Question re SSPX

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

Jestersage

Guest
I realized I will likely open a huge can of worms, but I need to ask: So what is so bad about SSPX, aside from the obvious schism?

Part of the reason I am asking is because my location being in Western Canada, and there is a retreat center by SSPX. Not sure if there is one for FSSP. in Western Canada.
 
The obvious schism should supply all anyone who is true to the Magisterium, would need to know.
 
I realized I will likely open a huge can of worms, but I need to ask: So what is so bad about SSPX, aside from the obvious schism?

Part of the reason I am asking is because my location being in Western Canada, and there is a retreat center by SSPX. Not sure if there is one for FSSP. in Western Canada.
Archbishop Gerhard Ludwig MÜLLER, 2012 Interview:

“The SSPX must accept the Holy Father, the Pope, as the visible head of the Church. They have a great respect for Tradition - they must, therefore, accept the position of the Pope as stated in the First Vatican Council. They must also accept the doctrinal pronouncements made since the Second Vatican Council, which have been authorised officially by the Pope.”

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/muller/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20120913_interview-muller_en.html

Vatican Council, First (1869–70)
Vatican Council, Second (1962–65)
 
They are not in schism - they are in a canonically irregular situation. If they were schismatic, then how come the Pope could give their priests faculties to hear confessions?

I do not support the SSPX, and would only go to one of their chapels if they had the only traditional Mass available, or if they had a Missa Cantata or High Mass as opposed to a diocesan Low Mass.
 
Disobedience - the illicit ordination of the bishops in 1988. Until they accept the Personal Prelature offered to them by the Holy See, I would avoid them.
 
I realized I will likely open a huge can of worms, but I need to ask: So what is so bad about SSPX, aside from the obvious schism?

Part of the reason I am asking is because my location being in Western Canada, and there is a retreat center by SSPX. Not sure if there is one for FSSP. in Western Canada.
It might clarify things by reading the writings of the actual St. Pius X, especially on the importance of Catholic Action. This pope not only wrote about Tradition, but also about the current need for unified Catholic action. This involved the laity working under their pastor and bishop-ordinary, not just following any priest or bishop who happens to be ordained.

He also referred to laity working alongside other laity and **pastors **to promote social justice, and oppose then-current evils that are even stronger now, on a diocesan level, national level, and international level. None of this would happen without obedience to the living magisterium.

Today obedience to the living magisterium is lacking, mostly on the Left but also on the Right. We live in an anti-religious-authority era. If you go to a religious retreat house where the anti-religious-authority temptation is especially tempting, you might learn something about St. Ignatius Loyola, but also you absorb other things. We all tend to think, “I’ll just take what is good and leave the rest behind”. But your attendance there encourages other attendees, and the people who run it, to continue listening to that anti-religious-authority temptation, rather than people like the real St. Pius X, and his call to Catholic Action.

Suppose the SSPX priest happens to be wavering, undecided about whether to unite in ministry with his bishop ordinary and the pope. Your attendance here may help him postpone what may be a positive decision for him; and postpone that needed FSSP retreat house in Western Canada.
 
It might clarify things by reading the writings of the actual St. Pius X, especially on the importance of Catholic Action. This pope not only wrote about Tradition, but also about the current need for unified Catholic action. This involved the laity working under their pastor and bishop-ordinary, not just following any priest or bishop who happens to be ordained.

He also referred to laity working alongside other laity and **pastors **to promote social justice, and oppose then-current evils that are even stronger now, on a diocesan level, national level, and international level. None of this would happen without obedience to the living magisterium.

Today obedience to the living magisterium is lacking, mostly on the Left but also on the Right. We live in an anti-religious-authority era. If you go to a religious retreat house where the anti-religious-authority temptation is especially tempting, you might learn something about St. Ignatius Loyola, but also you absorb other things. We all tend to think, “I’ll just take what is good and leave the rest behind”. But your attendance there encourages other attendees, and the people who run it, to continue listening to that anti-religious-authority temptation, rather than people like the real St. Pius X, and his call to Catholic Action.
Suppose the SSPX priest is undecided about whether to unite with his bishop ordinary and the pope. Your attendance here helps him postpone what might be a positive decision for him.
 
It might clarify things by reading the writings of the actual St. Pius X, especially on the importance of Catholic Action. This pope not only wrote about Tradition, but also about the current need for unified Catholic action. This involved the laity working under their pastor and bishop-ordinary, not just following any priest or bishop who happens to be ordained.

He also referred to laity working alongside other laity and **pastors **to promote social justice, and oppose then-current evils that are even stronger now, on a diocesan level, national level, and international level. None of this would happen without obedience to the living magisterium.

Today obedience to the living magisterium is lacking, mostly on the Left but also on the Right. We live in an anti-religious-authority era. If you go to a religious retreat house where the anti-religious-authority temptation is especially tempting, you might learn something about St. Ignatius Loyola, but also you absorb other things. We all tend to think, “I’ll just take what is good and leave the rest behind”. But your attendance there encourages other attendees, and the people who run it, to continue listening to that anti-religious-authority temptation, rather than people like the real St. Pius X, and his call to Catholic Action.

Suppose the SSPX priest happens to be wavering, undecided about whether to unite in ministry with his bishop ordinary and the pope. Your attendance here may help him postpone what may be a positive decision for him; and postpone that needed FSSP retreat house in Western Canada.
hmmm I see what you did there.

I think the disobedience is enough without bringing up other topics.
 
Disobedience - the illicit ordination of the bishops in 1988. Until they accept the Personal Prelature offered to them by the Holy See, I would avoid them.
For a number of years now, there have been reports surfacing in the media of one or another possible arrangement that might, or might not, result in some formal institutional arrangement, at some point in time.

I just want to point out that, since those talks and media reports began, many priests have already united with their bishop ordinary and the pope. They have **already **helped form many ministries that have served countless laity, who would not have been served if they had put their decision on hold. They have already had a positive, orthodox influence on many dioceses and diocesan clergy. They have been role models for many boys for vocations, who would not have had this kind of influence if the priests had waited, somewhere else, for something like a personal prelature.

Not to minimize the importance of current discussions on the world level, just to point out decisions that are made this year by individuals. These individual decisions by priests have already shown many blessings, because they chose not to wait.
 
I realized I will likely open a huge can of worms, but I need to ask: So what is so bad about SSPX, aside from the obvious schism?

Part of the reason I am asking is because my location being in Western Canada, and there is a retreat center by SSPX. Not sure if there is one for FSSP. in Western Canada.
From a couple of years ago but may help…

wdtprs.com/blog/2015/10/ask-father-is-it-okay-now-to-go-to-sspx-chapels/
That said, depending on local conditions (I know that in some places you can’t find a decent sermon or reverent Mass to save your life) exercising great prudence a person could go to SSPX Masses on occasion. A person can also fulfill her Sunday obligation at such a parish. Canon law is clear about that. Canon 1248 § 1 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law states:
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.
The SSPX is clearly using a Catholic Rite and again and again the Holy See’s Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei has clarified that one fulfill’s the obligation.
 
from a prior poster:

“…That said, depending on local conditions (I know that in some places you can’t find a decent sermon or reverent Mass to save your life) exercising great prudence a person could go to SSPX Masses on occasion. A person can also fulfill her Sunday obligation at such a parish. Canon law is clear about that. Canon 1248 § 1 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law states…” (end quote)

The SSPX does not have any parishes.

**Prudence **involves considering the effects of our actions on others. A priest who says a Mass in defiance of his bishop is going against Canon Law, and hurts himself. Indifference to his spiritual welfare is not consistent with prudence, for him or for the laity.
There is an obligation towards Charity, and avoidance of Scandal, as well as Mass attendance.

At any given time, a priest may be considering uniting with his bishop and the pope. Empty seats at the chapel may encourage a positive decision. If the pews are full, it is easier to justify procrastinating.

Not coincidentally, there are press releases every 6 months or so that “We are almost on the verge of an agreement for - Prelature - Ordinariate - Some other arrangement - with the Vatican. This time we really, really are close. If priests or laity go back to your diocese now by yourself, you miss out. Just a little longer”. Wait.
 
The SSPX does not have any parishes.
How do they not have any parishes? I’ve driven by Queen of Angels parish for almost thirty years. Is it not how they ordinarily do things?
Today Queen of Angels is a parish of 400 to 500 people, with a school, convent, rectory, parish hall, bookshop, print shop, offices and mailroom for the Angelus Press.
 
They are not in schism - they are in a canonically irregular situation. If they were schismatic, then how come the Pope could give their priests faculties to hear confessions?

I do not support the SSPX, and would only go to one of their chapels if they had the only traditional Mass available, or if they had a Missa Cantata or High Mass as opposed to a diocesan Low Mass.
They are the very definition of schism, which means not submitting to the authority of the Pope.
Archbishop Gerhard Ludwig MÜLLER, 2012 Interview:
“The SSPX must accept the Holy Father, the Pope, as the visible head of the Church.”
The reasons that the Pope is giving them concessions is that for decades the Church has been trying to bring them back into the fold. But, like little children, the more concessions that are given, the more they want.
 
Isn’t schism bad enough? One of the very gravest sins?
If they were in schism, would Pope Francis give them faculties for the Sacrament of Confession?

They are canonically irregular, their Masses are probably illicit, and they have significant issues regarding obedience to the Holy See. But saying they are in schism is pushing things.

However, it is wise, I think, to treat them with caution. Would I attend a retreat held by the SSPX? No, I would not.
 
No matter what their intention, no matter what your love for their spirituality, no matter your love for the extraordinary form of the Mass, no matter what they say about themselves, I don’t think one can support a group that claims to have a legitimate ministry in the Church but does not.
“The fact that the Society of Saint Pius X does not possess a canonical status in the Church is not, in the end, based on disciplinary but on doctrinal reasons. As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church. There needs to be a distinction, then, between the disciplinary level, which deals with individuals as such, and the doctrinal level, at which ministry and institution are involved. In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.” - Pope Benedict XVI,
w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/letters/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20090310_remissione-scomunica.html
Just my opinion. YMMV.
 
Part of the reason I am asking is because my location being in Western Canada, and there is a retreat center by SSPX. Not sure if there is one for FSSP. in Western Canada.
The FSSP does not have any retreat centers as such, but they do have an apostolate in Vancouver and they do offer retreats in various places each year. If you get a chance to do the Spiritual Exercises with Fr. Buckley, by all means, please do so! He is a rare treasure in the Church today and we don’t know how much longer we will have him. He has a wonderful mastery of St. Ignatius’ exercises, from a traditional Catholic perspective. I’ve been on several of his retreats and they are unforgettable and life-changing.

fssp.com/the-golden-jubilee-of-fr-james-buckley-fssp/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top