Usefulness of SSPX to the Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter ChristMyLife
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you ask the PNCC why they left the Catholic Church, they would say they never left. In their early years the “cause”, or their purpose, was more important than the structure, but over time the structure became a permanent goal in itself. When the RCC allowed Liturgy in Polish, when we got a Polish Pope and some bishops, but the organization goes on. It has momentum. Like SSPX. Sspx is not yet quite as far along, but it t on the same path as far as being a separate denomination
 
Last edited:
ChristMyLife said:
Come again?
Click to expand...
What @goout is saying is that we regularly have new users come in and post a thread along the lines of “Hey, I just learned about the SSPX; they sound cool; what do you think?” And then we have the same conversation we always have. Some of those new users disingenuously act like it’s an honest question, but they are actually just trying to promote SSPX here.
goout said:
I’ve read this site for what, 10 years. And this thread pops every week without fail.
Click to expand...
True (I’ve been here 14 years), but new user @ChristMyLife actually brings a genuine and fresh perspective on it. Most of the regular commenters on this topic post the same positions over and over. The OP’s dual strong opposition/support based on status is not a perspective I’ve seen illustrated here before (at least with this degree of strenuousness). In that sense, I’m not finding this to be the same old tired SSPX conversation that we always have.

Also based on the OP’s posting history and participation in other threads, I don’t think this is advertising, although I do agree that sometimes (often?) that’s what these threads are.
 
Last edited:
Wampa said:
thread pops every week without fail.
Click to expand...
You’ve sensed wisely and correctly.

I in no way support the SSPX in their current situation. I think a lot of what they say is disgraceful and divisive.

I do however, sympathize with their cause, especially with regard to liturgical reform.

I am saddened by their absence in the Church, because I believe their tradition minded voice needs to be speaking in the Church. But it frustrates me because instead of being a force for good in the Church, they sit at her gates as a voice of dissension.

I think I made my position very clear in OP and subsequent comments I made.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Idk. We need faithful Catholics that are faithful to the holy father. Doesn’t matter to me if they’re fssp or they belong to a regular NO church. But sspx says the no is valid so imo we don’t need them. In fact they’re doing harm.

Bokbok
 
My apologies I will try and delete my comment. Familiarity with the subject etc…
 
I agree with the OP, I think the SSPX will be a great influence to the church if they were regular.

I’ll give an example, I was invited to a TLM some years ago, a friend invited and told me good things about it, of course I attended, I wanted to see one of the oldest liturgies around, the chapel was small but beautiful, the lighting perfect, I took a photograph of the altar, my friend gave me a pamphlet with which to follow the mass, it wasn’t that hard, prayer at the foot of the altar, the reverence…all good but the homily was exceptional, the gospel was about Jesus healing a blind man and he linked this to baptism, he explained the signs and symbols used by the church and related it to us, we were the blind guy cure of blindness… I didn’t know much about liturgy but it was an eye opener, I was there 3 other times and they really told me what I have been doing in church for years. After the last mass there was a conference with the priest and he explained the problems he saw with the new mass and VAT II, I quickly researched about them I found they had a weird status, I loved their homilies, they had some nice points but I never received any sacrament from them again.
 
AlNg said:
According to Canon 751 of the Catholic Church’s Code of Canon Law and paragraph 2089 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, “schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.”
Click to expand...
Indeed, Pope Benedict removed SSPX excommunication and Pope Francis permitted SSPX to hear confession and give marriages so yes SSPX not in schism and according to that Canon, refusing to submit to Pope Benedict and Pope Francis is schismatic.
 
Last edited:
Aquinas11 said:
not in schism and according to that Canon, refusing to submit to Pope Benedict and Pope Francis is schismatic.
Click to expand...
That’s an impressive example of mental gymnastics…

So do the SSPX accept VII as a Holy Spirit guided council, and the OF Roman Rite as fully licit and valid form of the Roman Rite?
 
I cant speak for SSPX. The answer to those questions can be obtained by talking to an SSPX priest or going on a SSPX website or reading a SSPX book, but the OP previously indicated an unwillingness to consider these sources.
ChristMyLife said:
you wouldn’t catch me dead in an SSPX Chapel - I wouldn’t even go on an SSPX website or order a book from SSPX publisher
Click to expand...
 
I read someone say they’re not in schism, that’s not quite accurate. I believe they are “canonically irregular”. We don’t need SSPX. Almost everything I’ve read from them has been one of two camps, and the most common one, blames everything on Jews, and I’ve had enough of that (and yes, I checked, it was SSPX, not that there aren’t other groups that do that). Anyway, we HAVE traditionalists in the Church, minus the anti-semitism with FSSP and the like. That’s NOT to say all SSPX people are like that, or aren’t people of good will, but most of what I have run into, more often than not (and again, this is from personal experience), is very hateful, and blames every group you can think of, but especially Jews on everything wrong with the Church, this is just mainly what I have run into.
 
Last edited:
If the Diocese that has closed 50% of the churches and has plans for more, leaving many communities several miles from the nearest Catholic Church, would it be possible that an SSPX Church would be an acceptable replacement for the Diocesan “management”?
 
grotto said:
leaving many communities several miles from the nearest Catholic Church, would it be possible that an SSPX Church would be an acceptable replacement for the Diocesan “management”?
Click to expand...
No.

In that case, you would be released of your obligation to attend Mass.
 
ChristMyLife said:
In that case, you would be released of your obligation to attend Mass.
Click to expand...
I don’t think that’s quite correct. If we can attend an Orthodox service and have that satisfy our obligation to attend Mass, I would expect the same would go for the SSPX. In fact, I would attend an SSPX Mass before going to an Orthodox service.
 
Fauken said:
don’t think that’s quite correct. If we can attend an Orthodox service and have that satisfy our obligation to attend Mass
Click to expand...
Who told you an Orthodox Liturgy satisfies your obligation? It doesn’t.

Either you are able to attend Mass/Liturgy at a Catholic Church which is in good standing and full communion with Rome, and are required to fulfill the obligation.

Or

You are dispensed of the obligation.

If you live somewhere where there’s an Orthodox Church and an SSPX chapel 20 feet from your front door, but no Catholic Church for 500 miles, you are dispensed of your obligation.

If you want to attend the SSPX or Orthodox Liturgy, you can (provided you don’t receive Sacraments-Mysteries there), but you aren’t obligated to.
 
Last edited:
Bobby87 said:
As Card. Castrillon himself stated, the SSPX has never been in Schism.
Click to expand...
Then why all this confusion?

It doesn’t take a canon lawyer to figure out there is something gravely amiss with the SSPX and their standing with the Church.

I really don’t care to argue over objective fact. SSPX sympathizers always try to obfuscate things and muddy the waters using a bunch of technical canon lingo. It changes nothing.

If you need to tell yourself everything is fine, when it’s clearly not, so be it.

But I won’t support you in that thinking.
 
Last edited:
Aquinas11 said:
No, Pope Francis granted them right to hear confession:
Click to expand...
Okay…

So a Catholic can receive absolution from them…

I believe they can also be married in certain circumstances.

But they can’t receive the Eucharist under normal circumstances…
 
ChristMyLife said:
Who told you an Orthodox Liturgy satisfies your obligation? It doesn’t.
Click to expand...
canonlawmadeeasy.com

Can a Catholic Ever Attend an Orthodox Liturgy Instead of Sunday Mass?

Q: I would like to know if my children and I (Roman Catholics) meet our Sunday obligation at an Orthodox Divine Liturgy? Canon law seems to reference meeting the obligation “anywhere a Cath…
canonlawmadeeasy.com
“So does this mean that Catholics can never attend Orthodox liturgy and have it “count” as Sunday Mass, and can never receive any of the sacraments in an Orthodox parish church? Not so fast. There are specific, out-of-the-ordinary situations in which this may take place—and these are addressed in canon 844.2. A Catholic may lawfully receive the sacraments of penance, the Eucharist, and anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers in whose Churches these sacraments are valid, if (1) it is impossible for the Catholic to approach a Catholic cleric for these sacraments; (2) the danger of error or indifferentism is avoided; and (3) there is a genuine necessity or spiritual advantage to be gained from it.”
Click to expand...
Perhaps I should have been more specific in my post and said I was referring to an extreme circumstance where a Catholic parish in good standing was not available, but since you were discussing the possibility of attending an SSPX parish to satisfy one’s obligation when a parish in good standing wasn’t available, I figured I didn’t need to.
 
Last edited:
Aquinas11 said:
Pope Francis: For the Jubilee Year I had also granted that those faithful who, for various reasons, attend churches officiated by the priests of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X, can validly and licitly receive the sacramental absolution of their sins . For the pastoral benefit of these faithful, and trusting in the good will of their priests to strive with God’s help for the recovery of full communion with the Catholic Church, I have personally decided to extend this faculty beyond the Jubilee Year, until further provisions are made, lest anyone ever be deprived of the sacramental sign of reconciliation through the Church’s pardon."
Click to expand...
I have changed the emphasis in this quote to highlight a mistake people have made here, like Bobby87:
Bobby87 said:
They have canonical faculties to hear confessions. They are Catholic and members of the Church. You are either a Catholic or you are not. You can’t have it both ways.
Click to expand...
Pope Francis does not have the same difficulty saying that they may hear confessions while not being in full communion. In fact, the faculty to hear confessions is dependent on their commitment to recovering full communion. It is not a concession that can be made to Catholic priests in regular situations.

In every irregular, schismatic, heretical or other organization estranged from the Catholic Church there is a mixture of good and bad. If they would return, what is good in them would be a blessing to us. And what is bad will be a burden we would be willing to share. The SSPX seems unwilling to renounce some of the bad, like denying religious liberty or a strain of antisemitism, or whatever. Having those bad things reappear in our community would far outweigh any gain we might get from their “traditionalism.” IMO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top