SSPX says I will go to hell for not being SSPX

  • Thread starter Thread starter manny85
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
manny85 said:
Hello everyone,

I have a question for my tradional catholic friends. I have a coworker who I have some discussion with about our faith and him belonging to SSPX has told me he has asked his priest about what I tell him and he said his priest told him I would be going to hell for being “modern” catholic. Now I’m no saint 😛 but I told him his priest couldn’t say that and he didn’t like that. He always tells me how he can’t go to any of the “modern” catholic churches that I go to which are not SSPX or else he will go to hell. I don’t understand why they teach them such things. He doesn’t believe in reading the bible since his priest has told him only he can interprit the bible for them, let alone reading the catechism. :confused:I dunno what to say but I feel bad that he is so ignorant and hard headed and tells me I’m going to hell for being a Catholic.

Long story short is there anything I can tell him to get him off that crazy track? Or should I just keep my mouth shut and pray to God for him?

Thanks 😃
Click to expand...
I saw a youtube video by the SSPX bishop and he said that the 9/11 was done intentionally by the US government and that its a sin for women to wear pants!
 
Laudate_Dominum said:
I thought every Catholic priest had faculties in Rome? Like Jerusalem.
Click to expand...
So all a suspended Priest needs to do is head to Rome and they’ll magically have faculties?

No, I’m almost certain that it’s like any other parish.
 
I’m not stating it as dogma. I’m simply saying that’s always been my impression.
 
hudson said:
That is a very outdated answer. The SSPX status has changed in the past 7 years. Their Bishops are no longer excommunicated and they have in fact celebrated Mass at the Vatican. They status is indeed irregular though. Please read up on more current information then an answer from 2005.
Click to expand...
It has been pointed out on other threads that the fact that SSPX clergy have celebrated Mass at the Vatican does little if anything to indicate their status.

As I understand it, all a priest has to do is submit some form of proof of identity that he is a priest (the details of how that is done is not something I am familiar with) and then the priest can celebrate Mass at St. Peter’s.

I post this only for the sake of clarity.

-Tim-
 
hudson said:
My link was messed up for some reason. I was posting a link to the lifting of the excommunications.

catholicnewsagency.com/news/pope_benedict_lifts_excommunication_of_bishops_ordained_by_lefebvre/

I am not exactly sure what you want. The answers given by a Cardinal and a Msgr hold more weight in my mind then any given on these forums. Also the fact that the Sspx excommunications were lifted and were allowed to have Masses in the Vatican should show that it is not sinful to attend their Masses.
Click to expand...
Thank you again!

I think that an answer from these forums depends on the source. Answers from CAF Apologetics should be considered differently than the answers that you and I supply, don’t you think? Do you consider personal opinions and interviews to be included under the Magesterium? I’ve been told that this isn’t so, but perhaps you have other information.

Concerning your link, please note that the Congregation of Bishops wrote …

"We hope that this step may be followed by the caring accomplishment of the full communion with the Church of the whole Society of St. Pius X, thus witnessing true fidelity and truthful recognition of the Magisterium and the Pope’s authority with the proof of visible unity.”

While the excommunications have been lifted (stated elsewhere in your link), it appears that SSPX is not in full communion with Rome. If SSPX is not in full communion with Rome, then a Roman Catholic may not attend an SSPX Mass in fulfillment of a Sunday obligation – and I’d think that it follows that a Roman Catholic should not receive the Eucharist at an SSPX Mass.

I agree with you that it is not a sin to attend an SSPX Mass – just as it would be no sin to attend Divine Liturgy at an Orthodox Church, or a Jewish service at a synagogue, or a Protestant service. But we cannot do so in place of our obligation as Catholics to attend Mass every Sunday. Were we to do so, we could be sinning – and quite possibly in a grave manner.
 
Laudate_Dominum said:
It’s a sin if one participates in their Masses/services actively.
Click to expand...
Yes, sorry I didn’t make that clear.

Still, were one to attend inactively an SSPX Mass or other non-Catholic service instead of going to Mass on Sunday, one would be sinning. You can’t skip Sunday Mass and replace it with the service of your own choosing – whether you attend actively or inactively.
 
I thought I would post this since Br. Jr sent me some links that had St. Francis Admonitions and this one is interesting.

WORDS OF ADMONITION OF OUR HOLY FATHER ST. FRANCIS.
The Lord says in the Gospel: he “that doth not renounce all that he possesseth cannot be” a "disciple " 3 and “he that will save his life, shall lose it.” 4 That man leaves all he possesses and loses his body and his soul who abandons himself wholly to obedience in the hands of his superior, and whatever he does and says—provided he himself knows that what he does is good and not contrary to his [the superior’s] will—is true obedience. And if at times a subject sees things which would be better or more useful to his soul than those which the

p. 9

superior commands him, let him sacrifice his will to God, let him strive to fulfil the work enjoined by the superior. This is true and charitable obedience which is pleasing to God and to one’s neighbor.

If, however, a superior command anything to a subject that is against his soul it is permissible for him to disobey, but he must not leave him [the superior], and if in consequence he suffer persecution from some, he should love them the more for God’s sake. For he who would rather suffer persecution than wish to be separated from his brethren, truly abides in perfect obedience because he lays down his life for his brothers. 1 For there are many religious who, under pretext of seeing better things than those which their superiors command, look back 2 and return to the vomit of their own will 3. These are homicides and by their bad example cause the loss of many souls.

What do you guys think?

Also I didn’t know going to SSPX mass is a sin.
 
manny85 said:
Also I didn’t know going to SSPX mass is a sin.
Click to expand...
manny,

I found this on Fr Z’s blog, and I should apologize for earlier stating that it is sin to go to SSPX. I made some assumptions on what I’d read, and I should have read more thoroughly. Thanks to hudson for encouraging me to look for more recent information!

This means that if you go to a chapel of the SSPX on the day of precept or the evening before and attend Holy Mass, you fulfill your obligation. The SSPX celebrate in a Catholic Rite.

However, I do not recommend that people do this frequently, because frequency can undermine their unity with the Roman Pontiff. The risk of this erosion of unity could in part depend on the manner of preaching and many other factors.

Also, I will not recommend reception of Holy Communion at an SSPX chapel at this time, unless the conditions of your life are such that it would be very difficult to get to another church or parish actually in union with the local diocese and Rome. The obstacles must be serious, but they cannot be easily spelled out because the circumstances of people’s lives differ so much.

So, yes, you all fulfilled your Mass obligation. However, I will not go so far as to say that attendance at a SSPX chapel is “perfectly” permissible. It is permissible under certain circumstances.

If it were “perfectly” permissible, then the Holy Father would not be so concerned about bringing them back into clear unity with him and his successors.

Thank you for being concerned enough to ask. This question comes up fairly often and it bears review.
wdtprs.com/blog/2011/10/quaeritur-sspx-and-fulfilling-sunday-mass-obligation/

It still sounds like an “iffy” situation for a Roman Catholic to attend an SSPX Mass.
 
Thanks for finding that Splagchnizomai. I have been invited by my friend to go to SSPX chapel on sunday but maybe I will go to see if I can hear what his priest is saying. But I feel like they will smell me out and say I’m “modern” Catholic lol. He sent me a text saying us “modern” catholics don’t like to be called Roman Catholic because we are modern lol. I dunno Jen was very helpful pointing out that maybe he and his family are just the ignorant kind it seems. Oh well :dancing:
 
manny85 said:
He doesn’t believe in reading the bible since his priest has told him only he can interprit the bible for them, let alone reading the catechism.
Click to expand...
My SSPX priest recommended to me that I read the bible almost every day. Also they(also the not priests) read a lot of what the popes said and the catechism and most of the young members read the Vat II.

And the SSPX priests I know disagree with the “all not SSPX go to hell” priest.

Sorry for my English and God bless
 
Andre1000 said:
My SSPX priest recommended to me that I read the bible almost every day. Also they(also the not priests) read a lot of what the popes said and the catechism and most of the young members read the Vat II.

And the SSPX priests I know disagree with the “all not SSPX go to hell” priest.

Sorry for my English and God bless
Click to expand...
your english is fine, Andre.

Reading through this thrread I believe that most of us who attend SSPX Chapels can conclude two things: the friend mentioned in the original post is quite ignorant of the Society, or the friend is fictitious. A Society Priest who speaks in this way would be expelled from the Society, as he would be reaking of sedevantism or of a similar ilk.

I mean no disrespect to the original poster. Probably the former conclusion is true, and the latter one false.
 
maurin said:
your english is fine, Andre.

Reading through this thrread I believe that most of us who attend SSPX Chapels can conclude two things: the friend mentioned in the original post is quite ignorant of the Society, or the friend is fictitious. A Society Priest who speaks in this way would be expelled from the Society, as he would be reaking of sedevantism or of a similar ilk.

I mean no disrespect to the original poster. Probably the former conclusion is true, and the latter one false.
Click to expand...
I have thought the same thing since the start of this thread.
 
Thank you andre for your post,

For those who think that my friend is “fictitious” the sad fact is he is not. In my excitement to show him the information I had acquired from here and share it with him he became very crossed with me and said I wasn’t his friend anymore :confused: Like I’ve stated I have tried to tell him to read certain things but he always dismisses it if his priest or it isn’t from an SSPX source, this site doesn’t fit his criteria, and it seems this time maybe this may have bin the straw that broke the camels back. I really appreciate everyone who is part of SSPX posting and sharing as well all of us “novus ordo” posting. I pray for the SSPX and for my friend that God may help them understand and that he forgive me if I may have approached this situation the wrong way with my friend.
 
Melchior said:
Private Masses at the Vatican, not public. Slight difference.

The Neocatechumenal Way has done stuff in the Vatican as well. I’m certain that you have no issues with them at all, yes?
Click to expand...
There’s no such bthing as a private Mass. Mass is open to all who wish to attend.

But-- I understand what you mean. The Masses have been at a side Altar. Still–most Masses at St Peter’s are at side Altars.
 
maurin said:
There’s no such bthing as a private Mass. Mass is open to all who wish to attend.

But-- I understand what you mean. The Masses have been at a side Altar. Still–most Masses at St Peter’s are at side Altars.
Click to expand...
I meant; “Private Mass” (in Latin, Missa privata or secreta, familiaris, peculiaris),[8] which is now understood as Mass celebrated without a congregation, formerly meant Low Mass.

Having a public Mass within the Vatican would send some very mixed signals, considering the lack of legitimate ministry within the Church.
 
Melchior said:
I meant; “Private Mass” (in Latin, Missa privata or secreta, familiaris, peculiaris),[8] which is now understood as Mass celebrated without a congregation, formerly meant Low Mass.

Having a public Mass within the Vatican would send some very mixed signals, considering the lack of legitimate ministry within the Church.
Click to expand...
the fact that the Socie
ty is allowed to celebrate Mass in St Peter’s ought to send a very clear signal regarding their status in the Church. Have you heard of anyone not Catholic allowed to celebrate Mass in St Peter’s?

I agree. Confusing. But what’s the old adage? Actions speak louder than words?
 
maurin said:
the fact that the Socie
ty is allowed to celebrate Mass in St Peter’s ought to send a very clear signal regarding their status in the Church. Have you heard of anyone not Catholic allowed to celebrate Mass in St Peter’s?

I agree. Confusing. But what’s the old adage? Actions speak louder than words?
Click to expand...
I’m glad that you’re fine with the Neo-C Way and other assorted movements, including Charismatic events. Because those happen within the Vatican as well.

You probably aren’t fine with either of those, but applying the logic you just gave you may as well be 🙂
 
Melchior said:
I’m glad that you’re fine with the Neo-C Way and other assorted movements, including Charismatic events. Because those happen within the Vatican as well.

You probably aren’t fine with either of those, but applying the logic you just gave you may as well be 🙂
Click to expand...
Well that sure doesn’t follow, melchior.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top