SSPX Mass... diocesan confession?

  • Thread starter Thread starter NorthTexan88
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

NorthTexan88

Guest
I would post this right when I see the “SSPX formal schism post” :rolleyes:

I had a question about fulfilling my Sunday Obligation at an SSPX chapel. First let me say, I am 100% with the bishops and the pope I just prefer the Latin Mass. I am about 50-60 minutes away from the closest and only diocesan TLM in Dallas, and being a college student I cannot really afford to drive there every week. However, there is an SSPX chapel about 10 minutes from where I go to school. Since I have seen where SSPX confession are not valid, but their Eucharist is, could I go to confession at a diocesan parish and go to Mass at the SSPX chapel, would this fulfill my obligation? Please keep in mind this is strictly due to my preference of the TLM, not disobedience to the pope or bishops. Any help would be great.
 
NorthTexan88 said:
I would post this right when I see the “SSPX formal schism post” :rolleyes:

I had a question about fulfilling my Sunday Obligation at an SSPX chapel. First let me say, I am 100% with the bishops and the pope I just prefer the Latin Mass. I am about 50-60 minutes away from the closest and only diocesan TLM in Dallas, and being a college student I cannot really afford to drive there every week. However, there is an SSPX chapel about 10 minutes from where I go to school. Since I have seen where SSPX confession are not valid, but their Eucharist is, could I go to confession at a diocesan parish and go to Mass at the SSPX chapel, would this fulfill my obligation? Please keep in mind this is strictly due to my preference of the TLM, not disobedience to the pope or bishops. Any help would be great.
Click to expand...
I started out attending their Masses with much the same attitude. It can be a slippery slope. I wish you wouldn’t encourage them. Even if it is legit for you to go with a well ordered mind set, think about this. The priest was suspended from priestly ministry by the church the moment he was ordained. If you know this, and you are there, you are complicit in his sin, which I believe, objectively speaking, would be considered grave matter. A mortal sin for him. For you? Well, it is worth serious thought about the matter of sin.
 
The Masses [SSPX priests] celebrate are also valid, but it is considered morally illicit for the faithful to participate in these Masses unless they are physically or morally impeded from participating in a Mass celebrated by a Catholic priest in good standing (cf. Code of Canon Law, canon 844.2). The fact of not being able to assist at the celebration of the so-called “Tridentine” Mass is not considered a sufficient motive for attending such Masses.
Click to expand...
ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CEDSSPX.HTM
Click to expand...
I would be extremely wary of participating in illicit masses for anything but extremely grave reasons. It may be better to attend a nearby OF mass most of the time, and go to the further away EF occasionally.
 
NorthTexan88 said:
I would post this right when I see the “SSPX formal schism post” :rolleyes:

I had a question about fulfilling my Sunday Obligation at an SSPX chapel. First let me say, I am 100% with the bishops and the pope I just prefer the Latin Mass. I am about 50-60 minutes away from the closest and only diocesan TLM in Dallas, and being a college student I cannot really afford to drive there every week. However, there is an SSPX chapel about 10 minutes from where I go to school. Since I have seen where SSPX confession are not valid, but their Eucharist is, could I go to confession at a diocesan parish and go to Mass at the SSPX chapel, would this fulfill my obligation? Please keep in mind this is strictly due to my preference of the TLM, not disobedience to the pope or bishops. Any help would be great.
Click to expand...
I find it strange that the most important job of the priest is the Consecration of the bread and wine and that is valid but not the hearing of confession. Are you sure about that? Just curious.
 
Attending an SSPX liturgy every week would be playing a very dangerous game. Please don’t do it.
 
Phyllo said:
I find it strange that the most important job of the priest is the Consecration of the bread and wine and that is valid but not the hearing of confession. Are you sure about that? Just curious.
Click to expand...
Absolution is invalid if the priest does not have faculties (which must be received from the bishop EDITED IN: or directly granted by the law itself, which, so far as I understand, only applies in the case of danger of death).
Can. 966 §1 For the valid absolution of sins, it is required that, in addition to the power of order, the minister has the faculty to exercise that power in respect of the faithful to whom he gives absolution.
Click to expand...
§2 A priest can be given this faculty either by the law itself, or by a concession issued by the competent authority in accordance with can. 969.
Click to expand...
Can. 969 §1 Only the local Ordinary is competent to give to any priests whomsoever the faculty to hear the confessions of any whomsoever of the faithful. Priests who are members of religious institutes may not, however, use this faculty without the permission, at least presumed, of their Superior.
Click to expand...
§2 The Superior of a religious institute or of a society of apostolic life, mentioned in can. 968 §2, is competent to give to any priests whomsoever the faculty to hear the confessions of his own subjects and of those others who live day and night in the house.
Click to expand...
wdtprs.com/blog/2013/05/again-about-validity-of-absolutions-by-sspx-priests/
 
Yes, you should receive confession only from a priest in good standing with the church.

If you intend to continue going to the SSPX chapel, I would recommend refraining from the Eucharist. Your obligation is to attend mass weekly, not strictly speaking, receive communion weekly.

If you have the endurance, it would be even better to attend/receive communion at a diocesan mass Saturday evening, and then visit the SSPX mass on Sunday.
 
NorthTexan88 said:
I would post this right when I see the “SSPX formal schism post” :rolleyes:

I had a question about fulfilling my Sunday Obligation at an SSPX chapel. First let me say, I am 100% with the bishops and the pope I just prefer the Latin Mass. I am about 50-60 minutes away from the closest and only diocesan TLM in Dallas, and being a college student I cannot really afford to drive there every week. However, there is an SSPX chapel about 10 minutes from where I go to school. Since I have seen where SSPX confession are not valid, but their Eucharist is, could I go to confession at a diocesan parish and go to Mass at the SSPX chapel, would this fulfill my obligation? Please keep in mind this is strictly due to my preference of the TLM, not disobedience to the pope or bishops. Any help would be great.
Click to expand...
Short answer…yes.

Check post # 3 of this thread…

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=11103238#post11103238
 
Iron_Donkey said:
Absolution is invalid if the priest does not have faculties (which must be received from the bishop EDITED IN: or directly granted by the law itself, which, so far as I understand, only applies in the case of danger of death).

wdtprs.com/blog/2013/05/again-about-validity-of-absolutions-by-sspx-priests/
Click to expand...
Actually, IIRC, there is one other place where a confession from an SSPX priest would be invalid - that is, common error.

Or to put it in a hypothetical, say that Paddy Murphy, a good Catholic but a little ignorant of church politics, has some sins on his conscience. He sees a church, steps in, sees a confessional with a priest in it, and goes in and confesses his sins. The priest absolves him and he goes on his merry way. But the priest does not have faculties, say, because he belongs to the SSPX. But Paddy Murphy does not know that the priest he confessed to had no faculties. In fact, he reasonably believes that he entered a Catholic parish in communion with the Holy Father. In that case, canon law makes that valid under Canon 144.

As a counterexample of where Canon 144 would not apply: Paddy Murphy, seeing the crisis in the Church, adheres to all the teachings of the SSPX. He goes to their chapel exclusively, thinking that not even the FSSP Mass down the street is truly Catholic. He goes to confession. He knows the SSPX is on the outs with the Holy Father. In such a case, there would be no common error, and his confession would be invalid.

canonlawmadeeasy.com/2013/08/15/are-sspx-sacraments-valid-part-ii/

As for attending Mass, well, it is valid. So is a Clown Mass where borderline heretical doctrine is preached from the pulpit, if the priest says the Words of Institution and intends to do what the Church does. But I would advise you to refrain from going to either.
 
Just throwing out a different angle to think about in this situation…

How does one participate in the sin of another person? We sin through another person’s actions by …
  1. counsel
  2. consent
  3. provocation
  4. praise or flattery
  5. concealment
  6. partaking
  7. silence
  8. the defense of the ill done
  9. Counsel: If you tell or advise another person to do something sinful, so that they do it, you have sinned by participation in that person’s sin.
  10. Command: If you have authority over another, and you forced that person to commit something which is sinful, while that person might have mitigated guilt, you don’t.
  11. Consent: If you are asked if you think a sin is good thing to do, and have some power over the situation, and if you permit or approve or yield to the commission of the sin, you’ve sinned.
  12. Provocation: You badger or drive or dare a person to do something such that he does it.
  13. Praise of flattery: Pretty clear. This is another way of prompting a person.
  14. Concealment: A person commits a sin and then you help that person conceal the evidence or the action.
  15. Partaking: Another person is the principal person involved, but you are right there helping the actual sinful deed. For example, a person helping a doctor commit an abortion, a politician helping an aggressive governor or president or speaker of the house drive through recognition of contrary-to-nature “marriage” by providing a vote.
  16. Silence: There is an old adage that “silent implies consent”. If a person with great authority or moral authority is in a position to stop a sin from happening, and yet stays silent and doesn’t get involved, then that may constitute participation in the sin committed. This is trickier to figure out, but it isn’t rocket science. There may be attendant mitigating circumstances, such as the probable invasion of Vatican City, the capture of the Roman Pontiff and destruction of the Church in many places. In the meanwhile one could work quietly. One cannot, however, do nothing. Another point must be considered: the rules governing fraternal correction. It may not be your place to correct another person, depending on the circumstances.
  17. Defense: Pretty clear. You defend or justify or give an apology in favor of the sin committed. This is not the same as what a defense lawyer does in the case of a person who is guilty.
Source: wdtprs.com/blog/2011/07/quaeritur-participation-in-the-sins-of-other-people/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top