The SSPX and True Catholicism

[st_bernard]

Judging?! There’s not even a thought process! Unless there’s a wedding or other such event, if a person walks into a church, he is assumed to be a member. Am I judging my fellow parishioners when I assume they’re Catholic? Am I judging the people who walk into Calvary Chapel when I assume they’re Born Again? It’s a naturally noted observation, not a judgment.

Please know that my jumping into this thread has nothing to do with saying, “Nah-nah-nah – you’re bad because you do X.” It is clear to me that the posters in this thread love the Lord and wish to follow Him. My posts are to help anyone who may be misguided reconsider his position – just as I hope that other posts are there to help me reconsider anything I hold in error.

Gratia et pax vobiscum,

If a devout Roman Catholic desires to attend a Tridentine Mass and there is no indult Mass available to them, they are allowed to attend an SSPX Chapel.

No Scandal from anyone that I know.

Gratias

 

[paramedicgirl]

By this logic then…Our Dear Pope Bennedict is a muslim?

I’m not sure if I should or :bigyikes:

 

[paramedicgirl]

Gratia et pax vobiscum,

If a devout Roman Catholic desires to attend a Tridentine Mass and there is no indult Mass available to them, they are allowed to attend an SSPX Chapel.

No Scandal from anyone that I know.

Gratias

That’s also my understanding, and the reason my NO priest had no problem with me attending the SSPX church in November.

 

[Anima_Christi]

Missa, I’ll give you the down and dirty on my take with the SSPX.

But first, know that I finally left my previous Church when I went to Mass one day and they started singing “Awesome God” complete with choreography. It was the last straw, I had enough of the priest shoveling the Sacred Hosts by the handful and 18 (yes, 18) EMHCs up on the altar handing out communion. Not to mention the mini skirts, flip flops on the altar girls, and a host of other problems that made me wonder.

The next Sunday I went to the indult parish 45 minutes away just to check it out. I walked in the small church and took a big whiff of the incense left over from adoration that morning. As my eyes adjusted I focused on the altar, the statues, the candles, the altar rail - everything. I knew right then I was never going back to my previous parish. It took about three Sundays of “just” Low Mass and I came to the conclusion that I would now die without the Latin Mass. Then came the monthly High Mass. It was like a breath of fresh air.

Onward to the SSPX. Their chapel is closer, so I thought “why not?”

Perhaps it was just the priests there, but I do not attend Mass to listen to a homily about the “evils of the Novus Ordo.” As sick of the abuses as I was, I couldn’t be “fed” there despite the beauty of the liturgy. Now, I do not mean to make generalizations, but it seemed like there was more Pope and Novus Ordo bashing going on from the pulpit then there was teaching of the Scriptures.

And perhaps that is just this one SSPX Church. In fact, I would like to believe that it is just this one Church. But, at the same time, I feel that if Pope Benedict showed up at Bishop Fellay’s doorstep, beating his breast and stating that Vatican II was all wrong, it wouldn’t be enough for them.

They may say formally they only want freedom of the Tridentine Mass and the excommunications lifted, but the attitude put forth sometimes says otherwise. Once again, it would make my DAY/MONTH/YEAR/DECADE/LIFETIME if the SSPX were reunited, but sometimes I wonder. Just because of what I have seen.

Edit: To add, I am glad your experience with the SSPX was favorable. And Heaven knows I am thankful for what they have done, even if it wasn’t the proper means. Maybe one day all this will get settled.

Although, after saying ALL that, perhaps I am a hypocrit, but I would still take the SSPX over the local Novus Ordo parish.

Your experience must be different because I went to an SSPX chapel expecting to hear a lot of Vatican II bashing and didn’t, and my friend who usually attends the SSPX also said she usually doesn’t hear such sermons. The priest’s sermon was just like any other sermon. Actually, in my case, I probably hear more tongue-in-cheek slams against Vatican II and the Novus Ordo from my indult FSSP priest than my friend does from her SSPX priest, LOL. So, I don’t think it is typical that SSPX priests always bash Vatican II in their sermons.

And you’re right, the SSPX doesn’t simply want freedom for the Ancient Mass, and I agree with them. They understand very well that the Mass is just the tip of the iceberg and simply allowing it would not really get to the crux of the problem. Although freedom for the Traditional Mass for all priests would certainly be a huge improvement. (IMO, any priest may say it anyway without any scruple of conscience and anything that comes from the Vatican would have to recognize this, rather than giving “permission” to say it which we do not even need to begin with).

I am lucky enough to have the daily Traditional Mass within a 7 minute drive from my house, celebrated under the “indult” (which we don’t even need according to Quo Primum). If there were an SSPX chapel nearby that was closer, I would go there without a doubt. I know that I can never go back to the Novus Ordo, even when it is “celebrated reverently”.

 

[Anima_Christi]

JPII was no slouch either…he kicked out the whole SSPX…1984.

Yeah…one of the few times in his pontificate when he actually administered discipline was when he excommunicated Catholics for merely practicing the faith as they had always known it…

 

[bear06]

I know that I can** never** go back to the Novus Ordo, even when it is “celebrated reverently”.

Of course I’ve always got to ask when I hear these statements if you would go to a Novus Ordo on Sunday if there were no TLMs available to you? Say you were on vacation in a TLMless zone?

 

[Anima_Christi]

Of course I’ve always got to ask when I hear these statements if you would go to a Novus Ordo on Sunday if there were no TLMs available to you? Say you were on vacation in a TLMless zone?

Yes, I would go to a Novus Ordo to fulfill my obligation if there were no TLMs around.

 

[bear06]

Yes, I would go to a Novus Ordo to fulfill my obligation if there were no TLMs around.

:clapping:

 

[Lisa_Lavadores]

Quote=Lisa Lavadores
People seeing a Catholic enter an SSPX church do not know the state of his mind – his actions would suggest he is in union with SSPX. Isn’t that scandal?​

When your observation leads you to say that there is scandal–yes there is judging.

You acknowledge that the SSPX is Catholic. The state of mind of a person who attends the Mass at an SSPX chapel–is known only to God and the person. Yet --you say it is a scandal --just because they attend an SSPX Mass. You are attributing something which is not known to you–to a person–to then say it is a scandal.

Please know that always, always, always I am interested in truth – not just winning an argument for it’s own sake. When looking for truth, precise terms are needed or else communication is not possible.

You state that I acknowledge that the SSPX is Catholic. If it was just another Catholic organization, we would not be having this conversation. My point about the SSPX has never been about whether or not it is Catholic; it has been about the fact that it is in schism. To ignore that is to argue with somebody other than me. If my points are faulty, I want to know it. But please address my points instead of changing them and arguing with the changes.

The Church teaches the theology of the body. The things we do make statements. Our feet walking through the doors of a certain church are saying something. If someone walks into Church X and worships – his actions are saying “I belong to Church X.” It is therefore not judging to say, “That guy belongs to Church X” – unless you are using the word “judging” in the loosest possible sense, such as saying that the sentence “That piece of furniture has four legs, a back, and a seat designed to hold one person; therefore, it is a chair” is an example of judging. What would be judging is seeing someone walk into Church X and worship, then saying, “That person does not belong to Church X.”

Your point about my not knowing the person’s mind is correct – that’s why the concept of scandal is not based on someone’s thoughts. It’s based on his actions. Perhaps you think there is nothing wrong with receiving Communion from schismatic priests; if so, I will be happy to consider your reasons for thinking it is not a problem. But please don’t accuse me of judging for saying things like “The sun is at its highest point in the sky; therefore, it is noon.”

 

[Lisa_Lavadores]

That is a far cry different than a [blank] Protestant church. The SSPX sacraments are still valid.

Valid but illicit. It is my understanding that Orthodox confessions are valid. That does not mean that we can confess to an Orthodox priest.

Attending Mass at the SSPX, just so long as the person it there to attend the Tridentine Mass and not to follow their schismatic attitude, is allowed.

Can you please direct me to where the Church teaches this?

 

[Lisa_Lavadores]

By this logic then…Our Dear Pope Bennedict is a muslim?

Perhaps you skipped over the part of my sentence that I will now put in italics:

Quote: “Unless there’s a wedding or other such event, if a person walks into a church, he is assumed to be a member.”

I would hate to think that discussion here would devolve into silliness. B16’s trip and the reason for it were quite public.

 

[Lisa_Lavadores]

Gratia et pax vobiscum,

If a devout Roman Catholic desires to attend a Tridentine Mass and there is no indult Mass available to them, they are allowed to attend an SSPX Chapel.

No Scandal from anyone that I know.

Gratias

If this is true, I agree there would be no scandal. Please direct me to where the Church teaches this.

 

[Unfinished]

If this is true, I agree there would be no scandal. Please direct me to where the Church teaches this.

unavoce.org/articles/2003/perl-011803.htm
Msgr Cammilee Perl:

If your primary reason for attending were to manifest your desire to separate yourself from communion with the Roman Pontiff and those in communion with him, it would be a sin. If your intention is simply to participate in a Mass according to the 1962 Missal for the sake of devotion, this would not be a sin.

Msgr. Camille Perl is on the Ecclesia Dei comission. It is Pontifical, founded by Pope John Paul II. They deal with all Latin Mass issues.

From EWTN: The goals of the commission are to collaborate with bishops, with the dicasteries of the Roman Curia and with other interested circles in order to facilitate the full ecclesial communion of priests, seminarians, communities or individual men and women religious linked, to date, in various ways, to the Fraternity founded by Msgr. Lefebvre who desire to remain united to the Successor of Peter in the Catholic Church

 

[Lisa_Lavadores]

unavoce.org/articles/2003/perl-011803.htm

Msgr. Camille Perl is on the Ecclesia Dei comission. It is Pontifical, founded by Pope John Paul II. They deal with all Latin Mass issues.

From EWTN: The goals of the commission are to collaborate with bishops, with the dicasteries of the Roman Curia and with other interested circles in order to facilitate the full ecclesial communion of priests, seminarians, communities or individual men and women religious linked, to date, in various ways, to the Fraternity founded by Msgr. Lefebvre who desire to remain united to the Successor of Peter in the Catholic Church

Thank you for identifying who he is (I asked that question when the link was posted earlier in this thread).

However, I still have no idea what level of authority he has to make a statement on this issue which the faithful must accept. This is a summary of a private letter. Private letters are not teaching, they are not protected from error – they are opinions.

Re-reading this letter brought something else to my mind (off the topic of whether or not it is scandal). Traditionalists have a genuine reverence for the Body of Christ and how He is handled. This being the case, how are they able to overlook the fact that the Host is consecrated and distributed by excommunicated hands? Does anyone struggle with this?

 

[Walking_Home]

Thank you for identifying who he is (I asked that question when the link was posted earlier in this thread).

However, I still have no idea what level of authority he has to make a statement on this issue which the faithful must accept. This is a summary of a private letter. Private letters are not teaching, they are not protected from error – they are opinions.

Re-reading this letter brought something else to my mind (off the topic of whether or not it is scandal). Traditionalists have a genuine reverence for the Body of Christ and how He is handled. This being the case, how are they able to overlook the fact that the Host is consecrated and distributed by excommunicated hands? Does anyone struggle with this?

---

This was was not a private letter. The letter was in response to several inquires—which Ecclesia Dei addressed. Ecclesia Dei requested that the letter be published. Ecclesia Dei is part of the Roman Curia. So you can see–Msgr Perl has the authority.

The SSPX priests are validly ordained priest with consecrated hands. Their status does not invalidate their ordination or their hands. Since Msgr. Perl stated —to attend Mass for the sake of devotion is no sin----there is no problem with priests hands.

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/index.htm

THE ROMAN CURIA
In exercising supreme, full, and immediate power in the universal Church, the Roman pontiff makes use of the departments of the Roman Curia which, therefore, perform their duties in his name and with his authority for the good of the churches and in the service of the sacred pastors.
CHRISTUS DOMINUS, 9

Secretariate of State
Congregations
Tribunals
.
Pontifical Commissions
etc.

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_commissions/index.htm

Pontifical Commissions

Cultural Heritage of the Church
Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”
etc.

 

[Unfinished]

**THE ROMAN CURIA
In exercising supreme, full, and immediate power in the universal Church, the Roman pontiff makes use of the departments of the Roman Curia which, therefore, perform their duties in his name **and with his authority for the good of the churches and in the service of the sacred pastors.
CHRISTUS DOMINUS, 9

Yup. Unless the Pope says otherwise, Msgr Perl’s words can be taken as authoritative.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

The SSPX priests are validly ordained priest with consecrated hands. Their status does not invalidate their ordination or their hands. Since Msgr. Perl stated —to attend Mass for the sake of devotion is no sin----there is no problem with priests hands.

I don’t really think there’s a “rite for the reconsecration of desecrated hands,” so that’s probably a non-issue.

The real issue:
The SSPX priests are suspended a divinis yet continue to confect the Eucharist. That is grave matter. Receiving from such a priest is also grave matter.

 

[Walking_Home]

I don’t really think there’s a “rite for the reconsecration of desecrated hands,” so that’s probably a non-issue.

The real issue:
The SSPX priests are suspended a divinis yet continue to confect the Eucharist. That is grave matter. Receiving from such a priest is also grave matter.

---

So you disagree with Msgr. Perl. He did not say to receive from an SSPX priest was grave matter. Only if a person intent —was to separate from the Church would it be grave matter—a sin. So don’t make an issue—where there is non.

 

[paramedicgirl]

---

So you disagree with Msgr. Perl. He did not say to receive from an SSPX priest was grave matter. Only if a person intent —was to separate from the Church would it be grave matter—a sin. So don’t make an issue—where there is non.

My NO priest told me it was OK to receive communion at teh SSPX chapel when I went there in November. I specifically asked him if it would be a sin to do so, and he said no.

 

[Unfinished]

The real issue:
The SSPX priests are suspended a divinis yet continue to confect the Eucharist. That is grave matter. Receiving from such a priest is also grave matter.

No…it…is…NOT.

Now you are making up “mortal sin” rules like the SSPX is doing. They say it is a grave matter to recieve in the hand or attend a New Mass.

When in fact you are both wrong.

If the persons intent is to attend a Tridentine Mass just for the sake of attending one, there is ZERO sin. Even in receiving communion. That comes from the Vatican, and until the Pope instructs otherwise, it is the authoritative teaching.