No Pope

[JReducation]

Hi JR. First paragraph. The way I read it is the Sacrament itself is NOT invalidated although the person conferring it may not have the faculty/right to do so. The person conferring the Sacrament is in an invalid state. In other words the conferee does not MAKE the Sacrament valid??? The Sacrament is still a Sacrament? Gee I missed my calling. I think I should have become a Jesuit.

HUH?

In any case, I was wrong in my post. I based my answer on the canons prior to 1983, which were not as clear as the new canons. Another poster did us he favor of quoting the new canons.

Therefore, there is no question that the superior of the SSPX no longer has the authority to grant faculties to absolve. Therefore, the penitent does not receive absolution.

The only recourse that the penitent has is to the mercy of God, as do Protestants, Jews, Muslims and others who do not have the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

JR

 

[JReducation]

Of course one may become a member of the Third Order of the SSPX. The original question was asked, but could leave the impression to those unknowing, that one must “join” the SSPX as though it were its own Church, without faithfulness to the Pope, and not Roman Catholic, all of which are untrue.

How can one become a member of the Third Order of the SSPX if the SSPX is not a religious order?

Only religious orders have secular orders.

JR

 

[ethelzguy]

This is one area that they agree with the Catholic Church, namely, that Benedict XVI is the pope. They just don’t care for himor his predecesors, so they took up their toys and left.

Bingo

 

[JReducation]

What in the world does anything the SSPX says or thinks have to do with this thread? This is one area that they agree with the Catholic Church, namely, that Benedict XVI is the pope. They just don’t care for himor his predecesors, so they took up their toys and left.

Anyone is welcome to leave. However, you put yourself in a precarious state.

I look at it like a marriage. If you have a bad marriage and the relationship is so intolerable and so abusive that you must leave for your safety and that of your children, there is jusification there and of course you remain married but in separate homes.

But in this case, there was no intolerable abuse. There was a disagreement with the boss. I can quit my job if I disagree with the boss, but I better not expect to get paid as if I were still working for him. It ain’t gonna happen.

JR

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

This is why I ask all of you to hold Piuswoman in sincere prayer.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[I_Believe]

I think you are mistaken. It is not the traditionalists that are “hammered.” It is those who attack the Holy Father or advocate schism with the Catholic Church. Most traditionalists are faithful to the Holy Father and the Catholic Church. It is unfair to lump them together with those who have gone overboard.

Once one is identified as a trad, they are always mistaken.

A trad can say the sky is blue, and someone will say "no, actually, atmospheric conditions make it appear that way "

BTW, I made it a point of excluding sedes from my generalization, and stated such.

Trads are persecuted here pnewton. Not saying you do, but it’s a fact. I got blasted a while back for saying the forum was infested by trolls. Well, it sure didn’t take long for two of the ones who poo poohed my claim, to make the same claim themselves.

I didn’t call them on it because they were right. In both instances, the OP was obviously a baited thread.

We live, we learn.

 

[LilyM]

How can one become a member of the Third Order of the SSPX if the SSPX is not a religious order?

Only religious orders have secular orders.

JR

From the official SSPX homepage:

“The Society of St. Pius X is an international priestly society of common life without vows, whose purpose is the priesthood and that which pertains to it.”

Sounds close enough to a religious order to me.

 

[piouswoman]

This is why I ask all of you to hold Piuswoman in sincere prayer.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

Dear Deacon Ed B…since you are a deacon, have you ever heard of the term “Deacon couple”? I am asking because the Roman Catholic parish I grew up in, now has a Deacon couple…this is new to me and I ask for your explanation…By the way, thank you for the prayers.
Prayers and blessings to you,
Piouswoman who assists at the Holy Masses of the SSPX…

 

[piouswoman]

Once one is identified as a trad, they are always mistaken.

A trad can say the sky is blue, and someone will say "no, actually, atmospheric conditions make it appear that way "

BTW, I made it a point of excluding sedes from my generalization, and stated such.

Trads are persecuted here pnewton. Not saying you do, but it’s a fact. I got blasted a while back for saying the forum was infested by trolls. Well, it sure didn’t take long for two of the ones who poo poohed my claim, to make the same claim themselves.

I didn’t call them on it because they were right. In both instances, the OP was obviously a baited thread.

We live, we learn.

Your observation is correct…in my humble opinion, most of the threads in this forum are SSPX bait threads…I don’t mind, it gives me a chance to stand up for the truth and defend Tradition.

In the words of Archbishop LeFebvre…Tradition is defined as the Deposit of Faith transmitted by the Magisterium down through the centuries. This deposit is what has been given to us by Revelation; that is to say, the Word of God entrusted to the Apostles and transmitted unfailingly by their successors…

…All the dogmatic councils have given us the exact expression of Tradition, the exact expression of what the Apostles taught. Tradition is irreformable. One can never change the decrees of the Council of Trent, because they are infallible, written and published by an official act of the Church, unlike those of Vatican II, which pronouncements are not infallible because the popes did not wish to commit their infallibility. Therefore nobody can say to you, “you are clinging to the past, you have stayed with the Council of Trent.” For the Council of Trent is not the past. Tradition is clothed with a timeless character, adapted to all times and all places.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

Dear Deacon Ed B…since you are a deacon, have you ever heard of the term “Deacon couple”? I am asking because the Roman Catholic parish I grew up in, now has a Deacon couple…this is new to me and I ask for your explanation…By the way, thank you for the prayers.
Prayers and blessings to you,
Piouswoman who assists at the Holy Masses of the SSPX…

I have heard people call a deacon and his wife a deacon couple. But that’s about as far as it goes. Suffice to say, there are no women deacons. Wives must attend all the classes in the first year of formation with their husbands. I know of some instances where the wives have attended all the classes with their husbands. They do work in some parishes, but in a lay capacity. Perhaps (and this is speculation) people just refer to them, either in formation or after ordination as such. Do you know something I don’t.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[piouswoman]

I have heard people call a deacon and his wife a deacon couple. But that’s about as far as it goes. Suffice to say, there are no women deacons. Wives must attend all the classes in the first year of formation with their husbands. I know of some instances where the wives have attended all the classes with their husbands. They do work in some parishes, but in a lay capacity. Perhaps (and this is speculation) people just refer to them, either in formation or after ordination as such. Do you know something I don’t.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

Thank you deacon Ed…no, I don’t know anymore than thee…I thought perhaps with the reference to “Deacon couples” however, it moves closer to the idea of eventual married priests and perhaps even to eventually, women priests…heaven forbid. I find that introducing new or foreign ideas in small bits, numbs the shock to the receivers of the new ideas and so they may later accept without resistance, bigger agendas. I appreciate you taking the time to answer me.
Piouswoman

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

Thank you deacon Ed…no, I don’t know anymore than thee…I thought perhaps with the reference to “Deacon couples” however, it moves closer to the idea of eventual married priests and perhaps even to eventually, women priests…heaven forbid.

I honestly do not ever see this happening. With the exceptions of married priests in the Eastern Rites,(and they must be married before ordination and cannot be among those elevated to the rank of bishop)) and conversions of validly ordained priests who are married, into Holy Mother Church, I see no married clergy in the Roman Catholic Church, other than as stated.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[piouswoman]

I honestly do not ever see this happening. With the exceptions of married priests in the Eastern Rites,(and they must be married before ordination and cannot be among those elevated to the rank of bishop)) and conversions of validly ordained priests who are married, into Holy Mother Church, I see no married clergy in the Roman Catholic Church, other than as stated.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

Perhaps you are right, nevertheless, there do exist forces within the church that would desire to see it happen. In my opinion, it should not even be a topic discussed, and yet there are those that voice the opinion in favor, not only priests and bishops, but laity. The conversion of validly ordained priests who are married has always worried me.

 

[elts1956]

HUH?

In any case, I was wrong in my post. I based my answer on the canons prior to 1983, which were not as clear as the new canons. Another poster did us he favor of quoting the new canons.

Therefore, there is no question that the superior of the SSPX no longer has the authority to grant faculties to absolve. Therefore, the penitent does not receive absolution.

The only recourse that the penitent has is to the mercy of God, as do Protestants, Jews, Muslims and others who do not have the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

JR

Yeah, I know, sometimes my brain spins too fast. Sorry.

 

[JReducation]

From the official SSPX homepage:

“The Society of St. Pius X is an international priestly society of common life without vows, whose purpose is the priesthood and that which pertains to it.”

Sounds close enough to a religious order to me.

A society of common life is not a religoius order. They are not a congregation either. They are not religios. They are secular priests.

A religious order must have a rule, solemn vows, a cosntitution, be of Pontifical Right which means that they are excempt from all Church authority except the Pope and their own superiors, and be either friars, monks or nuns (not sisters).

A society is an organization of either priests or lay people who live in community, without a rule of life, they may make simple vows but not solemn vows, they do not belong to a religious family therefore they are seculars even if they are priests. They do not have Pontifical Right unless they have a papal indult, such as the Vincentians and Maryknowll and the Jesuits. They are societies with Pontifical Right.

Pontifical Right means that they come under the direct authority of the Pope and no local bishop can intervene with their govenment or way of life.

I don’t know if SSPX priests have Pontifical Right. However, they are still a society. Therefore, they are not religious. Only religious orders with solemn vows can have secular orders.

The only religious with solemn vows in the Church are:

Friars Minor
Benedictines
Augustinians
Dominicans
Carmelites
Cistercians
Poor Clares
Cloistered nuns
Camaldolese
Trinitarian friars
Society of Jesus

All others are either religious congregations or societies of common life. None of them may have secular orders. They can have lay associates.

Lay associates are not members of a religios order.

Secular Franciscans, Secular Carmelites and so forth are members of a religious order. They take vows and live the rule of the friars, but outside the enclosure.

See the difference?

JR

 

[LilyM]

A society of common life is not a religoius order. They are not a congregation either. They are not religios. They are secular priests.

A religious order must have a rule, solemn vows, a cosntitution, be of Pontifical Right which means that they are excempt from all Church authority except the Pope and their own superiors, and be either friars, monks or nuns (not sisters).

A society is an organization of either priests or lay people who live in community, without a rule of life, they may make simple vows but not solemn vows, they do not belong to a religious family therefore they are seculars even if they are priests. They do not have Pontifical Right unless they have a papal indult, such as the Vincentians and Maryknowll and the Jesuits. They are societies with Pontifical Right.

Pontifical Right means that they come under the direct authority of the Pope and no local bishop can intervene with their govenment or way of life.

I don’t know if SSPX priests have Pontifical Right. However, they are still a society. Therefore, they are not religious. Only religious orders with solemn vows can have secular orders.

The only religious with solemn vows in the Church are:

Friars Minor
Benedictines
Augustinians
Dominicans
Carmelites
Cistercians
Poor Clares
Cloistered nuns
Camaldolese
Trinitarian friars
Society of Jesus

All others are either religious congregations or societies of common life. None of them may have secular orders. They can have lay associates.

Lay associates are not members of a religios order.

Secular Franciscans, Secular Carmelites and so forth are members of a religious order. They take vows and live the rule of the friars, but outside the enclosure.

See the difference?

JR

I’m in formation to be a secular Franciscan - we don’t take vows, although we do make solemn promises.

My bad - perhaps the SSPX has ‘lay associates’ instead of an actual Third or secular order then

I’d call lay associates ‘members’ of the SSPX to all practical intents and purposes.

 

[JReducation]

I’m in formation to be a secular Franciscan - we don’t take vows, although we do make solemn promises.

My bad - perhaps the SSPX has ‘lay associates’ instead of an actual Third or secular order then

I’d call lay associates ‘members’ of the SSPX to all practical intents and purposes.

If you are in formation to join our order, then you will make solemn promises. Solemn promises is simply the new terminology that was adopted by our order when Pope Paul VI rewrote the constitutions.

The reason he reworded it was to avoid confusion between the vows the Friars Minor, the Poor Clares and the Secular Franciscans. Pope Paul VI felt it was very important for other Catholics to understand that Secular Franciscans remain secular men and women, even though we belong to a canonical order.

Often when people hear the word vows, they think of either marriage or conventual religious (religious who live in religious houses).

The key here is that in the case of SSPX or any society, they are not a religious family. They cannot have a second or third order. They are an association.

An association is a community of secular priests or lay people. They do not consecrate their lives through a formal profession of vows as do religious orders. They may have associates who do not live in the community.

The Jesuits have associates, Opus Dei, the Christian Brothers, the Sisters of Notre Dame de Namur. These folks make no formal commitment to live the life of the community. They do share in the spirit of the community through its prayer and at times they even participate in its ministry.

If you are contemplating or in formation to join our Order, I hope that you are not an SSPX supporter. If you are, you must mention that to your Minister. St. Francis has a very strong position on this in our rule. Our rule requires absolute and unconditional obedience to the Pope and to St. Francis.

There is no room in our rule for compromises on obedience, except when one is ordered to sin, which is the norm for the universal Church. This wouldn’t be a compromise.

To support the SSPX by participating in any of their activities and liturgies is incompatible with the Franciscan vocation, not because of the liturgy, but because of their precarious relationship with the Pope.

St. Francis does not make room in his rule for this kind of relationship. If we examine his life we find that he professed total obedience to the Pope without murmuring, perfect obedience as Christ practiced it.

If one wants to be a Franciscan, Carmelite, Benedictine, or Dominican, the order may demand that one sever all connections with the SSPX. That should be checked out by the candidate.

If one does not mention it to the superior or minister, one runs of the risk of making an invalid profession, that is a grave sin, since secular orders are real religious orders and their profession constitute real vows or solemn promises.

As far as I know the only Franciscans not in union with Rome that are legitimate Franciscans are the Anglican Franciscans. That is because they were Franciscans before the birth of the anglican communion. They retain the succession back to Francis. But a Catholic may not join them. They are our brothers and sisters in Christ and St. Francis, but we are not in perfect communion with each other, so we cannot cross over.

JR

 

[LilyM]

If you are in formation to join our order, then you will make solemn promises. Solemn promises is simply the new terminology that was adopted by our order when Pope Paul VI rewrote the constitutions.

The reason he reworded it was to avoid confusion between the vows the Friars Minor, the Poor Clares and the Secular Franciscans. Pope Paul VI felt it was very important for other Catholics to understand that Secular Franciscans are remain secular men and women, even though we belong to a canonical order.

Often when people hear the word vows, they think of either marriage or conventual religious (religious who live in religious houses).

The key here is that in the case of SSPX or any society, they are not a religious family. They cannot have a second or third order. They are an association.

An association is a community of secular priests or lay people. They do not consecrate their lives through a formal profession of vows as do religious orders. They may have associates who do not live in the community.

The Jesuits have associates, Opus Dei, the Christian Brothers, the Sisters of Notre Dame de Namur. These folks make no formal commitment to live the life of the community. They do share in the spirit of the community through its prayer and at times they even participate in its ministry.

If you are contemplating or in formation to join our Order, I hope that you are not an SSPX supporter. If you are, you must mention that to your Minister. St. Francis has a very strong position on this in our rule. Our rule requires absolute and unconditional obedience to the Pope and to St. Francis.

There is no room in our rule for compromises on obedience, except when one is ordered to sin, which is the norm for the universal Church.

To support the SSPX by participating in any of their activities and liturgies is incompatible with the Franciscan vocation, not because of the liturgy, but because of their precarious relationship with the Pope.

St. Francis does not make room in his rule for this kind of relationship. If we examine his life we find that he professed total obedience to the Pope without murmuring, perfect obedience as Christ practiced it.

If one wants to be a Franciscan, Carmelite, Benedictine, or Dominican, the order may demand that one sever all connections with the SSPX. That should be checked out by the candidate.

If one does not mention it to the superior or minister, one runs of the risk of making an invalid profession, that is a grave sin, since secular orders are real religious orders.

As far as I know the only Franciscans not in union with Rome that are legitimate Franciscans are the Anglican Franciscans. That is because they were Franciscans before the birth of the anglican communion. They retain the succession back to Francis. But a Catholic may not join them. They are our brothers and sisters in Christ and St. Francis, but we are not in perfect communion with each other, so we cannot cross over.

JR

Have you read some of my posts here? I most certainly am not a supporter in any fashion of the SSPX!

 

[JReducation]

Have you read some of my posts here? I most certainly am not a supporter in any fashion of the SSPX!

I have read your posts. But the one on the SSPX third order threw me off.

I’m sorry if I misread that particular post.

On another note, welcome to the family.

JR

 

[elts1956]

From the official SSPX homepage:

“The Society of St. Pius X is an international priestly society of common life without vows, whose purpose is the priesthood and that which pertains to it.”

Sounds close enough to a religious order to me.

PW. Do you believe in the Holy Roman Catholic Church, the Mystical Body of Christ ,as instituted by Christ and given into the hands of his Apostles? Do you believe St. Peter was the “rock” upon which the Church has been supported for the past two thousand years?