SSPX & FSSP relationship now?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ronb
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m pretty sure there is no universal law concerning the placement of the tabernacle, except that it be in a “prominent” place in the church… which gives you some wiggle room. In many great cathedrals the tabernacle is in a side chapel, and this was true long before Vatican II…

That said, in my own archdiocese, the archbishop has instructed all parishes to place the tabernacle front and centre in the sanctuary behind the altar…
 
FYI from the USCCB:
Gestures and Bodily Posture
  1. The gestures and bodily posture of both the Priest, the Deacon, and the ministers, and also of the people, must be conducive to making the entire celebration resplendent with beauty and noble simplicity, to making clear the true and full meaning of its different parts, and to fostering the participation of all.[52] Attention must therefore be paid to what is determined by this General Instruction and by the traditional practice of the Roman Rite and to what serves the common spiritual good of the People of God, rather than private inclination or arbitrary choice.
    In the Dioceses of the United States of America, they should kneel beginning after the singing or recitation of the Sanctus (Holy, Holy, Holy) until after the Amen of the Eucharistic Prayer, except when prevented on occasion by ill health, or for reasons of lack of space, of the large number of people present, or for another reasonable cause. However, those who do not kneel ought to make a profound bow when the Priest genuflects after the Consecration. The faithful kneel after the Agnus Dei (Lamb of God) unless the Diocesan Bishop determines otherwise.[53]
For the sake of uniformity in gestures and bodily postures during one and the same celebration, the faithful should follow the instructions which the Deacon, a lay minister, or the Priest gives, according to what is laid down in the Missal."
http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-wor...uction-of-the-roman-missal/girm-chapter-2.cfm
 
ronb said:
40.png
ronb:
This is kind of an odd subject but there’s a good reason for it. I’ve attended FSSP churches for about five or six years now. Formally I was in the SSPX (where I was conditionally baptized). There were reasons for the change to FSSP but I’m not going to go into that now. We never regretted the move and I’m happy we made it. We’ve now moved and, since there is no FSSP church where we live now, we are attending a Novus Ordo church where the regular priest has just started giving a Latin Mass once a month (every 2nd Sunday). We’re very thankful for that and also thankful that the Novus Ordo masses are very reverent at this church.
Click to expand...
I snipped this small section instead of pasting the entire post, lol.😉

Forgive my ignorance, but what is FSSP? I know the other one. This is sad, as Catholics we are supposed to be united, not devided.
Click to expand...
 
Thank you for clearing that up. I suppose that makes sense now why the two are at odds.

Still sad though. We really need to be united in our one Catholic faith as Christ commanded, with respect to our individual (small t) traditions and liturgies. We should not be separating as our Protestant Brothers and Sisters in Christ have done. Sad for these two young people.
 
Still sad though. We really need to be united in our one Catholic faith as Christ commanded, with respect to our individual (small t) traditions and liturgies. We should not be separating as our Protestant Brothers and Sisters in Christ have done. Sad for these two young people.
Click to expand...
I agree that it’s sad, but at the same time, I think the FSSP made the right decision to split from the SSPX. As much as I can respect the affinity that group has always had for the Latin Mass, their choice to separate themselves from the Pope is most unfortunate. The FSSP does it the right way: they offer the Latin Mass for those who want it, but you also don’t have to worry about associating with a group that is not in full communion with the Church when you attend their Masses.

Divisions are always sad, but sometimes they are inevitable. The Traditionalist movement has the unfortunate distinction of being made up of numerous factions that are an “offshoot” of the group they originated from. The SSPX “Resistance” or whatever they call themselves is a recent example. It’s only a matter of time before some disgruntled member of one of those Trad groups decides they can do it better and goes and starts their own group.

The FSSP was justified in doing what they did, but most of the other cliques out there in the Trad movement highlight the pressing need for communion with Rome, otherwise such groups are like a sheep without a shepherd, wandering aimlessly and falling further into an abyss that is difficult to crawl out of.
 
Last edited:
PrayForMe said:
The Traditionalist movement has the unfortunate distinction of being made up of numerous factions that are an “offshoot” of the group they originated from. The SSPX “Resistance” or whatever they call themselves is a recent example. It’s only a matter of time before some disgruntled member of one of those Trad groups decides they can do it better and goes and starts their own group.
Click to expand...
This was the history of Protestantism. Most denominations began when a departing group says “The leadership has strayed. We are not leaving, we are preserving, restoring, even though our status is irregular. NOT a schism.” The structure of a permanent denomination emerges gradually.

While the Protestant position is Sola Scriptura the Trad position is Solo Traditio, that we don’t need a Living Magisterium to interpret Tradition.

The Sola Traditio argument assumes that any 10 reasonable persons can interpret Tradition in the same way, even though they reject the similar argument made by Sola Scriptura folks.

The FSSP appears to reject the Sola Traditio argument, but strongly affirms Tradition itself, so often neglected since 1960.
 
Last edited:
Totally agree with what you just stated. That is how I feel about it.
 
In principle, SSPX families are fully members of their parish and Diocese, benefitting from and supporting any orthodox programs available.

In practice, families belong only to their chapel, and to the larger SSPX system. They usually have no contact with regional efforts for prolife, and other good things connected to parishes and diocese.

In principle, SSPX is a religious order with no lay “members”. In practice, for families, it’s gradually becoming - functioning - as a separate denomination. In practice, SSPX families are mostly isolated, except from other SSPX families.
 
Last edited:
ronb said:
they go to different “branches” of the Latin Mass church.
Click to expand...
There is much about the original post that is problematic, but this sentence kind of sums it up.

There is no such thing as a Latin Mass Church… to try divide the church in to mass groups is an severely misguided thing to do.
 
I didn’t say it was. However, it got all four of them plus Lefebvre excommunicated. And I’m not sure qualifying it as not schismatic “strictly speaking” is supposed to help paint it in a better light.
 
Bataar said:
People holding hands during the Our Father
Eucharistic ministers giving priestly blessings
The priest coming down from the altar during the sign of peace to shake hands with people
Allowing members of the laity to give the homily
Liturgical dance
Lack of holy water
Click to expand...
Which Church document states holding hands during the Our father is an abuse?

As only the priest is the Eucharistic Minister he can of course give priestly blessings. I assume you mean EMHC’s. However, they are NOT Eucharistic Ministers. What priestly blessings did they give. I assume you were up close to actually hear them.

GIRM:
  1. The Priest, standing at the chair or at the ambo itself or, if appropriate, in another worthy place, gives the Homily. When the Homily is over, a period of silence may be observed.
How would the aisles between the Church pews be considered unworthy?

How is lack of Holy Water an abuse?
 
Last edited:
Bataar said:
Some common abuses I used to see on a regular basis when attending the OF include:

People holding hands during the Our Father
Eucharistic ministers giving priestly blessings
The priest coming down from the altar during the sign of peace to shake hands with people
Allowing members of the laity to give the homily
Liturgical dance
Lack of holy water
Click to expand...
But none of these activities are supported by FSSP or SSPX.
 
Last edited:
However, this is not a statement that holding hands is an abuse.

Catholic Answers response:

Question:​

A visiting priest told us that according to the Vatican, it is not proper to hold hands or lift our hands upward when reciting the Lord’s Prayer—that this was reserved exclusively for the priest, who offers the prayer collectively to God for the congregation. If holding hands is in violation of Church practice, then perhaps it needs to cease?

Answer:​

In his book, Mass Confusion , Jimmy Akin states, “The Holy See has not ruled directly in this issue. In response to a query, however, the Holy See stated that holding hands ‘is a liturgical gesture introduced spontaneously but on personal initiative; it is not in the rubrics’ . . . For this reason, no one can be required to hold hands during the Our Father” (161). The appendix notes that the practice of holding hands during the Our Father is “discouraged.”
 
So, they’re submitting petitions to the local bishops for faculties to perform the Sacraments (with the exception of confession since Pope Francis granted it)? Have they apologized for the years of illicit (and thus invalid) confessions? How about the numerous illicit marriages performed in their chapels?

You have a very strange definition of “in communion” given that they didn’t have faculties for many many years.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for your teaching ministry.

I don’t think the SSPX is yet a fully separate denomination. Perhaps it will never be, as long as they don’t call the chapels parishes, and don’t officially enroll lay members

But as children grow up in this community, go on to be ordained, or raise children in this community, SSPX takes on a different character for most families than decades ago, when every SSPX parent had grown up in a parish, and every SSPX priest had spent most of his priesthood in a diocese.

What may never happen in principle, may be gradually happening in practice.
 
Last edited:
One job of missionaries is to link families up to a full diocesan and parish structure, as soon as a satisfactory one is nearby. Ideally SSPX would be phasing out chapels in cities with well established, diocesan promoted TLM parishes, and a bishop and leaders committed to orthodoxy.

“Our job is done here, but we will monitor and return if needed. But meanwhile, shifting missionaries to new, poorly catechized, liturgical abuse cities where we’re needed most. We will put a chapel where there is no TLM nearby.”

But they aren’t doing that in 2019. There’s nothing wrong with a temporary situation, unless the real goal is to keep that holding pattern going, for families, indefinitely.

Missionaries build strongholds, but don’t hold onto all of them.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top