The FSSP and the OF

[Mike30]

Because:

The FSSP exists to provide pastoral care to people who desire the EF.
The FSSP typically works in two circumstances: either they are given a parish church of their own, or they have “missions” to established diocesan parishes.

No one can force a priest to celebrate any Mass ever, so my point is that a priest can certainly be asked to celebrate Mass in either form if needed, but he can’t be forced by the bishop of the place to celebrate at all. This, coupled with the fact that a bishop certainly cannot prohibit FSSP priests from celebrating the EF, is the body of reasoning that leads me to believe that a bishop can never absolutely compel a priest to celebrate the OF. Not that they wouldn’t if they were asked, but that they can’t be forced to do so.

This is very scary because I imagine some day someone will try to pull something where FSSP priests and others are bullied into doing something that is not part of their charism.

Thats the weay real life is my friend. As I said, I’ve talked to four different FSSP Priests in three Dioceses and all have said that if the Bishop asks them to celebrate on Ordinary Form Mass, they are to consider it an order and do so. In other words they are not supposed to refuse. I would imagine that if it appeared that a particular Bishop had an agenda negative in nature to the FSSP, then maybe they could get out of it. But having to celebrate one occasionally, sounds entirely proper and above board to me all things considered.

Maybe we could get Brother JR to chime in on this one as I suspect he would know the answer.

 

[TimothyH]

So you are arguing that bishops can force FSSP priests to celebrate the OF? How? Is a bishop going to invite them to his diocese then say, “You will celebrate the OF?” I doubt that is legally possible unless the Fraternity agrees to it.

I am not arguing. I am stating a fact. A bishop can force any non-exempt (non-religious) priest to which he has granted faculties to say the OF. It is his right to do so as the ordinary. That is clear in canon law. The fraternaty has nothing to agree to. If they want to operate in the diocese then they accept that they are subject to the bishop in matters of public worship.

These next comments are speculation on my part… I would think that it would be prudent for the bishop however, to disucss the matter with the individual priests and possibly the fraternity itself before the invitation to operate in the diocese was put forward. It would be in very poor taste to invite a priest into the diocese who has no intent to say the OF and then try to force him to do so. There really is no need for opening up the bishop and the fraternity to public embarassment and controversy. I would think that a bishop, as part of an invitation to the FSSP, would clearly state whether he expects them to say the OF or not and let the fraternity make the dicision to accept the invitation or what priests to send. Again, this is my speculation only.

Yet canon 738 is crystal clear:

***Can. 738 §1 All members are subject to their own Moderators in matters concerning the internal life and discipline of the society, in accordance with the constitutions.

§2 They are also subject to the diocesan Bishop in matters concerning public worship, the care of souls and other works of the apostolate, with due regard to cann. 679 - 683***

The Church would never approve a constitution put forward by a Society of Apostolic life which contradicted canon law.

This is the biggest problem with the SSPX and what sets apart the FSSP from the SSPX. People want to focus on Vatican II but the fact is that the SSPX says flat-out that they will not celebrate the OF no matter what the local ordinary says. As non-exempt priests however, according to canon law, they must submit to the local ordinary. The issue of the bishops right to govern as a successor to the apostles and subjection or rejection of legitimate authority is bigger than the issues around Vatican II and tradition. This is why a prelature is so attractive for the SSPX because it gets around the canon law requirement to subject oneself to the ordinary in matters of public worship for non-exempt priests.

There was another thread on this very topic a few weeks ago, You would have thought that I claimed that Jesus did not rise from the dead when I brought up canon 738.

-Tim-

 

[ProVobis]

But having to celebrate one occasionally, sounds entirely proper and above board to me all things considered.

I could understand on a regular basis maybe, but occasionally? It would seem to me that that would be like asking 727-trained pilot to fly a 757 occasionally, or vice versa. Maybe it’s possible but the bishop has to decide if this is in the Church’s best interests. There are still skill levels that need to be considered. That, by the way, applies to the deacon, altar servers, EMHC, readers, etc. as well.

 

[OraLabora]

I could understand on a regular basis maybe, but occasionally? It would seem to me that that would be like asking 727-trained pilot to fly a 757 occasionally, or vice versa. Maybe it’s possible but the bishop has to decide if this is in the Church’s best interests. There are still skill levels that need to be considered. That, by the way, applies to the deacon, altar servers, EMHC, readers, etc. as well.

No, the way the OF is celebrated by most parishes, it’s more like asking a 747 pilot to fly a Cessna 150…

All in jest. Actually getting an airline pilot to fly a light aircraft can be quite a challenge. They get used to the stability of the big jet and tend to over-control the light aircraft.

 

[ProVobis]

No, the way the OF is celebrated by most parishes, it’s more like asking a 747 pilot to fly a Cessna 150…

All in jest. Actually getting an airline pilot to fly a light aircraft can be quite a challenge. They get used to the stability of the big jet and tend to over-control the light aircraft.

I have to admit, though, yours is a better analogy. Good job.

 

[Richard_Malcolm]

Another consideration is that most priests in the FSSP have never been trained to say the OF, and until there is grave reason for them to do so, I don’t see many of them taking time to learn it.

It takes perhaps ten minutes to learn the basics of the OF, as one priest I know put it - it’s not that hard. It’s certainly not like learning the 1962 Missal.

No, the real reasons for FSSP reluctance to say the OF have nothing to do with difficulty of learning it…

 

[ProVobis]

It takes perhaps ten minutes to learn the basics of the OF, as one priest I know put it - it’s not that hard. It’s certainly not like learning the 1962 Missal.

No, the **real reasons **for FSSP reluctance to say the OF have nothing to do with difficulty of learning it…

So. playing the devil’s advocate here, what are they?

Not challenging enough maybe?

 

[giuseppeTO]

I remember a couple of years ago that a Canadian Bishop, in Ontario perhaps, gave the order that, due to to health reasons, Communion was to be distributed in-the-hand until further notice, even during the EF. Rather than disobey, the FSSP closed their apostolate in that diocese. I believe the bishop subsequently lifted this requirement but I don’t remember if the FSSP resumed saying Mass there or not.