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

  • Thread starter Thread starter CWN_News
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
otjm said:
The illicitness of the Mass said is not on the person attending the Mass; it is on the priest saying it.

People have not been forbidden to attend SSPX chapels; they have been advised that they should not go and that it could provide a perilous risk to their salvation. The risk is not the Mass itself; it is the matters that come out in homilies, written materials, conversations with other individuals who take the positions against the Church which the Society does, and any other influences which may attend to one seeking out Mass there.
Click to expand...
Best homily I have ever heard in my life was at an sspx chapel…
 
giuseppeTO said:
Newt! It’s been a while … how are you. Here is an interesting consideration:

The Mass an SSPX priest offers is illicit based on the fact that he has not been granted faculties by the ordinary of the diocese. When an SSPX priest celebrates Mass at St. Peter’s in Rome, which is almost a daily occurrence, he makes an appointment ahead of time and at the appointed time of his Mass, he shows his celebret (from the Superior General of the SSPX) in the Sacristy and then is escorted to the altar assigned. It is typically either the altar containing the body of St. Pius X or the Clementine Chapel (relics of St. Peter).

So, even though he has not been provided Faculties from the Bishop (of Rome), he is none the less suffered to offer Mass along with whatever faithful are with him.

Is that Mass illicit and if so, why do you think illicit Masses are tolerated in one of the Holiest shines of Christendom? If it is illicit, why are no church authorities complicit in the (sin) of the priest and faithful participating in an illicit Mass. Is this a case of providing faculties by ‘toleration’ only?
Click to expand...
I see that no one has yet commented on your question as to whether or not the Masses celebrated in St. Peter’s in Rome by the SSPX are illicit or not. Those who believe that the SSPX are schismatic should take note of this important fact (that the SSPX are allowed to celebrate Mass at St. Peter’s).

I wonder…are the Eastern Orthodox, for example, allowed to celebrate Mass at St. Peter’s? Not that they would want to, but still. Are Lutherans or Anglicans allowed to celebrate Mass at St. Peter’s? I don’t think so. So why are the SSPX allowed to do so, if Rome believes that they’re schismatics? I think that the answer would be that Rome does not consider them to be as such; otherwise, why would the SSPX be allowed to celebrate Mass there?

There’s another important question, which maybe has already been asked. Is there a precedent for a Pope granting faculties to absolve sins (for a certain amount of time, or otherwise) to schismatics? Has this ever happened before? If not, then perhaps this, too, lends itself to the idea that the Pope does not consider the SSPX to be schismatic.
 
otjm said:
As to reconciliation, the offer made by Pope Benedict stands; it is still open to them. The ball has been in their court, and they have refused to play. Nothing hinders them from reconciliation other than their own choice.
Click to expand...
What is this offer exactly, and how do you know it still stands without expiration dates?

And what happened to all this being an “internal matter”?
 
otjm said:
And that is going to change Cardinal Mueller’s statement?
Click to expand...
Won’t change his statement but it may bring people back to God through confession. What’s more important here, legalism or salvation?
 
InSearchofGrace said:
Pope Francis’ Year of Mercy Indulgence Raises Canonical Questions

ncregister.com/daily-news/some-canonical-question-regarding-pope-francis-year-of-mercy-indulgence/

,
Click to expand...
from the article.
what is the canonical weight of this letter?
Click to expand...
Seriously?

Isn’t the Pope the final arbiter of Canon Law?

Does he have to issue an Apostolic Consitution to make his point clear? This has not been the first time he has “asked” priests to make their power of forgiveness more available.
 
Deacon Jeff,

I am afraid all I can offer you is anecdotal evidence. Most U.S. SSPX chapels (various priests and faithful), all of the SSPX seminarians in their Sub-Deaconate or Deaconate year, and many of the SSPX sponsored High schools make yearly pilgrimages to Rome. To my knowledge, requests to offer Mass at St. Peters or St. Mary Major are always honored. My son is a priest in the SSPX and has confirmed to me that this is accurate. The only evidence I can offer is the attached picture of a SSPX priest offering Mass in the crypt at St. Peter’s in the Clementine Chapel - perhaps the most privileged altar in the world. I am one of the two servers at that Mass.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
ProVobis said:
from the article.

Seriously?

Isn’t the Pope the final arbiter of Canon Law?

Does he have to issue an Apostolic Consitution to make his point clear? This has not been the first time he has “asked” priests to make their power of forgiveness more available.
Click to expand...
I read that article and actually thought it was an “Eye of the Tiber” spoof piece.

It read like an SSPX criticism about something the Holy Father said…

There is no way that guy was serious right?
 
ProVobis said:
…

Seriously?

Isn’t the Pope the final arbiter of Canon Law?

Does he have to issue an Apostolic Consitution to make his point clear? This has not been the first time he has “asked” priests to make their power of forgiveness more available.
Click to expand...
Hello,

I’m sure Mr. Nguyen is serious. It’s a good article. I was surprised it was in the Register, though. Anyhow, yes, you can say the Pope is the “final arbiter of Canon Law.” That doesn’t mean he can do whatever he wants, however he wants, and it automatically has effect in law. A legal system, which the Church certainly has and utilizes, requires everyone to follow certain fundamental procedures, even the Pope. Otherwise, there’s chaos.

No, he doesn’t need to use an Ap. Constitution. If he wants to modify law, however, the way it’s usually done is through “at least” a motu proprio.

I’m surprised you would suggest that the Pope “made his point clear” in this document…given the hundreds of posts on this thread alone wondering what it all really means.

Dan
 
Hoosier_Daddy said:
I read that article and actually thought it was an “Eye of the Tiber” spoof piece.

It read like an SSPX criticism about something the Holy Father said…

There is no way that guy was serious right?
Click to expand...
Sometimes it’s hard to determine which side these guys are on.

But, in fairness, it’s difficult to be objective in these matters.
 
dans0622 said:
I’m surprised you would suggest that the Pope “made his point clear” in this document…given the hundreds of posts on this thread alone wondering what it all really means.
Click to expand...
For the record, I coupled this document with previous “requests” that priests make themselves more available to hear confessions. One such “request” involved all priests who serve in the Vatican. As far as I see it, this document is not a stand alone. repetitio est mater studiorum. (repetition is the mother of learning).

I have no arguments against your other points. Chaos is the last thing we need. 🙂
 
ProVobis said:
For the record, I coupled this document with previous “requests” that priests make themselves more available to hear confessions.
Click to expand...
And have they?

Sadly we seem to be in a culture where the sacrament of Confession is viewed as an optional extra. It is as if people refuse knowledge that they may actually be in a state of mortal sin.

This is hardly helped when many clergy seem reluctant to mention sin in their homilies, when Confession is rarely offered before Mass, and when Confession is portrayed as an annual event at a service of reconciliation. However this is something that cannot be said about the Holy Father, or indeed the SSPX, or the FSSP etc. When it comes to acknowledging our sinfulness, the devil and the need for Confession, Pope Francis and the SSPX have quite a bit in common.
 
Well you’re not living on the same island as I am. It’s rare to hear homilies on sin, the devil, or the need for confession where I live. There are some gems of parishes where that does happen, but they seem to be in a minority.
 
Very likely, yes. I have good orthodox priests, and they do tout Confession once in a while, and are extremely committed to that sacrament as well, but as far as homilies go, I don’t know, they’re just a little superficial. They rarely get into nitty-gritty details like the devil, or specific evils in the world, let alone abortion, contraception, homosexuality. My priests have all the correct views on these subjects, but the homily time is spent talking about God’s love in general, or “our Lenten game plan”. In fact I rarely remember anything that was said. I just kind of endure them. Nonetheless, I have been told many times by different people that we have really great preaching in my parish. So perhaps we do, but I just wish they would get into those all-important specifics once in a while.
 
Yes, a very very blessed Island. I have traveled the world. I have lived in 5 diocese in this country. The Church .1/2 mile from my house has two priests. No confession hours. Regular homilies that contradict and mislead on Church teaching. I find it amazing that with so many registered people that they are so Holy. I mean no confessions? Wow! Not to mention that when I and my wife used to use ABC we were routinely told it was not a sin. I have said several times “Father, I am not here to discern that, I already have. I am here for absolution.” Both my wife and I attended a Jesuit College that had an open and active homosexual priest activist, I have seen people dancing at our weekly Rock Concert (Mass) just last Sunday. We are routinely told that the progressive gospel is the way to go. That the ways and beliefs of the past are idiotic.

We have had scandals that you would not believe. Sickening ones. Ones that have me with one foot out of the Church… It is sad.

I have also seen a wonderful faithful diocese. Your islands exist. But you need to know that they tend to be the exception not the rule. And seeing that they exist and exist in great number can be an education good Deacon.

But more to the point. What about any Catholic who lives near me. The SSPX down the street may be the only shot at a good confession many people have.
 
Your parishioners are fortunate to benefit from your ministry. Your internet insights are useful. In my diocese the SSPX chapel began in the 1970s when liturgical and catechetical abuses were far more common than now, though I still find them. Today we have 2 parishes with TLMs, newer priests seem orthodox, diocesan ministries are usually, not always, helpful. The diocese itself seems to be standing almost alone against the secular onslaught, as the Media tries to divide and conquer Catholics.

The SSPX chapel seems to be remaining “on an island”, where it is still 1975. (The websites reinforce the urgency to remain on that island). The people and priest don’t directly benefit from our local ordinary, or from the many diocesan ministries that are now mostly orthodox, for Catholic families and children. The SSPX people favor prolife and religious liberty. But I haven’t knowingly met any of them at diocesan programs, and they aren’t strong enough to have their own program.

Children growing up in SSPX may be insulated from a few bad things, but also from lots of good Catholic things in most regions. If their chapel closes, or if they move away, will they seek out reliable Catholic ministry under the authority of the bishop-ordinary? Or will they be influenced by an upbringing skeptical towards the bishop-ordinary- susceptible to “divide and conquer”?

I think the Church wants to reach out to families “on an island”, including extending the sacrament of Confession. But that doesn’t mean it is preferable for families to remain on the island, even though the websites teach that, and likely always will teach that. Instead of constantly posting about whether the SSPX is, or is not, “schismatic”, consider the isolation of families. Everything that happens, whether the pope does something disagreeable, or even when he does something like extend faculties for Confession, will be used by the websites as one more reason for families to remain on the island…just a little longer…
 
commenter said:
Children growing up in SSPX may be insulated from a few bad things, but also from lots of good Catholic things in most regions.
Click to expand...
This I find hard to believe. These people work with Muslims, Protestants, non-practicing Catholics, and others. Even if they don’t watch the news showing their local bishops saying Mass and stating their positions on different secular matters, they no doubt drive by a Catholic Church somewhere within a week or so. Some go to diocesan Masses, even occasionally to the OF. Maybe that’s when they become overly critical and post unkind things about it. Are you sure you want to force them to come off their “island”?
 
ProVobis said:
This I find hard to believe. These people work with Muslims, Protestants, non-practicing Catholics, and others. Even if they don’t watch the news showing their local bishops saying Mass and stating their positions on different secular matters, they no doubt drive by a Catholic Church somewhere within a week or so. Some go to diocesan Masses, even occasionally to the OF. Maybe that’s when they become overly critical and post unkind things about it. Are you sure you want to force them to come off their “island”?
Click to expand...
Not force. Invite.
I believe most of them are conscientiously hoping for the good of the Church. But probably some SSPX peeps are simply permanent grumblers, who oppose hierarchy. Anti-hierarchy Catholics are also flocking to groups like the PNCC, now rebranded as NCC, as well as “Catholic” churches on the Left and Right, and various Institutes or website foundations that raise money by denouncing the Vatican as too liberal. We may not be able to reach the grumblers. There will always be a market for Catholics with a grudge against the hierarchy. The SSPX will be there, 50 years from now, as well as the American Catholic Church, and others on the Left and Right.

I am thinking about conscientious families, trying to raise Catholic children. They tend not to benefit much from the trusting relationship with their ordinary, and rarely are in diocesan ministries. SSPX children are missing out on something. Who is their bishop? Do they have a diocese? I know they can watch the bishop on TV, as Baptists can, but that is not the same thing.

I am not against forming a protective “island”. But it should be an island protecting Catholic families against the hostile secular media, not an island of caution against the local diocese, where the pope’s picture is hanging but everything he and the local bishop says is taken with a big grain of salt. How does that affect children?
 
commenter said:
Not force. Invite.
I believe most of them are conscientiously hoping for the good of the Church. But probably some SSPX peeps are simply permanent grumblers, who oppose hierarchy. Anti-hierarchy Catholics are also flocking to groups like the PNCC, now rebranded as NCC, as well as “Catholic” churches on the Left and Right, and various Institutes or website foundations that raise money by denouncing the Vatican as too liberal. We may not be able to reach the grumblers. There will always be a market for Catholics with a grudge against the hierarchy. The SSPX will be there, 50 years from now, as well as the American Catholic Church, and others on the Left and Right.
Click to expand...
Anti-hierarchy Catholicism is probably more mainstream than one may think, even without these organizations. Yesterday one of my neighbors was on his way to church. As I walked by, I said jokingly that the Pope wants everyone to go to confession now. He responded, “So who listens to the Pope”?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top