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

[commenter]

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”?

The media pumps this into everyone’s mind. It is so taken for granted, we hardly notice this bias.

 

[Brendan_64]

Anti-hierarchy Catholicism is probably more mainstream than one may think, even without these organizations.

Indeed. And what of the many blatant abuses of the liturgy that take place? Lay people speaking during the homily slot, proper vestments not being worn by the priest, priests leaving the sanctuary to shake hands with the congregation during the Sign of Peace, congregations being told to hold hands during the Our Father, omitting the Creed, inventing Penitential Acts which don’t mention sin, instructing Extraordinary Ministers to give themselves their own Communion, and many other things that seem to be commonplace within many parishes. That is anti-hierarchy Catholicism as it blatantly ignores very clear instructions from the hierarchy.

 

[commenter]

Indeed. And what of the many blatant abuses of the liturgy that take place? Lay people speaking during the homily slot, proper vestments not being worn by the priest, priests leaving the sanctuary to shake hands with the congregation during the Sign of Peace, congregations being told to hold hands during the Our Father, omitting the Creed, inventing Penitential Acts which don’t mention sin, instructing Extraordinary Ministers to give themselves their own Communion, and many other things that seem to be commonplace within many parishes. That is anti-hierarchy Catholicism as it blatantly ignores very clear instructions from the hierarchy.

True.

 

[ProVobis]

Indeed. And what of the many blatant abuses of the liturgy that take place? Lay people speaking during the homily slot, proper vestments not being worn by the priest, priests leaving the sanctuary to shake hands with the congregation during the Sign of Peace, congregations being told to hold hands during the Our Father, omitting the Creed, inventing Penitential Acts which don’t mention sin, instructing Extraordinary Ministers to give themselves their own Communion, and many other things that seem to be commonplace within many parishes. That is anti-hierarchy Catholicism as it blatantly ignores very clear instructions from the hierarchy.

Whether it’s abuse or plain desacralization (I believe Cardinal Arinze used this term) of what the Church has always been held as sacred, this appears to be the rupture which recent Popes have spoken against.

 

[commenter]

Whether it’s abuse or plain desacralization (I believe Cardinal Arinze used this term) of what the Church has always been held as sacred, this appears to be the rupture which recent Popes have spoken against.

Actually the desacralization has covered many denominations, and even whole societies including the US and UK. It will be a struggle for our whole lives, and long after. It’s not a **“crisis”. The question is how and where families should respond, cooperating with other families and with an (imperfect) diocese, with imperfect ministries for families and children. The other problem is that the anti Christian lobby, especially in the media, dominates the political and cultural life of the Western countries. This reinforces consideration of how Catholics can cooperate for self defense starting at the local level. It forces us to reexamine our relationship to pastors, and how they relate to (imperfect) bishops; and how those bishops relate to each other, and to the Holy See.

 

[giuseppeTO]

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…

In fairness, I would lay a bit of this blame at the feet of the diocese. As a sacristan at an SSPX chapel, I see most of the communication that comes by mail. I remember in the last 5 years, only one communication from the diocese asking for a certain devotion to be offered after Mass on a particular Sunday. We gladly complied. Short of being asked to leave town, any request from the diocese would be honored as a request from the valid authority. We have never been asked to participate in a Lenten appeal, for instance. Some SSPX parishioners do of their own volition.

 

[commenter]

In fairness, I would lay a bit of this blame at the feet of the typical diocese (not necessarily yours). As a sacristan at an SSPX chapel, I see most of the communication that comes by mail. I remember in the last 5 years, only one communication from the diocese asking for a certain devotion to be offered after Mass on a particular Sunday. We gladly complied. Short of being asked to leave town, any request from the diocese would be honored as a request from the valid authority. We have never been asked to participate in a Lenten appeal, for instance. Some SSPX parishioners do of their own volition.

Just based on my own experience, I would lay more than a bit of this blame at the feet of the diocese. Even when they did initiate 1, then 2, diocesan TLM Masses in my city, there was a grudging article in the diocesan newspaper, “Well, we sort of have to offer this now”. No hint of “What a rich opportunity the TLM presents! Try it out!” Trust me, even though I have written what I hope are respectful posts disagreeing with the SSPX organization as such, I don’t in any way minimize the issues, the indifference, etc, not just on liturgy but other things, in my own and probably your diocese.

Fortunately in my diocese the disagreeable stuff is now coming from staff who are holdovers from the earlier, liberal era. I still encourage individuals to reconcile on their own and fully unite now with their diocese, but it won’t be a perfect diocese. (I am arguing with my diocese now, something unrelated to liturgy). We need to pray for officials on both sides of this controversy, and not judge them.

(You are a sacristan? Maybe this helped contribute to your son’s vocation. I hope he is doing well.) We visited Syracuse recently, went to Assumption, beautiful church and much heritage, Mass there.

 

[Brendan_64]

There is a real issue within parishes and dioceses of a seemingly ingrained attitude that liturgical abuses and lukewarm teaching are somehow OK. Very little ever seems to be done about it, to the point where it in many places it is viewed as the norm.

I know of Catholics who have become so disheartened by this that they have begun attending SSPX chapels out of desperation because of the abuses of the liturgy and poor teaching in diocesan parishes. This is a serious issue that diocesan bishops should take hold of and correct.

I can see how parishioners from diocesan parishes, who hold a firm view on Catholic liturgy and teaching would be attracted to Confession at an SSPX chapel.

 

[commenter]

There is a real issue within parishes and dioceses of a seemingly ingrained attitude that liturgical abuses and lukewarm teaching are somehow OK. Very little ever seems to be done about it, to the point where it in many places it is viewed as the norm.

I know of Catholics who have become so disheartened by this that they have begun attending SSPX chapels out of desperation because of the abuses of the liturgy and poor teaching in diocesan parishes. This is a serious issue that diocesan bishops should take hold of and correct.

I can see how parishioners from diocesan parishes, who hold a firm view on Catholic liturgy and teaching would be attracted to Confession at an SSPX chapel.

Emergency decisions have a way of turning into permanent policies, which are rarely the best possible option long term, especially for families. A teenager may be in a chapel (and “outside” the local diocese) today, because - 20 years ago - his mother was rightfully angered by liturgical abuses that were then common in nearby parishes. This teen may get some good things from the chapel. But he remains apart from the great majority of Catholic youth, family, prolife, etc programs now, regardless of whether nearby parishes have liturgical abuses in 2015. My local diocese has changed a lot since 1975, but the local chapel is still responding as if it were still 1975.

Organizations that were established for one purpose will keep finding new purposes to justify the organization, which takes on a life of its own. When I worked for the government, our department spent enormous energy convincing people that “Our *unique *work is not yet done!”.

If the problem that caused us to come into existence seemed to decline, we invariably found related problems that only we had the expertise to address. We invariably found certain trends that, over the next year, would show a new necessity for our organization, and the irreparable damage of prematurely dismantling it. Oddly enough, every year our PR people would discover 1 new threat, and 1 new opportunity, both of which needed our department to respond to.

"You still need us!"

 

[Brendan_64]

There is merit in what you say, but in reality there is sometimes only so much a person can put up with. If a person was in a situation where they had to endure years of liturgical abuse and lukewarm teaching in a parish, then for the sake of their own spiritual welfare they may have no choice but to go elsewhere. Worse still if they have children who see and hear these things. If the neighbouring parishes are similar, then for the sake of them and their families there may seem little alternative.

In some parts things are really quite bad in this regard Sunday after Sunday.

I do not attend an SSPX chapel myself (apart from on a few ocassions) but I really do understand why people decide to do so. Years of enduring slack liturgy, with frequent abuses, and poor teaching often sailing so close to the wind that it seems to cross the line, Sunday after Sunday, for years on end, really can take its toll.

I can fully understand why, now that SSPX Confessions are valid during thr Year of Mercy at least, some Catholics who would otherwise (out of loyalty) not go to sn SSPX Confession may now choose to do so.

 

[commenter]

There is merit in what you say, but in reality there is sometimes only so much a person can put up with. If a person was in a situation where they had to endure years of liturgical abuse and lukewarm teaching in a parish, then for the sake of their own spiritual welfare they may have no choice but to go elsewhere. Worse still if they have children who see and hear these things. If the neighbouring parishes are similar, then for the sake of them and their families there may seem little alternative.

In some parts things are really quite bad in this regard Sunday after Sunday.

I do not attend an SSPX chapel myself (apart from on a few ocassions) but I really do understand why people decide to do so. Years of enduring slack liturgy, with frequent abuses, and poor teaching often sailing so close to the wind that it seems to cross the line, Sunday after Sunday, for years on end, really can take its toll.

I can fully understand why, now that SSPX Confessions are valid during thr Year of Mercy at least, some Catholics who would otherwise (out of loyalty) not go to sn SSPX Confession may now choose to do so.

I hear you!
Let’s pray for those who are in problem parish situations, on either side of the Atlantic. The liturgical and catechetical abuses have been partly alleviated in many places, but there is still a problem in many places. Families are struggling, with insufficient support.

 

[pnewton]

I hear you!
Let’s pray for those who are in problem parish situations, on either side of the Atlantic. The liturgical and catechetical abuses have been partly alleviated in many places, but there is still a problem in many places. Families are struggling, with insufficient support.

The only criteria I judge this by, since no one keeps stats on such things, is the level of abuse that people gripe about. This is just my gut, but it seems in the last ten years here, the abuse that pop up on CAF are fewer and less severe. In fact, I would say now that half the stuff people complain about being an abuse is not an abuse but an option the priest or bishop takes that the complainant just doesn’t like. I take this as a positive sign.

In these cases, I do not view changing churches to go somewhere with cooler music any worse than changing churches to go somewhere with more Latin. The criteria is not the reason for the change, but the extent that the change will bring one from the Catholic Church.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

The only criteria I judge this by, since no one keeps stats on such things, is the level of abuse that people gripe about. This is just my gut, but it seems in the last ten years here, the abuse that pop up on CAF are fewer and less severe. In fact, I would say now that half the stuff people complain about being an abuse is not an abuse but an option the priest or bishop takes that the complainant just doesn’t like. I take this as a positive sign.

In these cases, I do not view changing churches to go somewhere with cooler music any worse than changing churches to go somewhere with more Latin. The criteria is not the reason for the change, but the extent that the change will bring one from the Catholic Church.

I would hope this is the case in many places. I have seen less posting about little issues here. But I think part of that is it is a pretty good way to inflame a thread and get it closed down. And it is hard to post things without identifying who what and where, which I think should be a CAF no no. I will say this. And it is because I do not live where my user name is anymore that abuse, and serious ones are still common. I think we just get fatigued by it. At our Mass yesterday the words of the Consecration were changed and ad libed. The entire validity of the Mass is in question sometimes for some of us…

but I am just so tired… Tired of fighting… tired of complaining… Just plain old exhausted. There is little to no recourse and it has been this way for years. With no sign of stopping. Some of the newer priests are better. But they are drowned out many times by the old guard…

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

There is merit in what you say, but in reality there is sometimes only so much a person can put up with. If a person was in a situation where they had to endure years of liturgical abuse and lukewarm teaching in a parish, then for the sake of their own spiritual welfare they may have no choice but to go elsewhere. Worse still if they have children who see and hear these things. If the neighbouring parishes are similar, then for the sake of them and their families there may seem little alternative.

In some parts things are really quite bad in this regard Sunday after Sunday.

I do not attend an SSPX chapel myself (apart from on a few ocassions) but I really do understand why people decide to do so. Years of enduring slack liturgy, with frequent abuses, and poor teaching often sailing so close to the wind that it seems to cross the line, Sunday after Sunday, for years on end, really can take its toll.

I can fully understand why, now that SSPX Confessions are valid during thr Year of Mercy at least, some Catholics who would otherwise (out of loyalty) not go to sn SSPX Confession may now choose to do so.

I second every word of this post. thank you.

 

[commenter]

I would hope this is the case in many places. I have seen less posting about little issues here. But I think part of that is it is a pretty good way to inflame a thread and get it closed down. And it is hard to post things without identifying who what and where, which I think should be a CAF no no. I will say this. And it is because I do not live where my user name is anymore that abuse, and serious ones are still common. I think we just get fatigued by it. At our Mass yesterday the words of the Consecration were changed and ad libed. The entire validity of the Mass is in question sometimes for some of us…

but I am just so tired… Tired of fighting… tired of complaining… Just plain old exhausted. There is little to no recourse and it has been this way for years. With no sign of stopping. Some of the newer priests are better. But they are drowned out many times by the old guard…

Thank you for your perseverance! The secular world gives us so much difficulty, it is sad when the Church gives us some, too.

 

[Brendan_64]

At our Mass yesterday the words of the Consecration were changed and ad libed. The entire validity of the Mass is in question sometimes for some of us…

That’s about as serious an abuse as you can get. My understanding is that a change to the words of the Eucharistic Prayer invalidates the Mass. Thankfully I’ve never witnessed that degree of abuse.

but I am just so tired… Tired of fighting… tired of complaining… Just plain old exhausted. There is little to no recourse and it has been this way for years. With no sign of stopping. Some of the newer priests are better. But they are drowned out many times by the old guard…

It really does wear you down. What is so difficult about celebrating a mass according to the Missal? It’s not exactly rocket science. Why the need for some priests to stamp their own ‘individuality’ on the Mass? Why not just say it as it is, as its meant to be said, as the Church wishes it to be said? And when you want this you’re viewed as some ‘old fossil’. It is just very wearing.

 

[TimothyH]

There is merit in what you say, but in reality there is sometimes only so much a person can put up with. If a person was in a situation where they had to endure years of liturgical abuse and lukewarm teaching in a parish, then for the sake of their own spiritual welfare they may have no choice but to go elsewhere. Worse still if they have children who see and hear these things. If the neighbouring parishes are similar, then for the sake of them and their families there may seem little alternative.

In some parts things are really quite bad in this regard Sunday after Sunday.

I do not attend an SSPX chapel myself (apart from on a few ocassions) but I really do understand why people decide to do so. Years of enduring slack liturgy, with frequent abuses, and poor teaching often sailing so close to the wind that it seems to cross the line, Sunday after Sunday, for years on end, really can take its toll.

I can fully understand why, now that SSPX Confessions are valid during thr Year of Mercy at least, some Catholics who would otherwise (out of loyalty) not go to sn SSPX Confession may now choose to do so.

Except that what many people think are liturgical abuses are really just perceived liturgical abuses and what may people believe is lukewarm catechessis are really just things they don’t want to hear. The Church’s authentic teaching on social justice is the perfect example. And so off they go parish shopping…

If we are doing our job forming and praying with our children then we can counteract anything our children are being taught in 1 hour of PSR each week. I have a friend - former Baptist, who sits near the steps to the sanctuary and teaches his children after every Mass.

If we are reading your Bible like we should, referencing the Catechism and doing our daily spiritual reading from the early church fathers and doctors then orthodox teaching shouldn’t be a problem for us. Catholics don’t even read the Bible!

If we are praying the Mass like we should and have contrition for our sins then 99% of what people believe are liturgical abuses would go unnoticed.

The hottest fire burns on the inside of a furnace, not the outside. Things are as slack as we decide they are.

-Tim-

 

[Brendan_64]

Except that what many people think are liturgical abuses are really just perceived liturgical abuses

Abuses of the liturgy are abuses of the liturgy. The clergy are not at liberty to adapt the Mass as they see fit, Redemptionis Sacramentum, GIRM and Canon Law are very clear on this. The Mass should reflect the mind of the Chirch (as laid down in the Missal) not the mind of Father Joe or the mind of the congregation.

If we are praying the Mass like we should and have contrition for our sins then 99% of what people believe are liturgical abuses would go unnoticed.

As Catholics it is our duty to notice these abuses and do what we can to try to have them corrected. Redemptionis Sacramentum makes that clear.

[RS 183.] “In an altogether particular manner, let everyone do all that is in their power to ensure that the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist will be protected from any and every irreverence or distortion and that all abuses be thoroughly corrected. This is a most serious duty incumbent upon each and every one, and all are bound to carry it out without any favouritism.”

 

[pnewton]

That’s about as serious an abuse as you can get. My understanding is that a change to the words of the Eucharistic Prayer invalidates the Mass. .

Changing the words of the consecration is wrong, but seldom invalidates the Sacrament. I looked up this real quick as an explanation, but you can probably search the CA website for the same info.
jimmyakin.com/2005/05/consecration_va.html

If the changes are of the nature you say then the consecration is going to be valid. As long as he conveys the ideas “This is my Body” and “This is . . . my blood” then the consecration will take place because the words he uses signify the reality of transubstantiation.

Is it a valid consecration?

Yes, as indicated.

So this sort of fiddling is exactly what we have when the SSPX says a Mass. We have a valid Eucharist, but a Mass that is said illicitly. It would be hypocritical for a priest who does such things to criticize the SSPX for their illicit Mass, as it would be for the SSPX to criticize such abuses.

 

[ProVobis]

Changing the words of the consecration is wrong, but seldom invalidates the Sacrament. I looked up this real quick as an explanation, but you can probably search the CA website for the same info.

Yes, De Defectibus seems to provide the more complete explanation.