Summorum Pontificum..Does it apply to the SSPX?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Armor_of_Light
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Armor_of_Light

Guest
I root for the SSPX, although I’m not a member…let’s get that out of the way. Maybe that clouds my judgement…I don’t know.

I always thought that SP applied to the SSPX as well, after all…they are catholic. It does not specifically name the SSPX of course. Why would it? At the time, they were…what shall we say?..in full schism perhaps? But now, they are not, so it applies. Right?

Thanks
 
Armor_of_Light said:
I root for the SSPX, although I’m not a member…let’s get that out of the way. Maybe that clouds my judgement…I don’t know.

I always thought that SP applied to the SSPX as well, after all…they are catholic. It does not specifically name the SSPX of course. Why would it? At the time, they were…what shall we say?..in full schism perhaps? But now, they are not, so it applies. Right?

Thanks
Click to expand...
Amended. The SSPX were not in full schism at the time.

From Wiki:

In his accompanying letter, Pope Benedict explained that his action was aimed at broadly and generously providing for the rituals which nourished the faithful for centuries and at “coming to an interior reconciliation in the heart of the Church” with Traditionalist Catholics in disagreement with the Holy See, such as the members of the Society of St. Pius X.
 
The granting of faculties only applies to those who have faculties in general to say mass. BTW, you shouldn’t root for schismatics.
 
I as well support full communion again for the Pius X and Pius V groups. I learned my faith and history of my church through a schismatic Pius V group.

The one change I have noticed in church since Pope Benedict is the robes the priests wear. They are no longer long solid color sheets with a stole they have married the old with the new and it is nice to see a return to more meaningful garments.
 
Alternative POV:

I don’t the SP will actually affect the SSPX at all. It certainly doesn’t right now, they have zero facilities and lack canonical status.

When they come back, I doubt it will apply either for two reasons.
  1. They might come back as a prelature like Opus Dei. They’d be playing by a different set of rules then.
  2. They might come back as a Society of Apostolic Life, probably with Pontifical Right. Again, different set of rules.
 
Armor_of_Light said:
They are not schismatic. You shouldn’t lie.
Click to expand...
Please remember to adhere to the Forum rules regarding the SSPX.

We do want to hear your thoughts and discussion, but be careful not to proselytize this or any groups that have an irregular relationship with the Holy See. Their members are no longer excommunicated, however, they are not yet back in the fold and remain in a problematic, separated state. Else, the Holy See would not have to have continued discussions with them.

Pope Emeritus Benedict was working hard to help our brethren there return to full communion with the Church, especially in the past year, but things have hit a snag. Prayers that Pope Francis might make more headway.
 
Spencerian said:
Please remember to adhere to the Forum rules regarding the SSPX.

We do want to hear your thoughts and discussion, but be careful not to proselytize this or any groups that have an irregular relationship with the Holy See. Their members are no longer excommunicated, however, they are not yet back in the fold and remain in a problematic, separated state. Else, the Holy See would not have to have continued discussions with them.

Pope Emeritus Benedict was working hard to help our brethren there return to full communion with the Church, especially in the past year, but things have hit a snag. Prayers that Pope Francis might make more headway.
Click to expand...
He wasn’t advertising, he was asking if SP was applicable to them. If it was, they would have some canonical leeway to set up shop in an area and offer the EF, or perhaps be leveraged by dioceses via the ED commission or other assorted groups.

The answer; right now they cannot, because they have no canonical ministry within the Church. When they come back, we can’t answer this until we knwo what status they will hold. A prelature and SoAL can both be invited in by a Bishop, however I don’t think SP is as binding on them in that case as it woudl be on a conventional secular priest.
 
Melchior said:
Alternative POV:

I don’t the SP will actually affect the SSPX at all. It certainly doesn’t right now, they have zero facilities and lack canonical status.

When they come back, I doubt it will apply either for two reasons.
  1. They might come back as a prelature like Opus Dei. They’d be playing by a different set of rules then.
  2. They might come back as a Society of Apostolic Life, probably with Pontifical Right. Again, different set of rules.
Click to expand...
This is my opinion as well, mostly based on the various conversations we’ve had here over the years and a bit of reading I’ve done elsewhere. I do not “root” for the SSPX or any other group outside full communion with Rome, but I do pray for their reconcilliation.

Since the SSPX current has no cannonical status and no facilities anywhere, I can’t see how rules about how/where/when to offer specific types of Masses can apply to them. They aren’t supposed to be offering Mass at all.

If and when they are reconcilled as a group, they will have specific rules applied to them based on what type of organization they become. Any SSPX priests who reconcile individually and become regular diocesean priests will fall under SP. If an SSPX priest becomes FSSP or joins another group, whatever rules that group works under would also apply to him.

Edited to add: I would hope that we would notice more about Pope Benedict’s reign than simply that some priests now wear different vestments. He was a wonderful Pope and made great strides in the reunification of many branches of Christianity!
 
SSPX has some other important things to work out before they worry about Summorum Pontificum - first and foremost being that they become regularized so that their priests actually have faculties to licitly celebrate Mass. How can SP apply to priests who don’t have faculties? That is sort of a necessary prerequisite.
 
There needs to be a sticky on here detailing the specifics of the current SSPX situation.

“The SSPX performed a schismatic act, however they are not in schism. They hold no canonical ministry or authority within the Church, and as such are only in partial communion. Their Masses are valid, but illicit. Their confessions are not valid, neither are their marriages. Anointing of the Sick is valid and licit, provided the recipient is near death and no other priest/bishop is present”. Baptism, of course, is valid and licit. If Confirmation requires faculties like confession does, their Confirmations are invalid too.

“One may fulfill their Sunday obligation at a SSPX chapel provided that they do not adhere to a schismatic mindset, and they solely go because they love the EF and there is no licitly alternative EF option”.
 
Mrs_Sally said:
This is my opinion as well, mostly based on the various conversations we’ve had here over the years and a bit of reading I’ve done elsewhere. I do not “root” for the SSPX or any other group outside full communion with Rome, but I do pray for their reconcilliation.

Since the SSPX current has no cannonical status and no facilities anywhere, I can’t see how rules about how/where/when to offer specific types of Masses can apply to them. They aren’t supposed to be offering Mass at all.

If and when they are reconcilled as a group, they will have specific rules applied to them based on what type of organization they become. Any SSPX priests who reconcile individually and become regular diocesean priests will fall under SP. If an SSPX priest becomes FSSP or joins another group, whatever rules that group works under would also apply to him.

Edited to add: I would hope that we would notice more about Pope Benedict’s reign than simply that some priests now where different vestments. He was a wonderful Pope and made great strides in the reunification of many branches of Christianity!
Click to expand...
Thanks for the responses so far. I meant ‘root for’ in the same sense that you describe here…I pray for them to be in full communion.

It seems that the FSSP and the SSPX are so close, I don’t get why the stubborness has to prevent what would be such a boon to trads and a blessing to the Church. It grieves me.
 
Melchior said:
There needs to be a sticky on here detailing the specifics of the current SSPX situation.

“The SSPX performed a schismatic act, however they are not in schism. They hold no canonical ministry or authority within the Church, and as such are only in partial communion. Their Masses are valid, but illicit. Their confessions are not valid, neither are their marriages. Anointing of the Sick is valid and licit, provided the recipient is near death and no other priest/bishop is present”. Baptism, of course, is valid and licit. If Confirmation requires faculties like confession does, their Confirmations are invalid too.

“One may fulfill their Sunday obligation at a SSPX chapel provided that they do not adhere to a schismatic mindset, and they solely go because they love the EF and there is no licitly alternative EF option”.
Click to expand...
Where are you getting those quotes from?
 
Melchior said:
There needs to be a sticky on here detailing the specifics of the current SSPX situation.

“The SSPX performed a schismatic act, however they are not in schism. They hold no canonical ministry or authority within the Church, and as such are only in partial communion. Their Masses are valid, but illicit. Their confessions are not valid, neither are their marriages. Anointing of the Sick is valid and licit, provided the recipient is near death and no other priest/bishop is present”. Baptism, of course, is valid and licit. If Confirmation requires faculties like confession does, their Confirmations are invalid too.

“One may fulfill their Sunday obligation at a SSPX chapel provided that they do not adhere to a schismatic mindset, and they solely go because they love the EF and there is no licitly alternative EF option”.
Click to expand...
Thank you! Every time I try to get this across, it just comes out wrong! I’m taking a screenshot of this so I can paste it up whenever necessary. Which is every week.
 
Joe_5859 said:
Where are you getting those quotes from?
Click to expand...
I wrote it myself. The amount of times the SSPX situation needs to be clarified either here or on other message boards is often, so I decided to just write a stock message that I can paste any time.

What I wrote is a correct assessment of the situation, and I’d like to think it remains objective.
 
Armor_of_Light said:
Thank you! Every time I try to get this across, it just comes out wrong! I’m taking a screenshot of this so I can paste it up whenever necessary. Which is every week.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I got tired of writing the same thing to people who say “they be schismatics!” on one side, and “their confessions are valid and they totally have full ministry in the Church” on the other, so I wrote this awhile ago so I can copy/paste.

It’s a complicated situation, which hopefully Pope Francis can square away once and for all by bringing them back in some capacity (the easiest would be to just bring them in as a SoAL, IMHO).
 
Armor_of_Light said:
Thanks for the responses so far. I meant ‘root for’ in the same sense that you describe here…I pray for them to be in full communion.

It seems that the FSSP and the SSPX are so close, I don’t get why the stubborness has to prevent what would be such a boon to trads and a blessing to the Church. It grieves me.
Click to expand...
Grieves me too. We just need to keep praying (although sometimes I feel like knocking some heads together. :D)
 
Melchior said:
Yeah, I got tired of writing the same thing to people who say “they be schismatics!” on one side, and “their confessions are valid and they totally have full ministry in the Church” on the other, so I wrote this awhile ago so I can copy/paste.

It’s a complicated situation, which hopefully Pope Francis can square away once and for all by bringing them back in some capacity (the easiest would be to just bring them in as a SoAL, IMHO).
Click to expand...
 
Melchior said:
I wrote it myself. The amount of times the SSPX situation needs to be clarified either here or on other message boards is often, so I decided to just write a stock message that I can paste any time.

What I wrote is a correct assessment of the situation, and I’d like to think it remains objective.
Click to expand...
When you put it in quotation marks, it gives the impression that you are citing some authoritative source on the subject. If you wrote it, then it is simply your estimation of the situation and that should be communicated so people don’t get confused. I wouldn’t want people to think the Vatican has issued a statement saying that it is just fine for people to go to an SSPX Mass. I don’t think the Holy See would state it as such.
 
Non-emergency baptisms performed by non-authorized persons are valid but illicit. Confirmations performed by schismatic bishops are valid but illicit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top