- Status
T
thistle
Guest
Not fulfill the Sunday obligation.
F
Faithdancer
Guest
D
Dies_Irae_1
Guest
You can go to an SSPX mass and receive Holy Communion if it’s not done in a spirit of schism. The mass is valid.
M
melchesidechpio
Guest
The SSPX means well and I respect them, but I would go no with this answer for various reasons most have been talked about. Until the SSPX is absolutely in 100% in good standing with Rome I would would shy away. Again they are good people but it is a touchy subject here
F
Faithdancer
Guest
I planned to attend the SSPX Mass yesterday, but couldn’t do that and also prepare for my responsibility helping with the youth at our parish picnic (I’m a Youth Ministry Coordinator, employed by the diocese). I do plan to attend the SSPX Mass soon. I think that one thing that may help mend the fences, in a small way and in our area at least, is for me to get to know some of the parishioners and pastoral staff at our nearest SSPX chapel. I’m certainly not privy to the high level talks between Bishop Fellay et.al. and the Vatican, but I can do my little part to reach out to our SSPX brethren, rather than ostracizing them. I will always, of course, attend a Sunday diocesan Mass, that goes without saying and I don’t have any problem with attending Mass twice in the same day! If I get to know some of the SSPX congregation I will certainly invite them to attend our diocesan EF Mass as well.
While I may not be able to do much, on my own, to break down the wall of isolation which separates us from the SSPX…imagine if this were a large scale grass roots effort?
That being said, when I do get to an SSPX Mass, I’m wondering if I will recognize any of the good people who attend Mass at our single diocesan EF Mass location? Perhaps some others are already going back and forth?
While I may not be able to do much, on my own, to break down the wall of isolation which separates us from the SSPX…imagine if this were a large scale grass roots effort?
That being said, when I do get to an SSPX Mass, I’m wondering if I will recognize any of the good people who attend Mass at our single diocesan EF Mass location? Perhaps some others are already going back and forth?
F
Faithdancer
Guest
That’s how I read it as well. And there is a huge difference between a spirit of schism and disobedience
and a spirit of fraternity and the desire to see the SSPX fully reconciled with the Magisterium
M
Moore11
Guest
Where are some getting that it does not fulfill the Sunday obligation?
I was under the impression that one could attend out of love for the EF in an area where they may not have access to ANOTHER EF.
Could someone clarify?
I was under the impression that one could attend out of love for the EF in an area where they may not have access to ANOTHER EF.
Could someone clarify?
L
larsont7
Guest
This question has more or less been answered several times:
Yes, it is permissible to attend an SSPX Mass, as it is a valid Mass. Let’s leave the shoulda, woulda, coulda arguments out of it, as they cloud the OP’s original question. The Church says it is OK to attend, so thus it is OK. You will find illicit Masses in both the EF and the OF, so the choice is up to you.
As far as the other Sacraments are concerned, it all comes down to jurisdiction, and since I am no canon lawyer, I’ll leave this topic alone as it is very complex. I can see both sides of this debate, and though I may feel one way, I’m not going to judge those that feel differently about it.
Yes, it is permissible to attend an SSPX Mass, as it is a valid Mass. Let’s leave the shoulda, woulda, coulda arguments out of it, as they cloud the OP’s original question. The Church says it is OK to attend, so thus it is OK. You will find illicit Masses in both the EF and the OF, so the choice is up to you.
As far as the other Sacraments are concerned, it all comes down to jurisdiction, and since I am no canon lawyer, I’ll leave this topic alone as it is very complex. I can see both sides of this debate, and though I may feel one way, I’m not going to judge those that feel differently about it.
D
Dies_Irae_1
Guest
Excellent summary.
K
Kevin812
Guest
On the issue of Confession —
After some quick research the answer comes down to the all important answer of – it depends!!!
What it depends on is the facilities of the Priest and this (apparently) widely varies by Priest, Bishop, and/or location.
It boils down to call/emailing/asking the good SSPX Father and/or the local Bishop (as appointed by the Pope.)
After some quick research the answer comes down to the all important answer of – it depends!!!
What it depends on is the facilities of the Priest and this (apparently) widely varies by Priest, Bishop, and/or location.
It boils down to call/emailing/asking the good SSPX Father and/or the local Bishop (as appointed by the Pope.)
M
Melchior_1
Guest
Their faculties have been suspended by the Supreme Pontiff. In this case, that trumps local Bishops.On the issue of Confession —
After some quick research the answer comes down to the all important answer of – it depends!!!
What it depends on is the facilities of the Priest and this (apparently) widely varies by Priest, Bishop, and/or location.
It boils down to call/emailing/asking the good SSPX Father and/or the local Bishop (as appointed by the Pope.)
Unless you’re just about to die, the Confessions heard from SSPX priests are invalid.
It would be like if a priest unilaterally decided to say “oh yes, your marriage is annulled” without having a couple go through the tribunal process.
K
Kevin812
Guest
Things are really never all that simple and complex questions always need rather complex answers.
M
Melchior_1
Guest
There are some things that we don’t actually need to over-think, and this is one of them.
The Pope, supreme lawgiver and chief judge of Canon Law, suspended their faculties. Again, to be clear; the leader of the Universal Church suspended their faculties on a universal level.
No Bishop can override the Pope’s ruling on this. The Pope has the keys. Until the suspensions are lifted, by the Pope, then the SSPX priests will not have faculties. A Bishop can “grant faculties” as much as they want, but it doesn’t change a thing because the Pope’s judicial measure is still in effect.
The lone exception to this is that the Church will provide faculties in the event someone is about to die. That’s it.
M
Moore11
Guest
That was an interesting way to put it.
While we may not see eye to eye sometimes I appreciate this post.
L
larsont7
Guest
As was said earlier, not everything is as simple as it seems. If anyone wants to hear the SSPX’s side of the story rather than the opinions of CAF users, then I suggest you read their website regarding the issue: sspx.org/miscellaneous/supplied_jurisdiction/validity_of_confessions_1.htm
Jurisdiction is a very difficult thing to grasp, especially for those who aren’t well versed in canon law, which, as I mentioned earlier, is why I stay out of it and don’t judge those who feel one way or the other. That being said, I have never been to an SSPX chapel nor received any of their Sacraments, but I can see the arguments for those that do.
M
Melchior_1
Guest
The issue I have with using the SSPX website for their reasoning is also a simple one; His Grace Lefebvre claimed that Canon Law provided him the means to consecrate the four Bishops. Blessed John Paul II said that the Law did not apply in this case. His Grace Lefebvre did it anyway, and as a result he and the four were excommunicated, and universal suspensions for all SSPX priests were done.
Sound familiar?
“Canon Law provides for the consecrations!” The Pope disagreed, and we’re seeing the fallout now.
“Canon Law provides for confessions!” The Pope disagrees, and we’re seeing the fallout now.
I’m sorry, but using their website as the litmus for this isn’t proper, as they’ve already proven that they will use Canon Law as they see fit, without paying attention to the judge. Can you imagine any Lawyer doing that in a civil courtroom? A lawyer says “this law is applicable” and a Supreme Court judge says “no it doesn’t”. Imagine if the lawyer continued to act that he was right and the judge was wrong, within that court room. Guess what will happen?
Contempt. Sanctions. Disbarment.
Again, sound familiar?
Lets use a couple of examples to help clear this up:
- Father Hans Kung has made some curious statements lately. If the Pope issues a suspension on Father Kung, he will not be able to hear confessions anywhere. The suspension is a universal one, as the Pope can issue universal Laws.
- My Uncle is a retired priest. He says private Masses when he travels, and he also acts as a “sub” when some priests go on vacations. When he does this, he needs faculties granted.
At the end of the day, Matthew 16:18 trumps all. Benedict (and JP2 before him) has the keys, and can bind and loose on Earth will be done likewise in Heaven.
Am I making a big deal about this? Maybe I am. But maybe it says something when the guy who tends to go “meh, no biggie”, “don’t sweat the small stuff”, “I’d be fine with Mass in an outhouse if the Mass is valid”, is saying “this is a serious deal, and we need to make sure that people understand it’s a serious deal”.
We’re talking mortal sins here, guys. And I’m not as concerned about the people who go to a SSPX confessional and don’t know the situation (I’m sure God’ll understand), I’m deffo very concerned with the people who should know better, but do it anyway.
Because, this isn’t illicit, this is INVALID. People can brush off the former, but the latter…I’d be careful.
L
larsont7
Guest
I don’t think we’re all that different, for I agree with much of what you said, which is why I don’t attend SSPX chapels or receive their Sacraments. In fact, I disagree with much of what that website I provided claims. My only point was that even though it may seem like a cut and dry issue, I just don’t see it that way, and to say with 100% certainty that their Sacraments are invalid is a line I’m not willing to cross.
I do believe the Church is in a crisis, and there are provisions within Canon Law that allow for supplied jurisdiction during times of crisis. I don’t agree with it to the extent that those in the SSPX do, but again, I see where they are coming from and won’t judge them based on their interpretation of Canon Law.
As a whole, I think anyone who loves the EF owes a lot to the SSPX, for if it weren’t for them, the EF would not be as accessible as it is today. I know the FSSP wouldn’t, since it was founded by ex-SSPX priests. That being said, until they are formally united with the Church, I will not attend myself, nor encourage or discourage others from doing so.
M
Melchior_1
Guest
Not Sacraments, Sacrament. Singular. Their other Sacraments are illicit, but still valid (although marriage is up in the air, after five years of studying Canon Law as a recreational hobby I still haven’t figured that one out).
No one is judging them with the exception of two men; one’s in Heaven, and I like Benedict’s chances. The Pope says the Crisis Clause does not apply. Therefore it doesn’t apply. I’m not judging them, rather I’m using the judge’s judgement.
- Status