SSPX Questions & Discussion

[GerardP]

Ok, I get it. You think Lefebvre was right and you are entitled to your opinion. The official documents issued by the Catholic Church disagree with you.

The facts disagree with “official documents” of the Catholic Church. Official documents of the Catholic Church can change. Facts cannot.

There really isn’t any point in continuing the discussion. I know where you stand and you know where I stand.

Is it accurate for me to say that you stand on an illogical premise? Papal infallibility run amock to become impeccability and consequently irresistibility.

Just a quick aside, I noticed that you made reference to the molestation scandal. It may interest you to know that the vast majority of priests who abused children were ordained prior to Vatican II.

Yes. It’s called infiltration. These vile creatures were often enthusiastic cheerleaders for Vatican II. Why do you think they pushed for “face to face” confessions? Why not look for new “expressions” of the Church’s teaching with psychology and the new sciences as Vatican II promoted. A nice Freudian bishop hires a sexually challenged non-believing psychologist influenced by Kinsey’s perversions and you have a brew of abuse ready and waiting.

You certainly can’t have a liturgy with vesting prayers that remind a priest of chastity when new psychological arguments show that it’s unhealthy for a man to repress his urges. Answer: Don’t question the freedom granted by the psychology, do away with the Liturgy.

 

[ThereCanBeOnly1]

Well, the thread started to get derailed within the first 5 posts.

What are the most pressing questions you have?

From what you posted, this is one of the pertinent points.

*“No “law,” can force him to cooperate in the destruction of the Church.” *

Establishing this premise is one of the main issues that needs to be brought to light. This has to be understood within the context of the indefectibility of the Church.

I believe that archbishop LeFebvre was brought to the fore by God precisely because the Church is indefectible.

One would think that God would always pick a Pope to be his champion, but history shows that God often picks less obvious people to get his message.

I was just listening to Bishop Sheen today and he said that God chooses the very elements that are used to cause trouble to repair the damage.

A disobedient Man in Adam is replaced by the Man-God obedient unto death.

The Proud Eve is replaced by the humble Handmaid of the Lord

The tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil is replaced with the cross where the Fruit of the Vine is found and eternal life.

God’s counterattacks have been from very unlikely sources. A bishop, a French bishop at that. How many French bishops have been troublesome for the Church in recent years?

Who would have thought that a more recent devastating blow by God would come from Hollywood itself? Mel Gibson’s “Passion” provided a devastating reminder to God’s enemies in Hollywood that He is in Charge.

Who knows how further restoration will occur? God only knows but when we find out, it will be a big surprise and we will see at that moment how the answer will be.

Good points. The movie the Passion and an interview I viewed by Mel Gibson brought my attention to the TLM. I was intrigued and began attending the TLM and this has changed my life forever. I cannot, in good conscience, return to the Pauline mass.

 

[MMLJ]

Yes. It’s called infiltration. These vile creatures were often enthusiastic cheerleaders for Vatican II. Why do you think they pushed for “face to face” confessions? Why not look for new “expressions” of the Church’s teaching with psychology and the new sciences as Vatican II promoted. A nice Freudian bishop hires a sexually challenged non-believing psychologist influenced by Kinsey’s perversions and you have a brew of abuse ready and waiting.

You certainly can’t have a liturgy with vesting prayers that remind a priest of chastity when new psychological arguments show that it’s unhealthy for a man to repress his urges. Answer: Don’t question the freedom granted by the psychology, do away with the Liturgy.

What is wrong with face-to-face confession? I mean I do not like it either, but what was the premise for this madness?

 

[GerardP]

What proof do you possess that shows that only consecrating one bishop instead of four would bring about the destruction of the Church?!

He wasn’t going to be allowed to consecrate any bishops. What LeFebvre realized was that the protocol he signed said that a bishop would be considered. Add that to the “apology” that was written for LeFebvre to sign and it was obvious he wasn’t being dealt with honestly.

How many times did LeFebvre delay the consecrations due to Rome’s stalling? He was 83 years old at the time. He concluded that they were waiting for him to die.

The FSSP took the deal offered to LeFebvre. They’ve never gotten a bishop and protocol 1411 took away their right to use the 1962 missal exclusively.

 

[GerardP]

What is wrong with face-to-face confession? I mean I do not like it either, but what was the premise for this madness?

How much does easier do “reconciliation rooms” make it for a priest to target/seduce/harass/molest a person?

He can see who he’s with, apply whatever techniques he’s learned and there is a degree of exposure coupled with privacy that allows him to scope out victims over a period of time. A slight 13 year old delicate high school kid would at least be an easy victim to corrupting influence.

I was in a “reconciliation room” not too long ago and the overt homosexuality of the priest was easily discernible. I’ve been to too many confessions where I’m the one talking about Catholic moral theology and the priest is the one squirming in his seat.

It’s funny when you hear some claptrap about what sins are not sins or not a big deal and you counter with “Doesn’t the Church teach…?”

I’m not saying there aren’t sincere priests giving face to face confessions. I’ve gone to them as well. But it’s unnecessary. If a person needs counseling they can get that from a priest or someone else. Confession is not a chat. It’s accusation, contrition, absolution and penance.

 

[MMLJ]

He wasn’t going to be allowed to consecrate any bishops. What LeFebvre realized was that the protocol he signed said that a bishop would be considered. Add that to the “apology” that was written for LeFebvre to sign and it was obvious he wasn’t being dealt with honestly.

How many times did LeFebvre delay the consecrations due to Rome’s stalling? He was 83 years old at the time. He concluded that they were waiting for him to die.

Very interesting, I did not realize that they may have been waiting for his death. I can empathize with why he consecrated bishops.

The FSSP took the deal offered to LeFebvre. They’ve never gotten a bishop and protocol 1411 took away their right to use the 1962 missal exclusively.

I see, and these are the same priests who offer the Indult, am I correct?

Thanks for your informative replies.

 

[MMLJ]

How much does easier do “reconciliation rooms” make it for a priest to target/seduce/harass/molest a person?

He can see who he’s with, apply whatever techniques he’s learned and there is a degree of exposure coupled with privacy that allows him to scope out victims over a period of time. A slight 13 year old delicate high school kid would at least be an easy victim to corrupting influence.

I was in a “reconciliation room” not too long ago and the overt homosexuality of the priest was easily discernible. I’ve been to too many confessions where I’m the one talking about Catholic moral theology and the priest is the one squirming in his seat.

It’s funny when you hear some claptrap about what sins are not sins or not a big deal and you counter with “Doesn’t the Church teach…?”

I’m not saying there aren’t sincere priests giving face to face confessions. I’ve gone to them as well. But it’s unnecessary. If a person needs counseling they can get that from a priest or someone else. Confession is not a chat. It’s accusation, contrition, absolution and penance.

I agree with you here on all points.

 

[bear06]

He wasn’t going to be allowed to consecrate any bishops. What LeFebvre realized was that the protocol he signed said that a bishop would be considered. Add that to the “apology” that was written for LeFebvre to sign and it was obvious he wasn’t being dealt with honestly.

How many times did LeFebvre delay the consecrations due to Rome’s stalling? He was 83 years old at the time. He concluded that they were waiting for him to die.

The FSSP took the deal offered to LeFebvre. They’ve never gotten a bishop and protocol 1411 took away their right to use the 1962 missal exclusively.

Oh my goodness. Now the Vatican lied to Lefebvre?! Let’s see, I can’t say anything about Lefebvre that the Church has already stated by you can call the Magisterium liars? What’s your proof of this?

I beg the original posters forgiveness but it’s utterly imaginable to come this far without a response. And since you, yourself have now agree with no response to arguments well outside the scope of the conversation, I’m not really sure why I beg forgiveness.

BTW, I don’t hear the FSSP complaining about a thing.

 

[AJV]

What is wrong with face-to-face confession? I mean I do not like it either, but what was the premise for this madness?

Just to note: the innovation in face to face confessions was allowing them for everyone. Previous legislation under the 1917 Code allowed it for men, but not for women, to avoid impropriety.

 

[MMLJ]

What are the most pressing questions you have?

These:

(1) If an individual previously attending the Novus Ordo service for many years and then Indult for about one year (and received the sacraments of baptism, penance), shall this individual be receiving the True Eucharist in its entirety, at an SSPX Mass?

**(2) **Is a confession valid and licit when made to an SSPX priest (more importantly in the eyes of GOD)?

(3) Is this individual, who knows the Crisis in the Church pertaining to the SSPX yet still remains a member for what ever reason (i.e.If the SSPX is in schism and/or excommunicated, yet an individual remains with the SSPX ), considered to be entitled to the salvation of the soul like any other Catholic?

**(4) **Is Matrimony ministered by an SSPX priest valid and licit?

**(5) **Upon Becoming an SSPX member, do any of the Sacraments have to be repeated (other than Baptism)?

**(6) **Can an SSPX member disagree with some of the teachings of a Pope? (e.g. Must an individual believe, as the Pope does, that Islam is a religion of High regard or great esteem, or Muslims worship the same GOD as Catholics?, do they have to accept Vatican II and the NO-mass?)

**(7) **Concerning the Bishops of the SSPX, if they are valid but ilicit, are their consecrations of SSPX priests valid and licit?

---

All are welcome to answer. It is important that Traditional Catholics also answer (SSPX, SSPV,CMRI, ICRSS,FSSP, etc.). Please be kind to each other when you post.

May GOD bless us All.

 

[bear06]

These:

(1)

 

[MMLJ]

---

Do you really feel that nobody has anwered these questions?

 

[GerardP]

Oh my goodness. Now the Vatican lied to Lefebvre?! Let’s see, I can’t say anything about Lefebvre that the Church has already stated by you can call the Magisterium liars? What’s your proof of this?

I beg the original posters forgiveness but it’s utterly imaginable to come this far without a response. And since you, yourself have now agree with no response to arguments well outside the scope of the conversation, I’m not really sure why I beg forgiveness.

BTW, I don’t hear the FSSP complaining about a thing.

First, you have to distinguish between “the Vatican” which is just a pop culture term, the Curia which is a particular group of offices, the hierarchy which is a broader term for the structure of the Church and the Magisterium which is a function of the Church.

“The Vatican” has been notorious for years about it’s bad PR and inability to tell the truth. The most obvious was the obstinate denials that the late Holy Father had Parkinson’s disease when asked.

You won’t hear the FSSP complain because they can’t without getting the punished.

 

[Walking_Home]

First, you have to distinguish between “the Vatican” which is just a pop culture term, the Curia which is a particular group of offices, the hierarchy which is a broader term for the structure of the Church and the Magisterium which is a function of the Church.

“The Vatican” has been notorious for years about it’s bad PR and inability to tell the truth. The most obvious was the obstinate denials that the late Holy Father had Parkinson’s disease when asked.

You won’t hear the FSSP complain because they can’t without getting the punished.

---

More than likely—if the FSSP complains—they would be kicked out of every diocese.

 

[GerardP]

Just to note: the innovation in face to face confessions was allowing them for everyone. Previous legislation under the 1917 Code allowed it for men, but not for women, to avoid impropriety.

The broader crime is called: Solicitation

You can read about it in the Catholic Encycopedia at

newadvent.org/cathen/14134b.htm

The specific crime is called: Sollicitatio ad turpia.

"…defined as the soliciting any person to carnal sin, to be committed with himself or another, by any priest secular or regular, immediately before, during, or immediately after sacramental confession, or on the occasion of or under pretext of confession, or in the confessional itself or in any other place generally used for hearing confessions, or in a place chosen by the penitent to make a confession, and this whether a sacramental confession be actually made or not. Moreover, the crime of solicitation may be committed not merely by words, but also by signs or other expressive actions, or by a letter to be read then or afterwards** If any penitent has been thus solicited to sin, he or she cannot be absolved by any confessor until the penitent actually denounces the delinquent priest to the proper ecclesiastical authority or promises to make such denunciation as soon as possible.** "

 

[Sure]

These:

(1) If an individual previously attending the Novus Ordo service for many years and then Indult for about one year (and received the sacraments of baptism, penance), shall this individual be receiving the True Eucharist in its entirety, at an SSPX Mass?

***Yes. The Eucharist is the fully valid. It is also illicit because the SSPX priest who consecrates it commits a sin of sacrilige because he is suspended. ***

**(2) **Is a confession valid and licit when made to an SSPX priest (more importantly in the eyes of GOD)?

No. Confession requires jurisdiction from an ordinary. SSPX priests lack this and cannot give absolution unless the penitent is in danger of death.

(3) Is this individual, who knows the Crisis in the Church pertaining to the SSPX yet still remains a member for what ever reason (i.e.If the SSPX is in schism and/or excommunicated, yet an individual remains with the SSPX ), considered to be entitled to the salvation of the soul like any other Catholic?

Only God can know. His Mercy is without limits and even one who has separated himself from the Church could be saved.

**(4) **Is Matrimony ministered by an SSPX priest valid and licit?

No. The witness to a marriage must also have jurisdiction from the ordinary.

**(5) **Upon Becoming an SSPX member, do any of the Sacraments have to be repeated (other than Baptism)?

No. A confession would be made. A marriage could be sanated without the knowledge of the couple.

**(6) **Can an SSPX member disagree with some of the teachings of a Pope? (e.g. Must an individual believe, as the Pope does, that Islam is a religion of High regard or great esteem, or Muslims worship the same GOD as Catholics?, do they have to accept Vatican II and the NO-mass?)

Any Catholic is free to disagree with Church teaching at their own spiritual peril.

**(7) **Concerning the Bishops of the SSPX, if they are valid but ilicit, are their consecrations of SSPX priests valid and licit?

***Their ordinations are valid, but illicit. ***​

All are welcome to answer. It is important that Traditional Catholics also answer (SSPX, SSPV,CMRI, ICRSS,FSSP, etc.). Please be kind to each other when you post.

May GOD bless us All.

May I suggest that you send a letter with these questions to your bishop and also to the Ecclesia Dei Commission in Rome. If you or someone you know is contemplating joining or, at least, frequenting an SSPX chapel you should get better advice than you will find on an internet message board. Such a decision can affect your salvation. Seek the guidance of the Church and not an SSPX priest who claims to be in union, but rather a trusted bishop (Archbishop Burke or Bruskewitz or Cardinal Castrillon) who you know does not need to be “reconciled” with the Church.

 

[Jo_Benedict]

Note:

This thread is closed. Thanks to all who participated in the discussion.