Pope Francis: SSPX priests will licitly and validly absolve sins during Jubilee of Mercy [CC]

[Lormar]

You are surprised by them? Are you brand new to the forums SSPX threads?

I’ve been here since 2009. When I came here, I was a sedevacantist.

 

[Megan7]

Perhaps just perhaps the Vatican and the Pope and indeed the Church herself also believe they have nothing to repent for. I am unaware of a repentance clause in the Document still waiting to be signed. I am unaware of any talk of repentance publicly at all as a condition of returning to full communion. Even the Pope today did not allude to that at all. Is there something you think they should repent for that perhaps the Pope and the Vatican are unaware of.
Why would anyone not be absolutely ecstatic about this?
Unless one did not like what the SSPX represents or the thought of Traditionalists being offered a say…

Progressive apparently has it’s limits…

And perhaps, just perhaps they do have something to teach and offer the Church. And perhaps Francis sees that in some cases the student teaches the master. That would be humble like him wouldn’t it.

I will leave you with the words of the Traditionalist Pope Francis who has said. “Who am I to Judge”

perhaps we could apply that here too…

:clapping:

I was thinking the exact same thing! PROGRESSIVE apparently has it’s limits…

God bless you!

+PAX

 

[ProVobis]

The SSPX may not be aware, but maybe Francis is th best thing that could happen to them.

It seems that if he is allowing for valid Confessions of SSPX priests that he is saying that there is nothing inherently sinful in those faithful attending SSPX masses. Otherwise, how could SSPX forgive SSPX faithful who still intend to attend SSPX masses

Unless there is anything to the contrary, and since confessions are often heard before Mass, I think it follows that those who have confessed here will stick around for the Mass. But I’m sure there will be those who need to have the diocesan okay for any of this and I can’t predict their response.

That said, I don’t think there has never been anything inherently sinful in attending the SSPX Masses, as long as they follow the approved liturgical books, which they do. It seems the only question left was whether such attendance would fulfill the Sunday obligation.

 

[Joe_5859]

What a huge deal this is.
Within the past year:

1)The Vatican calls the SSPX Catholic and declares so to another government, claiming it’s priests as its own. (Argentina)
2) The Vatican gives Fellay permission to discipline his own Priest.
3) The POPE himself takes the status to “no legitimate ministry” to permission and encouragement for the laity to seek out these priests for a sacrament.
4) The Pope recognizes that people attend these chapels “for whatever reason” indicating that he at least somewhat recognizes valid reasons for doing so.

Now, this is bigger than the MP or the (almost signing) of the infamous document. This is the incremental inclusion of the SSPX into the fold. Marriage will follow because it is obvious Francis is doing this out of concern and the needs of the laity who attend.

The question is not “how will the SSPX respond” The need not respond at all. The Question is how will the anti traditionalist crowd feel about the prodigal son…

This is bigger than we realize today. This is extremely good news!

I think it is good news, however I will point out that Pope Francis’ extension of faculties to the SSPX priests for hearing Confessions is limited to the Year of Mercy. It is not—at this time—indefinite. There is an expiration date.

Not to rain on any parades. I do think it’s a tremendous gesture of good will on the part of Pope Francis. It is an encouraging sign and I hope that it bears fruit. It may be true that the SSPX need not respond yet (particularly as relates to this specific instance), but I don’t think they can just passively wait around until their situation is rectified. At some point, they will be required to act and to make a choice.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Unless there is anything to the contrary, and since confessions are often heard before Mass, I think it follows that those who have confessed here will stick around for the Mass. But I’m sure there will be those who need to have the diocesan okay for any of this and I can’t predict their response.

That said, I don’t think there has never been anything inherently sinful in attending the SSPX Masses, as long as they follow the approved liturgical books, which they do. It seems the only question left was whether such attendance would fulfill the Sunday obligation.

Hey, come on Pro, let us hold hands and skip to Fr. Z’s office and ask him…

wdtprs.com/blog/2011/10/quaeritur-sspx-and-fulfilling-sunday-mass-obligation/

can. 1248 1. The precept of participating in the Mass is satisfied by assistance at a Mass which is celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite either on the holy day or on the evening of the preceding day.

This means that if you go to a chapel of the SSPX on the day of precept or the evening before and attend Holy Mass, you fulfill your obligation. The SSPX celebrate in a Catholic Rite.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I think it is good news, however I will point out that Pope Francis’ extension of faculties to the SSPX priests for hearing Confessions is limited to the Year of Mercy. It is not—at this time—indefinite. There is an expiration date.

Not to rain on any parades. I do think it’s a tremendous gesture of good will on the part of Pope Francis. It is an encouraging sign and I hope that it bears fruit. It may be true that the SSPX need not respond yet (particularly as relates to this specific instance), but I don’t think they can just passively wait around until their situation is rectified. At some point, they will be required to act and to make a choice.

I agree wholeheartedly. I also think politics plays a much larger role than we realize or wish to accept. Imagine some in the Church if BXVI had done this. And who knows, perhaps this is a Papal courtesy to the former pontiff. I think the likelihood is that at the end of the this will be quietly extended should no resolution come within the year of mercy. HOWEVER, this could also be a very very nuanced way of putting a clock on the negotiations. “you like having faculties? Oh, good, sign this so you can continue to have them…”

I see you working Pope Francis… Very very sneaky…

 

[ProVobis]

Hey, come on Pro, let us hold hands and skip to Fr. Z’s office and ask him…

Speaking of which…

wdtprs.com/blog/2015/09/pope-francis-for-year-of-mercy-grants-that-sspx-priests-can-validly-absolve/

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Speaking of which…

wdtprs.com/blog/2015/09/pope-francis-for-year-of-mercy-grants-that-sspx-priests-can-validly-absolve/

yup yup.

 

[Joe_5859]

I agree wholeheartedly. I also think politics plays a much larger role than we realize or wish to accept. Imagine some in the Church if BXVI had done this. And who knows, perhaps this is a Papal courtesy to the former pontiff. I think the likelihood is that at the end of the this will be quietly extended should no resolution come within the year of mercy. HOWEVER, this could also be a very very nuanced way of putting a clock on the negotiations. “you like having faculties? Oh, good, sign this so you can continue to have them…”

I see you working Pope Francis… Very very sneaky…

That crafty pope! It is kind of funny to think of how different the reaction is to Pope Francis doing this than if Pope Benedict had done the same. For Pope Benedict, the headlines would have said “Pope Grants Priestly Powers to Holocaust Deniers”.

I know when Pope Benedict XVI resigned, there was some lamenting that the SSPX missed their best shot at reconciliation. It is good to see that they haven’t been written off yet. They are still a relatively “young” entity. I hope that things get worked out so that any future illicit episcopal consecrations can be avoided. To me, that’s the big issue. Bishop Fellay won’t be around forever. And when it comes time for the current SSPX bishops to retire and pass the torch, it can be done in a good way or a bad way. It is gestures like this that I hope will lead to things being settled in a good way.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

That crafty pope! It is kind of funny to think of how different the reaction is to Pope Francis doing this than if Pope Benedict had done the same. For Pope Benedict, the headlines would have said “Pope Grants Priestly Powers to Holocaust Deniers”.

I know when Pope Benedict XVI resigned, there was some lamenting that the SSPX missed their best shot at reconciliation. It is good to see that they haven’t been written off yet. They are still a relatively “young” entity. I hope that things get worked out so that any future illicit episcopal consecrations can be avoided. To me, that’s the big issue. Bishop Fellay won’t be around forever. And when it comes time for the current SSPX bishops to retire and pass the torch, it can be done in a good way or a bad way. It is gestures like this that I hope will lead to things being settled in a good way.

From your keyboard to God’s Eyes.

 

[CaptFun]

Speaking of which…

wdtprs.com/blog/2015/09/pope-francis-for-year-of-mercy-grants-that-sspx-priests-can-validly-absolve/ < From Fr. Z’s blog

I liked Fr. Z’s take on the Pope’s announcement, this document:

wdtprs.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/15_09_01_Francis_SSPX.jpg

The above purported to be a screenshot of the document. Fr. Z’s commentary followed:

This is HUGE news.

Let’s examine this.

First, note the language. This letter says that he hopes that the SSPX will be reconciled. He says that he hears good things about the priests of the SSPX. But he says that the faithful may approach the priests of the SSPX for the Sacrament of Reconciliation (Penance) and that they shall validly and licitly receive absolution.

He doesn’t say that he is granting the priests the faculty to receive sacramental confessions. He places the emphasis on the faithful. In effect, the priests are being given the faculty to hear confessions, but there is a different emphasis. I have the sense that it is the need of the faithful who otherwise might not go to a non-SSPX priest that the Holy Father is stressing.

Think about the case of a person who is dying and there is, say, an ex-priest -a guy who was “laicized” because he committed certain crimes, present, the Church’s laws says that in the circumstances of the person’s danger of death any validly ordained priest automatically has the faculty validly to absolve.

The need of the dying person is of such overwhelming importance that the law itself grants the ex-priest (or suspended priest, etc.) the faculty. The stress is on the need of the dying person, not on the priest.

I think this is an analogous situation.

I have occasionally had to hunt for confession. Some parishes have it for just an hour or so once per week (announced) - unless one goes non-incognito and makes calls to schedule a confession with a priest.

I have even gone to churches at the correct posted time to find for some reason confession is not offered. Holy Day schedule changes things? Priests on retreat? Refurbing the church?

It would be an interesting statistic if churches put a turnstile on the confessional doors and reported just how many people in a parish of thousands are going to confession. Or a time clock to be punched to show how many hours the clergy devotes to sacramental sin forgiveness (for planning purposes only of course ).

When a penitent GOES to confession, it is usually the case I’d think that he/she IS sorry for the sins committed and anxious to be officially reconciled. Bearing THIS in mind … as the document may be emphasizing … getting people reconciled to the Lord and the Church is more important than who is administering the forgiveness. In actuality it is Christ … but delegating that power was the first thing He did on the night of the Resurrection.

Coordinating all this with a Jubilee year is astute too. It’s an exceptional year. A time for forgiving debts … and apparently more. The Church was also given the power to retain peoples’ sins … but since Jesus gave the forgiving power first (and without that sins were already being retained!) forgiveness and reconciliation should be the priority (as it IS here ) !

I’ve been hoping for a reconciliation between the SSPX and the Church. Sentimentally I am drawn to the SSPX a bit, having been raised with the Latin Mass an emphasis on the vertical relationship (giving GOD the hour of worship) … in community but not emphasizing that as much - till the hour is over.

Sometimes it has looked like it’s the SSPX side that is less anxious to unite (or re-unite). And yes, if there was a quickly announced reconciliation, I’d expect some groups in the Church (and the SSPX) would be rather skeptical of it and wary rather than immediately rejoicing.

This is a surprising development … and I’m hoping for the best.

If I DO go to an SSPX priest for confession … should I confess that I have not gone to one of THEIR masses ever? Or Catholic Masses _____ many times? < kidding, for entertainment value, of course.

 

[CaptFun]

I think it is good news, however I will point out that Pope Francis’ extension of faculties to the SSPX priests for hearing Confessions is limited to the Year of Mercy. It is not—at this time—indefinite. There is an expiration date.

Not to rain on any parades. I do think it’s a tremendous gesture of good will on the part of Pope Francis. It is an encouraging sign and I hope that it bears fruit. It may be true that the SSPX need not respond yet (particularly as relates to this specific instance), but I don’t think they can just passively wait around until their situation is rectified. At some point, they will be required to act and to make a choice.

Extending the special (easier to complete) rules for the forgiveness of abortion has that Year of Mercy deadline too it looks like. Normally one has to go to a Bishop? Bishop’s office?

Today we’re in the period BEFORE these things take place. After December 2016 the Year of Mercy (with these exceptions to the rule(s) ) ends. That’s not unmerciful though.

Without a deadline … nothing would ever get done! **-- old Journalism axiom
**

 

[ProVobis]

Extending the special (easier to complete) rules for the forgiveness of abortion has that Year of Mercy deadline too it looks like. Normally one has to go to a Bishop? Bishop’s office?

Today we’re in the period BEFORE these things take place. After December 2016 the Year of Mercy (with these exceptions to the rule(s) ) ends. That’s not unmerciful though.

I heard this reported on, of all radio stations, Rush Limbaugh. He made the comment that he wasn’t Catholic but does it mean after a year, no more mercy be shown? He made no further comments and I missed any callers who responded to this.

 

[Layp3rs0n]

This is amazing news. However, the Fundamentalist Evangelicals have already twisted it. Just saw a video title on YouTube: “Murderer Pope Francis Okays Abortion For One Year”!

 

[Joe_5859]

Extending the special (easier to complete) rules for the forgiveness of abortion has that Year of Mercy deadline too it looks like. Normally one has to go to a Bishop? Bishop’s office?

Today we’re in the period BEFORE these things take place. After December 2016 the Year of Mercy (with these exceptions to the rule(s) ) ends. That’s not unmerciful though.

Jimmy Akin does a good job of explaining things:

Holy Year Gestures on Abortion and the SSPX: 12 Things to Know and Share

In most dioceses in the U.S., the local bishop has already granted this authority to his priests to forgive this sin without appealing to him in every instance. But this may not be the case everywhere.