Questions about the SSPX

  • Thread starter Thread starter seanri
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

seanri

Guest
Hello. I was wondering and am not entirely clear.Is the traditional mass given by the priests of the SSPX valid in the eyes of the Roman Catholic Church? Is it valid to attend mass at a SSPX church,recieve communion,fulfill the Sunday obligation?I once attended and recieved communion but was somewhat ignorant as to wether if it was valid in the eyes of the Church that I did.Did I sin in doing so?Are there other traditionalist groups offering the latin mass that are in full communion with Rome?What is the status of the negotiations so far in the SSPX and the Vatican? A reply would be appreciated. In Christ. Sean
 
seanri said:
Hello. I was wondering and am not entirely clear.Is the traditional mass given by the priests of the SSPX valid in the eyes of the Roman Catholic Church? Is it valid to attend mass at a SSPX church,recieve communion,fulfill the Sunday obligation?I once attended and recieved communion but was somewhat ignorant as to wether if it was valid in the eyes of the Church that I did.Did I sin in doing so?Are there other traditionalist groups offering the latin mass that are in full communion with Rome?What is the status of the negotiations so far in the SSPX and the Vatican? A reply would be appreciated. In Christ. Sean
Click to expand...
There have been innumerable threads about this same issue. In short, yes, the Eucharist is validly offered by the SSPX. Whether one should attend there is a matter for discussion, and whether it was a matter of “sin” depends on personal disposition. Yes, there are other in full communion with HMC who also offer the EF. The FSSP, ICRSS, some local parishes, certain groups of Franciscans, etc.

Might be worth a trip to look at some previous threads in this forum.
 
The masses offered by SSPX are valid, but illicit, as its bishops and priests ordained by them were illiicitly ordained, and SSPX as such has NO canonical status in the Church yet, as the most recent statement by Pope Benedict expressly states.

Furthermore, since the Sacraments of Confession and Matrimony require jurisdiction, which SSPX lacks, these sacramenets administered by them are invalid.
 
Cluny said:
The masses offered by SSPX are valid, but illicit, as its bishops and priests ordained by them were illiicitly ordained, and SSPX as such has NO canonical status in the Church yet, as the most recent statement by Pope Benedict expressly states.

Furthermore, since the Sacraments of Confession and Matrimony require jurisdiction, which SSPX lacks, these sacramenets administered by them are invalid.
Click to expand...
The issue of “jurisdiction” for the validity (no question about liceity) of Penance in the Latin Church is questionable. The question comes down to: does the priest have faculties? If the priest is validly ordained, it seems to me that is a matter of law, which means it’s a matter of liceity rather than validity.

Matrimony could be seen a bit differently, and I won’t go there. Whatever the argument, it’s far too legalistic for me.
 
malphono said:
The issue of “jurisdiction” for the validity (no question about liceity) of Penance in the Latin Church is questionable. The question comes down to: does the priest have faculties? If the priest is validly ordained, it seems to me that is a matter of law, which means it’s a matter of liceity rather than validity.
Click to expand...
The faculties of Penance are granted by the local bishop, whether the priest is visiting or a member of the SSPX or an independent, and I doubt if it is granted to either. I would stick to diocesan priests for confession. The Mass is a different issue.
 
malphono said:
The issue of “jurisdiction” for the validity (no question about liceity) of Penance in the Latin Church is questionable. The question comes down to: does the priest have faculties? If the priest is validly ordained, it seems to me that is a matter of law, which means it’s a matter of liceity rather than validity.

Matrimony could be seen a bit differently, and I won’t go there. Whatever the argument, it’s far too legalistic for me.
Click to expand...
Oh no! We disagree about something 😦 After all these years 😉

In another thread I cited the Council of Trent on this one:

“because the nature and character of a judgment requires that sentence be pronounced only on those who are subjects (of the judge) the Church of God has always held, and this Council affirms it to be most true, that the absolution which a priest pronounces upon one over whom he has not either ordinary or delegated jurisdiction, is of no effect” (Council of Trent, Sess. XIV, c. 7).

Seems pretty straightforward to me. It’s actually the matrimony one that I don’t get. Since the priest is the witness, not the minister of that Sacrament, why would he have to have jurisdiction? Anybody?
 
seanri said:
Hello. I was wondering and am not entirely clear.Is the traditional mass given by the priests of the SSPX valid in the eyes of the Roman Catholic Church? Is it valid to attend mass at a SSPX church,recieve communion,fulfill the Sunday obligation?I once attended and recieved communion but was somewhat ignorant as to wether if it was valid in the eyes of the Church that I did.Did I sin in doing so?Are there other traditionalist groups offering the latin mass that are in full communion with Rome?What is the status of the negotiations so far in the SSPX and the Vatican? A reply would be appreciated. In Christ. Sean
Click to expand...
In one sense, yes, their sacraments are valid. But they are also illicit because they are in schism. You do not fulfill the Sunday obligation by attending their services.

Only you can judge whether you sinned or not.

The status is that Benedict XVI has reached out to this group in an extraordinary and controversial fashion, and so far from what I know there is little or no reciprocity. The SSPX is still in schism. While their sacraments may be valid they are illicit and not in communion with the Catholic Church.

Cheers
 
** You do not fulfill the Sunday obligation by attending their services.**

Some canonists have argued that one can, provided he does not intend to adhere to schism by so doing.

I myself pray that the SSPX will be fully reconciled and restored to full communion with the Holy See, which has not happened yet, though the lifting of the excommunications is a big step towards this.
 
Thanks Cluny. I hadn’t heard that opinion before. It would seem really odd, though, for a faithful Roman Catholic to attend such a service in lieu of a Roman Catholic Mass…I mean, I’m assuming that the availability of the latter would be much more prevalent than the availability of the former.

Cheers
 
DavidPalm said:
Oh no! We disagree about something 😦 After all these years 😉

In another thread I cited the Council of Trent on this one:

“because the nature and character of a judgment requires that sentence be pronounced only on those who are subjects (of the judge) the Church of God has always held, and this Council affirms it to be most true, that the absolution which a priest pronounces upon one over whom he has not either ordinary or delegated jurisdiction, is of no effect” (Council of Trent, Sess. XIV, c. 7).

Seems pretty straightforward to me. It’s actually the matrimony one that I don’t get. Since the priest is the witness, not the minister of that Sacrament, why would he have to have jurisdiction? Anybody?
Click to expand...
I’m not sure we actually disagree, but of course we’re looking at it from different points of view.

My comment was strictly that it seems to me to be a matter of law, based on the delegation of faculties. In the case at hand, it’s possible that the SSPX may be correct (and I don’t say that often, as you know 😉 ) that it’s a matter of “supplied jurisdiction” in lieu of specific faculties. Under that same premise, any validly ordained priest can give absolution, in extremis.

But of course, I’m not a canon lawyer and I really don’t claim to know the definitive answer to the case at hand. (As with so many things, I suspect that there is debate on the issue even among canon lawyers.) :confused:

As for Matrimony, I habitually avoid most discussion of that issue. The laws are much to arcane for me.
 
sticks fingers in ears and hums

There is no crisis in the Church. There is no crisis in the Church.
 
diggerdomer said:
You do not fulfill the Sunday obligation by attending their services.
Click to expand...
Who makes up this stuff?
Can. 1248 §1 The obligation of assisting at Mass is satisfied wherever Mass is celebrated in a catholic rite either on a holyday itself or on the evening of the previous day.
Click to expand...
This seems straightforward to me.
 
ProVobis said:
Who makes up this stuff?
This seems straightforward to me.
Click to expand...
Well, ProVobis, I think you know why there is confusion.

SSPX priests, if ordained by a Bishop not in communion with Rome, are validly but not licitly ordained.

The sacraments are valid. Up in the stickies, Msgr Camille Perl says attending an SSPX Mass fulfills the Sunday obligation, but also could be sinful if one goes solely to participate in the schism. If one goes for the Latin Mass, it probably isn’t sinful.

How’s that?
**
**
 
PaulinVA said:
Well, ProVobis, I think you know why there is confusion.
Click to expand...
I agree, Paul. There exists this confusion because of the liberal elements in the Church who will not conform to, and actively undermine the Holy Father’s clear wishes as made known to us in his accompanying letter to the Motu Proprio addressed to the Bishops of the world (which one may find on EWTN’s website). The Holy Father notes that the Canonical situation of the Society is an internal matter of reconciliation within the Church, made even more clear by the simple fact that the excommunications of the Bishops of the Society have been lifted.
SSPX priests, if ordained by a Bishop not in communion with Rome, are validly but not licitly ordained.
Click to expand...
The sacraments are valid. Up in the stickies, Msgr Camille Perl says attending an SSPX Mass fulfills the Sunday obligation, but also could be sinful if one goes solely to participate in the schism. If one goes for the Latin Mass, it probably isn’t sinful.
Click to expand...
What schism? This is a fallacy, and a fallacy made even more clear by the Pope’s remarks made in the above-mentioned Letter. Now unless “internal” and “within” have changed their meanings and now mean ‘external’ and ‘without’, your comments assume that Msgr. Perle’s comments are more up to date and outweigh the Pope’s instructions on the matter (see his letter addressed to the Bishops), when in fact Msgr. Perle’s comments are older and do not in anyway outweigh anything the Pope has to say on the subject. Your comments are quite outmoded and only serve to continue and amplify the confusion that you yourself admit exists.

For me and my house, Paul, we will follow the Pope, Christ’s Vicar on earth.
 
seanri said:
Hello. I was wondering and am not entirely clear.Is the traditional mass given by the priests of the SSPX valid in the eyes of the Roman Catholic Church?
Click to expand...
Rather than seek our opinion, read the documents.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=269697

From:

unavoce.org/articles/2003/perl-011803.htm
“1. In the strict sense you may fulfill your Sunday obligation by attending a Mass celebrated by a priest of the Society of St. Pius X.”
His second question was “Is it a sin for me to attend a Pius X Mass” and we responded stating:
Click to expand...
and
"2. We have already told you that we cannot recommend your attendance at such a Mass and have explained the reason why.
Click to expand...
 
pnewton said:
The OP did not question any crisis, your fingers or your ears.

FYI - Confession wasn’t even mentioned.
Click to expand...
Mea culpa, mea culpa, mex maxima culpa. Sorry, confession, supplied jurisdiction, faculties etc, were all mentioned in the conversation. Why can’t I talk about them again? Is that not allowed?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top