Ecclesia Dei.

If you’re making the point that we cannot make a blanket statement that any and every single Catholic that has ever stepped foot in an SSPX church is excommunicated, then I would agree.

If you’re making the point that no lay people have been excommunicated as a result of their participation in SSPX, then I think I would disagree with that. I find it hard to believe that everyone who attends Mass at SSPX churches does so solely for love of the old Mass without any support for the disobedient acts of the SSPX bishops.

I feel like I’ve stepped into the middle of an ongoing, perpetual argument without fully understanding the history. I’m still trying to get my footing in order to understand what each side is saying. So be patient with me, please! 🙂
 
Joe_5859 said:
:confused: The pope issued the statement Ecclesia Dei in regards to Lefebvre and the SSPX. I don’t think any such statements exist about the other people/groups you mentioned, so I’m not sure I understand the relevance.
Click to expand...
The poster was being quite facetious. All persons mentioned are in good standing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top